> 6. Same work, more pay.
Exactly why do you think that this is funny?
> 8. Wedding dress - $8000; tux rental - $100.
Wedding dress - $300; new double breasted dark teal suit - $450.
> 9. We keep our last name.
Did that.
> 12. One mood, ALL the time.
Liar.
> 14. A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase.
Same here, and a carry-on at that.
> 20. We don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt.
Right, that's why you're muttering "righty, tighty" under your breath.
> 21. We almost never have strap problems in public
Unless you play baseball.
> 23. The same hair style lasts for years, maybe decades.
You just comb it farther over.
> 30. We can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives, on December 24, in 45
> minutes.
Glad I'm not married to you. My DH gets his shopping done early and
locks it in his suitcase so he can torture me about it.
Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
> Fred wrote:
>
>> 6. Same work, more pay.
>
> Exactly why do you think that this is funny?
I think ironic is closer and it is far less true. I remember several guys
being truly P.O'd that I made more than they.
>
>> 8. Wedding dress - $8000; tux rental - $100.
>
> Wedding dress - $300; new double breasted dark teal suit - $450.
Snazzy!
>
>> 9. We keep our last name.
>
> Did that.
>
>> 12. One mood, ALL the time.
>
> Liar.
>> 14. A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase.
>
> Same here, and a carry-on at that.
>
>> 20. We don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt.
>
> Right, that's why you're muttering "righty, tighty" under your breath.
Hey - I resemble that remark!
>
>> 21. We almost never have strap problems in public
>
> Unless you play baseball.
>
Try hockey!
>> 23. The same hair style lasts for years, maybe decades.
>
> You just comb it farther over.
>
>> 30. We can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives, on December 24, in 45
>> minutes.
>
> Glad I'm not married to you. My DH gets his shopping done early and
> locks it in his suitcase so he can torture me about it.
>
And mine is out shopping with DS as we speak!
Cheryl
have a wonderful festive season no matter where or what you are doing.
joanne
>On 12/24/03 9:35 AM, in article 3FE9A422...@mindspring.com, "Dr. Brat"
><epc...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Fred wrote:
>>
>>> 6. Same work, more pay.
>>
>> Exactly why do you think that this is funny?
>I think ironic is closer and it is far less true. I remember several guys
>being truly P.O'd that I made more than they.
I guess I work for a pretty good company, because I get paid just the
same as the guys. In fact, I make more than many of them, because
I've been there longer! And make the full scale (drivers hired from
truck-driving schools, with little or no experience, are paid at a
lower rate, and for a longer period).
Darla
Sacred cows make great hamburgers.
In engineering, especial government contractors, women get paid the same as
the men or there is a good chance of losing the contract.
Cheryl
> In fact, I make more than many of them, because
>I've been there longer!
More than one junior attorney has been distressed to learn that his secretary
earns more than he does. :)
And those of us who've been around long enough to be in that position use it to
keep the little twerps in line. VBEG "Obviously, sonny, you're not worth as
much to the firm as I am, so shut up and do what I tell you to do."
Christmas shopping season is now officially over. But for those of you who
aren't done yet, Ross Dress for Less opens early on Friday, with 60% off.
--
Finished 12/14/03 -- Mermaid (Dimensions)
WIP: Angel of Autumn, Calif Sampler, Holiday Snowglobe, Guide the Hands (2d
one)
Paralegal - Writer - Editor - Researcher
http://hometown.aol.com/kmc528/KMC.html
For heavens sake, develop a sense of humor, and learn to laugh. There is
nothing particularly disparaging in these jokes, as long as you take it in
fun.
If you have no sense of humour, then I am very sorry for you, because you
miss so much in this life. I have noticed several folk here who take
everything so literally and seriously!! Lighten up, and be happy, for
crying out loud.
I hope all have a wonderful holiday. I will, despite the fact I am 67, and
have the MIL with us. Happily I have invited the neighbors over, so dinner
will take more than the normal 15 minutes ( it had better!!!)
Gillian
"Karen C - California" <kmc...@aol.com.LuvXS> wrote in message
news:20031224210147...@mb-m21.aol.com...
LOL - only at the beginning. There are ways - it's called the "old boys" -
the more entry levels are indeed all the same. The women seem to get the
promotions a little slower. I can still remember some grumpy, smelly old
physicist telling me that I was in the way of the young guys, because I had
a husband so didn't need to earn more money - but the young men had plans -
would be getting married, etc. You can only imagine my answer to him. Of
course, this was a guy who would "jog" during the day - come back to the
office without showering - then we saw him one day - realized he was jogging
in his dress socks - yuck. A man who's office you never stepped into come
Wednesday (he also didn't believe in changing his clothes much during the
week). Sad to say - it became much harder for me to get timely promotions -
quite the issue - since I had more education, qualifications, and in some
ways was more competent. But, I learned about that from mentoring and
working with many more junior females coming into the work environment.
Some of these things on the Fred jokes - I think the humor is just not
working for the younger ones (under 50?) amongst us. Maybe it's a
generational thing about not appreciating the sarcasm, or something.
Happy Festivus, Chanukah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, Devali (when it comes) -
whatever,
ellice
> LOL - only at the beginning. There are ways - it's called the "old boys" -
> the more entry levels are indeed all the same. The women seem to get the
> promotions a little slower. I can still remember some grumpy, smelly old
> physicist telling me that I was in the way of the young guys, because I had
> a husband so didn't need to earn more money - but the young men had plans -
> would be getting married, etc. You can only imagine my answer to him. Of
I sat on a search committee where one of my older male colleagues argued
that we shouldn't hire the (to my mind) more qualified of two candidates
because she was engaged and when her husband finished his Ph.D., she
would leave us to follow him to whereever he got a job. It's
unbelieveable that this stuff is still happening, but it is.
> Some of these things on the Fred jokes - I think the humor is just not
> working for the younger ones (under 50?) amongst us. Maybe it's a
> generational thing about not appreciating the sarcasm, or something.
I didn't really see any sarcasm in it. I am not lied to by mechanics
because I pick very carefully, but I have been talked down to in
hardware stores and left out of bonding activities that eventually
impacted people's careers because I was female. I just don't think it's
funny and I don't think a forum that is primarily female is the place
for such stuff. And no, I won't lighten up about it. It's too important.
> Happy Festivus, Chanukah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, Devali (when it comes) -
> whatever,
And the same to you.
> I had
>a husband so didn't need to earn more money
I got that, too. Male co-worker, hired after me, wife had a job with a really
good salary, and I was told that he was getting a raise, I wasn't, because they
just had a baby. 'Scuse me? Between us, DH and I weren't earning together
what this guy's wife earned alone, and he was the one who "needed" the raise?
They had health insurance through the wife's job, we didn't have any. A lot of
other benefits they had through the wife's job, we didn't have at all. I guess
I had a different picture of who was more in need of (and more deserving of) a
raise.
Got it again some years later, that it would be no hardship on the family if I
got laid off, because I had a husband. Yuh-huh. A DH who earned just over
minimum wage, and whose take-home wouldn't even cover our rent. Some people
just can't grasp the concept that wives are frequently the primary breadwinner.
So maybe that's why some of us aren't laughing - because we feel that if we
keep laughing when it isn't really funny, people will never see these
remarks as out-of-line or demeaning. And it works both ways - we shouldn't
demean others either. Gets real complicated, doesn't it!
This is the season of good will. I for one am resolving to watch what I
say, and not fall into stereotypical remarks or responses. Thanks to all of
you in this thread - you gave me a lot to think about. A joyous holiday to
you all.
Pat in Illinois
"Gillian Murray" <gillm...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:mQrGb.8359$IM3...@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
IT'S GOOD TO BE THE WOMAN
* We got off the Titanic first.
* We can scare male bosses with mysterious gynecological disorder excuses.
* Taxis stop for us.
* We don't look like a frog in a blender when dancing.
* No fashion faux pas we make could ever rival The Speedo.
* We don't have to pass gas to amuse ourselves.
* If we forget to shave, no one has to know.
* We can congratulate our teammate without ever touching her rear.
* We never have to reach down every so often to make sure our privates are
still there.
* We have the ability to dress ourselves.
* We can talk to people of the opposite sex without having to picture them
naked.
* If we marry someone 20 years younger, we're aware that we look like an
idiot.
* There are times when chocolate really can solve all your problems.
* We'll never regret piercing our ears.
* We can fully assess a person just by looking at their shoes.
* We can make comments about how silly men are in their presence, because
they aren't listening anyway.
"Texasxsgal1" <texas...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031224225818...@mb-m17.aol.com...
Meredith
Elizabeth
--
Actually, I'd like to ammend that statement. The first one wasn't so
harmless. A lot of good and important men were lost on the Titanic.
And the second one is sort of backlashish. Gynecological disorders
wouldn't be so mysterious if women's health issues were the getting the
attention that some less chronic issues get.
>
>And never forget - women were expected to quietly leave before their
>pregnancies showed.
Yep. I'm a "miracle". According to the date my mother was finally allowed to
leave her job, I was born at four months gestation. :)
>Sorry, folks,
>
>For heavens sake, develop a sense of humor, and learn to laugh. There is
>nothing particularly disparaging in these jokes, as long as you take it in
>fun.
Interesting that so long as *you* think it's funny, then you have a
sense of humor. If *we* don't find it amusing, we *don't* have senses
of humor.
Often times, hearing another point of view wakes people up to another
point of view. There isn't just a "one way" or the "other way". Often
views are many faceted. I've learned a lot from some posts here. I've
been corrected in my assumptions - often learning from them. Sometimes
I reject another's view, other times I don't but try to include it in my
thinking process. Sometimes I have to be hit with it a few times before
I begin to understand. Dissent has its merits.
As a matter of fact, I have wanted to post my own "view" on: "If I was
headmistress of a needlework school," and set up a criteria. I have it
all typed and ready to go. If only it wouldn't stir up a hornets nest.
What I'm truly trying to do is get other "viewpoints" that might have
strong merit. If only people would look at it that way. <grin> Rather
like a scholarly approach. Not quite the U.S. Constitution, but drawing
from many great thinkers to come up with an "ideal" that can always be
tweaked by amendment. <smile>
And along these lines: what would be more correct (does anyone think)
when relating to "peculiar" types of embroideries that arise in certain
areas of the globe. I was given the word "ethnic", which I used, but
today an idea struck me that perhaps a better word would be "regional".
So, I looked them both up. However, like the words
"premier/premiere", I'm having trouble discerning which is a better fit.
<another grin>
Dianne
Gillian Murray wrote:
> I still think it is much better to laugh, or shrug things off ( attributing
> it to stupidity, if you will) than take every statement apart analytically.
> You will never make everyone agree with you (not a "Darla" you, but a
> general "you"), and life is far to short to try to change people's opinions;
> there will always be the other half who do not believe what "you" think, and
> they are equally convinced that "you" are wrong. It is a waste of time and
> energy doing this.
>
> Now, after a nice Christmas dinner with neighbors, I am going to relax, and
> look over my "stitchy" gifts!!
>
> Merry Christmas to all
>
> Gillian
>
>
> "Darla" <dar...@mindspring.clothescom> wrote in message
> news:9hmmuvgakqeelaqaf...@4ax.com...
But you don't shrug things off. You're not shrugging this off and I
have several times received email from you telling me that I shouldn't
have said things I said or that I should let things go. That's not
exactly shrugging it off, is it?
> You will never make everyone agree with you (not a "Darla" you, but a
> general "you"), and life is far to short to try to change people's opinions;
I'm not looking to make everyone agree with me, but I see no reason to
sit silent over what I think is wrong. Would you have counselled people
that life is far too short to try to change laws keeping women or blacks
from voting? My sister is gay. Do I want the same rights for her and
her partner that I and my husband have? You better believe it. Life is
too short NOT to try to change people's opinions on that one.
> there will always be the other half who do not believe what "you" think, and
> they are equally convinced that "you" are wrong. It is a waste of time and
> energy doing this.
That's your opinion. But you'll never convince me that it's a waste of
time and energy to point out the places in our culture where women are
still portrayed as inferior to me. I have no problem with different,
but I will work to change the view that we're inferior wherever I
encounter it, even if it's in what you see as a harmless joke. You
won't change my opinion that such things are not harmless. There's your
waste of time and energy. You don't like my activism? Shrug it off.
Elizabeth
>I still think it is much better to laugh, or shrug things off ( attributing
>it to stupidity, if you will) than take every statement apart analytically.
>You will never make everyone agree with you (not a "Darla" you, but a
>general "you"), and life is far to short to try to change people's opinions;
>there will always be the other half who do not believe what "you" think, and
>they are equally convinced that "you" are wrong. It is a waste of time and
>energy doing this.
>
>Now, after a nice Christmas dinner with neighbors, I am going to relax, and
>look over my "stitchy" gifts!!
>
>Merry Christmas to all
>
>Gillian
>
>
>"Darla" <dar...@mindspring.clothescom> wrote in message
>news:9hmmuvgakqeelaqaf...@4ax.com...
take care, Linda :)
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 18:08:26 -0600, Dianne Lewandowski
<dia...@heritageshoppe.com> wrote:
><snipped>
>Often times, hearing another point of view wakes people up to another
>point of view.
><snipped>
>As a matter of fact, I have wanted to post my own "view" on: "If I was
>headmistress of a needlework school," and set up a criteria. I have it
>all typed and ready to go. If only it wouldn't stir up a hornets nest.
> What I'm truly trying to do is get other "viewpoints" that might have
>strong merit. If only people would look at it that way. <grin> Rather
>like a scholarly approach. Not quite the U.S. Constitution, but drawing
>from many great thinkers to come up with an "ideal" that can always be
>tweaked by amendment. <smile>
><snipped>
>Dianne
Vancouver Island, bc.ca :) (remove 'nospam' to reply)
See samples of my work at: www.members.shaw.ca/deugau
Dianne
I've been puzzling over this question myself in trying to get down on paper the
results of some research I've been doing on a unique (as far as I can tell)
technique for cross-stitch embroidery. It's not "regional," in that many other
forms of the cross-stitch are practiced in the region where this style arose.
"Ethnic" I find too Anglo-centric a term. So, I'm playing around with
"traditional," "tribal," "people's," "peasant," and "folk," alone and in
combination.
Annie
Interesting. I've always felt the same about the word "ethnic". "Peasant"
and "primitive" used as descriptives always strike me as condescending -
sort of Lady-of-the Manor-ish.
I think traditional is good, combined with another adjective, maybe a
geographic one.
emerald
>I've always felt the same about the word "ethnic". "Peasant"
>and "primitive" used as descriptives always strike me as condescending
Indigenous?
Historical?
Local?
Skip the modifiers and simply say "typical of the Black Forest region"? Or
"numerous 17th century examples of this are found on folk costumes in what is
now Budapest"?
I mean, what was "the in thing" in the 1400s was not necessarily "the in thing"
in the 1800s, so if you just tag it as "Moldavian", it may lead some readers to
think that this is the only style ever used in Moldavia, when, in fact, a
century earlier everyone was doing rustic monochrome cross-stitch on burlap and
a century later everyone was doing high-falutin lacework on fine silk.
And how was it used? Maybe hardanger was only done on aprons to show the dress
underneath, but never on blouses where it might show bare skin? Or only single
girls could wear peacocks and married women had to embroider only blackbirds on
their clothes? Or only men could have dragons, while girls' clothing was
required to have flowers?
Interesting, I asked my husband at dinner, and he felt "ethnic" was more
race-oriented, or "brown" oriented in its nuance. He liked "regional"
because it doesn't have such negative connotations.
Thanks for the input!!!
Dianne
Peasant and primitive: I agree with you. Not good word choices. Some
of these embroideries are far from either general connotations these
words might have.
I'm talking specifically about a place wherein a particular embroidery
stitch, technique or style developed. It can get muddy to talk about
embroideries of the Ottoman empire because it was so vast. But
"regions" within this empire developed unique stitches (Mushabek - don't
ask me the correct spelling at this instant). So it's a "regional" stitch.
I have to use a broad term covering embroideries that are distinct in
style and use of stitch. Old Hedebo is similar to Schwalm, and uses
similar openwork stitches, but they are "distinct" regional embroideries.
There's just got to be a "name" that covers this. :-)
Dianne
As I understand it, post-1800 Mountmellick did not arise in an "area" or a
"region" but in the mind of a single, socially-conscious Englishwoman who
sought to alleviate poverty in a small corner of rural Ireland by helping
destitute women use a pre-existing skill (the ability to use a needle) to
manufacture something that could be sold for desperately-needed income to the
middle-class English market. She thought that British strivers who couldn't
afford the highly-fashionable, but much more expensive, far more delicate,
Scottish white work, would buy the coarser work *she* designed (and taught her
Irish workers to stitch) using inexpensive materials, sort of like today when
people (myself included) will shop in Target for Pottery Barn knock-offs. And,
she was right. The pieces sold very well until machine-made whitework was
developed toward the end of the century, knocking the bottom out of the market
for hand-made white work of all types. So, to me, Montmellick is a
manufactured style, designed specifically with market considerations in mind.
It is an "ethnic" embroidery only in the sense that those who initially
stitched the pieces were of Irish ethnicity. And, for those poor workers, it
was probably more of a radical than a traditional form of needlework, as they
hitherto had probably had neither the money nor the materials to do much
stitching besides darning.
I hope the foregoing doesn't sound like a rant. I'm finding this an
interesting discussion.
Annie
>Thanks for the input!!!
Let me know if you want me to put on my editor hat and have a look through the
final text for you.
Just because something is made for income doesn't mean it isn't unique.
Just because somebody from another country started the "process"
doesn't mean it isn't unique to the region where it was practised.
There is hardly a stitch known to man that wasn't done somewhere else in
the world. But often, certain regions (or groups of people) do it in
their own unique "fashion".
I've looked through a lot of clothing and embroidery books (certainly
not all ever printed), and the type of wool on wool embroidery practised
in Australia is not anything like that practised elsewhere in the world.
There are unique stitches and unique ways of combining stitches.
None of the stitches are "new". In New Mexico, from Spanish influence,
Colcha embroidery "became". But it's simply Bakhara couching only 2
threads, and wool, and unique ways of using color that make it distinct.
Chikan embroidery is from India, and - although there are a few unique
stitches employed that began there (such as the phunda knot) - basically
it's a knock-off of fine French embroideries. And the embroideries of
Ayreshire (Scotland) are simply a "style" that evolved from the French.
Often, the only way to tell the difference is in the construction
process of the finished goods. And, of course, the embroideries from
India - while trying to copy European patterns - really are distinct
because of their own art/cultural influence. The unique way the Scots
embroidered and designed, once you study it, are unique in most cases.
Sometimes the French influence creeps in.
Just like the space shuttle of Russia is different from the space
shuttle of the U.S. Same thing - different "style" based on their
cultural influence.
I would think that, in many parts of the world, embroidery was often
practised to make a living. :-)
To me, what separates embroideries is either stitches unique to a given
style, or color unique (like the Hopi's used different colors and
designs, but many American Indians made blankets - but all distinct).
So, these styles and peculiar stitches developed in certain "regions" -
whether or not they originated there, and whether or not they did it to
keep from starving or to embellish wedding dresses (weaving of Lithuania
and the unique construction techniques which are crocheted - including
the buttons).
Anyway, as I re-read what you wrote and I just typed - perhaps we are
talking about something different. Are you referring to something else
and I missed your point?
Dianne
I've been given the word "ethnic", but I'm not fond of it and wondered
if others thought "regional" might be a better fit. It doesn't matter
*when* the embroidery was practised, or even if it changes through time.
If it's something that has been documented as having arisen from a
group of peoples - even if only practised for 50 years but the work is
of such character that modern embroiderers wish to emulate it because
it's unique - then there has to be an all-encompassing term other than
"ethnic", I would think. ??
Dianne
Karen C - California wrote:
To use your example:
Mountmellick, from Mountmellick, Ireland. Uses (these) unique stitches with
fiber X on ground Y.
Chikan embroidery, from India, strong influenced by the French tradition of
xxxxxxx and has these unique stitches.
Obliviously, you can make this much smoother to read - I have a tremendous
headache starting, I think I have the start of a sinus infection (my parents
adopted a cat and my sister smokes and guess where I spent Xmas Day).
Cheryl
Figuring any leisure will be spent knitting
On 12/27/03 8:12 AM, in article bsk0ki$coet8$1...@ID-164987.news.uni-berlin.de,
I didn't say, or intend to imply, that ethnic was synonymous with either
peasant or primitive.
> There is Nothing condescending about the word Ethnic , unless you want
> or mean to use it as such.
I am also aware that "ethnic", in fact, applies to each and every one of us.
However, in the way the word is currently used in North America, it refers
exclusively to things that are non-European in origin and that's an
incorrect usage, IMO. As someone already said, it's too Anglo-centric.
emerald
>Interesting, I asked my husband at dinner, and he felt "ethnic" was more
>race-oriented, or "brown" oriented in its nuance. He liked "regional"
>because it doesn't have such negative connotations.
But there can be different ethnicities in a region. Take "Eastern
Europe" as just one example. By definition, it includes Russians,
Poles, Czechs, Slovakians, Ukrainians, Belorussians.... Mexicans
don't include themselves in the concept "Central American."
It's even more complex than that: Poles, Czechs, and Slovaks very much
object to being called Eastern European and prefer the term Central
Europe. (By definitions preceding the Cold War, Eastern Europe refers
to those countries using Cyrillic rather than the Latin alphabet.)
However, one could break the regions down smaller: Polish, Bohemian,
Ruthenian, Carpathian, Kashubian, Eastern Siberia, South Siberia...
That would perhaps be more useful, since the embroidery typical of, for
example, Polish Galicia, is different than that of the northern area
known as Warmia.
Which isn't surprising, seeing how Mexico is part of North America. : )
Katrina L.
Because I need a blanket term for all these types. Like a title page. :-)
Dianne
I understand that I can point out (or to) a typical embroidery by
saying: Carpathian embroidery (if indeed they have a distinct style).
But what I need is a catch-all phrase as a "header", and THEN list the
styles I'm looking for in more exact terms, such as "colcha,
Mountmellick, Casalguidi, Schwalm et al."
I know it's hard. <grin> That's why I'm asking to hopefully get some
insight from those that know more than I.
If I wrote a book with an all-encompassing title, and each chapter
listed a specific embroidery style and explained it and pictured it,
such as Chapter I: Carpathian; Chapter II: Polish Galicia
What can I call the book? (No, I can't call it Embroideries of the
World). There's raised embroidery, crewel embroidery, wool-on-wool
embroidery, chenille embroidery, cross stitch embroidery, Brazilian
embroidery, and then there's these *regional* types like Schwalm and
Casalguidi and Ayreshire and Mountmellick and Chikan et al.
I'm uncomfortable with the use of the word Ethnic, so was hoping to come
up with a better terminology. Maybe there isn't one. <smile>
Dianne
> If I wrote a book with an all-encompassing title, and each chapter
> listed a specific embroidery style and explained it and pictured it,
> such as Chapter I: Carpathian; Chapter II: Polish Galicia
>
> What can I call the book? (No, I can't call it Embroideries of the
> World). There's raised embroidery, crewel embroidery, wool-on-wool
> embroidery, chenille embroidery, cross stitch embroidery, Brazilian
> embroidery, and then there's these *regional* types like Schwalm and
> Casalguidi and Ayreshire and Mountmellick and Chikan et al.
>
> I'm uncomfortable with the use of the word Ethnic, so was hoping to come
> up with a better terminology. Maybe there isn't one. <smile>
I think regional works fine, but that's just me.
Joyce in RSA.
"Dianne Lewandowski" <dia...@heritageshoppe.com> wrote in message
news:bsl3b3$e508h$1...@ID-164987.news.uni-berlin.de...
You could always include the term "Selected" in the title and have something
like "Selected Regional Needlework from Around the World" as a title. This
lets people know that you aren't using absolutely EVERY type of needlework
available but you have selected those types YOU, as the author, feel are
pertinent to the needlework skills being discussed. CiaoMeow >^;;^<
.
PAX, Tia Mary >^;;^< Queen of Kitties
Angels can't show their wings on earth but nothing was ever said about their
WHISKERS!!
Nothing is complete without a few cat hairs!
>I don`t think regional is appropiate , becuase of the many Numads ,
>that spread their knowledge in many regions ,,,,
Nomadic peoples DO stay in their chosen part of the world (assuming there are
no unwanted "geo-political influences") and that area can be called a region.
This is not to say that nomadic people have never gone outside of their chosen
area, just that, as a group, they don't **usually** do this. Bedouin tribes,
for instance (the first nomadic tribe that comes to mind), don't **usually**
travel all the way up to Europe or over to the Orient. If memory serves, they
pretty much stay in the desert regions of the Middle East and Northern Africa.
CiaoMeow >^;;^<
How about Regions?????
Cheryl
They don't consider themselves part of North America, either. But
we're talking the people of the region here, not what geographers have
to say about it.
Sorry, gang, I couldn't resist after playing oh so very nice with family during
Christmas. Now I feel better. Happy New Year all. Boo
Dianne Lewandowski wrote:
> What can I call the book? (No, I can't call it Embroideries of the
> World). There's raised embroidery, crewel embroidery, wool-on-wool
> embroidery, chenille embroidery, cross stitch embroidery, Brazilian
> embroidery, and then there's these *regional* types like Schwalm and
> Casalguidi and Ayreshire and Mountmellick and Chikan et al.
>
> I'm uncomfortable with the use of the word Ethnic, so was hoping to come
> up with a better terminology. Maybe there isn't one. <smile>
--
Brenda Lewis Rhianno...@netscape.net
WIP: "Pink Baby" photo frame, Candamar
I'm BAAAAACK!