Flair Fashions

 

Between her divorce and my mother switching careers to become a journalist, she started her own business, Flair Fashions.

She wanted to be free days to take my brother and me to school and be present in general.

Her plan? Flair Fashions.

She would go into Boston's clothing district on Kneeland Street and pick out 30 outfits of various styles and sizes. Then copying the Tupperware party model, she would have house parties. Women would invite friends and they would order from the samples.

Our second living room was her office and stock room. For each party, the samples would be wrapped in green sheets and carried to the car.

She only worked September thru mid December and January thru June. Summer and Christmas were not good for business.

Soon people asked her to do fashion shows. She agreed.

She hired Mrs. Eisenhower (no relation to Ike) to be the moderator. Mrs. Eisenhower with her perfect figure and her hair in a bun oozed attainable style and elegance for the middle class 1950s New England woman. 

It worked well until Mrs. Eisenhower developed laryngitis the night before a big show for a local woman's club. My mother never thought of herself as a public speaker, but the night would be too lucrative to cancel. Also my mother had written all the descriptions and they were brilliant.  Since my mother's other employee was Aunt Helen who could work back stage getting the volunteer models dressed and out on the temporary runway, the evening went without a hitch. 

She discovered sales were higher in less prestigious homes. Women from expensive houses had less disposable income. Pulling into a house with parked expensive new cars she knew again women would think of bills before clothes.

In the 1950s obesity was less of a problem, but my mother grew tired of women swearing they were a size 10 when they could barely get into a 16. She learned to say that this or that dress was made in smaller sizes than normal.

Mother considered me a walking advertisement.  During vacations I would go to Kneeland Street with her. The owners treated me as a princess and my mother, who had excellent taste, made sure I was well clothed. I could go over 20 days without wearing the same outfit. 

At my 30th class reunion a classmate asked if I NOW would reveal where I bought my clothes. I'd always answered, "My mother's business." The class mate thought I was being snobby until I told her that it was truly my mother's business. We laughed about it.

My mother became a journalist for the last 25 years of her life by accident. She did not miss the house parties.  

The Ring Chapter 16

 

BETHANY STEINER

“MY PARENTS WERE always different from my friends’ parents. In both countries. Didn’t matter. U.S. Germany.” Bethany’s head was in Tobias’s lap. They were on her two-seater couch which opened into her bed. Bethany tended to make it up every morning because it was too crowded in her tiny flat when the couch was open. Unless she was going to be out all day and fall into bed when she came home. Then it was too much work.

She could have used her alcove for her bed, but that contained bookcases and a desk. Her kitchen had a camp-sized refrigerator, a microwave and a small counter dominated by a small oven.

She loved her apartment. Maybe it was her mother’s genes that she was happy with “just enough.” From her father she inherited a desire to delve into a subject and dig, dig, dig until she discovered every atom, which is why her work wasn’t work but a passion.

Until she lived with her mother and fell in love with the garden behind her mother’s tiny house, city living meant no plants.

It was in the lab where she met Tobias Becker, an older lab assistant. Together they worked under Dr. Johan Müller who treated the two of them as his professional children.

As close as Bethany was to both her parents, she hadn’t wanted to tell them about her growing relationship with Tobias, not that they would disapprove.

Tobias kept pressing her for an introduction. She kept postponing it.

“I tell you what. When they’re back from Sweden, I’ll have us go out for a meal together. Before Mutti goes back to the States.”

That her parents went on a trip together was weird. Sure, her mother wanted to check out Viking designs she could use on her dishes. Sure, her father was working on a new documentary. If her mother hadn’t broken her ankle she would have gone back to the U.S. right after her vernissage.

Bethany wondered if her parents might, just might, get back together. She certainly hadn’t liked her stepmother and was relieved when her father saw his second wife for being wrong for him. None of this had she shared with Tobias.

In their work they shared everything, maybe it was time to start sharing her inner feelings.

“I can’t believe my parents went to Sweden together. When I was over there for Chinese food last time you would think they were dating or something. He actually used chopsticks and fed her the last shrimp with them. Like a movie scene or something.”

Tobias stroked the hair strand that had fallen on Bethany’s forehead and adjusted the pillow between her head and his lap. “They scare me.”

“Why?”

“They are so accomplished. I mean your mother has art shows all over the world, your father does documentaries and writes books while still teaching.”

“When you meet them, just imagine how they look in the morning, needing showers, combing hair, brushing teeth.”

American Refugees

 

I've often heard Americans say over the years, "If (fill in the name) is elected, I'm leaving the United States. Very rarely do they.

Not after 2024. People didn't just say it. They did it.

This past week we've hosted a couple who have sold everything to move to Europe. They call themselves American refugees.

After they left we were having morning coffee with a couple of Brits who were just back from lunch in Spain. When you live near the border, it's easy to border hop for anything as simple as a cup of coffee.

They reported sitting next to a table full of Americans who also called themselves American refugees.  

They knew they were Americans, they said, because they were speaking loudly. Americans have the reputation of speaking loudly. 

There is a difference between American refugees and those that have been bombed out of their homes, attack by armies, ridden in small boats that could dump them into seas, displaced by gangs, lost everything, walked hundreds, maybe thousands of miles and suffered like none of us can imagine. 

American refugees often have resources such as sales from property, savings, skills and talents that might land them a better job if an employer is not already waiting for them.

That does not mean that American refugees aren't suffering emotionally. Leaving family, friends for an unknown future can  be scary. Reactions may vary with generation. A person who leaves because they can get a free or inexpensive degree is very different from people with pensions and social security. 

American refugees report moments of overwhelming sadness at what is happening in the United States. The excitement of a new life helps but it is does not erase the sadness of what is lost.  

They don't think of themselves as the huddled masses described  on the Statue of Liberty. Nor do they think of themselves as those being snatched by ICE and held in primitive conditions. Most of those who think of themselves as American refugees may be surprised at the number of hoops they have to jump thru to settle in a new country and the learning curve to adjust to a new culture and language. 

Many who call themselves refugees talk about missing family, especially grandchildren whose special occasions they will miss. Some express fear of reentering the U.S. with border officials looking at phones and laptops where they criticized the government. And stories of people like themselves being detained at the border does little to reassure them. "I'll wait for a new administration, they tell themselves" and hope they won't have to stand at a dying parent's bedside before then.

In the past Americans who moved to other countries might call themselves expats. The term refugee is new and scary. 

 

 

Coat Hangars Two Brave Women

 Two women who had trouble finding work 

They Won It, 7 to 2 

“The federal government has never given money to Planned Parenthood for abortion. It gives money to it for the provision of contraception and well-woman care: for the treatment of venereal disease, mammograms, and so on. The anti-abortionists recognize that the money is not used for abortion, but they want it cut off anyway. It is a real threat.” Sarah Weddington 

How many women as well as babies would have died if Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee had never been born? Weddington was out front in the Roe v. Wade case: Coffee in the background. They were the lawyers who won Roe v. Wade, taking abortion from the back alleys to safe places. The court case gave women back control of their wombs. 

Linda Coffee

Sarah Weddington is the name that comes to mind to anyone who is familiar with Roe v. Wade. Yet another attorney, Linda Nellene Coffee, was very much a part of the case from the beginning. Weddington went on to a career in politics. Coffee worked as a lawyer and avoided the limelight.

Like Weddington, Coffee graduated from the University of Texas Law School/Austin, a year after Weddington in 1968. She held an undergraduate degree in German from Rice University. Much of the information for this chapter comes from a 19 January 2017 article in Vanity

Fair by Joshua Prager called “Roe v. Wade’s Secret Heroine Tells Her Story.” I asked Prager if he could put us in contact. He said Coffee had asked that he not do that. I did find an address for her, have sent a letter, but didn’t expect nor did I receive a reply.

Linda Nellene Coffee was a Christmas Day baby making her appearance in Houston, Texas in 1942. When the family, which included a younger sister, moved to Dallas, she became active in the local Southern Baptist Church.

Her career choice as a lawyer was not based on a lifelong calling. An excellent student, she considered medicine and math. Her degree from Rice University in 1961 was in German. But she took the LSAT and entered law school, graduating with highest honors. She had the second highest bar exam score in the state.

Coffee’s early exposure to the abortion issue was when she saw a film in high school. It planted the seed that women should be able to control their own fertility.

After graduation, Coffee found women were not in demand in Texas legal firms. Domestic-relations law interested her after she had interned with a legal aid society that worked with disadvantaged women.

Eventually she worked with the Texas Legislative Council where she helped draft bills to be put before the legislature. According to the Prager article, her supervisor encouraged the clerks to take stances.

She was exposed to a case in 1969 that challenged the sodomy laws based on privacy issues, which would later feature in Roe v. Wade.

Coffee wanted to tackle the abortion laws. In the year 1970, history would change possibilities for American women. Coffee met Norma McCorvey, who would become “Jane Roe.” They lined up with Sarah Weddington, who also wanted to challenge the abortion laws. Coffee did much of the initial work in writing the petitions, filing the suit and sharing in the oral argument in the district court.

The Supreme Court’s 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, which annulled the state’s ban on contraception, would provide the basis. The reason? It violated a right to “marital privacy.” Coffee also brought in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th, and 14th amendments (See Appendix A).

It cost $30 to file the suit on 3 March 1970 at the Dallas federal district courthouse.

Weddington and Coffee won the first round—sort of. The three judges said the law was void BUT that the district attorney could continue to enforce the same unconstitutional laws.

Coffee appealed to the Supreme Court, and on 3 May 1970 they agreed to hear the case.

For many reasons, the team decided that Weddington would be the presenter. She preferred the spotlight. Coffee sat and watched.

When the judgement came down 22 January 1973 only Weddington was mentioned in the news reports. She was content in the result but not the attention. 

Sarah Weddington

Sarah Ragle Weddington was born 5 February 1945 in Abilene, Texas to a Methodist minister, Rev. Herbert Doyle Ragel, and Lena Catherine.

Because her father was transferred about every four years, she regularly changed communities and schools. For some children this would have been destabilizing, but Weddington thrived and ended up developing leadership qualities that were ahead of her time. Some of her accomplishments and activities included:

        Church choir singer

        Band

        Drum major

        President of the Methodist Youth Fellowship

She earned a B.A. in English from McMurry University before studying law at the University of Texas, one of 40 women out of a student body of 1,600. Being told it would be tough as a woman, she became even more determined to finish.

Weddington knew firsthand what a woman went through if she wanted/needed an abortion when she discovered she was pregnant without wanting to be. It was in her third year of law school in 1967. Because her life was not in danger from the pregnancy, she had no hope of a legal abortion. Her solution was to go to Piedras Negras, Mexico where she was met by a man with a white shirt and brown pants. Because she worked three jobs, she could afford the procedure.

Weddington was lucky. The clinic was clean.

Weddington later told the New York Times that when she came to after the procedure she thought, “I pray that no one ever finds out about this.” Many years passed before she chose to reveal it.

The father was Ron Weddington, whom she married the next year. They divorced in 1974.

Like many new graduates, finding work was difficult. A group of graduate students from her university were working on how to challenge the abortion laws.

Norma McCorvey was introduced to Weddington by Coffee. McCovey was not a sweet woman caught in a trap by unfortunate circumstances; she would never make an ideal poster child. This was not her first pregnancy; another child had been adopted by her mother.

Over the years McCorvey would change from being pro-choice to pro-life—from being pro-Weddington to anti-Weddington. (See Chapter 27)

McCorvey was the Jane Roe in the Roe v. Wade.

Wade was Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, who had been nicknamed “The Chief” by the Dallas Bar. He gained more national attention after the release of the film The Thin Blue Line about the conviction of Randall Dale Adams for killing Police Officer Robert Wood. Although sentenced to death, Adams was exonerated in 1988. Some 15 people who were sentenced under Wade’s watch were later found innocent thanks to DNA testing.

This was the case for which Weddington and Coffee had been waiting. Preparation included working with doctors who had seen far too many women suffer and/or die in the many hospital obstetrics infection wards maintained for the women who had complications from illegal or self-induced abortions.

Coffee and Weddington first presented the case in district court in Dallas in May 1970.

Ward helped them without wanting to when he said, “I don’t care what any court says; I am going to continue to prosecute doctors who carry out abortion.” Procedural rules stated if local elected officials continue to prosecute after a federal court ruling of unconstitutionality, there is a right to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Coffee appealed to the Supreme Court, and on 3 May 1970 they agreed to hear the case.

For many reasons the team decided that Weddington would be the presenter. She preferred the spotlight. Coffee sat and watched.

Weddington had done very little legal work when she went before the highest court in the country. She based her major arguments on the 14th amendment (See Appendix A) and another Supreme Court ruling, the Griswold v. Connecticut decision, which allowed the sale of contraceptives based on the right of privacy.

Right before the hearing started, Weddington said she had a flashback to her own abortion. No woman, she felt, should have to go through that even though she did not die and was not physically permanently damaged.

As the hearing began she said she was very nervous, but once she stood, she said that she felt herself grow calm.

Her opening remarks stated, “We are not here to advocate abortion. We do not ask the court to rule that abortion is good or desirable in any particular situation. We are here to advocate that the decision whether or not a particular woman will continue to carry or will terminate a pregnancy is a decision that is made by that individual. That in fact she has a constitutional right to make that decision for herself.”

She claims that she was “conscious the fate of many women for many years would be resting on my performance.”

When the judgement came down 22 January 1973 only Weddington was mentioned in the news reports. She was content in the result but not the attention.

They’d won with a 7-2 majority. Weddington had to wait for the ruling to be airmailed to her in those pre-fax, pre-email days before she could read the opinions. She was 26 and remains one of the youngest lawyers to ever go before the Supreme Court successfully.

Weddington went on to a distinguished career including:

        Three terms in the Texas House of Representatives

        First female General Counsel in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1977

        Assistant to President Jimmy Carter, 1978-1981

        Lecturer at Texas Female University, 1981-1990

        Founder of the Weddington Center

        Speaker and adjunct professor at the University of Texas Austin

Weddington wonders why the debate continues, not just about abortion but contraception as well. She knows many of the people who persist are religious but decries that one person’s religion should control the life of a person who is not of that belief system.

It is not just the right for a woman to have an abortion that she supports. Weddington talked about Planned Parenthood: “The federal government has never given money to Planned Parenthood for abortion. It gives money to it for the provision of contraception and well-woman care: for the treatment of venereal disease, mammograms, and so on. The anti-abortionists recognize that the money is not used for abortion, but they want it cut off anyway. It is a real threat. But Planned Parenthood may ultimately benefit from what Trump is doing and saying. Last week, I was in Houston for a Planned Parenthood event. Usually, there would be about 1,000 people in the audience. This time, we had 2,500. People are very worried, and they are giving more generously.”

Weddington says she thinks when they write her obituary that it will feature her Roe v. Wade victory. Depending on who writes it she will be either considered a heroine for saving the lives of perhaps millions of women or an evil person responsible for the deaths of millions of babies. 

Works by Sarah Weddington

        A Question of Choice, Smithmark Publishers, 1993

         The United States Delegation to the United Nations Mid-Decade Conference for Women, Copenhagen, 1980

        The legal status of homemakers in Texas, 1997

        “Getting the Right to Choose,” Time, 31 March 2003 

Works with Sarah Weddington as a Contributing Author

        Guide to resources, 1980

         Honoring a commitment to the people of America: the record of President Jimmy Carter on issues, 1980

        Roe v. Wade: proceedings of arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court, 1970s

        Barbara Vackar papers, 1972–1979

        Hermine Tobolowsky collection, 1957–1983

        Texas women in politics, 1977