Books of 2007

Here is a list of the books I read this year, in order from best to worst. Feel free to post any passionate agreements/ disagreements in my comments. Just keep in mind that I most likely have a better taste in books than you do.

1) Water for Elephants.
2) Charity Girl.
3) The Secret Life of Bees.
4) Interpreter of Maladies.
5) Dress Your Family up in Corduroy and Denim.
6) Fourth Comings.
7) The Female Brain.
8) Real Women Eat Beef.
9) Lost in the Garden.
10) The Wonder Spot.
11) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
12) A Long Way Down.
13) The Memory Keepers Daughter.
14) Dreams from My Father.
15) Four Blondes.
16) Lipstick Jungle.
17) The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time.
18) The Audacity of Hope.
19) Women and Money.
20) How We Are Hungry.
21) I Am America! And So Can You.
22) Running with Scissors.
23) I'll Take You There.
24) Company.
25) The Way We Eat: How Our Food Choices Matter.
26) The Hours.
27) On The Road.
28) Special Topics In Calamity Physics.
29) Holidays on Ice.
30) My Sister from the Black Lagoon.
31) Sideways.
32) The History of Love.


Colbert and Oates let me down this year, as did other acclaimed novels like Running with Scissors and Special Topics. Water for Elephants I picked up on a whim, and it was excellent. I know I should read more non-fiction, but my life is non-fiction, and that gets really boring sometimes.

Any suggestions for 2008?

Tuscan Whole Milk Customer Reviews

Oh. My. Goodness.

Bright Eyes - First Day of My Life

I dare you to watch this and not smile at all.

Eye of the Beholder

I'm going to start this post by saying that I'm not sure what feminism is. I've read a lot about the backlash of the sexual revolution in the 70's, and how feminists who lived and stuggled for equal rights at that time feel that women today do not know what feminism is. I know that some young women today believe that sexualizing themselves also qualifies them as being a feminist- which feminists from the earlier waves of the movement completely disagree with. So is it either of these, or something else? I don't know. I'm a woman, and I'm not entirely sure what feminism exactly is. Is it being able to have sex with anyone you want? Being able to wear provactive clothing to work? Not taking your husbands name, giving up your job, having kids? I'm not sure. But the thing I'm sure of about feminism is it gave women choices. You want to go to work? Well, go join the workforce! Get a college education! Run a company! Play sports on a college level! Want to have kids? Ok. Don't want to have kids? That's fine, too.

These days I think feminism is in the eye of the beholder. I know for me, knowing that I have choices in life empowers me, and many will say that empowerment is part of feminism- although women will get empowerment in different ways.

So this brings me to the reason for this post. Usually when I read "feminist" writing- which to me basically involves any writer discussing the life choices women make and how they affect their jobs/personal life/families- I agree with a lot of what the writer has to say. Mainly because a lot of what I read deals with some type of ambiguity: I'm not the only one of my generation that doesn't know what feminism is, exactly. But today after reading a great article on Salon.com by Rebecca Traister (who I think is a really great writer), I came across "related" articles. The title of one? "Michelle Obama's Sacrifice" by Debra Dickerson. This writer says that Michelle should not have scaled back on her work at the University of Chicago Hospitals to speak for her husband on the campaign trail. She should be working, not sacrificing her career in order to help her husband win the presidency so that she can be a "hostess" as the First Lady. Dickerson writes:

She has traded in her solid gold resume, high octane talent and role as vice president of community an external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals to be a professional wife and hostess.

There are a lot of things wrong with this comment. The first being that the First Lady is not just a hostess. In fact, if Michelle does become the First Lady, she will probably be able to do more for people than if she stuck with her old job. She would have access to plenty of media attention, not to mention politicians who could help her do things for the American people. But what really gets me is the title of this article, and the overall tone. Her sacrifice. Doesn't this feminist writer see that the fact that Michelle has had the choices to do whatever she wants- go to law school, get a high powered job, and then be able to be a stay-at-home mom or First Lady or whatever, isn't THAT the great thing here? Why is this being turned into a negative, when all I can see are positives? She got a law degree, has a high powered job, and now she speaks on the campaign trail for her husband and still gets the kids to school on time! Just the fact that the wife of a presidential candidate who has not even secured his party's nomination is able to speak in front of tens of thousands of people and get the attention, respect and adoration as she is getting also says a lot about how far women have come. Years ago, Michelle would have never gotten this much attention.

I think that Michelle Obama should be admiried as a great example of feminism- because of the choices she has, and the choices that she has made.

Andrew Sullivan

The more I read Andrew Sullivan, the more I like what he has to say. I know the article is long, but if you're interested at all in the presidential election (or Obama) I think it's really good. If it's too long for your tastes, check out his blog. Usually he links to other things (I don't know how the hell he finds enough time to blog every half hour AND write for The Atlantic) but he also writes there too. 

Got Your Nose!

Now, I'm not much of an animal person myself. But I just can't get over this cuteness.

Just a Spoonful of Sugar

A recent study has show that giving honey to children before they go to sleep can help their cough.

The funders of the study? The National Honey Board. Hmm. There might be a slight conflict of interest there.