Free Martha!

Okay, I know she's not actually IN prison. Despite all those stupid pictures that were going around about how she would decorate her cell (which were designed by someone with NO IDEA about Martha, because they were WAAAAY too tacky for her cell decor. It would be something tasteful, perhaps with some Shaker furniture, with a lot of sea foam green, thank you very much). But I think she is innocent of the charges against her, and it is ridiculous that her career is in jeopardy because she took her broker's advice. People say "it's the cover up that gets you." What, exactly, did she cover up? A murder? An invasion on shaky evidence? Or perhaps illicit adulterous sex while on the job? Who was seriously harmed by Martha's actions? Yeah. That's what I thought you'd say.

I've thought all along that the case against Martha Stewart was being driven

1. by a desire to make an example of a famous person
2. because people dislike her for no really good reason
3. because she's a powerful woman (dare I say it, even, at times, a bitch?)

I heard on the news that courtroom sketch artists were having a hard time drawing her because she has no "distinguishing features." How about that hair, man? That's good. And the self-assured tilt of her eyebrows. The pictures I've seen are definitely unattractive, and unflattering. These people are supposed to be artists, yet they can't even get a woman who has been a public icon for years face right? Puh-leeze. The lack of good courtroom sketches is, in my humble opinion, just another low blow against a woman who has really done no one any real harm, and a lot of people some real good.

So to get your news fix on this issue, here are some web links: There's a nice blog dedicated to her courtoom proceedings that I checked out. Then there's Slate's guide to the trial, with fabulous headlines like: "Back-Room Deals and Heads on Platters." Martha herself keeps you posted with her official stand at Marthatalks.com

What I think is going on is that people who haven't ever liked Martha and all that they think she stands for (an upper middle class sort of WASP-ish ness) want to punish her for her status as a woman who deals in the domestic. Even though in reality, her style is NOT about demanding perfection, but demanding, instead, that one simply take pleasure in things like a home-made whipped cream (which I tell you, really is better than the stuff in the plastic tub). To take some time to bake a cake from scratch, when you can. To try to make your home a pleasant place. It ISN'T about keeping women stuck in the 1950s, as I've heard some people say. It's not about a return to the Home Ec sheet on what a good wife should do for her hubby. If you can't do it, or don't want to-- hey. That's fine with her, and with me, and any other domestic goddess type. But I don't hate people who DON'T want to cook and throw dinner parties-- why do you hate folks like me because we enjoy it? It's not anti-feminist, to be a domestic diva. No one is saying that you're bad if you don't do domestic stuff, or that it should be your only choice as a woman-- being in the home. But it ought to be one of your choices-- and the belief that someone is "just a housewife" is inaccurate and spiteful. ALL women's roles should be respected and validated. Not just the ones the media recommends, but the ones you personally wish to play.

The attitude of "burn Martha" is terribly scary and part of an anti-powerful woman backlash that has been going on in this country for a long time.

I've heard non-domestic types say they "hate her". Why? Because you can't live up to your own personal standards? Well neither can I-- but she doesn't expect you to. It's about trying what you can-- not doing everything. I can NOT do all of the things Martha does-- I do not have my own staff, thank you. But some of her recipes and tips are wonderful, and her type of influence is exactly one of the reasons why people who once rejected everything domestic as oppressive and retrograde are instead thinking of how to make easy home-made meals, instead of popping off to the dreaded McD's again. No one who is a Martha Stewart fan thinks less of you if you can't do a quiche, or get your souffles to rise. But her skills are in things that HAVE been traditionally thought of as women's domain-- and people hate her because she says it's important to pay attention to these little things again. It's not about NOT working outside the home-- but about making your home a home.

It is precisely a double standard, and as one website put it, "I get e-mails all the time from men who want to turn the clock back to colonial times. ... They call her a witch, they seem to say she's guilty before a trial. ... They seem to be very angry at her and at us for defending her." Yes. Martha's trial is definitely a witch hunt, of the worst sort. People want to see her "burn" for all the same reasons they like to see powerful women kept in their place. In a country where wife-murderers play golf, and the Enron execs are out sailing yachts and drinking Cristal, Martha risks jail time for a monetary exchange that was, for her, the equivalent of me giving you ten bucks. It's a vicious sort of petty spite against a woman for reasons unclear to me. It's not about seeing justice done, because frankly, if justice really were a consideration in this, there wouldn't have been a trial at all.

If Martha Stewart serves jail time for this, I would have to say that we have lost our way and that the world is really screwed up beyond repair.