Showing posts with label baby. Show all posts
Showing posts with label baby. Show all posts
Monday, March 9, 2009
A Few More
OK just a few more that I edited today. The last one cracks me up. For some reason they are all darker here than on my computer....I'll blame blogger. They even look better in photobucket. Hmm.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Babybeast at Nine Months and Change
These were taken today at 9.5 months old. Some are obviously better than others in a technical sense, but I thought I'd just post them all anyway.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
They are so cute when they are dormant.
She's been on my lap here for a few hours. She's had a cold for about a week - we all have, but hers doesn't seem to be improving much. No fever, though, so maybe she'll perk up tomorrow.Actually, she's on a pillow on my lap - she outgrew the lap for tummy-down sleeping purposes maybe a month ago, which is too bad because it was a surefire way to get her to sleep. With one knee bump bump bumping her up and down. Head hanging off one side, feet hanging off the other. Mister Lawyer did not think it looked comfy, but it got her to sleep and who can complain about that?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Babybeast is Nine Months Old
Technically she has been nine months for a few days, but she had her "well baby" visit today, which typically consists of several needle jabs and a very sad mommy.I requested that we put off her vaccines since she has been
ill and the pediatrician didn't blink, which I appreciate. I also asked to have her allergy tested via blood testing since we had to endure the bloodletting anyway for the lead test. One of her brothers is extremely peanut-allergic and reacts to several other things as well. He tested positive 
around nine months, so if she has it, she almost certainly will too. Hopefully she will be like her oldest brother and at worst be plagued with seasonal pollen allergies - they will make you miserable, but they won't kill you.Oh and this will come as no surprise to anyone who has seen her, but at 24.5 lbs she's at the 99.7th percentile of fatness for baby girls, or as plotted in a scientific manner, well off The Chart. Unfortunately, she's only at the 75th percentile in height. Which means, as my pediatrician kindly pointed out, that, "she doesn't miss a meal, eh?" No, no she doesn't.
The second boy was 27lbs by nine months, though, and he's pretty skinny now and the oldest was 26 pounds and change and he's very tall yet proportionate, so I have hope that Ms. Chubbywumpus, who is actually more active than either boy ever was, will thin out with time. I'll have to post a photo soon to mark nine months - maybe tomorrow if she seems agreeable to posing.
Hooray to me for surviving nine months (and counting) of being a mommy to three!
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Little Girl Clothes
My baby boys were roughly ten pounds each at birth and were roughly 30 pounds each at 12 months old. So not small. The rule of thumb was that they wore twice their age in clothing. At 3 months, they wore 6 month clothing. At twelve months, they wore 24month or 2t size and so on. Even now, while they have slowed down, the 5 year old is in 8-10 boys and the 3 year old is in 5-6.The girl is admittedly beefy for her age - there is no doubt about it. She weighed in at 24 pounds 7 ounces today. So not exactly svelte. But get this, she, at only 8 (almost 9) months old, its wearing 2-3t clothing for tops and bottoms. Even by the boys twice-age-in-clothing-calculations she should only be wearing 18month size at the maximum and she is smaller than they were!
Clearly, baby girl clothes are much smaller than baby boy clothes when comparing the same size. And yes, I know baby girls themselves are often a bit smaller than baby boys, but I wouldn't say there is a massive difference. And if there is a difference, why not make the clothes the same and just let the baby girls grow into them?
I think I know why and here's my theory - let me know what you think.
~ Proposition one - baby girl clothing is infinitely more adorable than baby boy clothing - it just is. I like a cute boy's blue and green froggie outfit as much as the next mommy, but the cute factor of girl clothing is through the roof, far surpassing the boys department by any measure you could possibly use.
~ Proposition two - there is simply more variety of baby girl clothing. Boys have tops and bottoms - long and short pants and sleeves and if you want to get crazy, some overalls and maybe a sweater vest. Baby girls have long pants, yoga pants, sweat pants, long skirts, footed leggings, footless leggings, short skirts, frilly skirts, short pants, capris, shorts, any of which might be separate or calculated to be worn in conjunction with their matching t-shirts, embroidered tops, babydoll tops, cotton blouses, halter tops, tank tops, hippie chick tops, sequined tops, casual dresses, dressy dresses, jumpers, overalls, shortalls, and so on. There are a myriad combinations of vastly more designs. And they are all really cute.
~ Proposition three - people like to buy girl clothing. Parents. Grandmas. Neighbors. Aunties. Mommy's best girlfriends. Come on - they do. We do. We all do. Why? Well it's effing cute for starters. And people think little girls should look nice (a whole different topic) and should look pretty and that they like to look pretty and if they aren't old enough that the mommy wants them to look pretty. And let's face it, right or wrong, we all like pretty baby girls in cute little outfits. So we buy them, lots of them. In all the various combinations available, of which there are many.
So my hypothesis is this - I think that manufacturers make the clothing sizes for baby girls smaller intentionally so that we have to buy more of their products more often. It's brilliant - we are forced to go shopping for simply adorable clothing in all the adorable combinations they offer even more often than we otherwise would and the typical mommy is none the wiser. In fact, except for the financial expenditure, we kind of like it. So the clothing makers win big and we conspire along with them by "needing" their offerings. Interesting.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Guess Who Slept All Night?
In her very own bed in her very own room?
We had a difficult period getting her down due to the cold, but she slept from about 10:00pm until almost 5:00am which is nothing short of a miracle. She was woken by the elder Beastling at 6:00am but she went back to bed until 8:57.
She then had almost a three hour nap today.
I'm not sure if it's due to her being sick or not, but this is working for me.
Speaking of sleeping, here is the 3 year old plum tuckered out yesterday. He must have slept like that for an hour and a half. I should have moved him to his comfy bed, but something of a quasi-scientific interest in his position compelled me otherwise.
We had a difficult period getting her down due to the cold, but she slept from about 10:00pm until almost 5:00am which is nothing short of a miracle. She was woken by the elder Beastling at 6:00am but she went back to bed until 8:57.
She then had almost a three hour nap today.
I'm not sure if it's due to her being sick or not, but this is working for me.
Speaking of sleeping, here is the 3 year old plum tuckered out yesterday. He must have slept like that for an hour and a half. I should have moved him to his comfy bed, but something of a quasi-scientific interest in his position compelled me otherwise.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Well now I feel guilty
for complaining about my notsleepy babe yesterday. She's sick and was up all night with all the snuffles and the wuffles and the sadnesses.
But she is, also, at this very minute sleeping. Where? In her very own crib (yes, crib!) in her very own room. Not in the pack and play in our room. Not in our bed. She's been down for 45 min so far. And counting.
If this goes well, we might give her the permanent boot tonight. I'm not sure if I have the fortitude, to be honest, but it sure sounds attractive.
Mister Lawyer and I used to read before bed. Books without pictures that didn't have rhyming verse. Since Babybeast, we are stuck going to bed in the pitch black for fear of waking her. The thought of being able to read again is very exciting. I'll try to remember to post a photo of Mister Lawyer's To Be Read pile. You will be horrified - it's several feet tall. Heck, I'm horrified and I live with it.
For now, I'll be happy if I can get another half hour of nap out of her. Fingers crossed, people!
______________________________________
Here you go. This is his pile of accumulated materials that need to be read. Technically it's only one of several piles. And that box at the top is a recent shipment from Barnes & Noble.
But she is, also, at this very minute sleeping. Where? In her very own crib (yes, crib!) in her very own room. Not in the pack and play in our room. Not in our bed. She's been down for 45 min so far. And counting.
If this goes well, we might give her the permanent boot tonight. I'm not sure if I have the fortitude, to be honest, but it sure sounds attractive.
Mister Lawyer and I used to read before bed. Books without pictures that didn't have rhyming verse. Since Babybeast, we are stuck going to bed in the pitch black for fear of waking her. The thought of being able to read again is very exciting. I'll try to remember to post a photo of Mister Lawyer's To Be Read pile. You will be horrified - it's several feet tall. Heck, I'm horrified and I live with it.
For now, I'll be happy if I can get another half hour of nap out of her. Fingers crossed, people!
______________________________________
Here you go. This is his pile of accumulated materials that need to be read. Technically it's only one of several piles. And that box at the top is a recent shipment from Barnes & Noble.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Sleeps Like A Baby
If "sleeps like a baby" means getting up every hour on the hour, wailing at the top of her lungs, farting, and then demanding food, then yes, she does.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Sleep, optional
Memo to Babybeast:
I should preface this by thanking you for sleeping from nine yesterday evening until almost eleven. That's almost two hours straight; please don't think I didn't notice or appreciate your obvious efforts. I'd like to discuss the events which occurred shortly thereafter, however, as they are of some concern.
Firstly, after eating a nice big meal at both 8:30 and 9:00pm, I'm really not so sure you need to eat at 11:00, 11:45, 1:30, 2:30, 3:15, and 3:40. After all, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you are not in any danger of wasting away to nothing. And then when you woke up around 5:00 and I dragged you into the bed (against my better judgment, but really, who has good judgment at 5:am?) I'm afraid I did not explain clearly enough that my near proximity alone is not the same as an all you can eat as long as you can eat buffet. Please curtail your eating needs to two post-bedtime meals per night, effective immediately.
Further, and I hate to take your fun away, but gleefully scaling both your father and I at 7:00am while screeching cheerful baby screeches and poking at our eyeballs is just not going to work for me. I've spoken to your father and he is in agreement on this one. Cheerful baby screeches are acceptable, but not when accompanied by eyeball clawing. Thank you for your understanding.
In short, I think if you follow these guidelines, you will find that I am more more pleasant to be around during the day which only serves to benefit your experience as an infant. Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
The Mommy
xxx
I should preface this by thanking you for sleeping from nine yesterday evening until almost eleven. That's almost two hours straight; please don't think I didn't notice or appreciate your obvious efforts. I'd like to discuss the events which occurred shortly thereafter, however, as they are of some concern.
Firstly, after eating a nice big meal at both 8:30 and 9:00pm, I'm really not so sure you need to eat at 11:00, 11:45, 1:30, 2:30, 3:15, and 3:40. After all, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you are not in any danger of wasting away to nothing. And then when you woke up around 5:00 and I dragged you into the bed (against my better judgment, but really, who has good judgment at 5:am?) I'm afraid I did not explain clearly enough that my near proximity alone is not the same as an all you can eat as long as you can eat buffet. Please curtail your eating needs to two post-bedtime meals per night, effective immediately.
Further, and I hate to take your fun away, but gleefully scaling both your father and I at 7:00am while screeching cheerful baby screeches and poking at our eyeballs is just not going to work for me. I've spoken to your father and he is in agreement on this one. Cheerful baby screeches are acceptable, but not when accompanied by eyeball clawing. Thank you for your understanding.
In short, I think if you follow these guidelines, you will find that I am more more pleasant to be around during the day which only serves to benefit your experience as an infant. Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
The Mommy
xxx
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Babybeast at 7.5 Months
She is teething. And mighty crabby about it. I don't think I like that last shot as it has some serious flaws, but here it is anyway. I might add a few more if I have time to work on them tomorrow.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
100 Most Popular Baby Names of 2008
So this is weird. Mister Lawyer and I are at the exact same number of popularity this year. How odd is that?
I like a lot of these names. But I dislike quite a few as well. And there are a couple I loathe. Yes, loathe, you read that right. Come on people, spelling something (Nevaeh, for example at #97) backward does not make it a cool name; it's lame. And worse, it's lame and difficult to pronounce: a winning combination if there ever was one.
And I'll never understand using the name of a celebrity, or at least one that is less than a true legend. #8 Addison. #40 Keira. #60 Aaliyah. I cannot fathom how a mere character in an evening drama has skyrocketed to number 8 over the last few years...it's nothing short of bizarre to me. But it's not my kid to name, is it? Regardless, this one takes the cake:
Of course they had plenty of hideous trendy names a hundred years ago too, so hopefully they will just stay put in the cobwebs of history.
So anyway - here's the 2008 list, for your reading pleasure:
Name information from Babycenter.com.
I like a lot of these names. But I dislike quite a few as well. And there are a couple I loathe. Yes, loathe, you read that right. Come on people, spelling something (Nevaeh, for example at #97) backward does not make it a cool name; it's lame. And worse, it's lame and difficult to pronounce: a winning combination if there ever was one.
And I'll never understand using the name of a celebrity, or at least one that is less than a true legend. #8 Addison. #40 Keira. #60 Aaliyah. I cannot fathom how a mere character in an evening drama has skyrocketed to number 8 over the last few years...it's nothing short of bizarre to me. But it's not my kid to name, is it? Regardless, this one takes the cake:
A new father has secretly named his baby girl Sarah McCain Palin after the Republican ticket for president and vice president.That said, there are so many lovely names on there - I love that people are dredging up classic names from the past and giving them another go round, especially for girls. Ava. Lila. Abigail. Evelyn. Grace. Ella. Lillian. I adore Tristan. Julian. Thomas.
Of course they had plenty of hideous trendy names a hundred years ago too, so hopefully they will just stay put in the cobwebs of history.
So anyway - here's the 2008 list, for your reading pleasure:
Name information from Babycenter.com.
June 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
