Giant Memorial Day Blowout Bargains!

Melanie had also been made secretary for both the Association for the Beautification of the Graves of Our Glorious Dead and the Sewing Circle for the Widows and Orphans of the Confederacy. This new honor came to her after an exciting joint meeting of those societies which threatened to end in violence and the severance of lifelong ties of friendship. The question had arisen at the meeting as to whether or not weeds should be removed from the graves of the Union soldiers near those of Confederate soldiers. The appearance of the scraggly Yankee mounds defeated all the efforts of the ladies to beautify those of their own dead. Immediately the fires which smoldered beneath tight basques flamed wildly and the two organizations split up and glared hostilely. The Sewing Circle was in favor of the removal of the weeds, the Ladies of the Beautification were violently opposed .

GONE WITH THE WIND

Margaret Mitchell

The first time I read GWTW, I was mesmerized by the name “Association for the Beautification of the Graves of Our Glorious Dead.” It was so evocative, so rich in subtext, so noble, and so…so…so Southern. I was enraptured of the idea that one could have Glorious Dead. And that ladies could fight to a less glorious death over weeding was positively beyond my scope of comprehension.

Fast forward a few decades and suddenly, the dead aren’t so glorious and in fact, they seem to have even lost their gloriousness for Memorial Day. Yes, there are parades and flags are set out in local cemeteries, but for every person who stops to observe the solemnity of the day, there are a dozen who are out scouting the local sales for Memorial Day Blowout Bargains! Bunting now decorates adverts and store signs, and speeches are presented as sound bites on the evening news.

Memorial Day is a fine idea. It was meant to be a day of reflection and appreciation; a day when we pause to recall those who put their lives on the line out of a sense of duty and honor. Even if we disagree with why we were in Iraq or in Afghanistan now, it doesn’t matter; they wore the uniform in service to this country. Scoring a  big screen TV at a great price has no place in that same pantheon. Like every other holiday in this country, it has been hijacked into a reason to go shopping. How is it that Madison Avenue thinks the only thing America does is shop? It’s a chicken and the egg kind  of thing. Did the ad execs notice we shop or do we shop because the ads compel into the stores?

Oddly, today was also the second day of the holiday Shavuot and a day on which we recite Yizkor, the memorial service. While Shavuot often falls at the end of May, it’s rare when second day happens to fall on Memorial Day. That said, it’s quite fitting. It’s a short service within the service, and one says the prayers appropriate to one’s loss as well as for communal groups. It’s not an easy service to get through, but it specifically addresses loss and the impact of that loss. And it is quite to the point: we remember our dead. 

America should be saying Yizkor for our lost soldiers, for our Glorious Dead. If there’s going to be a Memorial Day, maybe that’s what it needs to be: a day when there aren’t sales, when people perform some kind of national service to remind us that we are one single country and one American community.

And if we do that, maybe our candidates will remember that they are also part of the one country and one American community.

Just a thought.

Wifely Person’s Tip o’the Week

Tuesday, May 29^th, marks the 559^th anniversary of the fall of Constantinople to the Turks.

And the 59^th anniversary of Sir Edmund Hillary’s conquest of Everest.

Traditionally, angel food cake with chocolate icing is served. 

Are You Now Or Have You Ever Been A Uterist

Sunday morning, I was minding my own business, cup of coffee in hand, and the New York Times…in print….my  favorite Sunday indulgence, before me,  when I happened upon an editorial in the SUNDAY REVIEW section: The Campaign Against Women. There was no by-line, and I supposed that's just as well, being it is an editorial. The piece succinctly delineated the 4 major areas in the Republican platform that put women at risk: abortion, access to health care, equal pay, and domestic abuse. Using legislative changes currently proposed in state legislatures across the country, the thesis is supported by governmental action and not opposition rhetoric. And this should be scaring the shit of women across this country.

Okay, now I can understand the philosophical differences between people who have (or have had) a uterus and people who are less fortunately equipped. I have a father, a brother, and TWO sons. I had a husband (until he had the poor form to die.) I know how penile beings think...and I don't remember any of my guys ever so much as intimating a woman's place was shackled between the bedroom and the kitchen with a nursery in between. 

Recently, seven states have enacted measures that restrict the availability of abortion even in cases of rape, incest, or, most terrifying of all, where the life of the mother is in jeopardy. The new statutes require that a women be "near death" before an abortion can be performed. "'Near death," however is not defined. Wanna battle that one out in court? With your wife or daughter or sister lying there fading away? 

And speaking of women's reproductive rights - here's another update from Fantasy Land: they want to un-fund organizations that provide women with affordable, competent health care INCLUDING but not limited to birth control, AND get rid of the programs that provide support for parents of young children. So, the net result is more kids and no net. Can you please explain to me why on earth you would want to hinder pregnancy prevention? 

In the re-authorization of Violence Against Women Act, our crackhead Congress managed to rip the teeth right outta the bill. Gone, amongst other crucial portions, is the protection for immigrant women whose status depends on a spouse. The end result is that instead of preventing abuse, a whole classification will be more likely to remain with an abuser because there is nowhere to turn.

And as if Wisconsin's Scott Walker's attack on unions followed by the successful demand for a recall election hasn't had any impact on this moron of a governor, he just repealed a state law that allowed women to bring equal pay lawsuits to the state courts rather than to force a long, costly battle in federal court. As if this will discourage women from standing up and yelling, "FOUL!" Or, in Governor Walker's case, "FOWL!"

What is it about these Republican guys that makes them think women are going be herded back into the 19th ...not even the 20th!... century without a fight? Don't these men have wives, mothers, sisters, and/or daughters? Can they not see beyond their own hot air cloud to even glimpse the ramifications?

I am not talking radical feminism here…I’m talking about basic health and human services issues. Believe me, if I was being a radical feminist here, these are not the issues I’d be going after. This is about the status quo with an eye toward a gender unbiased future.

Which brings me back to something that keeps rattling around this little empty head of mine like a pea in a tin can: these guys don’t go after guns and Viagra….both of which are dick things; they go after anything that directly impacts someone with a uterus. Why? What is it about the menstrual cycle that scares them? That women can bleed for 7 days non-stop and NOT die? Or maybe it’s that we can do the one thing they can’t: bring a new life into the world.

Penis envy is bullshit. No one wants one of those; they just get in the way of a guy’s ability to think. Nope. This is a clear case of uterus envy. If they cannot accomplish what we can….they are going to do everything in their power to screw it up for the rest of us.

Ladies….this is our time. We have the ultimate power. If you know a Republican who preaches the gospel of the reduction of women’s rights, reproductive or otherwise, straighten him out immediately. And if you need help, I’m willing to bet there are lots of sisters around who would be more than happy to assist. 

The Wifely Person's Tip o'the Week

Getting ready for Shavu'ot? 

Try making your favorite cheesecake with half cream cheese and half neufchatel.

It really does come out fluffier.

NO MORE GAY FRIENDS

Seems like  gay marriage has taken over the airwaves of late. Between Joe Biden forcing POTUS to come out of the philosophical closet, and the head of the RNC’s declaration that a plank of the party's platform is to fundamentally deny civil rights to an entire class of people, there has been so much venom spewed that I began to think seriously about my own sentiments toward gays and gay rights in an attempt to better understand where all the agita comes from. The issues being addressed (or not addressed) were beginning to pile up and suddenly I had a funny feeling I was not being completely honest with myself or, perhaps worse, with my readers.

Was I harboring a secret prejudice? Was I hiding behind some politically correct posture and using it as a shield? Or was it something more nefarious, something I was loathe to confront in others, much less myself? I spent a lot of time obsessing about this. I examined and re-examined everything I've written about homosexuality in the past year, hoping it would shed a renewed light on my thought process. It did, and I came to some conclusions:

• I am not gay. My sexuality is not in question. I have a fair number of friends who are lesbians and nope, I am not attracted to anything but their intellect and senses of humor. Skill at mahjong is definitely a plus but I am definitely a hetero kinda girl. 

• Having been in the theatre biz for a long time, gay guys are part and parcel of the scenery. Since I'm not invited into their bedrooms as either participant or spectator, I’m not entitled to any opinion. Their sexuality has no impact whatsoever on me. I’m more interested in their upper brains. 

• I really don't care if someone is gay. Really. What anyone does in the privacy of his/her own bedroom is none of my business. I’m just not interested in someone else’s sex life. Not gays, not straights, not even Kardashians.  Unless I know someone is being raped or abused or hurt in any way and I am in the position to call the cops to stop a criminal act...consenting adults of any persuasion having sex is not a criminal act. 

La Coste

Now, let's add another layer of confusion to this debate with the addition of Tom Friedman's column in Sunday's NY Times, This Column is Not Sponsored By Anyone. Ostensibly, it deals with corporate sponsorship, but it raises an interesting point about labeling. Everything has a label these days...from college football stadia to high school lockers. Are you old enough (like me) to recall when it started? Remember Jordache and Gloria Vanderbilt? Or “Nothing comes between me and my Calvins?” Or the La Coste crocodile  and the Ralph Lauren polo guy? These were all visible signs of  70’s coolness. Suddenly everything had to have a label. Even infant clothes sprouted designer labels. Inner city kids were murdered for the name brand sneakers and team parkas. Why do we feel the need to pigeon hole everything in our life?

I when I was in grad school and sported a full length cast on my leg following surgery, my dad painted those trademark green and maroon stripes down the front, with the interlocking Gucci "G" diamond pattern all over the rest of it. We even stopped at Gucci on Fifth Avenue to show it to the ladies and they loved it. That was then….this is now.  These days, I don’t want someone else’s name emblazoned on anything I own. The label is nonsense… it must be about quality. And this applies to people as well. 

So I've made up my mind. From now on:  

NO MORE GAY FRIENDS.

NO MORE GAY MARRIAGE CONVERSATIONS.

NO MORE BLACK PRESIDENTS.

NO MORE MORMON CANDIDATES

NO MORE JEWISH PRINCESSES  

(Actually I dumped that last one long ago...but that's a different blog topic.)

Going forward, my friends will be my friends. They will not be my gay friends, or my Polish friends. Barak Obama will not be our black President. Nope. No more. Unless a label is specific to the point of the conversation, as in, “My New York friends have a different understanding of Pastrami from my Minnesota friends," I will no longer label people.

As for DOMA or the ridiculous amendment here in Minnesota, there will be no more discussion of GAY marriage.  Marriage is marriage is marriage and everyone has the right to turn a significant other into an instant next of kin. We can talk about civil rights begin denied a class of citizens because of sexual orientation. We can protest that civil rights are for ALL American citizens, and all citizens constitute WE, the PEOPLE.

This is NOT about  being politically correct; it’s about being humanly aware. We can change the conversation in favor of inclusiveness, and it doesn’t cost a damn thing. 

Join me in rejecting the label culture in favor of 

civil discourse, 

civil rights, 

and 

equality for all American citizens under the law.

The Wifely Person’s Tip o’the Week

The longer we continue to affix the labels,

the longer those targeted segments of the population 

experience alienation and discrimination.

Speak Up Loud and Speak Up Often!

A modified version of this appeared on the Minnesota Public Radio - Commentary site this morning. And while I am thrilled that they published it at all, a few of the finer points were edited out. Therefore, here is the column in its entirety. 

****************************************

I just watched the most terrifying video clip I’ve ever seen. It wasn’t from ALIEN or some Gothic vampire flick, it was a radio talk show host delivering his message to his loyal listeners. It wasn’t just the topic that was scary; it was something he said in the middle of his screed.

Richard Grenell

The speaker was Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association on his May 1st broadcast talking about the resignation of Richard Grenell, a senior adviser to the Romney campaign who happens to be an openly homosexual man. Now, no matter how you feel about homosexuality, you cannot help but be terrified by what Bryan Fischer said about the candidate. Below is a quote taken from the video:

“Mitt Romney has been forced to say, ‘Look, I overstepped my bounds here. I went outside the parameters here. I went off the reservation with this hire. The pro-family community has called me back to the table here. Called me back inside the borders of the reservation’….I [Fischer] can flat out guarantee you he is not going to make this mistake again.’”

Excuse me? Did I hear that right?

We, The People who, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, were just told by some guy that his organization controls some other guy who is a major party candidate for President of the United States.

Now, I’m sure Mr. Romneyy will come out and denounce Mr. Fischer, but the damage is done. This radio guy just told America that his organization, small as it is, is so powerful that presidents will bow to their will, and that we should all fall in, goose-stepping all the way, behind him.

While ultimately this may be a matter of free speech, there are lingering doubts over how much power the ultra-right wing lobby really wields. On some levels, it hearkens back to that classic film, The Manchurian Candidate, casting a rather large shadow over the Republican party. Are they pandering to that segment, and at what cost?

So here’s the question that needs to be asked: if Mr. Fischer and his constituency have this much power, and if Mitt Romney is elected, what comes next? Are all homosexuals to be denied employment? Are the business they own to be given to heterosexuals? And what is to become of them? Are there already plans in the works for relocation camps to house them away from the general population?

Manzanar in California

Sounds more like Germany, 1933…or California in 1942. Let’s not forget what a fearful government did to We, the People of Japanese descent during World War II.

We, the People do not have the luxury of standing idly by while this kind of rhetoric is making it onto the air waves. We, the People need to stand up for the rights of ALL American citizens.  If you don’t approve of the Vatican, don’t be a Catholic. If you don’t approve of abortion, don’t get one. If you don’t approve of homosexuals, don’t be one. Regardless of opinion, We are part of We, the People and have all the same rights as every other citizen of the United States regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation.

It’s unimportant whether or not Mr. Fischer is telling the truth. He thinks he is, and probably a whole lot of other people think he is, too. And this can spread. Fast. Too fast. Unless We, the People, stand up against bigotry of ALL kinds, there will be no one left to speak for any of We, the People when they come for the rest of us.

Wifely Person's Tip o'the Week

If we do not step up to the plate to protect our civil rights,

we don't deserve to have them

Overhead Bins: All By Yourself!

Being a news junkie and all, I read all sorts of stuff besides The New York Times. You really can get a balanced list thanks to the internet and I take full advantage of that. Thanks to the internet, I am a regular over at The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal,  The London Telegraph, Ha'Artez and even Al Jazeera. Clearly, I don't agree with everything in those sheets, but it does help to know what the opposition is thinking.  

Cindy Adams

But I have a confession: I am a devotee of The New York Post. Don't ask me to explain it, other than my father loooovvves The NYP and its slightly right of Attila The Hun politics. I, however, am more of a Page Six kinda girl, although these days wannabe glamorazzi and celebutards are beyond me. (I loved Liz Smith and was devastated when they canned her a few years ago but you can find her in a much better place these days: WoW.) My morning coffee, however, was reserved for Cindy Adams. I always thought Cindy Adams was sharp, funny, witty, urbane...all those New York things I miss being out here in flyover land. At 82, she's amazing. She travels, she writes, she shops, she's everywhere...but she's also turned mean. 

It started a while back with the Duchess of York. And then, for reasons I cannot fathom, she went off on then Kate Middleton, now Duchess of Cambridge, and her family. She wrote things that were not nice in the worst possible way. And I'd pretty much stopped reading her column because I don't like mean. 

But I happened to catch her column on Friday...probably because it was about travel, Skies not so friendly. About recent travel experiences, she ranted about flight attendants who would not pick up her carry-on luggage and hoist it into the overhead bin. 

                          This week I made two United flights. To San Jose, Costa Rica, and back. 

                            Despite my difficulty, male cabin attendants ignored my hand-luggage problem. 

                            Each issued the precise phraseology: “I have a bad back.” Neither expanded 

                            that terse statement. Gentlemen passengers came to my rescue.

                            Three crewmen on different flights suffering identically? Explaining the ailment

                             identically? Either geriatric stewards need be retired or they’ve agreed: “Screw 

                             this. We’re not luggage schleppers.”

She went on to describe other adventures on  the road that  made her sound like the original poster child for the ugly American. But it was that luggage thing that got my bungies in a knot. 

Being on the business travel side of the travel business, I rarely side with the airlines but this time, I felt for every person on that plane who had to deal with Madame Adams and her carry on bags. And my professional take on this is Lady, if you can't manage yer own luggage, check it.

Now, for the record, I think charging for luggage is an outrage. You are already paying exorbitant amounts to sit squashed in a sardine can and now, the airlines are charging you for a virtual seat for your bag...unless you wish to risk life and limb of your fellow sardines by bringing your anvil sample case into the cabin. I've watched those things being swung over your head like a kapporah chicken only to be shoved into a bin where the attendant has to slam the door three or four times to make sure that catch catches, thereby preventing said anvil from tumbling out during takeoff.  The next excitement occurs at the end of the flight as everyone crams into the foot wide aisle to get the hell off the plane...but not before attempting to decapitate the nearest unsuspecting person when removing the anvil from the overhead bin.

I can see why flight attendants say they have bad backs to avoid doing this for every little old person who comes aboard schlepping a box o'bricks for the grandchildren, expecting someone else will risk injury to hoist it into the bin. I'm pretty sure enough of them have been hurt doing that to justify saying, "No, I am unable to assist." It might be cheaper to schlep the thing on board, but really, relying on the kindness of strangers?  If you can schlep it through the airport, you should be able to lift it yourself. 

So far, no one's been killed by an anvil falling out of the overhead bin, but eventually it will happen. And when the airline gets sued for huge amounts of cash due to reckless endangerment, attractive nuisance, and wrongful death, then, maybe then, they will rethink this philosophy. 

Once upon a time on Swiss Air

Or, they might decide it's more cost effective to ban carry-on luggage altogether and change those overhead bins into "top berth" sleeper seats. It's not like it's not been done before.

The Wifely Person's Tip o'the Week

Planes are not the only way to travel. 

There are trains, and sometimes, that's a great alternative. 

The Five Second News Cycle Ad Nauseum

If you're a news junkie, you have to notice a certain amount of back peddling these days. Seems to me that all those nasty things would be candidates were saying about Mittens the Bore are coming back to bite everyone. Suddenly, he's the hair presumptive and everyone is jostling for position.

That's fine. They should please pick someone and get the rest of the ToonTown Trolley Clowns off the stage. Enough already with the junior high politics and their promises of more pizza at lunch. It's complete and utter bulloney and everyone knows it.

So now, the business of the campaign will start in earnest and this is interesting all by itself. People you thought had been hustled off the stage are suddenly back with bizarre statements in an effort to draw attention to themselves. Sarah Palin's response to the Secret Service InappropriateBehaviorgate clever way to remind us how really out of touch with the real world she is...which is not necessarily a bad thing. Even La Bachmann is appearing on chat shows. What? Suddenly she wants to run for Vice President?

But will this finally bring about a news cycle under control? In our dreams. It’s now open season on anyone who has ever shaken hands with a politician. Bring back Joe the Plumber!

Meanwhile, there’s this quote being attributed to Anne Romney:

“Why should women be paid equal to men? Men have been in the working world a lot longer and deserve to be paid at a higher rate. Heck, I’m a working mom and I’m not paid a dime. I depend on my husband to provide for me and my family, as should most women… and if a woman does work, she should be happy just to be out there in the working world and quit complaining that she’s not making as much as her male counterparts. I mean really, all this wanting to be equal nonsense is going to be detrimental to the future of women everywhere. Who’s going to want to hire a woman, or for that matter, even marry a woman who thinks she is the same, if not better than a man at any job. It’s almost laughable. C’mon now ladies, are you with me on this?” 

The original appear in FREE WOOD POST, a website that bills itself as "News that's almost reliable." You think that would be a big hint? Apparently not. Now, this is the second time in two weeks I've found myself defending Ann Romney. Frankly, I don't like the woman; she comes off as smug and smarmy; not exactly someone I ask over for coffee. But.....

And this is one big, giant butt...

Putting words in her mouth and setting it up to appear as real news is cruel, deceitful, and decidedly not funny. Actually, it meets the definition for both defamation and libel, and the intent is clearly to harm Mrs. Romney. This went beyond the bounds of comedy; it was clear from the presentation of the piece that it was meant to masquerade as a genuine news article. Make fun of the candidates, fine. Make fun of the candidate wives' clothes, fine Who cares? No one. But when you attribute vicious remarks to a woman who is not a candidate, thereby making her somewhat off limits, you have crossed the legal line. Look, I'm all for a good laugh, but there needs to be a line drawn someplace and this may be it.

The truth is that the five second news cycle leaves little time to digest what is happening while creating a voracious appetite for news. And to feed that appetite, every fart is flashed across the globe as a breaking news update. The result is not increased understanding; it's the manufacture of non-news that obfuscates understanding the real issues. Ultimately, this feeds the stupid cycle: people are used to dumbed down crap news that they begin to believe anything said with gravitas by a talking head. How else can you account for people believing FOX NEWS?

And speaking of tv news, last week I wrote a letter to the TODAY show explaining why this viewer, whose addiction to the show began with Dave Garroway and  J. Fred Muggs, has switched to CBS's morning show. I told them I couldn't stand the never-ending Kardashian report. Thank G-d I’m already at work when that horrid hour of Kathy Lee and Hoda Kotb comes on. Talk about brain-dead air! I used to like Ms Kotb back when she was a journalist but aligning herself with that brainless twit has sucked all the credibility out of her. How does she look in the mirror?

I don’t expect an answer from NBC, but I was thinking that if enough people wrote to complain, maybe they’d take it seriously. 

Or not.

Wifely Person Tip o'the Week

Disgusted by what you see on television news? Write a letter.

Word is that letters are taken seriously since people actually have to sit down and write them.

"There's no satisfaction for a man, unless....."

Betty, Bella, and Gloria - 1972

Remember that feminist movement thing in the 60s and 70s?  The one with Bella Abzug and Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem and Simone de Beauvoir? The one that happened so that we could make our own choices? We demanded equality in the workplace. We did not want to be tracked toward being only mommies, teachers and nurses; we wanted to be doctors and lawyers or, as in my case, directors. A lot of us were out there blazing trails. Some did it with flair, panache and publicity; others did it quietly, from underneath like tulips emerging in the spring. We believed we were making a difference and that future generations of women would not have to struggle to make those choices.

Or not.

When I heard Hilary Rosen’s remarks, I was totally offended.  I’m no fan of either Romney, but Ms Rosen was dead wrong in her comment about “never worked a day in her life.” Since she was not party to the discussions about what Mrs. Romney would or would not do, Ms Rosen has nothing to say on the subject.

Equally offensive was Michele (the Moron) Bachman’s comment:

           “One thing I know is when women are home full-time they have 

            a better pulse on the economy than probably their husband has.”

She claims she meant that women see prices rise first because they’re traditional grocery shoppers, but she damned an entire segment of the population with a reference as judgmental as Ms. Rosen’s.

Both of these women just fired unnecessary salvos right at the sisterhood. We fought those battles so women could choose one, the other, or even both. But the point is, we do get to choose...and both those women denigrated our choices no matter what they are.

I think what pisses me off most is that millions of women are going about their daily business working in jobs, getting paychecks, feeding their families, in addition to all the things we used to do when we were stay-at-home-ladies without having decreed more hours in the day. The expectation is that we simply shoulder the increased burden.

And we do. We do it because not working is not always an option. We look at what we do, take pride in what we do, and know that we’re setting a positive example for the women who will come after us….much the same way Betty and Bella, Gloria and Simone did when we were first making those waves. 

But it’s becoming increasingly clear that there is a growing political movement that would quash the gains we have made. Candidates Perry, Santorum, and Romney stood behind their podia and made pronouncements that would limit the choices women have. They would penalize us for having that which they don’t have: a uterus. We can grow new life and they cannot. That, dear readers, is not penis envy; it’s uterus envy. And we’re on to them.

Now, who hasn’t heard of LYSISTRATA? This is a little play written about 2500 years ago by a Greek guy named Aristophanes. In the play, the women want the interminable Peloponnesian War to stop. So when other methodologies fail to convince the guys running the war to knock it off, Lysistrata convinces the women to do what comes naturally: cut the menfolk off in the bedroom to force them to negotiate for peace.

If our male politicians want to use our sex against us, I would suggest that we follow Lysistrata’s example. If they want to inhibit access to birth control, we inhibit access to the birth canal.  If they want to limit our choices of what we can do with our bodies, well, I suggest we limit what they can do with theirs.

And to be honest, it isn't just about the  bedroom; it's about not rolling over and playing dead while these guys threaten everything we've held dear as a society. They are threatening social justice in ways that 20 year ago we would've thought impossible. The vast majority of the programs they threaten to cut target women and children, as well as our ability to care for our families. 

War has indeed been declared against the gender that makes up approximately 50.8% of the US population. Either we stand together as women against this attempt to drag the country back to the 19^th century, or we should all start getting fitted for whalebone corsets. You know, of course, if they win, whalebone will suddenly become available…

Get my drift?

Wifely Person's Tip o'the Week

There's no satisfaction for a man, unless the woman shares it.

                                                                                              LYSISTRATA  

                                                                                              Aristophanes

                                                                                               c. 411 B.C.E