GPS app usage rising among teenagers with smartphones, as more and more teens use location services like Foursquare and Facebook to connect and meet up with friends. This is a screenshot from a "check-in" on Foursquare. (Foursquare/AP)
GPS app usage rising among teenagers with smartphones
There has been a lot of speculation but little really known about Americans’ use of location-based services (LBS) and geosocial services on cellphones. Thanks to some new research from the Pew Internet Project, the picture is starting to fill in.
Pew defines LBS as anything from GPS-enabled map services to, for example, nearby restaurant reviews using an app or browser on one’s cellphone. Examples of geosocial services are “check-in” services like Foursquare and Gowalla, the latter recently acquired by Facebook.
The use of both types is rising with smartphone adoption, Pew found. Smartphone use went from 35% of US adults last May to 46% this past February, less than a year.
At last we have some data on teen use of location services! As of last July, almost a fifth (18%) of teen smartphone users use a geosocial service such as Foursquare. That’s 8% of teen cellphone owners and 6% of US 12-to-17-year-olds overall. Not surprisingly, older teens use them more than younger ones.
I say “not surprisingly” because part of the enjoyment of check-in services is being independently mobile so one can spontaneously go to meet friends who’ve checked into a specific location. Of course, more urban kids could use public transportation, but that cuts down on the spontaneity a bit, and younger kids generally need some measure of permission from a parent to move around the city on their own.
Here are some other numbers on use of location services:
- LBS: “Almost three-quarters (74%) of smartphone owners” use real-time LBS info on their phones, “up from 55% in May 2011.” So “the overall proportion of adults who get location-based information has almost doubled” in less than a year – 23% to 41%
- Geosocial use went from 12% to 18% of US adults in the same May-to-February period. Ninety-three percent of geosocial service users also use LBS
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Anne Collier blogs at NetFamilyNews.
Malia Obama loved it: helping your teenager decide about sleepaway camp can be a tough decision. Our teen experts advise an open, honest and measure approach to talking about this fun American tradition. This Jan. 4, 2010 file photo shows President Barack Obama as he walks with daughters Malia, left, and Sasha as they return to the White House after a vacation in Hawaii. Malia, 12, went away at sleepaway camp this summer for the first time. (Charles Dharapak/AP)
Malia Obama loved it: helping your teenager decide about camp
Talk to a group of teens and they will tell you that they can't wait until the summer so that they can return to the sleepaway camp that they've been going to for years. They just can't wait to spend several weeks living together in a cabin often on bunk beds with others that they have come to regard as part of their extended family. And, many of these teens grow up and become too old to be campers and go on to become counselors at these same camps.
Many, also, keep their camp friends for years and include them among their closest friends.
For many teens, there is something so special about being away from home, feeling independent,and creating and sharing special moments with their peers. I recently spoke to my own daughter about why she loved sleepaway camp and she said that the girls in her bunk really gelled and formed incredible bonds. Oh yes. She did say that it was nice to get away from parents for the summer.
Keep in mind that sleepaway camp is not for everyone. I didn't like it. My daughter started going at age 11 and loved it.
Parents often ask how they will know if their child is ready for a camp away from home. Here are some general guidelines.
1. If your child is starting to talk about it then she may be ready.
2. A child who does well away from home may also be showing signs of readiness. A child who is uncomfortable with sleepovers is certainly not a candidate for four weeks at a camp away from home.
3. Adaptibility and flexibilty are important traits to look for in your child. If your child adapts well to changes then this is a good predictor that she will benefit from a camp that is suited to her.
4. Ask yourself if your child has a reasonable set of social skills. If not, then perhaps this should be dealt with before sending your child away from home.
5. Are you comfortable with the idea of sleepaway camp? If you are strongly against it then your child is unlikely to feel good about the idea.
If you have determined that your child is ready to go away to camp then first you need to find the right camp that meets your child's interests whether they include art, athletics, or even academic enrichment.
Next, I would suggest starting out with two or three weeks the first summer and increase the length of stay the following summer if all goes well. Finally, help your child prepare for camp by perhaps having them meet some of their campmates before camp starts.
Related: Are you a Helicopter Parent? Take our quiz to find out!
Act upbeat about it and your mood will be contagious. Keep in mind, of course, that sending your kids to sleepaway camp is a very personal family decision.
I hope it goes well.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Jennifer Powell-Lunder and Barbara Greenberg blogs at Talking Teenage.
Tyra Banks warns about the perils of skinny, and that's great. But what gets lost in the “models are too thin and therefore bad role models for our girls” discussion is that models shouldn’t really be role models for our girls who should have loftier goals. Ms. Banks arrives at the Time 100 Gala in New York April 24, 2012. (Lucas Jackson/Reuters)
Tyra Banks talks skinny. We say models model clothes, not life, for our girls
Supermodel Tyra Banks has been getting a lot of press this week for her “open letter to models” in The Daily Beast in which she praises Vogue magazine’s new pledge to stop using young teen models and those who appear to have eating disorders.
This move, she says, could do wonders for little girls, who have been subjected to increasingly twiggy beauty standards.
“When I started modeling, I used to see models who seemed unhealthy backstage at the fashion shows,” she wrote. “They appeared to be abusing their bodies to maintain a certain weight. These girls were booked over and over again for countless fashion shows and photo shoots. I’m sure many of you today have witnessed this, or even live it. Now, real progress is finally on the horizon. Vogue is stepping up, doing the right thing, and protecting that girl. Perhaps that girl is you!”
Well, thanks for the encouragement, Tyra. Sort of. Because, really, that girl is decidedly not me. Or my daughter, I hope.
Related: Are you a Helicopter Parent? Take our quiz to find out!
See, what gets lost a lot in this whole “models are too thin and therefore bad role models for our girls” discussion is that maybe models shouldn’t really be role models for our girls.
There’s nothing wrong with the “Vogue” announcement earlier this month. Nobody is going to take issue with Conde Nast International Chairman Jonathan Newhouse’s statement that “Vogue believes that good health is beautiful. Vogue Editors around the world want the magazines to reflect their commitment to the health of the models who appear on the pages and the well-being of their readers."
But the idea that this will change body image problems for girls misses the point. The models in women (and teen) magazines will continue to be thin and beautiful. That’s their job. (I mean, it’s not like aspiring to look like Tyra Banks is not particularly attainable for most women, either.) And having "thin and beautiful" as an aspiration – perhaps not the loftiest of goal.
So as Vogue changes its standards, what we can change at home is how we talk to our daughters about media, about the images in the magazines, and – all importantly – the way we absorb these messages ourselves.
Which brings up my favorite part of Ms. Banks’s letter: “To moms everywhere, we need to educate our girls not to fall prey to thinpirational images of beauty,” she writes. “So where do we start? By being very careful about how we talk about our own bodies in front of our daughters.”
Exactly.
7 ancient tips to good behavior, straight from the sage Erasmus and his compatriots, the esteemed Francis Bacon, Sydney Smith and Lord Chesterfield, as recommended by our resident happiness expert. English roses outside St. Paul's Cathedral in London. (Mary Knox Merrill/The Christian Science Monitor)
7 ancient tips to good behavior, straight from the sage Erasmus
This Thursday: 8 tips for how to behave yourself, from sixteenth-century scholar Erasmus.
One thing is true about happiness: there are very few new truths out there. The greatest minds in history have turned their attention to the subject, so while it’s often challenging to put that wisdom into actual practice, it’s pretty clear what kinds of actions are likely to yield a happier life.
Likewise, “tips lists” have been around for a long time. I get a big kick out of uncovering tips lists from the past: Sydney Smith’s tips for cheering yourself up from 1820, Francis Bacon’s tips for how to be happy from 1625, Lord Chesterfield’s tips for pleasing in society from 1774.
In De Civilitate Morum Puerilium Libellus: A Handbook on Good Manners for Children, Erasmus gave seven tips about how to behave yourself around other people. He wrote this list around 1500 A.D., and his advice has a long shelf life.
According to Erasmus, you should not …
1. gossip
2. tell unkind stories
3. boast
4. indulge in self-display
5. seek to defeat others in argument
6. interrupt people when they tell a story
7. be too inquisitive
What would you add to your own list? For myself, I need to add:
8. don’t “top” (meaning, don’t say things like, “Wow, you think that was bad, wait until you hear what happened to me”)
9. don’t keep bringing the conversation around to your favorite topics if other people don’t seem as obsessively interested in them as you are.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Gretchen Rubin blogs at The Happiness Project.
Rapper Jay-Z, who will take a music break to hang out with his new baby Blue Ivy Carter, hugged his nephew Daniel Smith as his as his wife, singer Beyonce watches the New Jersey Nets play the Miami Heat in April 2012. (Reuters)
Jay-Z music break for baby Blue reflects new daddy nurturer trend
We encounter our fair share of celebrity mom stories here at Modern Parenthood, so it was a nice shift this week when we heard about a celeb dad’s baby gushings.
Rapper Jay-Z, proud papa of four-month-old Blue Ivy Carter, told MTV news Monday that he will be taking a break from the recording studio to spend time with his baby daughter.
“I thought I would be more inspired with all the new feelings and everything that I’d have to write about, but it really happened the other way,” he said. “I just really want to hang out with her. I just want to enjoy those moments for a bit and I’m sure that feeling for music will come back soon.”
Hov seems to be onto a daddy trend here:
According to a recent report from Boston College’s center for Work and Family, a growing number of fathers see their role not just as breadwinner but as nurturer.
In a survey of nearly 1,000 dads with white collar jobs at Fortune 500 companies, with nearly half earning more than $100,000 a year, Boston College researchers found that a significant majority picked “both caring for my child and earning money to meet his/her financial needs” as the best way to describe how they viewed their responsibility to their children.
Most fathers in this survey, however, didn’t take all that much time off when their children were born. Only one in 20 dads took more than two weeks off after their most recent child was born, and only one in 100 took more than four weeks off. Sixteen percent did not take any paternity leave at all.
At the same time, researchers found that more than 75 percent of these dads would have liked to spend more time with their babies.
“Collectively, these findings highlight a noteworthy gap between what fathers desire, and what they seem able to do to adjust their work lives after their children are born, both in an immediate sense (e.g., through taking leave) and an ongoing sense (e.g., through using flexible work arrangements.)”
Jay-Z and wife Beyonce Knowles certainly have a lot more job flexibility than most new parents. (Forbes magazine ranked the pair as the country’s second richest celebrity couple, earning an estimated $72 million between May 2010 and May 2011.) And we’re quite sure that as Blue Ivy’s mom and dad go back to work – Jay-Z has announced that he will headline and curate a Philadelphia music festival; Beyonce is scheduled to perform three concerts in Atlantic City over Memorial Day weekend – childcare will not be an issue.
Still, we’re all for Jay-Z being part of this daddy trend, as well: The Boston College survey found that 82 percent of fathers agreed that family life made them feel happy and helped them be a better worker.
This was, perhaps, what was going on when hit the recording studio days after Blue Ivy’s birth to record his song “Glory.”
“Most amazing feeling I feel, words can’t describe the feeling for real.
Baby I paint the sky blue, my greatest creation was you, you.”
Will we soon hear lyrics about changing diapers? We doubt it.
Let it be: learning to let go, and live in the moment, instead of constantly worrying about the future implications of yours and your children's emotions. Take a deep breath, and simply accept what's happening right now. (Ann Hermes/The Christian Science Monitor )
Let it be: learning to let go and live in the moment
I just read a very powerful sentence in a wonderful book, "The Gift of an Ordinary Day," by Katrina Kenison. She said, “As soon as I stop wishing for things to be different, I am met by the beauty of what is.”
How much time do we spend wishing for things to be different? I am one of those “the grass must be greener over there” people – always wondering “what if.”
No matter what the present moment brings – whether it’s a child screaming in rage, a car that won’t start, angry words from a friend or relative, too little money – if it is negative, we tend to place blame elsewhere, decide we are at fault, or shutdown in hopelessness.
How hard it is to stop wishing for things to be different? What if we were able to say, “This is what I have to deal with right now. This is what is happening. Let me stay right here and pay attention. It’s OK if I feel angry, embarrassed, impatient, bewildered, disappointed, afraid." Imagine just staying in that feeling and taking responsibility for it.
We want to retaliate, blame, find an answer, sweep the moment away and forget. “The beauty of what is” might not actually be beautiful, but when I can stay with what is and accept it, something beautiful happens.
I might say to myself, “This sucks, I hate it, but it’s not the end of the world and I can deal with it.” I actually begin to relax and my emotions tend to soften a bit. When I react in anger, all that happens is I create more and more resistance.
We’re so used to passing the buck, blaming someone or something else, that it is hard to just stay still and acknowledge, “This is how I feel,” or “This is how my child is feeling right now.” Especially with kids, we worry what this anger means for the future, we fret over why it’s happening and when will she ever learn, etc.
Why can’t we simply accept that this is what’s happening right now?
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Bonnie Harris blogs at Connective Parenting.
The ‘Mean Girls’ effect: a new study of 200 girls and boys shows that popularity among young teens is a double-edged sword. Photo: Lindsay Lohan as Cady, Amanda Seyfried as Karen, Rachel McAdams as Regina and Lacey Chabert as Gretchen in the 2004 high school comedy film, "Mean Girls." (Michael Gibson/AP)
The 'Mean Girls' effect: teenagers and the quest for popularity
Popularity, the social status that so many of us crave for our kids and yes, let's face it, often for ourselves as well, may actually not be healthy.
Yes, you read that correctly. The blush may be off this rose that we refer to as popularity – that term that evokes desire, longing, and fear in millions of us throughout all stages of life, but particularly during the teen years.
In a study in the journal Child Development, popularity among young teens was found to be a double-edged sword. Researchers studied a group of almost 200 boys and girls of various racial and ethnic backgrounds who were in the seventh and eighth grades. It's no coincidence that these do tend to be the years when teens are most concerned about their social standing among their peers.
On the bright side, the popular teens had some positive qualities. Their social skills appeared to be stronger and they tended to have closer relationships with both their mothers and their closest friends.
On the darker and less rosy side, they were found to engage in a higher level of problematic behaviors including alcohol and substance abuse. Perhaps being a member of a group of trendsetters contributes to the higher likelihood of engaging in riskier behavior because of the link described by the lead researcher of the study: The popular kids who also tend to be the trend-setters may be acutely aware of the expectations of the "cool" peer group, and may therefore be more susceptible to engaging in behavior that helps them fit in.
And, according to everything that we have read, the double-edged sword gets even edgier.
Popularity during youth does not seem to give individuals an advantage in life over those who have a few good friends to see them through both their joys and struggles.
The key to much of life's satisfaction appears to be that you have at least one good friend who is attuned to you and really "gets you." Whether or not these individuals are the most sought after for parties and other exclusive social events seems to make little difference.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Jennifer Powell-Lunder and Barbara Greenberg blogs at Talking Teenage.
"How to spot a predator." Really? Our free range parenting expert sounds off on some parents' continuing stranger danger fears of predators that lurk in parks and troll coffee shops for new victims. In an April 3, 2012 photo, signs and messages are posted on the front of the house and faded fliers are taped up on posts near the home of a baby allegedly kidnapped in Kansas City, Mo. (Jill Toyoshiba/The Kansas City Star)
"How to spot a predator." Really?
Hi Readers.
Still trying to figure out what part of this Circle of Moms post, "How to Spot a Child Predator," irks me the most. It’s by a lady who was at a cafe and heard a man asking two third grade boys questions like, “What’s your favorite subject?” and “Who do you want to marry when you grow up?”
He also asked them some math problems, so the lady immediately “understood” what she was hearing:
"…like a thunderbolt, it hits me! Those boys are being groomed."
How exactly did she know he was up to no good? She trusted her gut. And now she wants the rest of us to trust it, too:
"I wrote this so you’d read about the types of questions a potential predator uses so you can prepare your kids.
Please don’t scare your kids, but do talk to them. Use these, or examples like them, so your kids know what bad strangers ask."
Except that there is no evidence whatsoever that this was a “bad stranger,” or that these are the type of questions a bad stranger would ask!
It’s like saying, “I would have been raped by the man in the grocery store today if I hadn’t realized what he was up to! So I’m alerting the rest of you: If a man ever asks, ‘Do you know what aisle the paper towels are in?’ Run! He is a bad stranger. Don’t thank me – I’m just trying to help!”
Uh…thanks. But no thanks.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best family and parenting bloggers out there. Our contributing and guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor, and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. Lenore Skenazy blogs at Free-Range Kids.
The most popular baby names stay popular for only so long. Could Sophia (this year No.1) soon go the way of Barbara (No. 764)? (Vadim Ghirda/AP)
Most popular baby names ... for now. Beware, Sophia.
We wrote Monday about how the Social Security Administration had released its most popular baby names of 2011, with Sophia leading the pack for the girls and Jacob holding steady as the country’s No. 1 boy name.
Today, we take a peek at what’s happened to some of the other top names from the past few decades. And it turns out that Sophia, Isabella, and Emma should be afraid. Very afraid.
As we mentioned before, the administration keeps a database of American baby names going back to 1880. A user can browse the names by popularity or year, which can turn into a mesmerizing look at American groupthink – or at least pop culture creep.
Sociologists, psychologists and those specializing in onomastics (the study of names) have theorized why it is that parents – even those scouring baby name books for the perfect, unique moniker – tend to end up as part of a country-wide trend.
Names, the prominent theories say, are typically driven by fashion. And while many parents today might be trying to pick a “unique” name (a new trend in and of itself), they usually don’t want something totally outlandish. So they’ll try to make a little twist on an existing popular name; for instance, turning “Emily” (No. 1 from 1996 to 2007) into “Emma.”
The thing is, everyone else is doing the same. ("Emma" went from No. 53 in 1996 to No. 1 in 2008). Because you can’t actually be fashionable and unlike all the others.
This is also why a name that sounds culturally “high class” quickly “filters down” in socio-economic standing. (“Freakonomics” authors Steven Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner wrote about this.) As the masses decide to name their children, say, "Chloe" (today’s No. 10, up from No. 853 in 1982), Chloe becomes, by definition, less elite.
If parents really wanted unique, they’d pick one of those names that they heard every day in elementary school. “Jessica” – No. 1 or 2 from 1981 to 1997 – has dropped from No. 11 in 2001 to No. 120 in 2011. “Jennifer,” top ranked from 1970 to 1984 is now at spot 134.
But these are names that parents already have. Or that they associate with friends, enemies, frenemies, sisters, whomever, and don’t want to revisit. This is, we suspect, what has happened to Barbara, Carol, Deborah, et al. – top names from the 50s.
Barbara sat in the top 10 baby girl names from 1927 to 1958. Today? She’s No. 764.
Carol? Top 10 from 1936 to 1950. Today, No. 972.
Deborah, who enjoyed top 10 standing from 1950 to 1962? Now No. 808.
Take heed, Isabella. (No. 2 this year, already on her way down.)
Jacob and William (No. 1 and 2) don’t have to worry quite as much. Boys names tend to have less variation. Sixth-ranked “Michael,” for instance, held the No.1 or 2 spot from 1954 to 2008. And he’s never dipped below No. 60 in the last 100 years.
Jessica Simpson is launching a new maternity clothing line for moms-to-be. Her advice? Show off that "baby bump." The singer and actress took that advice to heart during her much publicized pregnancy. She gave birth to daughter Maxwell Drew earlier this month. (Macy's/Business Wire)
Jessica Simpson: New maternity clothing line to show off baby bumps. Of course (+video)
If you thought Jessica Simpson wouldn’t be talking (or Tweeting) about pregnancy anymore, think again.
Just weeks after the singer-slash-actress gave birth to daughter Maxwell Drew Johnson, she has let it be known that she will soon launch a new line of clothing for moms-to-be.
She announced the partnership between Camuto Group, the master licensee behind her label, and retailer Destination Maternity Monday. The new label will be... Jessica Simpson Maternity. Of course.
“I’m so excited to partner with Destination Maternity to design a collection of fashionable styles that make you look and feel great,” Simpson said in a press release. “You want to wear clothes that are flattering to your baby bump; you want to show your bump off.”
Oh my. In some ways this is really too easy.
Because, if there was ever a mama-to-be who was happy to show off the “baby bump”...
But I won’t go there.
Because, you know, sometimes when you’re eight months pregnant all you want is a nice new outfit. Something, anything, to make you feel just a little bit better and forget that you’ve been in the same maternity pants for about seven days straight. So if Simpson wants to add her stye to the growing maternity clothing industry – and add maternity clothes to her 24-product fashion portfolio – awesome.
She says her new line will have a “vintage 1970s feel,” with maxi dresses, printed tops and so on. (The women I know who gave birth in the 1970s have never said anything nice about their maternity duds, but I’m guessing Simpson will try to fix this.)
No word about whether an animal print kaftan, the sort that she wore to the hospital, according to her Tweets, will be in the mix.
Previous
Become part of the Monitor community