She's crafty

It may be impossible, but my dream is to be the Noah's ark of yarn and thread crafting. I absolutely can't get enough. Crammed under my little dorm extra-long twin bed, I have supplies for knitting, crochet, cross-stitching, spinning, and a touch of sewing (but only under extreme duress). Back home I still have my bobbin-lacemaking supplies which have been looking a little abandoned lately (your day will come, my lovelies). Somewhere I have a tatting shuttle which I still have no idea how to use. I also have a list of new skills I wish to acquire, including:

• spinning on a spinning wheel
• using a sewing machine
• actually learning to shuttle and/or needle tat
• card weaving
• triangle loom weaving
• regular loom weaving
• embroidery beyond cross-stitching

I'm sure there are more, I just haven't found them yet. To compound the problem, I have half-finished projects stashed nearly everywhere. I have a blanket I've been working on for almost a year, but now that it's more than halfway done it's fairly heavy to work with. I have several doilies abandoned at the point when they either ask me to break of the thread and re-join it on a different stitch or when I have no idea what the pattern is saying. Or if it starts to ruffle too much. I have a crochet string bag barely past the base and a dragon who is nearly done but still needs wings (I dread the wings).

Not to mention all of the yarn I've spun on my Turkish drop spindle which my amazing roommate got me for Christmas, but for some reason I never use any of it. Maybe it's because I'm mostly using cheap wool with bits of vegetation still trapped in the fibers, or maybe because I've already gone through one leg of the journey with the fiber and I think that's far enough to take our relationship. Or maybe I keep saying "ooh, shiney!". After the dragon I am going to make a crochet version of Jiji from Kiki's Delivery Service, maybe another doily, a hat, possibly a new cross-stitch project, and then I'll consider all of the other projects. Oops!

I love having all of these skills. Give me a pair of needles, I can make you a scarf or anything else. A crochet hook? I'll try to sketch up a pattern for a filet crochet doily or dig into the internet to make a stuffed animal. My pattern making software has not only allowed me to make cross-stitch patterns, but also filet crochet patterns and even the color-working for my Star Trek sweater project of two years ago. All of these arts are basically disappearing. You can't buy any good lace bobbins outside of the UK and you can barely find anyone who does most of these crafts who is under 50.

It's sad, because you can do some amazing things out of yarn and thread. I've been trying to get my boyfriend to take up crochet because I think he'll love the pattern manipulation that forms amigurumi. Bobbin lace is absolutely incredible, but I dread the day when we will ask how it was made and the only answer will be "I don't know, but they did it". Crafting will not become the next Stonehenge as long as I can help it. Even if I only learn the basic skills for each craft I want to know, I'll at least have a foundation to grow off of.

Now if only I could get a good number of Midlands bobbins, I could really make some awesome lace!

Why don't you get a job?

One of the biggest fears for kids of my generation is that there are going to be no jobs for us after college. We're all gearing up. I'm sticking with my undergraduate major in psychology because "I can get hired anywhere". I have no idea if there is an validity in that statement, but it gives me hope.

The standards are a lot higher than when my parents and grandparents went to school. Back then, a high school degree was like a bachelor's degree now. That means that I have to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in education just so that I can be considered for jobs. Also, we're going to hit the job market at one of it's toughest times and we're going to have to compete with other people our age with nearly the same credentials. Not only am I stressed about how far I'm going to have to take my education (and how I'm going to pay for it), but I also have to find the time to pump up my resume with research and other extracurricular pursuits.  I'm freaking out, worrying that I don't have enough time to devote to my schoolwork, training for my job (so I can pay for food/grad school), looking for undergraduate research work, and still finding time to relax so that I don't go insane and can function at a normal level.

And what do I keep hearing? Get a job. The general conception is that there are too many people, not just college students, lazing about and complaining that they can't afford basic necessities like health care or good food. Everyone thinks they should get jobs. They make it sound so simple. What about the fact that there are probably too many overqualified applicants for positions, making it that much more competitive to get a position. Or maybe there simply aren't enough jobs. A couple years ago our parents were dealing with fears of being laid off and in a few more years, we're not only going to have to compete with our own age group but also older people still in the job hunt.

What particularly frustrates me is that section of an application where you list prior experience in the workplace. Until this past summer, I had none. I had to list my position as "volunteer" at the local hospital and my salary as "0". What is particularly frustrating is when I have to give the reason for leaving the position and I have to write "I stopped volunteering so that I could get a paid job". See how well that worked out. It seems that all jobs expect some sort of past experience, but what if you can't get your foot in the door? It seems like there are fewer entry-level jobs being offered nowadays and yet you can't be hired without prior experience.

I'm sorry, all you people who say "just get a job". It's just not that easy.

How Disney awakended my sexuality

I am extremely happy that I grew up during the Disney Renaissance. I can still remember those advertisements on the VHS tapes saying “Coming summer of 1998….”  or having one of the Channel Surfers tell me about how the animators of Tarzan took inspiration from surfers and skateboarders. Since I didn’t get cable until I was almost 10, my childhood was mostly shaped by these movies. In our tape cupboard in the TV room, there is a fairly impressive collection of Disney DVDs. I don’t have all, but needless to say I have all of the princess ones. And in a way, despite Disney’s squeaky-clean and family-oriented image, they helped to introduce me to the concept of sexuality.

Source

In the beginning, there was Ariel. Extremely goofy bangs aside, she is pretty attractive. It seems like the earlier princesses of the Disney company were very conservatively dressed, coming straight out of fairly conservative eras. However, with The Little Mermaid, Disney was dealing with a concept that was already loaded with sexuality. In fact, I think I heard once that the legend of mermaids came about by extremely horny sailors spotting manatees and wanting have sex with them. But I might be off the mark here. In any case, one thing can be said for Ariel’s attire: the only thing keeping us from seeing her boobs is a pair of shells. That’s it. Plus, her midriff is showing. This was intriguing to me because I first saw this movie in the mid-90’s (I was born in 1991). At the time, cropped shirts were fairly commonplace and I somehow instantly internalized the notion that a bare stomach was sexy. In fact, I thought belly-buttons were supposed to be sexy before I discovered breasts. Ariel had the whole package. I realized there was something provocative about her and how she was dressed (or not. There aren’t really any “clothes” to speak of) and that started to get me thinking that about what makes people attractive.

Why is the human form so ugly?!   Source

 

Once that seed was planted, Beauty and the Beast started to develop the idea that characteristics other than physical ones could be sexy too. It seems like almost every girl I talk to who is a fan of Beauty and the Beast experienced the same emotional journey as Belle. In the beginning, Beast is downright scary. He’s big, he looks like a cross between a vampire bat, a werewolf, and the devil, and he snarls. Enough said, and Belle has every right to hide in her room. But then the story feeds us little girls the myth that we all wish was true: men can be changed. You can take a gruff and emotionally abusive man and turn him into a kind person who feeds birds with you. Sheer bliss. Beast’s edges soften, he gives Belle the library, and then there’s that amazing ballroom scene. Who didn’t want that dress? By the final battle, the Beast was sexy. He had that deep voice, he would do anything to protect Belle (even letting her go), and yet still had the bad boy thing going for him. I didn’t care what he looked like; I loved him. And then he had to go and turn into a human. That was the most disappointing transformation ever. He didn’t even keep his gravelly voice. When he and Belle are dancing together in the end, I keep thinking that she could do better. She doesn’t look as happy with the human prince as she did with Beast. Good looks actually killed his sex appeal for me, and left me longing for the “monster” that the whole movie wanted to get rid of.

And then there was Aladdin. Oh dear goodness, I don’t know who to be attracted to in that movie. First off, there’s the title character. He’s adorable, a bad boy, and his vest is open. Need I say more? 

D'aww!   Source

Plus, his voice is so soothing when he sings…. Really, he seems like a fun guy. He takes you places, he’s willing to do anything for you (even lie), and he fights a giant snake. Perfect boyfriend? Possibly. But then there’s Jasmine. Damn she’s hot! Her design harkens back to my interest in Ariel what with the bare stomach and ample cleavage, and her voice is low and sultry. Plus, she doesn’t take sh*t from anyone! A light bulb really flickered on for me when she tries to seduce Jafar in order to divert attention from Aladdin stealing Genie’s lamp. My reaction was pretty much the same as Genie’s. The scarf ripples off of her and she moves like a cat. Hot. Damn.

Source

This was the point as a child that I realized that she had a certain…something, and that she was using it to get a man to do what she wanted. I didn’t quite know what sex actually was, but I did know that there was something about certain people that made me want to look at them or listen to them. I remember when I saw the cover of Cool World (I know, sooooo not a Disney flick) at the local video store and I was curious as to why the little cartoon guys at Holli’s feet were slobbering. 

Source

 Maybe it had something to do with her cleavage or her posture, but these were things that I had seen hinted at in Disney movies and with this cover it was adding more evidence that a certain….something made people act in a certain way. I now realize that what they were reflecting was sex appeal. I am not saying that Disney made me into a sex maniac. I just found it interesting that the most family-friendly entertainment company is what started making me think about what makes people attractive to other people.

Hey you, stay out of my cervix (and do you know what goes on in there anyway?)

I am not only outraged, but I'm terrified that the general trend for this country has been that white, middle-aged, Christian, upper-middle to upper class men have started to try and determine what a woman can do with her body. I know that these men do have followers who agree with their standpoints and that they represent a portion of the American people, however they do not speak for all Americans. 98% of American women use some form of birth control, so who are they to think that they can alienate the many to serve the few?

Take for instance Rick Santorum's stance against contraception. Not only abortion, contraception too. Am I the only one who thinks that this sounds irresponsible? And then there was Mitt Romney's mishap when he didn't understand hormonal birth control. It was so bad that a television host took it on herself to educate him. I think some people, my self included, feel that should at least know all the facts if they are going to oppose something outright.

The issue with reproductive rights that I see is that the people (men) who are so anti-abortion and anti-contraception is that they are unable to see the real world consequences. They seem to believe that America will turn into the old school Norman Rockwell painting where every man and woman having sex is married and they have as many children as possible by having bland and non-kinky sex and abstaining when they do not wish to have children (ignoring the male gender role that also comes along with this mindset in that men are animals who cannot control themselves when it comes to sex and that women are supposed to capitulate, or else not tempt them at all). What about us people who don't prescribe to this mindset? What about the married couple who own nipple clamps? What about the couple who want kids but are unable to support them? What about the people in a committed relationship but are unable to get married or those who simply do not want to get married at all. We can't just flip a switch and turn off our sexual urges, and it's not just men who think about sex constantly.

Western society has tried ignoring sex. In the Victorian era, women were thought to be pure, asexual beings while men were still the dogs that they are thought of as today. In order to maintain their wives' purity, men were not supposed to press their wives to have sex constantly. Instead, they were expected to discretely purge their urges by visiting prostitutes. Meanwhile, women would become agitated and become "hysteric", so they would have to visit a doctor who would administer a "pelvic massage" until the woman experienced a "hysterical paroxysm". Translation: the women were sexually frustrated so they went to the doctor who would then masturbate them until they had an orgasm. In fact, it's because of this sexual repression that the vibrator was invented so that women could "relieve" themselves at home without being at the doctors for literally hours. The vibrator was the fifth electrical device approved for home use.

So sex happens. And despite people's best attempts to be upstanding and abstinent citizens, it doesn't always work. Just look at Herman Cain and his sex scandals. And just think of us poor sods who aren't trying to be upstanding citizens. If sex does happen, everyone, not just women, deserve to have it safely and with minimal risk of disease or unwanted pregnancy. Sure, contraceptives don't work as well as flat out abstinence (a success rate of 99.99...%, counting the Virgin Mary), but at least it decreases the risk.

And what about if a woman does end up pregnant unexpectedly. What if the contraceptives fail, or if she is sexually assaulted because she was dressed "like a slut" (clothing doesn't cause rape, rapists do)? What if she can't support a child and giving it up for adoption would already add one more mouth to already crowded foster homes? It would make sense that she should be able to make the choice to have an abortion in a safe and controlled environment preformed by trained professionals who would minimize the risk of her having any complications. However, I feel like the majority of people who claim to represent the majority don't see it that way. I'm afraid that if it is harder to find a place that preforms abortions under professional care, there will be an increase of back-alley abortions that will result in hundreds if not thousands of women dying because of complications. Baby's father from Dirty Dancing isn't always going to be there to make sure the woman makes it out alright. And like it or not, contraception and abortion has been a part of our culture for centuries. The Classical world used the Silphium plant as a contraceptive, and this practice was so popular that the plant became extinct. In fact, it is speculated that the seeds of this plant are the reason for the Valentine "heart" shape.

Politicians need to look at the real consequences for their decisions of public health. They are focusing too much on the ideal and not enough on how people actually act. If I say "people are going to have sex, like it or not", the counter argument should not be "well they shouldn't!" Not everyone prescribes to a man's way of thinking, and if they are going to make decisions on what is and what is not allowed to happen in a uterus they should at least get the input of someone who has one

Stop it

SI don't know if I have ever mentioned this on either of my blogs, but I am currently working toward a bachelor's degree in psychology. I mention this because it means that even though I am not a fully licensed psychologist, I have taken a few courses and I kno what it means when someone is schizophrenic: it means that they have a psychological disease usually marked by delusions and/or hallucinations. There are more complex and technical criteria that I admittedly can't rattle off without looking through my Abnormal Psych notes, but I do know that "schizophrenic" does not mean "self contradictory".

Schizophrenia is an extremely difficult disease to understand, even for those in the mental health profession. Patients percieve and see things that others do not. They can be dogged by paranoia and thoughts that their caretakers could be trying to harm them. Sometimes they become catatonic, retreating within themselves and not moving for days, weeks, or even longer. Needless to say, communication can be very difficult. The cause could be genetic, environmental, or a combination of both. Treatment is tricky, and sometimes the medication is more difficult to deal with than the disease itself.

The misuderstanding of schizophrenia reaches far back into history. Even after the mentally had stopped being imprisoned and started being treated, the public had begun to understand that "schizophrenic" meant double personalities. It isn't hard to see why. Definitons of mental illness have been written and re-written over the last century, and this constant flux paired with the media success of Sybil and The Three Faces of Eve probably paired multiple personalities with the term. However, it seems that new people have begun to use "schizophrenic" in a way to mean something self-contradictory.  This isn't just hearing it on the street either. I've read articles which use the term in this way, and these are articles from otherwise intelligent and informed people.

I realize that terminology is constantly changing. Dumb used to mean someone who was mute, but now it means stupid. Gay used to mean happy and exuberant, but now it means homosexual or is a more unsavory term for stupid (I hate that particular usage). I don't know why people using the word "schizophrenic" annoys me so much. It could be that it is because I am more familiar with the technical and psychological definition, just as I am sure that scientists must get frustrated when people say that they "have a theory" when what they really have is a hypothesis. But really, can we stop using schizophrenic to mean this? I'm afraid that people's perception of the disease will get warped. Again.

Lying to my parents

Parent: "So, how does it feel to be done with this semester?"

Me: "Actually, I still have a paper to write." (this part is true)

Parent:(stern look) "And when is it due?"

Me: "Uh, the 19th" (also true)

Parent: (stern look)

Me: "What? It's mostly written. It just needs some polishing. Unfortunately, it needs a lot of polishing, so I'm going to be working on it the next couple of days."

Translation: By "mostly written" I mean that I have done some research. By "polishing" I mean writing, and by "a lot of polishing" I mean that I need to start writing. And by "working on it the next few days" I mean watching College Humor videos on YouTube. For some reason, I end up watching this one over and over...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ83EBh3r7g

Turn, turn, turn

I go through many craft obsessions. I am a bit of a craft project polygamist, because at any given time I could have two knitting projects, a crochet project, some cross stitching, and some bobbin lace to work on. Lately I've been in the mood to spin some yarn.

Last year when I visited Webs in Northampton (a yarn store with a 21,000 square foot warehouse out back) I found that they had a little section dedicated to spinning. I had been interested in learning how to spin for a few years so I picked myself up a Louet top-whorl drop spindle and some wool roving at 99 cents per ounce. I left very happy. My first yarn was extremely clumsy and lumpy. As was my second and third. This past summer I ordered another 8 ounces of wool and it got a little better. A month ago I suddenly decided that I needed alpaca wool so I hopped in the car and did an after school trip to the warehouse. The result of this spinning effort was a yarn which vaguely resembles a misshapen worsted weight/chunky variety. This will become a hat. I also picked up a very small bag of local wool from the farmer's market and spun it into a worsted weight yarn in about two hours.

That is the point when I got spin crazy. I had no wool left. On top of that, my awesome friend gave me a brand new Turkish spindle, so now I have two lonely spinning tools with nothing to spin. Sure, I could work on my other projects, but nothing is as satisfying as seeing a fluffy lump of fuzz run between your fingers and turn into a thin strand of yarn. I love stretching out the lumps and feeling the fibers run past each other until the piece is smooth. I love feeling the weight of the spindle and the thrum as it spins. I feel all out of sorts. And besides, the blanket I'm working on is getting fairly large and unwieldy. I would much rather deal with a spindle than about 6 pounds of blanket.

I do have a sort of project to keep the spinning part of my mind active this winter break. In the basement there is a spinning wheel which has belonged to our family for years. The crankshaft is disconnected from the treadle and it's so gummed up with dust it looks gray instead of brown. I don't even know what kind of wheel it is, it's that old. Well, that and I need to seriously educate myself on spinning wheel parts. So that is what I shall do. If possible, I want to fix it up a bit and get it working so that I can learn to use it. Then all that's left is to raise some sheep/alpacas/angora rabbits and then shear the wool, wash it, card it, and then I can start spinning. I think I have more work to do...

 ------------------------

By the way, did you know that there are some crazy spinning fibers out there? There is the usual sheep's wool, alpaca, angora and whatnot. There non-hair fibers like silk and flax. But then you can also get camel, yak, and bison wool (bison runs for about $40 per ounce. Yak is a little cheaper at $20-$30). And then things get really crazy. You can buy milk protein (casein) fiber which I shouldn't get because that's precisely what my boyfriend is allergic to, as well as a blend of 70% merino (sheep) wool, 15% cashmere, and 15% New Zealand common brushtail possum. Yes sir, I can spin myself some possum yarn. Challenge accepted!