The Ravelry Spin-Up

Since everyone who has ever had anything to do with Ravelry is resurrecting blogs or putting out Tweets, posts, vlogs, or for all I know, posting signs on the telephone poles in their neighborhoods, I figured I should go ahead and say my piece.

First, my disclaimer: I am a loud and proud Libertarian. I voted for Gary Johnson (weed for everyone!) and did not actively support Trump prior to his election. However, as a member of the military, I do support my presidents while they are in office, regardless of whether I voted for them or not.

The thing that has me most distressed about the responses to the Ravelry policy change is the rampant ignorance on all sides. People will make judgment calls based on little or no actual evidence – NOT FEELINGS – and then call out people who disagree with them in a horrendously offensive way. That is, effectively, what Ravelry did with their policy, and that is the response that has been elicited from both supporters and detractors.

I am a college English professor. I am frequently confronted with these kinds of “arguments” from my students when we are discussing texts. I say, “what did you think about the text you read for today?” and I get responses like, “I hated it! It was boring!” Or “I liked it! It was funny!” and my response to both the positive and the negative is always “Ok, WHY do you think that?”

An answer to that question that does not include direct evidence from the text is NOT A VALID ANSWER. As heartless as it sounds, I don’t care about my students’ feelings about a text unless they can validate them with evidence from the text. This proves not only that they read the text, but that they understood what it was about and can place the text within the larger context of their own experiences.

This is the type of answer I love to hear: “I disliked the second text because on page 2, in paragraph 5, the author directly contradicts a statement than he made on page 1, in paragraph 4, and that leads me to question the honesty of the entire text.” That is a negative opinion that is clearly based on solid evidence rather than just feelings or ungrounded impressions.

I recently saw this comment in response to one of the many blog posts about the Ravelry policy change:

“I agree with Ravelry. Trump needs to see that his actions affect all kinds of people. He believes that he has the right to say whatever he wants without considering the result. We should all be able to take a stand for our beliefs without backlash from those who do not agree. This is called freedom of speech. It scares me that we are starting to lose this valuable right.”

Let me dissect this comment as an example of faulty argument.

First sentence – ok, good lead-off. I appreciate you stating your opinion up front. Second sentence – I’m not sure how a policy on a fiberarts website shows Trump anything; I wasn’t aware that he was an active Ravelry user. Third sentence – again, I don’t recall Trump being an active user of Ravelry, but I would be happy to see proof to the contrary, so this policy is NOT directed at Trump. Sentence four – here is when the author of this comment becomes self-contradictory; if we should all be able to take a stand for our beliefs without backlash from those who do not agree, then HOW does the Ravelry policy banning open support for Trump PROTECT this? It actively goes AGAINST this statement the author of this comment has made. Sentence five and six – this author further discredits their own argument by pointing out that they are frightened at the loss of freedom of speech, and yet they support/agree with Ravelry’s policy, which is blatant censorship.

This opinion is self-contradictory. It has no direct factual support. I have seen other comments that say that they support Ravelry because “Trump is a nasty person” – ok, what exactly does that MEAN in practice? What specifically has Trump done TO YOU that you disagree with? I have seen claims of attacks on women’s rights that are not backed with any sort of proof or evidence, and even the Ravelry claim that Trump openly supports white supremacy cannot be directly supported with solid evidence. It is all hearsay.

Because I want to show both sides, here is another comment:

“I will no longer be using Ravelry based on their decision! I am an avid knitter but they have no business in politics. I find the liberal left in this country to be the largest group of hypocrites and the most inhumane group ever! They are constantly undermining everything good thing that this administration tries to do. Bye Bye Ravelry”

First sentence – again, glad to see the initial viewpoint up front. Second sentence – there have always been political posts, discussions, and patterns on Ravelry. Stating that politics does not belong in [insert forum, hobby, group here] is an opinion, not a fact. Third sentence – this is just as big of a sweeping group defamation as the Ravelry claim that all support for Trump is direct support for white supremacy. Fourth sentence – again, show me the evidence. What good things specifically? How did the liberal left undermine them specifically? I’m not saying the evidence doesn’t exist – I’m saying it doesn’t exist in this comment, which leaves the opinions of the comment unsupported.

Ultimately, I have chosen to close my own ten-year-old account on Ravelry because I cannot support blatant censorship of those with whom you disagree. I understand that they have the right to make that call and I respect that right; I also understand that I, as a consumer, have the right to take my business elsewhere if I disagree with how they exercise their rights.

I also spent considerable time looking for evidence to support their claim that Trump is a white supremacist, and I did the same with the claim that Obama was a Muslim. Both times I came up empty. These are – to use one of my students’ vocabulary words – attempts to VILIFY those with whom you disagree or those whom you do not support.

People need to be aware, now more than ever, that if something is not supportable by actual evidence, it is NOT TRUE. It does not matter how often news outlets report on it, nor how many news outlets report on it, nor what side those news outlets are on, nor how much money they bring in each fiscal quarter. If the statement cannot be supported by facts, it is NOT TRUE. Do not look for the statements – look for the supporting evidence.

Here is an example that I use in all of my classes on validating sources: How many of you have heard the “statistic” that your mattress “doubles in weight” after 7 years, due to mites, sweat, dead skin cells, and other nasty-nasty things? Do you know where that “statistic” came from? A young “journalist” wrote that into an opinion piece because she thought it sounded good. It was not based on any sort of scientific study. The original author literally MADE IT UP. And yet, because people blindly trust anyone who publishes articles under the header of a news outlet, it was believed. And it was not only believed, it was assumed that it was backed up by scientific fact. From there, mattress and furniture companies began incorporating the “statistic” into their advertising materials, again without validating the claim and looking for supporting evidence. So a claim is now viewed as fact because enough people have repeated it without checking to see if it is actually supported by verifiable scientific evidence.

That is frightening.

What I want people to know about the Great Ravelry Spin-Up is not anything about tolerance, free speech, hate speech (which, I would like to point out, comes from both Trump supporters AND Trump vilifiers, as well as people who don’t give a damn about Trump either way), or censorship. I want people to understand that just because someone – even someone you think you trust as an authority – makes a claim, that does NOT MAKE IT TRUE. It must be supported by evidence, regardless of whether the person making the claim is the most trustworthy person you know. If a claim cannot be supported by evidence and fact, it is groundless.

And making important decisions based on groundless claims is a dangerous thing to do, no matter the context.

Julia

Creativity, Productivity, and Self-Sabotage

I’ve begun to suspect that the reason I spend so little of my available time working on my sewing, knitting, and crochet projects is because of the restrictions I’ve placed on myself. The irony is that I put those restrictions in place to make me MORE productive. And you know what they say: Repeating the same action and expecting different results is insanity. Thus, I’ve decided to revise my approach to creating in the hopes that I will, you know, actually create things.

The Current Rule: NO multiple WIPs!

I am a product maker, not a process maker. This gets discussed quite a bit among knitters, but I don’t see it brought up as much among seamstresses. As my goal is to actually finish projects that I start so that I can have a useful finished object, I’ve tried to limit the number of things I have in progress so that I will put all of my efforts into one project at a time: One knitting project, one crochet project, and one sewing project. That’s it. That’s all I’m allowed to have in the works at any given time.

The problem with this approach is that if I don’t feel like working on the one project that I have in progress, I don’t have any other projects to put my efforts into…so I end up procrastinating, usually by going online and looking at other people’s projects or ideas for future projects. The fallacy of my one-project-productivity-push mentality is that if I only have one project, that is what I will work on. However, there actually is another option: To not work on anything. And that seems to be the option I choose most often.

The opposite side of the fence, and the one I am desperately trying to avoid, is having eight thousand projects in various stages of completion and with little hope that any of them will ever be finished. In my early 20s, I would frequently start projects and not finish them; that is what I am desperately trying to avoid. HOWEVER, upon reflection, I have realized that there was something significant about the projects that I never finished – they were items that, once finished, I never would have actually worn. As a 20-something, I knew that I wouldn’t wear or use the finished object, which eliminated my desire to put any effort into the item. I didn’t know that at the time, but now I see the pattern.

Right now, my reason for not working on a project usually involves whatever stage of production I am at – the shirt I am sewing needs the collar attached, and I don’t feel like doing anything fiddly, or the sweater I’m knitting is at the “yards of stockinette” stage and I don’t want to do something mindless. Eventually I will work on these projects because I do want the finished object. But I *do* consider sewing, knitting, and crochet to be my hobbies (i.e., things I do for enjoyment) rather than work, so if they feel like work, I won’t want to do them. My “One WIP only” rule has turned my hobbies into work. So, what is the solution?

The New Rule: Multiple WIPs Allowed*

Obviously there must be some caveats. All good rules have fine print, right?

– There must be variety in the types of WIPs

I’m not a good assembly line sewer. I’ve tried, and it basically exacerbates the issues I have with avoidance and procrastination. If I am going to have multiple projects in progress, they must be varied in terms of techniques and difficulty.

– If I realize that I am avoiding a project because I have decided that I don’t want the finished product, I will get rid of the project.

There is no joy in finishing something that I am just going to get rid of. It is wasted effort, and no wonder I don’t want to work on a project if I know the effort is going to waste. Better to just pitch the whole thing and get on with another project that I do want to finish.

I occasionally read articles and blog posts about lost knitting mojo or “sewjo” and how to get it back. But I don’t think I’ve ever seen an article about what to do if you have the mojo but cannot seem to get yourself to actually work on your projects. Hopefully this nitpicky analysis of my approach to productivity will help some other makers realize that they have self-sabotaged in a similar way, so that we can all get back to enjoying our hobbies instead of accidentally turning them into work that we avoid.

Mad [Domestic] Skillz: A Comparison

Lately I’ve been thinking about how my various maker skills compare to one another. For once, I’m not focused on the differences in the products. Rather, I am thinking about the differences inherent in the processes. Crocheting, Knitting, Sewing (specifically, tailoring/dressmaking), Spinning, and Weaving are all “fiber skills” or “fabric skills,” but there are some key aspects of each process that have stuck in my brain. Here’s my simplified comparison:

Crocheting –

• Starting expense: Low (only yarn and a hook)
• Perceived required dexterity: Medium (manipulating tools with both hands simultaneously)
• Amount of prep time required: Low (just chain and go, or “magic ring” and go)
• Ease of correcting errors: Medium (ripping out is easier than in knitting, but you cannot “drop down” to fix small errors as you can in knitting)
• Pattern availability: Low (people seem to spurn crochet in favor of knitting for garments)

Knitting –

• Starting expense: Low (only yarn and needles)
• Perceived required dexterity: Medium (manipulating tools with both hands simultaneously)
• Amount of prep time required: Low (but depending on how many times you have to remeasure your tail for the long-tail cast-on, this can take awhile…)
• Ease of correcting errors: Medium (if you master the use of a crochet hook to “drop down” and fix single mistakes, you are gold; if you have larger mistakes that require a rip, be prepared for tedium and time-sinkage)
• Pattern availability: Ridiculously High (the knitting boom of the last 10+ years has flooded the market with both books and independently published patterns. Yay, Ravelry!)

Sewing (tailoring/dressmaking) –

• Starting expense: Medium-High (if you want a good machine, be prepared to pay for it; likewise, if you want the professional finish of a serger, particularly one with the coverstitch feature)
• Perceived required dexterity: Low (the machine will do most of the work for you. I’ve sewn using only one hand with no problem, and generally you are using your non-dominant hand just to hold fabric in place while your dominant hand cuts, marks, positions, and pins)
• Amount of prep time required: Medium-High (I personally do not consider assembly and cutting of patterns, layout and cutting of fabric, and winding/threading of the sewing machine and serger to be sewing)
• Ease of correcting errors: Low (once the fabric is cut, baby, it is CUT. Granted, you can rip seams and resew them if you make post-cutting mistakes, but each rip-and-redo weakens the structure of the fabric and encourages fraying)
• Pattern availability: Ridiculously High (as with knitting, the maker boom has resulted in a corresponding boom in the availability of both “big three” (i.e., Burda, Butterick/McCalls, and Simplicity) patterns and indie patterns)

Spinning –

• Starting expense: Low (really, all you need is some fiber and a spindle; if you go the Alden Amos (R.I.P.) route, you can start with the cotton from a medicine bottle and an unbent paper clip)
• Perceived required dexterity: High (with spindle-spinning, you need to coordinate your hands and the independent motion of the spindle; with wheel-spinning, you must use both hands and your feet)
• Amount of prep time required: Low (just pick up some fiber and a tool and have at it)
• Ease of correcting errors: Low (once you introduce twist into the fiber, it is twisted; theoretically you can remove the twist, but you would have to reprocess the fiber for spinning in order to truly erase the mistake)
• Pattern availability: High (every well-known spinning guru has multiple videos through Craftsy, F&W Media, etc, as well as books on spinning techniques for both spindle and wheel)

Weaving –

• Starting expense: Low-High (I wove tiny tapestries using styrofoam meat trays and cheap yarn as a child, but more expensive tools will enable the production of much more elaborate fabrics)
• Perceived required dexterity: Low (weaving is rhythmic and mindless once you have everything set up and ready to go, but the set-up requires quite a bit of brain work rather than dexterity)
• Amount of prep time required: High (spending more time on the warp than I do in actually weaving the weft is standard)
• Ease of correcting errors: High (un-weaving is fairly straightforward, but if you don’t want to take the time to fix a mistake, just call it a Saori piece and move on)
• Pattern availability: High (for actual fabric patterns, there are many books available; for what to do with the finished fabric, there are specialized books for sewing with handwoven fabrics in addition to all of the commercial and indie sewing patterns on the market)

Hopefully I don’t need to add a disclaimer about how all of this is just my damn opinion. And these are just the skills that tend to take up the most of my time; I also have experience with Tatting, Embroidery, Cross-stitch, and some other techniques that I might eventually add to this list.

In considering this list, it is easy for me to understand why I tend to avoid working on my spinning: The high required dexterity and the low ease of correcting errors means that the likelihood of permanent screw-ups is very high. As an unrepentant perfectionist, that is very off-putting. I’ve known for years that cutting is my least favorite part of sewing, specifically because mistakes are permanent. Knitting and Crochet are much easier for perfectionists to pick up and run with because mistakes are not permanent unless I choose to leave them in my project (spoiler: I never do).

Maker Pledge

This is a pledge I absolutely will keep. MUST keep.

As a long-time maker, particularly where sewing is concerned, I have put many hours (days, weeks) of my life into making garments for myself and for others. I have afterward put significantly less time into actually wearing the things that I make. With regards to the costume pieces I have sewn, that’s understandable. But it is less justifiable when I think about all of the dresses, skirts, pants, and tops I have made over the years. Ultimately, what it comes down to is this:

I have a very solid understanding of what looks good on my petite, hourglass frame, and have made many things that accentuate and show off my figure. BUT THOSE THINGS ARE NOT WHAT I FEEL COMFORTABLE WEARING.

I have great legs (thanks, mom!); I do not want to show them off every day. I have a tiny waist and big hips (thanks, grandma!); I do not like wearing tight tops anymore. I have a pretty nice rack and lovely, squared shoulders (thanks…dad? *shrug*), but I don’t like wearing strapless tops, or even sleeveless shirts, although I used to wear nothing but tank tops in the past.

When I look at the things I’m comfortable in, the things I have bought that I wear nearly every day, it is the ankle-length skirts, loose and drapey tops, flared or trouser-cut pants/jeans, and long cardigans/vests. I prefer my legs to be covered, my cleavage to be non-visible, and my figure to be hinted at by flowing woven fabrics without a lot of body, rather than being blatantly displayed by unsubtle spandex and knits.

So, dammit all, THAT IS WHAT I AM GOING TO MAKE. From now on, I will no longer make things because they will look good on me. I will make the things that I actually want to wear (which also happen to look good on me). I am one of those rare creatures: a woman who is in no way ashamed of her body, thank God, but that does NOT mean that I need to put it on display for everyone around me.

From now on, I pledge to only knit, crochet, and sew clothing for myself that I will wear on a daily basis, that will make me feel comfortable and well-put-together, rather than sewing things that would make me look good, but will never, ever get worn. Amen.

Efficiency VS Consistency

I taught myself how to knit from a book back when I had just started college and the internet was still a relatively new thing. There were no YouTube video tutorials and I didn’t know of any knitting websites. Hell, I don’t think Google was even a search engine yet; it was just AskJeeves and DogPile and God only knows what else that has since been lost into oblivion.

The instructions I was following were for English style knitting. I was used to tensioning yarn around my left hand for crochet, so I had to futz around with it a bit to get a working set-up that wouldn’t cut off my circulation or give me yarn burns on my right hand. I eventually figured out what worked for me and have been knitting that way for over 10 years. I’m not particularly fast, but my stitches are even and my gauge is consistent. I rarely have to adjust my needle size to get gauge for a pattern, and I never do gauge swatches; I just start knitting my project and measure my gauge once I have enough stitches completed to make it possible to get an accurate measurement. I think I’ve only ever had to rip out one project because I wasn’t getting gauge.

But, as I said, I’m not particularly fast. I’ve seen variations of English-style knitting that are referred to as “flicking” rather than throwing, because the yarn is held close to the needle tips and flicked over the tip to make each stitch. Yeah, I can’t do that. I tension and throw the yarn with my middle finger, while using my index finger to move the stitches along the needle. Perhaps it’s because my fingers are relatively short in relation to the size of my palm, but I cannot “flick.” Well, unless I’m using my middle finger, but that’s a different motion entirely.

I’ve also occasionally tried continental knitting, particularly when I’m knitting stockinette in the round I can see how that method is much faster than throwing or flicking, but my concern is that it changes my gauge. Since the size of a knitted stitch is determined by how the needles are held and how the yarn is tensioned, any change to that configuration will inherently result in a change in gauge.

So the question is: Since I’ve always had such good luck with gauge, is it worth messing with my consistency in order to increase my efficiency? This requires more thought.