I adore that blog. It is one of my must reads. I also admire Martha Stewart and thought she got screwed when she got sent to jail for something that would have earned a man a slap on the wrist if anyone noticed at all. I am your basic working woman, I never wanted to stay home (except now, when I'm tired of working and dammit, if I'd gone into the feds I'd be able to retire by now like my cousin did). But that does not mean I have any ill will, contempt, or anything else for anyone who gets to revel in cooking and quilting and canning things. I may not have time to do many of those things but I still love them, and I do them when I can, and Jane's photography blows me away. And honestly, until I read that bitchy article, I had never really thought about whether she had a day job or not. It never even occurred to me to wonder. In the year or so I've been reading her blog I never saw her hold forth on the virtues of not working vs. working, let alone hold herself out as someone to be admired because she "sacrificed" herself to have this fabulous life baking and crafting and growing things. She shares lovely images and ideas, and keeps herself out of it to a remarkable degree. And I certainly never felt that I was somehow "not as good" because I don't can my own preserves, or actually hate gardening and can't keep a tomato plant alive.
The article is a manufactured catfight, based on the false premise that every woman feels pressured to quilt, bake, make preserves, knit, whatever, and is burdened by guilt because she can't find time. Bullshit. We can't all make a book out of it, but a whole lot of us still squeeze these things in around the day job. We do these things because we love them. We can do these things and love these things and also be doctors and lawyers and nurses and teachers and accountants and whatevers. We do not have to forsake everything domestic to have careers too. It is not an either/or, pick a side, you're either with us or agin us controversy. In trying to sound all ballsy and feministy and knock the book, the author falls back on the anti-feminist position that a woman who has a job can't do anything else, and we should hate books like this and people like Martha Stewart, for making us feel "inadequate." What a slick, backhanded way of telling us how we are supposed to feel - in trying to blame Jane Brocket for making women feel inadequate, the writer is telling readers that they are supposed to feel inadequate, that this is the evil underhanded motive of a book about nice things. Me, I like being reminded of the pleasure of baking and the like, it helps motivate me to make time for it, and it makes me happy.
So I love Yarnstorm. Take that, whiny faux-feminist writer person.
You are The Wheel of Fortune
Good fortune and happiness but sometimes a species of
intoxication with success
The Wheel of Fortune is all about big things, luck, change, fortune. Almost always good fortune. You are lucky in all things that you do and happy with the things that come to you. Be careful that success does not go to your head however. Sometimes luck can change.
What Tarot Card are You?
Take the Test to Find Out.
Found via Chelle
And you know, I think it's accurate. I've had a lot of bad things, really bad things, happen in my life, and yet I'm still rolling along. Not much danger of "success going to [my] head" though - all I have to do is wash my face and feel the screw heads under the skin to remember that I have used up a whole lotta luck lately.
I do not take any of my good fortune for granted.