It's amazing what you can do with a few feathers and a couple of hours.....
Sunday, 22 April 2012
I do more than knit....
Occasionally I make stuff in other ways too. Recently a friend told me she was going to Malta to attend a wedding and instead of a hat, she wanted a fascinator. For those who don't know, a fascinator is a concoction of net, feathers, lace, ribbon, flowers and sparkles generally attached to a hair slide or hair band. They've recently caused controversy at the Ascot race meeting, as they don't qualify as a hat for the Royal Enclosure.
It's amazing what you can do with a few feathers and a couple of hours.....
It's amazing what you can do with a few feathers and a couple of hours.....
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
A little layette
We're waiting for my friend to have her third baby at the moment. For someone who was told 5 years ago that conception was unlikely, she's done pretty well so far with a boy and a girl, and now we are waiting for another boy to arrive :) In amongst all the other bits of knitting I've done recently, I've been making small things for the baby. A set of baby clothing is called a layette, but that's a term that doesn't seem to get used much these days, perhaps because relatively few women make the clothes their babies wear in the first few months after birth.
So what do you put in a layette? Generally it will consist of vests, pants (often known as soakers in America I believe), all-in-one babygro or bodysuits, leggins, jackets, and the usual mittens, booties and hats / bonnets. You can add a blanket if you have time. The key is to use patterns and styles that allow the baby to be dressed with the minimum of pulling of arms and legs, and that allow nappies (diapers) to be changed without removing the whole garment.
I've done 4 pieces so far, and I'm about to make a couple of pairs of pants as the baby will be in terry nappies during the day at home.
So what do you put in a layette? Generally it will consist of vests, pants (often known as soakers in America I believe), all-in-one babygro or bodysuits, leggins, jackets, and the usual mittens, booties and hats / bonnets. You can add a blanket if you have time. The key is to use patterns and styles that allow the baby to be dressed with the minimum of pulling of arms and legs, and that allow nappies (diapers) to be changed without removing the whole garment.
I've done 4 pieces so far, and I'm about to make a couple of pairs of pants as the baby will be in terry nappies during the day at home.
Friday, 23 March 2012
more dolls and more movement
Two things to blog about today, especially as it's been a good couple of weeks since the last post. First I'd like to introduce my newest pair of dolls, Abney and Teal:
Second, the fall-out from my husband's momentary lack of judgement continues. On Sunday I thought I would start a letter to him using the Jpay email service, and when I hit the preview button I noticed that his housing assignment had changed.
This is something we had expected, but even so it was a surprise and not a welcome one. It means he has been moved from minimum security to medium security, and makes it more likely that he will have to turn out for hoe squad. And no, that has nothing to do with hookers.
So I've been waiting all week to hear from him, and as is often the case, the letter that did arrive today was written the day before he moved cells. It's a very wierd concept, living 2 weeks behind yourself all the time. And people wonder why I may get a little testy sometimes when I read forum posts from people who haven't had their morning/daily/hourly email fix from their penpal and O-M-G could it be that their penpal doesn't want to speak to them anymore or perhaps the penpal is laying in a pool of blood taking his (it is invariably a he) last breath.
As mother would say, some people don't know they're born.
These two have been a real labour of love! They are the characters from a Cbeebies animated show of the same name, and have been made for a friend's 2 year old daughter. You can see some episodes of the show here and decide for yourself how well I've matched them to the characters. I did have to make a couple of changes, to accommodate a 2 year old's fingers and temper in being able to dress and undress the dolls! I'm especially pleased with Teal's hair and her sneakers.
Second, the fall-out from my husband's momentary lack of judgement continues. On Sunday I thought I would start a letter to him using the Jpay email service, and when I hit the preview button I noticed that his housing assignment had changed.
This is something we had expected, but even so it was a surprise and not a welcome one. It means he has been moved from minimum security to medium security, and makes it more likely that he will have to turn out for hoe squad. And no, that has nothing to do with hookers.
So I've been waiting all week to hear from him, and as is often the case, the letter that did arrive today was written the day before he moved cells. It's a very wierd concept, living 2 weeks behind yourself all the time. And people wonder why I may get a little testy sometimes when I read forum posts from people who haven't had their morning/daily/hourly email fix from their penpal and O-M-G could it be that their penpal doesn't want to speak to them anymore or perhaps the penpal is laying in a pool of blood taking his (it is invariably a he) last breath.
As mother would say, some people don't know they're born.
Sunday, 4 March 2012
This is why TDCJ needs to allow international phone calls by inmates
The best example of a real situation has occurred to illustrate the stupidity and missed opportunity of TDCJ and the Texas Legislature in not permitting inmates to make international calls via the new phone system. Inmates are permitted only to call those on their visitation lists who have a registered USA land-line with the phone company (excluding Hawaii and Alaska). And for those thinking that Skype would circumvent this issue, it wont. You have to provide proof of residency that matches the landline number.
There was a riot at my husband's unit last Thursday.
Normally I wouldn't be too concerned, because it is a big place and often he is nowhere near where the trouble is. I just wait for the letter with the details which usually takes between 10-14 days to get here. But this time, the circumstances are different:
The confrontation happened when the field crew were returning to the chow hall. I currently don't know if my husband has been given his old job back on food service (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred) or if he is still assigned to the field squad and had to go out to work (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred), or even if he is still not being called to work at all and just went for his lunch as usual (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred). So whatever his assignment, the chances are high that he was there.
I've been told there were several officers and inmates involved, an officer has a broken jaw and injured hand (and I'm sad for them that they had to deal with it) and that tear gas / pepper spray was used. The unit was put on temporary lockdown, which was later lifted for all excluding the wing where the field crew are housed.
I am pretty sure that once the lockdown ended, many inmates got on the phones and were telling their loved ones that they were OK. Those whose loved ones live in the USA anyway. My husband doesn't have anyone to call because none of the family over there have a land-line in their name - like so many Americans and a growing number of Europeans. So he can't even call someone and ask them to pass a message on to me that he is OK. He fulfills all the inmate-related requirements for calls, such as not being in Ad Seg.
So I have to wait for around 2 weeks before I hear anything from him, even if he mails something out that very night. How is this fair on me, when others can receive calls? I'm not asking for special treatment, just equity with other friends and family of TDCJ inmates who are no better or worse individuals than I am.
There was a riot at my husband's unit last Thursday.
Normally I wouldn't be too concerned, because it is a big place and often he is nowhere near where the trouble is. I just wait for the letter with the details which usually takes between 10-14 days to get here. But this time, the circumstances are different:
The confrontation happened when the field crew were returning to the chow hall. I currently don't know if my husband has been given his old job back on food service (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred) or if he is still assigned to the field squad and had to go out to work (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred), or even if he is still not being called to work at all and just went for his lunch as usual (which would put him in the chow hall when the disturbance occurred). So whatever his assignment, the chances are high that he was there.
I've been told there were several officers and inmates involved, an officer has a broken jaw and injured hand (and I'm sad for them that they had to deal with it) and that tear gas / pepper spray was used. The unit was put on temporary lockdown, which was later lifted for all excluding the wing where the field crew are housed.
I am pretty sure that once the lockdown ended, many inmates got on the phones and were telling their loved ones that they were OK. Those whose loved ones live in the USA anyway. My husband doesn't have anyone to call because none of the family over there have a land-line in their name - like so many Americans and a growing number of Europeans. So he can't even call someone and ask them to pass a message on to me that he is OK. He fulfills all the inmate-related requirements for calls, such as not being in Ad Seg.
So I have to wait for around 2 weeks before I hear anything from him, even if he mails something out that very night. How is this fair on me, when others can receive calls? I'm not asking for special treatment, just equity with other friends and family of TDCJ inmates who are no better or worse individuals than I am.
Sunday, 26 February 2012
You can't choose your relations
Most people, I think, would like to look back through their family tree and find some interesting or noteworthy characters. Maybe a politician, a mistress of a Royal, an heroic soldier, or perhaps a darker side to their family such as a slave trader or criminal. But that's OK when it's in the past isn't it. We can distance ourselves and our present lives from anything that our ancestors might have done, because we are not them. True?
Funny then how that doesn't apply to current family situations. If you find out that a family member has gone to prison for example, do you react the same as if that family member lived 100 or 200 years ago? I suspect not. And I don't understand why.
There is a term, "guilt by association". This actually has some legal standing, not only in several American states, but also in English law. It means if you know about an illegal (or just plain wrong) act and do nothing to stop it, you are as guilty as the person actually committing that act. It does NOT mean that anyone who simply knows the individual is as guilty as the criminal themselves. It is perfectly possible to know someone and not condone their actions. I know this because I am one of those people.
I learned this weekend that people who know me (or know of me) in real life have been reading this blog. My first reaction to that is Great! That's what it's for! But then I started to think about how what is written here could potentially change how those people treat me the next time we meet or have to work together. It's not that it is any secret that my husband is in prison in the US, or even what he did to end up there. Everyone who knows me socially, knows about my marriage. I am still the same person I was before those readers found this blog - still doing the same job in the same way, living in the same crappy social housing and still liking the same music and speaking in the same language with the same spiritual beliefs. But now not only do I wonder if they will treat me differently (however subtly) but also if I will treat them differently too. It's an unusual situation: I know roughly who they are, and they obviously know me, but they may not know that I know. Sounds more like an espionage thriller than a day in the life of an inmate wife....
The reason I'm posting about this though is more because I have been doing some genealogy recently. I did my husband's birth mother's family a while ago and thanks to the Mormons I managed to trace them back to the late 1600s to their origins in the Bayern area in the Bavarian region of Germany. I've been there, it's lovely, and I haven't yet found the exact reason for their relocation to what is now Maryland USA. In my husband's family there are wealthy timber merchants and a politician (to his amusement, a Republican), but no other criminals that I've discovered.
Last weekend I did some digging into my own family history. My mum tried a few years before she died, but did not get very far, mainly because she couldn't get access to any documents (pre-internet) and because our families seem to have their children later in life so there are bigger generation spans and most of them have died. We're also not in any way shape or form a "close family".
I used a relatively new site findmypast.co.uk which allows you to purchase blocks of credits to access documents, rather than having to sign up for a whole year's subscription. This was my magic key! I have now tentatively gone back on both my parent's sides to around 1800, but I now have some mysteries of my own to solve:
* Why did my great great grandfather retire from the police before he was 35, and how and why did he show up on a census return aged 16 living at an address in Cheapside London with no parents and only a "Person in charge" given?
* Why does his daughter show up much later with her husband and also a different man living with them, with his status given as "father in law"?
* Did both sides of the family know each other? And was one a lodger of the other family at one point as a census return suggests?
* If my grandad had a sister, who lived just 20 miles from the rest of us, why didn't my parents ever tell me, especially when I knew about his brothers?
One of our family names is Coldrey. It's not particularly common, and I'd be interested to hear from anyone else with that name, who might be able to shed some light on my retired policeman.
On the whole though, my history is how I had been told. We're of simple country stock and really haven't moved out of our native county before my parents up-sticks to Cornwall. I'll be doing a trip back to our main village in a couple of weeks so maybe I'll have some more pieces of the puzzle after that.
Funny then how that doesn't apply to current family situations. If you find out that a family member has gone to prison for example, do you react the same as if that family member lived 100 or 200 years ago? I suspect not. And I don't understand why.
There is a term, "guilt by association". This actually has some legal standing, not only in several American states, but also in English law. It means if you know about an illegal (or just plain wrong) act and do nothing to stop it, you are as guilty as the person actually committing that act. It does NOT mean that anyone who simply knows the individual is as guilty as the criminal themselves. It is perfectly possible to know someone and not condone their actions. I know this because I am one of those people.
I learned this weekend that people who know me (or know of me) in real life have been reading this blog. My first reaction to that is Great! That's what it's for! But then I started to think about how what is written here could potentially change how those people treat me the next time we meet or have to work together. It's not that it is any secret that my husband is in prison in the US, or even what he did to end up there. Everyone who knows me socially, knows about my marriage. I am still the same person I was before those readers found this blog - still doing the same job in the same way, living in the same crappy social housing and still liking the same music and speaking in the same language with the same spiritual beliefs. But now not only do I wonder if they will treat me differently (however subtly) but also if I will treat them differently too. It's an unusual situation: I know roughly who they are, and they obviously know me, but they may not know that I know. Sounds more like an espionage thriller than a day in the life of an inmate wife....
The reason I'm posting about this though is more because I have been doing some genealogy recently. I did my husband's birth mother's family a while ago and thanks to the Mormons I managed to trace them back to the late 1600s to their origins in the Bayern area in the Bavarian region of Germany. I've been there, it's lovely, and I haven't yet found the exact reason for their relocation to what is now Maryland USA. In my husband's family there are wealthy timber merchants and a politician (to his amusement, a Republican), but no other criminals that I've discovered.
Last weekend I did some digging into my own family history. My mum tried a few years before she died, but did not get very far, mainly because she couldn't get access to any documents (pre-internet) and because our families seem to have their children later in life so there are bigger generation spans and most of them have died. We're also not in any way shape or form a "close family".
I used a relatively new site findmypast.co.uk which allows you to purchase blocks of credits to access documents, rather than having to sign up for a whole year's subscription. This was my magic key! I have now tentatively gone back on both my parent's sides to around 1800, but I now have some mysteries of my own to solve:
* Why did my great great grandfather retire from the police before he was 35, and how and why did he show up on a census return aged 16 living at an address in Cheapside London with no parents and only a "Person in charge" given?
* Why does his daughter show up much later with her husband and also a different man living with them, with his status given as "father in law"?
* Did both sides of the family know each other? And was one a lodger of the other family at one point as a census return suggests?
* If my grandad had a sister, who lived just 20 miles from the rest of us, why didn't my parents ever tell me, especially when I knew about his brothers?
One of our family names is Coldrey. It's not particularly common, and I'd be interested to hear from anyone else with that name, who might be able to shed some light on my retired policeman.
On the whole though, my history is how I had been told. We're of simple country stock and really haven't moved out of our native county before my parents up-sticks to Cornwall. I'll be doing a trip back to our main village in a couple of weeks so maybe I'll have some more pieces of the puzzle after that.
Sunday, 19 February 2012
Could you live without friends? (WAP petition)
I've been away for a few days and been busy as it's been my birthday, but I need to post a link to a petition that has been set up by the folks at the Write A Prisoner website.
To sign it, click HERE and please add it to your Facebook, Twitter, etc
The rationale behind it is as follows.....
"We are WriteAPrisoner.com, a website that posts the following types of profiles for inmates: Educational, Employment, Housing, Legal, and our most popular, Pen-Pal. Members of the public choose to write the inmates posted on our website via postal mail. We do not give inmates access to the Internet in any way. In 2003 the Florida Department of Corrections proposed a rule to ban inmates from seeking pen-pals. This rule bans inmates from participating in all of our programs. We attended the State’s public hearing on the proposed rule in Tallahassee, Florida, as did representatives from many other organizations that oppose the rule, including the ACLU, the Catholic Church, members of the public, ministers, and others. Not one person showed up to support the rule! Still, in 2004, the rule was implemented by former Florida Department of Corrections’ Secretary, James Crosby. (Incidentally, Mr. Crosby, who implemented this rule, has since been imprisoned himself on corruption charges.) In 2009, along with Freedom Through Christ Prison Ministry (one of the oldest prison ministries in this country), we challenged this rule in Federal Court, represented by a highly competent team of lawyers from the Florida Justice Institute. Presenting NO EVIDENCE of wrongdoing by pen-pals or WriteAPrisoner.com of any kind, the district court arbitrarily ruled against us (and the inmates).
We appealed to a panel of judges on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in hopes that justice would prevail. Again, presenting not a single piece of evidence of wrongdoing, a panel of three judges ruled against us in yet another stunningly arbitrary decision. While we pursue the appeals process, we are hopeful that you will sign this petition asking Governor Scott of the State of Florida to repeal this senseless and destructive rule.
Research overwhelmingly shows that inmates having access to contacts outside of prison has a highly positive and effective impact on rehabilitation. Still, the State of Florida has cut them completely off without even so much as a single documented problem. Numerous studies show us the State’s position is counterproductive to helping these people turn their lives around and returning to us as well adjusted citizens: http://writeaprisoner.com/why-write-a-prisoner/default.aspx
Since the adoption of this ban in Florida, two other states have followed suit and adopted almost verbatim language of the Florida Department of Corrections’ rule that bans our mail. They are Governor Nixon from Missouri and Governor Daniels from Indiana. We intend to send this petition to all three governors. Please support what little is left of a First Amendment for prisoners or those seeking to help them turn their lives around, and sign this petition today. Thank you!"
To sign it, click HERE and please add it to your Facebook, Twitter, etc
The rationale behind it is as follows.....
"We are WriteAPrisoner.com, a website that posts the following types of profiles for inmates: Educational, Employment, Housing, Legal, and our most popular, Pen-Pal. Members of the public choose to write the inmates posted on our website via postal mail. We do not give inmates access to the Internet in any way. In 2003 the Florida Department of Corrections proposed a rule to ban inmates from seeking pen-pals. This rule bans inmates from participating in all of our programs. We attended the State’s public hearing on the proposed rule in Tallahassee, Florida, as did representatives from many other organizations that oppose the rule, including the ACLU, the Catholic Church, members of the public, ministers, and others. Not one person showed up to support the rule! Still, in 2004, the rule was implemented by former Florida Department of Corrections’ Secretary, James Crosby. (Incidentally, Mr. Crosby, who implemented this rule, has since been imprisoned himself on corruption charges.) In 2009, along with Freedom Through Christ Prison Ministry (one of the oldest prison ministries in this country), we challenged this rule in Federal Court, represented by a highly competent team of lawyers from the Florida Justice Institute. Presenting NO EVIDENCE of wrongdoing by pen-pals or WriteAPrisoner.com of any kind, the district court arbitrarily ruled against us (and the inmates).
We appealed to a panel of judges on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in hopes that justice would prevail. Again, presenting not a single piece of evidence of wrongdoing, a panel of three judges ruled against us in yet another stunningly arbitrary decision. While we pursue the appeals process, we are hopeful that you will sign this petition asking Governor Scott of the State of Florida to repeal this senseless and destructive rule.
Research overwhelmingly shows that inmates having access to contacts outside of prison has a highly positive and effective impact on rehabilitation. Still, the State of Florida has cut them completely off without even so much as a single documented problem. Numerous studies show us the State’s position is counterproductive to helping these people turn their lives around and returning to us as well adjusted citizens: http://writeaprisoner.com/why-write-a-prisoner/default.aspx
Since the adoption of this ban in Florida, two other states have followed suit and adopted almost verbatim language of the Florida Department of Corrections’ rule that bans our mail. They are Governor Nixon from Missouri and Governor Daniels from Indiana. We intend to send this petition to all three governors. Please support what little is left of a First Amendment for prisoners or those seeking to help them turn their lives around, and sign this petition today. Thank you!"
Wednesday, 1 February 2012
Not Public Property
There are a lot of stereotypes that go with prison; the bully guard, the cruel warden, the flirty nurse/teacher/librarian, the tough convict, the wimpy convict, and of course the inmate's wife. How do stereotypes become? In most cases, it is because there are indeed a very small number of people who do act/look/behave in such a way that is extreme. And because these are extreme cases, people tend to talk about them, and so the myth evolves into a stereotype that most people recognise and many people actually thinks is the real thing.
There was the first episode of a new drama on BBC 1 last night, called "Prison Wives". It's not a documentary, it uses fictional characters and a fictional prison, but it portrays the lives of an assortment of women whose husbands are locked up in the UK. I really was in two minds whether to watch it, and saw the first three or four minutes after the credits started before I turned it off. But the tiny bit that I did see, made me think it would be a good drama, probably addressing some of the issues that British inmate wives face in a sensitive and unsensationaistic way. Of course it is entertainment, but the BBC often has a way of commissioning dramas like this that handle topics in a far more grown-up way than many so-called "documentary" makers do.
One of the reasons I decided not to watch the programme was that I'd had enough of prison for one day. I don't do my husband's time for him, and I don't feel obliged to make it the centre of my universe in the way that it is for him. While I have an interest in prison issues and I like murder-mysteries, that doesn't mean it is the only thing that interests me.
When I got home from work last night there was a message in my inbox on one of the prison forums I inhabit, from a woman from Associated Press UK, asking me if I would like to take part in a film about "women who fall in love with inmates". Most of the time, I just delete messages like that, especially when there is a specific section on that particular forum where the media can post their requests for guinea pigs. Last night though, it really rubbed me the wrong way.
It is one thing to post a general request for all to see, but quite another to invade my inbox with a request, especially when they have obviously not taken the time to read what is publicly available about me and my husband. If they had done so, they would know that I did not fall in love with an inmate, I fell in love with a free man who then went on to comit a crime and is now an inmate. Not the same thing at all. They would also know, if they chose to find out, that I also write to several other inmates across America - why don't they want to know about friendships with inmates? Why don't they want to talk to me about two of my pals who have both spent time on Death Row (in different states) and who are now in general population serving life sentences?
But what really got me was the old ploy of "your chance to tell your story". Am I expected to bite their hand off and cry "Of course I'd love to take part in something that would lead to so much ridicule and pity being sent my way, and may damage my chances of moving to the US or my husband's chances of parole at a later date". It would not be our chance to tell our story; it would be us being used to illustrate whatever whimsical slant the producer wanted to put on their own perceptions of what life is like for "someone like me".
I came to the conclusion several years ago that there is no way to show on film this life that my husband and I have without the majority of people either thinking we are sad, mad or bad. The minute you start to try and explain, it makes you sound desperate or dillusional, even to those who may not immediately think poorly of you. I even find myself thinking how daft I sound sometimes, so I can imagine what others must think. I decided that film is not the medium to use if I want to give a positive portrayal, at least, not someone elses' film.
I write this blog because I know there are people out there who face a similar situation to us, with the hope that they can find information and maybe a little solidarity here. I am open and honest with the people I meet face to face about where my husband is and why, but I don't parade around town with a banner to make a statement about it. I don't eat, sleep and think prison 24/7 and I have absolutely no intention of doing so.
If anyone is going to make a film or write a book or play about us, it will be us. We're not some Victorian freak show that you can amuse yourself with, and frankly we don't fit into the stereotype that the media seem desperate to show anyway. We're just two people making the best of a bad situation together.
If you want juicy scandal, try the Lohans or Hiltons of this world.
There was the first episode of a new drama on BBC 1 last night, called "Prison Wives". It's not a documentary, it uses fictional characters and a fictional prison, but it portrays the lives of an assortment of women whose husbands are locked up in the UK. I really was in two minds whether to watch it, and saw the first three or four minutes after the credits started before I turned it off. But the tiny bit that I did see, made me think it would be a good drama, probably addressing some of the issues that British inmate wives face in a sensitive and unsensationaistic way. Of course it is entertainment, but the BBC often has a way of commissioning dramas like this that handle topics in a far more grown-up way than many so-called "documentary" makers do.
One of the reasons I decided not to watch the programme was that I'd had enough of prison for one day. I don't do my husband's time for him, and I don't feel obliged to make it the centre of my universe in the way that it is for him. While I have an interest in prison issues and I like murder-mysteries, that doesn't mean it is the only thing that interests me.
When I got home from work last night there was a message in my inbox on one of the prison forums I inhabit, from a woman from Associated Press UK, asking me if I would like to take part in a film about "women who fall in love with inmates". Most of the time, I just delete messages like that, especially when there is a specific section on that particular forum where the media can post their requests for guinea pigs. Last night though, it really rubbed me the wrong way.
It is one thing to post a general request for all to see, but quite another to invade my inbox with a request, especially when they have obviously not taken the time to read what is publicly available about me and my husband. If they had done so, they would know that I did not fall in love with an inmate, I fell in love with a free man who then went on to comit a crime and is now an inmate. Not the same thing at all. They would also know, if they chose to find out, that I also write to several other inmates across America - why don't they want to know about friendships with inmates? Why don't they want to talk to me about two of my pals who have both spent time on Death Row (in different states) and who are now in general population serving life sentences?
But what really got me was the old ploy of "your chance to tell your story". Am I expected to bite their hand off and cry "Of course I'd love to take part in something that would lead to so much ridicule and pity being sent my way, and may damage my chances of moving to the US or my husband's chances of parole at a later date". It would not be our chance to tell our story; it would be us being used to illustrate whatever whimsical slant the producer wanted to put on their own perceptions of what life is like for "someone like me".
I came to the conclusion several years ago that there is no way to show on film this life that my husband and I have without the majority of people either thinking we are sad, mad or bad. The minute you start to try and explain, it makes you sound desperate or dillusional, even to those who may not immediately think poorly of you. I even find myself thinking how daft I sound sometimes, so I can imagine what others must think. I decided that film is not the medium to use if I want to give a positive portrayal, at least, not someone elses' film.
I write this blog because I know there are people out there who face a similar situation to us, with the hope that they can find information and maybe a little solidarity here. I am open and honest with the people I meet face to face about where my husband is and why, but I don't parade around town with a banner to make a statement about it. I don't eat, sleep and think prison 24/7 and I have absolutely no intention of doing so.
If anyone is going to make a film or write a book or play about us, it will be us. We're not some Victorian freak show that you can amuse yourself with, and frankly we don't fit into the stereotype that the media seem desperate to show anyway. We're just two people making the best of a bad situation together.
If you want juicy scandal, try the Lohans or Hiltons of this world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)