Saturday, March 14, 2009

14 march 1955 "One More Rant"

socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Here is where I think people get confused and scared. Here is the definition of socialism under MARXISM:

(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

The ideals of 'fear of socialism' began after WWII and were really propogated by the coporations. The idea that we work together as a community and help one another out, that is socialism. The fear that we will live under a totaliterian state is Marxism. We now, quickly withouth thinking, so, "Oh no, not socialism." and what we are saying is "no we do not want to help our neighbors." That doesnt always have to be through the goverment.

It is true that the high cost of healthcare is from all the insurance companies and their lobbying but they exist in their form because this was a captialist and not a socialist society. The healthcare never got to be in the hands of the people and there are many cases when a person NEEDS modern medicine. An appendicitis and cancer are not going to be cured by home remedies. I don't want to sound harsh, but I am also afraid of the upswing of home healthcare that is a response to our not affording actual healthcare, certainly preventative medicine, could be dangerous in that it is not a be all cure all solution. It must go hand in hand with actual scientific medicine. They are not mutually exclusive.

I began to think this morning, after going over all the posts and then discussing with my hubby our current culture:am I a part of a newbreed: the over-educated homemaker?

Now, I am certainly not against homemaking, but I am returning to a role at closer to 40 than 20 that would have become the role of a young girl out of high school or jr college, only I have years of university in my head and my general need for education. IS that a modern concept? And I don't mean 1950s housewives were stupid, but they did not feel the need to have a vast education, probably because they would depend upon the schools to teach their children what they didnt know or else they valued their skillset and home knowledge AS valuable knowledge that could be passed onto their dauthers. I am not making judgements in this idea and in fact doing this project so I can UNDERSTAND where we stood and where we stand now?

Is it good, we new breed of overeducated homemakers? Or, in our over analyzing our we the reason that the home-skills are thoguht to not be valid education and knowledge in the first place? It is all very interesting to me, and hopefully you as well. That simple concept: the value of our current idea of education compared to that same idea in the past. In this case 1955.

We may now say, oh the housewife in 1955 in middle america maybe had no education beyond high school, therefore she is under educate. However, we, as a collective socitey, set the norms for what is education. The ability to, in this example, stay in a budget, make things when the money is not there, plan and prepare meals, clean effectively and efficiently. These are education in that they had to be learned. They are not inherent behavior. So, therefore, do we now say that those things (cleaning, budgeting, cooking) are education? I am not sure that we do.

Is that why, for the most part, they have been removed from our schools as they are not deemed actual knowledge? And, if this is the case, why have we come to think this in modern socitey? Why is it that learning Dickens is more valid than learning to budget your money? This path of reasoning ALWAYS leads me back to the original concept of our modern society being consumer driven. I know, I keep harping on it, but I am just feeling suddenly as if my eyes are opening!

In the very time when this knowledge of homemaking was most valued (1950s) is also the time we began to de-value it. But, why? To give women their freedom? Perhaps, that was used as the cause to get behind, but think about it. If you have a generation that despises this knowledge of self-preservation and the ability to make your own clothes, cook your own food, grow your own food, manage your own money, take care of your own children and elderly, who will buy and need all the things we now depend on? I mean even our children and our old people now are a product within a consumer economy, because of daycare and nursing homes. The coporate sturcture that now exists in our country relies heavily on our inabilites and our not asking "why"?

Again, maybe I am just being a conspiracy nut all of a sudden, but I really believe the more you follow a path with reason to its point, the truth is reavealed.

That is also why I do not want anyone to think I am picking on them for their opinion that they think Socialism is bad. I just wanted to point out that our idea of socialism in this country was formed in post war America by corporations. I have an ad ( I can't find it today but will post it this week, as I am out of the house again today, because Vintage friend and I are working on a project!) in one of my women's magazines, a full page ad, against what is described as Socialism. It is an ad put out by the phone company. When I found it, it was very frightening. Because, to change a generation, you do it through the then heart of the home: the mother. This is a very machiavellian ideal. The phone company was putting out anti-socialist propaganda, because they wanted to put the spin on it that it was un-american, as they described it as going against individual business ownership, which is not true. And, by doing so, they could allow people to support their idea of large monopolies that in fact only helped their business interest and eventually lead to the growth of corporations that took the freedoms of individual business and community out of the hands of the people. Socialism is basically about community.

Also, it is just a term. I don't think our country should allow itself to be defined by any term. I don't necesarily want the government taking care of us, but I do know that for the amount of tax we now all pay, to help fund things that put money into pockets of the few, could certainly help the masses with basic healthcare. Such reform would also address the Insurance company. Another corporation born out of the fear and propaganda of post war 1950s where companies used our fears of the changing world to have us buy into their idea that we need to pay them for future woes. The fact that they are as powerful and have as many lobbyists now, is because we bought into the concept they began to feed us at that time and because we didn't ask "WHY" and get involved in our local politics. They defined what being american should be and by that very act make it un-american. As we were the country of people who thought for themselves.

Someone commented that people run to the doctor with the first sniffle. This, in fact, is not ture and CANNOT be true for many, because they cannot run to the doctor as they have no healthcare. My close friend is an ER physician, and he often gets those hard working honest people who cannot afford healthcare and could NOT go for the first sniffle but now are forced to go to him on the thrid week of sniffle and end up with a high ER bill they cannot pay and then we all pay for anyway but a higher cost all of which goes to the insurance companies which are, yes, corporations!

I don't want a socialized state as some people view it. I want a nation, that we had once planned, of people with the gumption to ask "WHY?". That is why we have this country. IF my and my husbands ancestors hadn't said to England, "why do I have to follow your religion? Why do I have to do as you say" they would not have come here.

If other immigrant nationalites hadn't said, "Why, do I have to live under this dictatorship, Why do I have to live this way?" they would not have come and made this country stronger with their traditions.'

I am just afraid that many people today are fed the anti-socialist hype from the very corporate structure that has it all in place, so we don't ask why and just go out and buy.

I mean, do you ask yourself, "Why is this toothbrush $1.00 at Walmart, but $5.00 at the local owned store" Oh, it must be Walmart has magic fairies that build items for free for them. Every action has a reaction. Every choice we make has a consequence. We can try to believe what we are fed and say "It is American to do this or that" but to be "American" is to think for yourself and ask 'WHY" that is that aspect of this country and it's people that I am proud of, not because a corporate chain store sells an american flag made in china for .50 cents!

We seemed to have traded the tyranny of kings and dictators from our past for the sublet tyranny of the corporations. How are they not like a king, making all the governement decisions that decide what is good or bad for our tax dollar. The basis for ANY society is its education and health. Plain and simple.

Please, no one be offended by anyting I have said. I am speaking from my heart and from what I feel I am finding out from my research. To look at the daily magazines and news of a different time is very enlighteneing and I want to share all of this with you.

I also, don't want you to think that this blog will only be political. I still care (even more so!) for the knowledge of recipes, and cleaning tips and dressmaking, and in fact this political aspect of asking "why" makes me realize how we have devalued such skills. I want to get those skills back. I also want them to recieve the same respect and acceptence that they are as much knowledge as reading Dickens (and I love Dickens!) but why can only one skill set be valid?

So, do not think that now my posts will be all rant. IF anything I am becoming more excited to learn and take back the education and knowledge of our past mothers, grandmothers etc. I just want to live in a world where these things are important and that if we educate our selves in them, we may find we don't need to spend so much and may not need two incomes etc. And we may be able to tell our government from the local to the whitehouse, what is important to ALL of us and that we do not want to be corporate fodder.

Thanks for listening to this unedited rant, as I need to go off to my project with my vintage friend. We are working on somthing that might be giving us more space to continue to learn our 'homemaking' skills. More about that in future blogs.

And remember, Love first. We all may come to this forum with different views, ieals, religions, beliefs, but at the root of it all, we are all women and human. We want what is best for all of us and through knowledge and thinking we can come to it. Who cares if we cannot affect the white house, but if we can all change our own small communities, maybe it will ripple out someday and become a part of our overall culture.

Until later, happy homemaking and remember...

Ask WHY?


  1. Again, I just need to say, do not worry, this blog will not be a political blog, only when it is pertinent. I just found it interesting that by my going back to doing what many today think of as 'o silly womens work' has brought me to the realization of the flaws of our current time on so many levels!.
    I am still going to have many recipes and dressmaking etc. What I love is we may be the Renaissance women. WE know about the world, make a change through our knowledge and how we spend and also make a great meal, look nice, sew up a storm and are great mothers and wives and friends and sisters and all while wearing darling outfits. Go us!

  2. i actually read most of this was very 'you'. first, i think many of the homemaking classes were gotten rid of due to a lack of 'need', but now with schools being in the shape they are, it seems most of them are down to the basics out of budgetary restrictions anyway.
    second, i too am in awe of how people will just take what they hear/read and file it away as the Lord's Gospel Truth without any question of why it's been said, what's the reasoning, or even take a look at WHO has said it in the first place. there are certain public faces out there that can say anything and it's just accepted as truth. unfortunately, you can't tell who's telling the truth, who THINKS they are telling the truth, or who's just bold-faced lying...and many people are okay just not asking who's who on those lists.
    i'm still unclear why you have to wear a puffy dress to have good morals, a pleasant disposition, a caring nature, or to be a good housewife, but i guess you just like to look pretty. ;)

  3. I grew up in the 1950's, the heart of the Red Scare. The ad that really put the fear into me stated flatly that under Communism there would only be one flavor of ice cream. I used to think of that when we were practicing Duck and Cover under our school desks.

  4. Wouldn't be interesting if a woman from the 1950's could time travel into our times and see what has happened? Would she be proud? disgusted? disappointed? would it cause her to try to change things in her own time? To show people the value of the knowledge and learning that they already have?

    I think she'd be disappointed and want to go home as soon as possible. I'd want to go home.

  5. 50's Gal,

    Just a comment from a northern neighbor. I cannot comment on U.S. health care as I have never lived in the U.S.

    As a Canadian we have healthcare services provided by the government. Some things are not covered but our basic healthcare and treatment of illness is. I don't feel that it negatively affects us as Canadians in any way. We are still a democratic society. We know that if we lose our job and need to see a doctor we still can. We do not need to worry about insurance coverage as much although without insurance we still pay for medications, dental care, and a few other things. We are not perfect - we still have some things to be resolved and continue to make improvements to our healthcare.

    Just thought you might be interested in how it works up north.

  6. Did you ever hear of distributists? They have very interesting ideas, and say nearly the same thing that you do. There are several sites of interest, just google "distributism"

  7. The puffy dress is for fun, but to look good and care about your grooming reflects to yourself that you care enough about you and your time to look good for you on your time and not just for the 'office'.

  8. “Socialism is basically about community.”

    Socialism, as a form of government, is not about community, it’s about government. Community is about community.

    “We now, quickly without thinking, so, "Oh no, not socialism." and what we are saying is "no we do not want to help our neighbors." That doesnt always have to be through the goverment.”

    “They defined what being american should be and by that very act make it un-american. As we were the country of people who thought for themselves.”

    As long as what you are saying is that, without changing to a socialist government, we, as a society, need to help each other out more (be more “social”), then I would agree. As I said before, we need to help and support each other through our family, friends, church, local community, etc. before we allow the government to do anything. We need to fix where we went wrong and start doing things right, including getting big business and big government back where it belongs, not change our form of government. When I say, “Oh no, not socialism.”, I’m NOT saying, “No, I do not want to help my neighbor.”

    Hey, Anon, the Wikipedia even mentions GK Chesterton in it's decription of distributism.

    The solution needs to come from the people, not the government, or big business.

  9. the puffy dress thing was just a little joke at the end of my serious comment...didn't mean anything by it...sorry.

  10. PL, yes, I know that GK Chesterton was a distribtist. I think it's distributists who stress the importance of community, local trade, small businesses etc. They are also against both capitalism (big businesses) and socialism (big government).

  11. Regarding the view that homemaker's work was beginning to be devalued in the 1950s, I wonder if part of that was caused by a backlash from the women who had worked out of the house during WWII and had enjoyed it and their young daughters who had witnessed that and then became homemakers in the 1950s.

    I have lots of jumbled thoughts on this. I start in the 50s then go back to the 40s, 30s, etc. until I get to the turn of the century and the farther I go back the more I wonder if part of the devaluation was an attempt to take away the recently gained agency of women by putting them back where they "belonged" as less educated, less experienced non-citizens.

    Of course the corporations would benefit much more from a worker who would be purchasing more things, than from a homemaker.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts, readings and experiences, it is all very thought-provoking.

  12. It sounds like I want to be a Distributist? Is that the right word? Wow, I am learning so much from all of this. This is exciting, isn't it. I think monday I will post about recipes and cleaning and leave the politics for awhile. I do think what our canadian friend said was interesting. I am definitely against big gov AND big buisiness as well, so we all should make a new ism. How about homemakerism! Let the women of the world run it for awhile, right?
    Thanks everyone for your thoughtful and well thought out responses. I love that we can disagree and then help one another see different views. I definitely do not feel like I have all the answers and am always learning. That is so important, don't you think? Thanks again everyone!

  13. It sounds like it. :) Homemakerism is good, although distributism is just fine as well, but takes some practice in getting the pronunciation down. :) It doesn't roll off the tongue gracefully at first.

    I think everyone was fabulous in keeping the conversation on a respectful level. Thanks, everyone!

    Now, I'm really looking forward to hearing about what you were up to today.

  14. Sounds like Australia has a good healthcare system compared to U.S. (Much like Canada does?) Not sure, but England seems to make basic healthcare available to all as well. Thankfully we don't have to worry about 'losing our homes' to pay for an unexpected illness or accident. There's variety and choice; and many can afford and pay for private health cover which entitles them to 'extras' like choice of doctor or hospital... but we have public hospitals available to all, (albeit with long waiting lists for different category surgeries..)but for emergencies it's a relief to know it's free..

  15. isn't it funny that we now just know and casually admit that the government is NOT the people. we say the answer should come from the people NOT the government. But, I think I hears somewhere that the gov. was uppose tobe of and for the people. it is,now, for the corporation thanks toloobyists. Unless we could completelyrestructure and rethink the whole CONCEPT of insurance in this country, I fear we can't really change. They are one of the privatused sectors that hold all our shared money in their hands already. In my state, MA, a law was passes that everyone HAS to have healthcare. not here is affordable healthcare but you must have it and we 9THE GOV.of THE PEOPLE)WILL not PROVIDE it, so we have to o to the private sector to purchase a government sanctioned thing. That is like there being a law that says we have to have red hats, we wont provide them with your tax money, soget to old navy abd buy red hats and then old navy (who lobbyed for it) can now say :red hats are 400.00 each. It just baffles me because we already pay taxes WHY cant some of that tax money go to healthcare and education?Why is that unamerican but not to use it to fund other things? The cost of healthcare AND education has been one of the MAIn deciding factors in hubby and my decision on children. We just wanted to make sure there was enough money for school. If we had been Canadians, we probably would have had two children as we knew they could have an education and healthcare guranteed.

  16. oh, and Jim, sorry I should not have said we are all women, I am so glad to have a man comment, wish we could get more and their opinion on the homemaker. Most modern young men don't even know what that would mean. Many people think homemaking was a form of slavery.

  17. I love this! For my psychology class I am doing a social experiment where I come to all my classes as a 50s house wife. I have the dress, the shoes, the make up and a few articles from an actual magazine to help me out. I am even making cookies.

    While Lover is a little nervous about how he should act, I think it should be a fun little statement against norms. I'm trying to prove that compared to the 50s, women's rights have no place in today's society.

    I look to your blog for inspiration!

  18. Madame Belle-are you in HS or University? Sounds rather intersting, but then again I'm pretty much doing the same thing.
    How have people responded to you?
    It is funny how whenever we adress the 50's we always start with the fashion and then as we go into the psychology of the times, we begin to peel back the layers of the 1950 housewife like layers of an onion, to only find another interesting layer beneath that.
    Perhaps the 1950s really did get alot of the social aspects right and we really can use this as a model. Obviously we do not want prejudice, but again this was the decade that we began to broke down those norms as well.
    I would love to hear more about your experiment.

  19. I've been enjoying your blog. :)

    Don't forget about the subset of women who went from college to home in the 50's(and before). They were expected to get educated, but not necessarily work. My mother was one of those women in the 50's. She got a degree in English Literature and Teaching; however, only taught for one year before she had my sister in '58.

    Both my grandmother's also attended college in the late twenties, early 30's. From what one of my grandmothers told me it was more of a social experience, and a good place to find a man. She attended a two year college which was more like a finishing school - lots of parties, literature, arts, music, and practical homemaking skills. It actually sounded like fun! We still have my grandmother's lovely oil paintings. She was a wonderful artist, and just a passing hobbyist at it.

    Education for the women in my family came in handy in that it helped them pass along the love of learning to their children. They had the know-how to enrich their children's lives outside of the school system.

    BTW, my state(VA) is having terrible budget problems as well. I'm praying they don't raise taxes yet again! Our property taxes are crazy. They went up something like 300% a few years ago. I used to work for the state, and I hear that they are laying people off in my department - so sad. Personally, as a former state employee I saw a lot of waste...throwing more money at the problem isn't always the best thing.

    Thanks for letting me ramble. ;)

    I have to say, I am really enjoying learning U.S. History all over again from the beginnings, from our roots - my son is a fifth grade homeschooler, so I learn(re-learn) right along with him. I know what you mean about forgetting where we have been.

    Fabulous blog! :)

  20. Thank you so much, Alexandra, and I forgot that aspect of housewives. That is why I think, were in 1955, I would be one of the wives who was first educated at university (as I actually was) and then met my 'man' and thus would be entrenched in parties, entertaining, most like have a 'Gussie' and my charity and club meetings. I also agree that that sort of university life of 20s-50s sounded like fun. I saw the movie about Wellesley (where I almost went for post-undergrad work in art history) Mona Lisa Smile. I thought the movie was okay, but on some level it felt again like a moder interpretation that said, look being a homemaker is not a real job. I understand we do want the choice, and I am glad of it, but honestly we are no longer given the choice as it is really represented as a career path anymore and I understand that it is a career that involves a husband, but if you do plan on marrying someday, anyway, then why not be prepared to be a career wife/homemaker? Being prepared for anything is not bad.
    I really feel now that I have done my actual education and now need to continue with the education of the home. I hope someday to be such a woman, educated in books and home, clubs and charities, golf with the ladies, bridge, supper parties, occasional trips to the theatre with my darling husband, garden club the whole nine. It all sounds like a wonderful life and what has started as a project is beginning to become training for the woman and wife and community member I want to be.

  21. Oh, and I also paint. I could one day be the grandmother who dabbled at some lovely paintings, of course I would need children to one day be that grandmother. I wonder if I could go straight to grandkids. Any adults with children who want to be adopted by a nice 1950s educated grandmother who paints and gardens? That could be my ad.

  22. Hi Donna--there's a fabulous award waiting for you on my blog. Come and get it! And thanks for all your great posts.

  23. My paternal grandmother got her B.A. during the early '40s and well she did. She was married during the war, but was widowed in the mid-50s. Left with four children under the age of 10 to raise. She went to work as a high school teacher and took in boarders to help pay the note on her house. Her husband's aunt and uncle moved in, too, to help care for the children. Thank goodness for that college degree! She was able to earn enough not just to put food on the table, but to put all four of those kids through college and eventually pay off the note on that house. She went back to school to earn her M.A. after all the kids were grown.

    My maternal grandmother didn't even get to graduate from high school. She came of age during the Depression and had to go to work as "hired help" on a farm. She became a farmer's wife and mother to one. She may not have been highly educated, but ran an efficient household and helped make it possible that her own daughter graduated from high school and college.

    The magazines and sitcoms may paint quite an image of the "typical" '50s housewife, but the reality of women's lives was just as varied as could be.

  24. I am SO curious about what you and your friend are working on!!! :)

    My very long comment on your previous post also applies to this. I love your blog - even when it is political and philosofic! :)

  25. Weenie_elise-ooh! an award? Is it best homemaker?!
    Jitterbug_yeah, I never really swallow what they show as 'average' homemaker on the old shows, yet they do paint a sort of picture that I think many women wanted to work towards, clean home, loving family, freindly neighbors, helping and belonging to a community. etc. I wish that education today did put more emphasis on 'homemaking' as skill and education. Really it is important for both sexes. Even a consummate bacherlor should know how to mend his clothes, cook his meals, and balance his check book. Especially if we want to raise a new generation who are less dependent on the corporation for its needs, don't you think?
    Sanne-Gee I hope I haven't made too big a deal out of what Vintage friend and I are up too!

  26. My mother was(and is) a 50's woman. She never worked outside the home. I spent many days with the babysitter as my mother did Junior League, sewing circle, PTA, Church sodality and such. She did not get paid- but I venture that she was out of the house more than I was with a full time teaching position.
    I have a few friends who had moms who were divorced in the 50's. They were POOR because women were not paid for their work. In fact my mother's mother was poor since her husband died during the war and their store was taken over by men "who knew better" since she could not hold property as a "fine woman".
    I remember my father not hiring women because men had families to support. He would let widow women stuff envelopes at their houses.
    "Leave it to Beaver" did not exist. It is a myth.
    Nope- lived it. Not interested in going back. Interesting to read about a person's interpretation though. Even though my mother was college educated- she would have never had this conversation with my father.

  27. "Leave it to Beaver" did not exist. It is a myth."


    I don't think it's completely fair what you said. "Leave it to Beaver" may have not been true for you, but it was/is for others, without the corney dialogue. :) You can't tell others that that reality, their reality, didn't/doesn't exist just because it didn't exist for you. It may not have been the norm then, or now, but it does exist.

  28. I agree with you PL and I am not really wanting anyone to go 'back', but why do we have to throw the baby out with the bath water? We now, as women, can be anything and can get equal pay, but those of us who do want to be homemakers or mother/homemakers should and would have a better time of it if there was more an opportunity to have it done. I cannot speak for everyone in my generation, but when I was at university, I knew of no girl, not one, who said, I would like to be a homemaker, but I knew PLENTY who didn't know what they wanted to be, but did like things like getting together to try baking etc. I just think in the great big world there are probably women who would be perfect and happy homemakers who do not even KNOW it is an actual job. It hardly seems fair to say leave it to beaver doesnt exist because your relatives were left without husbands. Also, as far as college education BEFORE homemaking is concerned. Today, unlike 1955, four years of school can be about 100,000 dollars in student loan. Another "AMERICAN" institution that we don't want to be free. If a woman knew she wanted to be a homemaker, she would be better off not starting out in debt and she could always go back to school later. Even the current concept of college education is really failing many of the new generations, it hardly guarantees a job, but it DOES gurantee high debt. I have two friends who are married and just had a baby. They are both paying off student loans and now my friend wants to stay home and raise her child but they cannot, because they have to pay of all this money so she could learn to read 19th century literature. I just think it would be nice if an option were offered to women (and men if they were so inclined) to realize that becoming a homemaker/wife/mother is an important job and really is the most important. Without them we have no children and without proper rearing, populations full of people who may feel the lost need from that.
    So, I don't want us all to 'go back' but to go forward with knowledge of what was good and bad in our past and to keep and improve on the good bits. What is the point of having memories if we never bother to look back and learn?

  29. "Oh, and I also paint. I could one day be the grandmother who dabbled at some lovely paintings, of course I would need children to one day be that grandmother.

    Do you have siblings (or siblings-in-law) who have or will have children? You can always be Auntie or Great-Auntie 50sgal and share your love of painting with those kids.

    I'm Auntie Hairball and will probably be Great-Auntie Hairball in several more years as my oldest nephew is about to be *gulp* 24!

    Goodness, I vividly remember changing that boy's diapers and now he's grown! LOL

  30. My siblings are older and I am auntie, but not really. I am close in age to them. They are really my friends. I have almost no experience with rearing or being around children other than when I was a 'child-aunt'.

  31. I've just read these last two rant blog posts (I'm a bit behind the times!) and I felt the need to comment. I really enjoy your blog and agreed with many of your thoughts here. I'm also very wary of our current government and country in general but I did want to say a few things.

    I agree that we have become overly consumed with buying loads of cheap crap and owned by our possessions more than the other way around. But it isn't as simple as saying we should cut back and make do on one income. I do see the value in everything you said in that regard but it just isn't feasible for many. If I didn't work in addition to my husband we wouldn't have even the one junky used car that we do have. I have to work in order to make the payments on the health insurance offered by my husband's work which we need so badly. Neither of us has has health care in a decade and we suffer for it.

    One income isn't realistic for many families (we don't even have kids!) because it is no longer possible for the working man to earn enough from his job to support a family. The decrease in manufacturing jobs has been replaced with the service industry which is generally lower paying and with fewer benefits. Working for one company and then retiring with a pension is becoming the stuff of legends. We aren't poor enough to qualify for public assistance but we are still at the level where we struggle for many things. I wish I could be a homemaker and I do my best to do so part time. I'd happily give up cheaply made clothing and fancy coffee if that were the trade off. But I'd have to give up so much more than just "stuff". I think a lot of people are in the same boat.

    You are very fortunate to be able to live as you do but it isn't an option for everyone.

    Please keep writing this blog. It has become very important to me in the short time since I've discovered it. I used to keep a blog that I've since abandoned but you are inspiring me to take it up again.


 Search The Apron Revolution