Carolyn Hax was asked this week a question by set of expectant parents who wish to keep their child’s picture off the Internet.  They asked if they were crazy for wanting to ask people not to post their child’s picture on Facebook, and Carolyn answered that while they’re not crazy, they’re completely unrealistic.  She asks:

How likely is it that someone bad will zero in on your child’s image from among the random millions of images on Facebook alone, fix upon it and do harm? And, by comparison, how likely is it that you’ll harm your family relationships by trying to assert so much control over relatives — specifically over their relationship with your child?

She doesn’t tell the questioner not to pursue this path of asking people not to post their child’s picture online, but essentially boils it down to “choose the battles that withstand an effort-benefit analysis” and she gives many reasons why asking this of others doesn’t bring about big benefits for the big effort.

And I say bullshit.

Everyone has a right to set their boundaries.  Because that’s what we’re talking about here: boundaries.  And essentially, what Carolyn Hax is telling this questioner who obviously feels strongly about keeping their child’s image offline is that their boundaries are silly and annoying to others.  That just because other people are comfortable, they should be comfortable too.  She scoffs and tells them nothing will happen except that they’ll damage their relationship with their family members.  And frankly, if your family members are that offended by this request, I have to question what sort of relationship you have with your family members?  I mean, who puts a social media site and their pleasure on it before other human beings?  I don’t mean that they can’t post pictures of themselves, but what sort of human being says, “I care more about posting pictures of your child than I do about your feelings!”  Seriously, those are the people we should swallow our feelings to have a relationship with?

I don’t post pictures of my kids online not because I think they’ll end up on pedophilia sites.  I don’t post pictures online because I didn’t think it was my place to make this decision for another person.  So I erred on the side of caution until I could ask them how they felt about it.  And good thing I did because my daughter really really doesn’t like people looking at her and doesn’t want her picture posted.  I have to respect that.  It’s her boundary.  And it’s my job as her parent to help her convey her boundaries to others; not to dismiss them or knock them down.

Different people have different boundaries, and I don’t expect people to know mine or the twins until we tell them*.  When someone takes a picture, I ask them if they’re planning to post it online because we don’t post pictures of the twins online.  I’m sure people may not understand it, but they still respect it.  We’ve only encountered one person who gave us shit about it.  Which let me know quite clearly that person wasn’t worth being close to because they didn’t care about my boundaries.  Boundaries are what help us harmoniously interact with other human beings, so, yeah, they’re pretty important to me.

I do think that — in general — people who have a firm understanding of trespassing in the face-to-face world forget about the concept of boundaries when they get to the online world.  For instance, we all know to knock before entering a house, even if the person is expecting us and we know that their door is likely unlocked.  It’s polite; it shows a respect for the other person’s space.  And yet we don’t show that same courtesy when it comes to Facebook.  People post pictures of other people without asking.  Without giving that little knock on the door in the form of asking the person after you snap their picture, “hey, do you mind if I post this on Facebook?”  Just a common, polite question.  One you only need to ask once to determine how that person feels about posting their image.

And perhaps that is the advice Carolyn Hax should have given instead of calling it “an information embargo that’s bound to fail?”  It’s only bound to fail because we’re not teaching people to be as respectful online as they are in the face-to-face world.  That not all of us want to have someone tag us, or check in with Foursquare when they’re with us, or post about our outings on Facebook, or throw up our image on Instagram.  Some of us don’t want to participate with that side of social media not because we think something terrible will happen if our picture is online, but because we simply don’t enjoy it or it makes us uncomfortable.  There are some people who enjoy being out there — front and center — and there are those of us who are more comfortable skirting the walls of life.  And I’m a wall skirter when it comes to posting images online.

So… that’s my advice.  Be polite.  You know your feelings, and you probably can guess your kid’s feelings or your partner’s feelings.  But for everyone else; the guests at your party or the person you met at that conference or your friend who joined you for a slice of pizza: ask.

* Of course, there have been plenty of times when pictures have been posted accidentally.  Then we say something, and they’re removed and life goes on.  There have also probably been plenty of times that a picture has gone up that we don’t know about at all.  And in those cases, ignorance is bliss.  But if someone knows me and knows my feelings about it and disregards my feelings, I think that’s problematic.

The Wolvog has always like to collect discarded electronics, and he has an impressive collection of blackberries, cell phones, calculators that he fools around with.  One of his favourites is an old iPod that my sister gave him years ago when she upgraded.  About a year ago, it ceased to work, so we took it to the Genius Bar to humour him (the thing was ooooooooooooold.  Like 89 in iPod years) where they deemed it officially dead and asked him if he’d like to buy an iCoffin… I mean… recycle it.  No, he snapped, his iPod was NOT dead, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Fast forward to this week when the Wolvog wandered into the room, grinning.  “Do you remember my green iPod?”

“The one we threw out?” I asked.

“We didn’t throw it out,” the Wolvog told me.  “I’ve been trying to get it started again.  And tonight, I succeeded.”

Cue loud crash of thunder and a bolt of lightening outside while my son devilishly wrings his hands like a mad scientist and pulls out the zombie iPod.

We are calling it Frankenpod, since it indeed has been brought to life despite the fact that the Genius Bar employees were unable to do so.  The Wolvog downloaded his music into it and spent the night with his incredibly outdated piece of electronic equipment, chillaxing with the Beatles.

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaah… Frankenpod is ALIVE!

*******

And now the blogs…

But first, second helpings of the posts that appeared in the open comment thread last week.  In order to read the description before clicking over, please return to the open thread:

• “Fitnessgrams: the Latest in Fat Shaming” (Family Building with a Twist)
• “How the Cheerios Commercial Got it Wrong” (Three Geminis and a Sagittarius)
• “A Welcomed Comment” (The Koob Triplets)
• “The Very Bad Time” (Little Chicken Nuggets)
• “Ghosts and Fairy Tales” (Stupid Stork)
• “Departed Denver Discouraged” (Dreaming of Dimples)

Okay, now my choices this week.

The Adventures of MissOhkay has an eye-opening (and heart-stopping) post about her child’s picture showing up on a Pinterest board called “Things I Love that are Black.”  She so eloquently points out: “To a stranger, though, Miss E has none of that. She is flat. Without context. To a stranger, she is just an attractive thing that is black. Er, brown. And I don’t want her viewed that way.”  Read the whole post, especially if you pin things or post images.

So Close has a thought-provoking post on what we owe our parents as they age, and, in turn, what expectations we should have if we have children.  She explores the “what if” of their behaviour colouring the choices we make too, and the fact that all parents are not created equally.  Should a parent who does a crappy job parenting be taken care of “just because?”  It’s an interesting discussion.

Lastly, Misfit Mrs has a post about being back at square one after a failed cycle.  I love how it moves from the sigh to the boob jeggings.  Yes, the boob jeggings.  You may want to click over and read the whole thing — it’s that good as a post that captures the everyday.

The roundup to the Roundup: Frankenpod.  And lots of great posts to read.  So what did you find this week?  Please use a permalink to the blog post (written between June 7th and June 14th) and not the blog’s main url. Not understanding why I’m asking you what you found this week?  Read the original open thread post here.

Today we’re discussing Measure of Love as part of the GRAB(ook) Club, and I’m participating too.  You can answer my question without having read the book (though… you know… what are you waiting for?  It’s a great summer read).

Arianna presents a sticky situation in Chapter Two.  She’s at the dry cleaners when an annoying woman holds up the line for twenty minutes, arguing about her missing clothes.  Arianna falls into a conversation with a man standing behind her who turns out to be a writer for a comedy news show.  They end up grabbing coffee together and chatting after they get out of the dry cleaners.  They part ways without making any plans to see each other again; in fact, she doesn’t even have his last name though it wouldn’t be difficult to find it since she knows where he works.

Rachel thinks this crosses a line, especially since Arianna is in a committed relationship with Ethan.  Arianna doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with grabbing a cup of coffee with a stranger.

Which person do you think is correct and would you have gotten coffee with the man if you had been Arianna waiting in line?

After you answer my question, please click over to read the rest of the book club questions for Measure of Love.  You can get your own copy of Measure of Love by Melissa Ford at bookstores including Amazon.

This is the inaugural post for the GRAB(ook) Club. Like the idea of a book club where you don’t have to leave your living room? Then read more about the GRAB(ook) Club which holds the book discussion on blogs, a Facebook group, and a GoodReads group.

June’s Book is Measure of Love by Melissa Ford.  You can jump into the discussion by clicking any of the blogs below (links will appear when the post goes up), or joining the Facebook or GoodReads group (links to those groups are in the information post).

• Stirrup Queens
• Bereaved and Blessed
• Me Plus One
• Are You Kidding Me?
• The Road Less Travelled
• Lavender Luz
• Two Bees in Love
• CD1 Again
• Slaying, Blogging, Whatever
• Adventures in Writing, Reading & Bookcrossing
• The Book Diva’s Reads
• Two Adults, One Child
• Queen of the Slipstream
• Inconceivable!
• River Run Dry
• Sticky Feet
• Better Full Than Empty
• Bionic Mamas
• Pepper (on GoodReads/Facebook)
• Linda (on GoodReads/Facebook)
• Anne (on GoodReads/Facebook)
• Amy (on GoodReads/Facebook)
• Jacqueline (on GoodReads/Facebook)

NEXT STEP: sign up for the July book The Fault in Our Stars by John Green (discussed on July 18) by leaving a comment below telling me that you’re in, the name and url of your blog, or whether you are blogless and will be discussing on the Facebook/GoodReads groups.

Updated at the Bottom

What doctors seem to forget is that there is a physical cost, a financial cost, AND an emotional cost to infertility.  A neuroscientist has developed a new method that he claims can get people pregnant within 24 weeks or he’ll give you your money back.  No IVF required.

And that’s swell.  IVF has a big physical cost, so conceiving without it is obviously better for the body.  If there is a money back guarantee, there is no harm, no foul when it comes to the financial cost.  But what about the emotional cost?

What about being put through the wringer because someone has filled you with hope only to dash it?  What about finding out that you fall in that much smaller category of people who don’t have success with his method?  And beyond that, for the most part, it sounds like the equivalent to taking a sugar pill to cure cancer.  Walks in the woods and going to sleep by 11 pm isn’t going to help a person who has zero sperm or no fallopian tubes.  Last I checked, exercising won’t cure my clotting disorder.

But regardless of the fact that his method sounds like it only applies to those who are subfertile vs. infertile, I do want to point out to hucksters and doctors alike that it’s not just the physical and the financial that come into play when it comes to treating infertility.  We don’t just need mindful IVF policies and shared risk programs.  We need the team to address the emotional side of infertility too.

Because there’s no sanity back guarantee.

Update:

And — for once — there is an infertility that you are going to want to read.  Caveat — I haven’t finished it yet, but so far so good.