I’ve seen this commercial at a couple of blogs, and in both cases, the blogger defended it, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone think that it’s anything but delightful. I’m sure the word “beaver” was not originally meant to be a nice word, but obviously, this commercial is reclaiming it in an effective way. But perhaps it was ready to be reclaimed? I mean, I’ve always wondered why “beaver” is supposed to be an insulting word. Who doesn’t like beavers? They are cute, they work hard, and sure, they could bite you (which vaginas can’t, though no one tell Chris Matthews), but on the whole, beavers have a positive role in our society. “Pussy” or any other cat pun seems meaner, because while cats are actually awesome, they have an unfortunate reputation with fierce authoritarians who dislike how a cat can reduce your pretensions with a haughty stare. But I can’t for the life of me imagine someone having a low opinion of beavers, so I never got why this word falls into the pantheon of ugly words for cunt.
I mean, it would be better if it was “otter”, I suppose. Really captures the playful angle, and would make for an even better visual pun in commercials. But “beaver” is not so bad.
I fear that I have to call bullshit on this article in the New York Observer about how some! women! wear! jeans! and! T-shirts! Like you know, instead of rolling out of bed into a cocktail dress. Not because I wear jeans and T-shirts 24-7. (After all, it’s the traditional garb of my people.) That would be unfair. I live in Austin, where we like to brag about how you “can” go anywhere in jeans, by which we mean you must. Mandatory casual. Women can get away with wearing skirts, but only if they are vintage/funky and of course, comfortable, the sort of thing that says, “These are my other jeans.” If you wear a tie in public, people laugh at you here. If you deny this in my comments, Austinites, I suggest you look around a little harder next time you wear a tie outside of the office.
No, I’m calling bullshit because I’ve been to New York. Twice. And both times, I slummed around in my jeans and T-shirts, because really, I don’t have any other clothes, and I didn’t get any stares, insults or abuse from the locals. The seemed not to notice me at all, which says to me that I wasn’t really looking crazy or out of place in the jeans-and-T-shirt ensemble that I carefully put together by tossing it in a suitcase randomly.
I have to agree with Tracy Clark-Flory, though, that the putting down “frivolous” femininity that’s going on to basically justify being a tomboy is unnecessary. Seriously, I shared a room with Jill at Netroots Nation, and she wore a dress that she had on a hanger and everything, and she is not frivolous, stupid, unfeminist, or anti-utility. There’s no doubt that a lot of the pressures on women to be very decorative in their manner of dressing come from the patriarchy, but it’s also clearly an art unto itself that should be respected as being fun and creative, and I think disdaining fashion as an art is just another form of misogyny, saying that something that’s traditionally considered in the female realm is stupid by definition.
Plus, the article makes it clear under no uncertain terms that to be “allowed” to pull off the tomboy look, you have to fit a certain mold.
Ms. Tenenbaum, 38 (whose family was the inspiration for the Wes Anderson film The Royal Tenenbaums, though she said the actual resemblance is slight), has unfussy brown hair that falls to several inches above her shoulders, and clear, radiant skin…..
Ms. Schwartz, a tall, bare-faced brunette, was drinking cappuccino in Nolita near her office the other day in a monochrome shirt and cardigan combo and slim brown corduroys….
A direct descendant of the Audrey Hepburn gamine and the bra-eschewing hippie chick, the urbane tomboy’s fashion rebellion is absent political message, or anger: it’s more of a casual shrug toward the strictures of femininity.
You have to be tall, you have to be slim, you have to have clear skin, and you probably have to have “striking” features. I say fuck that. Some of my favorite tomboys I’ve known were not afraid of the hoody because they have big boobs and wore a size 14, and they look great. What’s the point of being a tomboy if the stress to be a sex object is just as high?
67 Responses to “A sillier Feminism Friday post”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I’ve always hated the connotation that women who wear jeans and t-shirts have low self-esteem, don’t care for themselves, and have a bad self-image. For one thing, jeans and a t-shirt don’t say any of that unless they’re dirty or uncomfortable or ill-fitting. Secondly, a woman can look great in jeans and a t-shirt.
But most importantly, it’s a matter of PERSONAL CHOICE. What if you think you look best in jeans and a t-shirt? What if you find jeans and a t-shirt most comfortable for you, and you naturally function better when you’re comfortable? etc. Most people- men AND women, particularly women of my mom’s generation- seem to think that women ought to dress for everyone EXCEPT themselves.
It’s true: a cute dress does make me feel amazing and look hot. But part of the reason I only wear cute dresses and fancy tops on the weekends if that I don’t want to be seen as “cute” or “sexy” or “flirty” on weekdays when I’m trudging around campus and having serious discussions in my classes. Clothing is both fun and really god damn annoying, because it sends such strong messages about the wearer.
Oh god, what a waste of bandwidth that article was. And then the men:
The average woman’s makeup does not make her look like a totally different woman, for heaven’s sake. I think this guy was asked to comment and just made some shit up because he hadn’t really thought about it.
And the implied catfight/fighting over men between the girly girl and the tomboy? Weak. So weak.
And you have to have money (the reference to $200 jeans). Wearing $200 jeans (bought at Barneys!) and not caring about fashion? Not really all that compatible. This reminds me of Real Simple magazine or some shit like that.
I run around in jeans, sweaters and snowboots half the year because I’m a student and the town I live in is made entirely of steep hills, snow and ice from December through April, but that does not make me a tomboy or a radically new kind of woman. God. Slow news day to the power of umpteen.
I think my other comment is in moderation, but I might add: despite spending most of my life in student attire (sweaters, jeans, low heels/flats), drinking mostly whisky and beer, and hating almost all Julia Roberts vehicles, I actually consider myself very much a girly girl.
Oh, and giant fuck you to the writer for creating this idiot straw-girly-girl anyway.
I would like to add that after 2 years in Japan, I have come to the inevitable conclusion that English-speaking Westerners of all sexes and ages are sloppy, daggy and really ought to do something about their appearance. Writing criticisms explicitly about women is just using women as a bellweather for a broader social problem in the West, that we have lost care for our appearance.
People in Japan of all sexes and ages are just so much cooler to look at than English-speaking westerners. Cleaner, better groomed, more interesting, diverse and unique clothes. We could all benefit from that attitude filtering across.
There’s this old white guy in my neighborhood (in NYC) who wears a dress, clown makeup, a giant beard, rides a goofy-painted bike, and keeps a big white bird on his shoulder. And you know what? The only part that really throws people is the bird.
Women wearing jeans getting so much as a second glance in this city? No fucking way.
beavers? they have a background of being hunted, trapped, skinned, theyre actually kind of ugly up close,& they probably smell fishy.
if were going with semi&aquatic furry mammals, i kind of think seals are teh cutest.
I have puzzled about the Beaver term too… but you have to remember, it’s pretty certain some vulgar back-slapping hetero guys came up with it. So I figured it out, despite not being a vulgar back-slapping hetero guy: beavers eat logs.
soft & pretty:
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l64/dragonflyyy85/320580-Fur-Seal-0.jpg
maybe this is why your vagina wasnt nicknamed ’seal’:
http://www.news24.com/News24/Columnists/Chris_Roper/0,,2-1630-1649_1827200,00.html
:)
I’m sorry, I got as far as “the inspiration for the Royal Tennenbaum’s is a professional photo organizer in New York City” before my brain shut off in self-defense. Professional goddam photo organizer? That had better not be what I’m thinking.
Beavers are pretty unpopular with anyone who doesn’t want their land flooded. It’s one of the reasons they were almost hunted to extinction.
I think they’re darn cute up close, though (especially the babies), and I’ve been as close as you can get without actually picking them up. Didn’t notice a smell.
But I’m personally not into animal euphemisms. For one thing, whenever I say “I love beavers!” people snicker.
I do not get the jeans and t-shirt thing at ALL.
bluebonnet: if you think a beaver would smell fishy, a seal isn’t going to improve things much.
Me, I’ve always thought “bearded clam” is a much worse phrase for female genitalia than beaver. I also detest the phrase “bumping uglies” for sex.
I love the commercial! Abso-freakin-lutely hilarious!
Thoughts on the New Yorker Article: I wear jeans to work probably 3 times a week. They’re comfortable and, in a science classroom, jeans make more sense than a skirt or dress. Why the hell would I want to wear slacks with a scratchy tab, which cut into my waist like a girdle, which show my students exactly where my panty line is, and which tend to be cold when you have to do yard duty in 30 degree weather? Depending on the brand (and where it’s made), I might wear size 10, 12, or 14 size slacks. Even within the same brand, I might wear a size 10 button fly but a size 12 zipper fly pair of slacks.
On the other hand, my husband can walk into an Eddie Bauer and buy a pair of 34 X 34 pair of jeans without trying them on. Each 34 X 34 fits the same. Even the 34 X 34 jeans from JCPenny’s, Macy’s, American Eagle, and Target fit the same. So now I buy men’s jeans too. Why put up with the hassle, when the men’s clothing industry has figured out how to give the consumer what they want?
I think this is one of the best blog articles I’ve read, if not the best. Illuminating and hilarious. Quite an achievement.
And just to show the Men’s Rights guys that saying so doesn’t suddenly render me incapable of properly objectifying women, allow me to say that a google search of “Size 14 Women with Big Boobs in Hoodies” is going to be the very next page I load off these here internets.
APS
P.S. Dammit. It’s a nope. Someone alert the network of assholes with bad mustaches and some blank digicam tapes.
But most importantly, it’s a matter of PERSONAL CHOICE. What if you think you look best in jeans and a t-shirt? What if you find jeans and a t-shirt most comfortable for you, and you naturally function better when you’re comfortable? etc. Most people- men AND women, particularly women of my mom’s generation- seem to think that women ought to dress for everyone EXCEPT themselves.
EXACTLY. It is for this reason that hate hate HATE the show “what not to wear”. If you want to wear bulky sweaters that have cartoon charcters on them, have at it. The fact that most of the people there do not request to go on the show, but other people send in videos of how “horrible” they look, is even more disturbing to me.
Well, but “what not to wear” is a euphemism, of course. The true title of such shows should be something closer to “check out these clueless bitches who don’t know how to properly dress up for men.” It’s not about whether the woman WANTS to look different than she does, it’s about whether *I* would get more enjoyment out of seeing her dressed in something else.
APS
I admit WNTW is a guilty pleasure for me (or was, before I grew obscenely bored with the format) but yes, definitely, although I think WNTW is more about projecting the “right” class image than it is about dressing up for men. That’s why they put almost everyone they make over in these J. Crewish little outfits.
I think there’s a point to being able to conform to those class expectations, particularly if you want to get ahead professionally (like it or not, people do care about things like that), but the moment when the subject Sees! The! Light! and/or cries is always a bit icky.
That’s a good point, although there isn’t a bright line between the class structure and the patriarchy.
APS
I’m sorry, y’all are totally missing the point of What Not to Wear. It takes people who have no fashion sense and explains the basics to them. Not “how to look standard-patriarchal hot”, but “how to get rid of clothes that look bad on you and learn to pick out ones that look good on you”. Okay, granted, their style is kind of basic and low-key, but that’s sort of the point: first, find clothes that you don’t look bad in, then learn to figure out whether something more daring will look good on your shape and coloration and so forth. I wish they did it for guys, too, because there are a lot of guys out there who could use similar advice.
And later, if you figure out that bulky sweaters with cartoon characters on them actually suit your shape and coloration, then go for it. It’s just that most people who dress like that haven’t the faintest idea how dreadful they look. Of course it’s a class issue: you want to do better in life, it certainly won’t hurt to look like someone who’s doing better. Nothing wrong with that.
Better grooming standards would be fabulous, though of course one can be well-groomed in jeans and t-shirts.
Oh, no, and some of it is definitely patriarchal. Like when they’ve had women in from Canada or New England and wouldn’t let them replace their practical winter boots because that Doesn’t Produce The Right Line On The Leg. There’s a class element there (surely you must be wealthy enough to take cabs everywhere…right…right?), but they don’t ask men to wear impractical shoes.
Count me in the “love” column for WNTW. If you have a non-standard figure (in my case, big boobs and no hips), it’s hard to figure out why the hell everything your friends can wear looks bad on you. It was a relief to find out that my body isn’t the problem, the clothing manufacturers are the problem. Now I actually have jeans that fit, not ones that are too tight in the waist and clownishly baggy at the thighs.
Plus I like the fact that they go for a wide range of body types and show them all what clothes will be flattering for them.
My new guilty pleasure: “How to Look Good Naked.” Though I really don’t need to see Carson Kressley get yet another massage. It’s okay to let her get one by herself, Carson.
Oh the patriarchy LOVES to enforce class structure through clothing. Always has.
How many novels are out there like Pamela or movies like Pretty Woman or plays like My Fair Lady that are all about taking low class, poorly dressed women, changing their attire, and **poof** suddenly these women are marriage material!
As Melanie Griffith’s character says in Working Girl “If you want to be taken seriously, you have to have serious hair.”
Yeah, but “bad” and “good” have a context, no? Sometimes they take people who wear very “alternative” clothing and put them in the same old J. Crew soccer mom stuff and, well, there’s more going on there.
I mean, when people wear clothes that are six sizes too big or too small for them there’s an obvious issue, but some of the rest of it is just taste, and taste is very class-bound.
They do have men on the show now and again.
It’s a perfectly valid coping strategy, I agree. I’m a huge clotheshorse myself and I care a LOT about image because I know it matters (and because, hell, I love dressing up). But on a broader social level, it’s not fair.
There’s an amusing moment in the first Naked Gun movie where Leslie Nielson’s character is at the bottom of a ladder and Priscilla Presley is on the ladder (in a dress). Nielson looks up and says “Nice beaver!” She replies “Thanks! I just had it stuffed!” and hands down an enormous “taxidermyed” beaver.
I do not think I will ever understand how clothes represent some sort of personal statement about the person wearing them. Clothes are a necessity that are purchased when needed and serve the specific function of providing covering from the elements. Beyond that, they are a huge waste of time and money.
There is that. I don’t hate WNTW or anything; just sometimes the “you must look like THIS” thing (blazer over sweater over button-down with Medium Rise Uniform Dark Wash Straight Leg Jean Oh Yes) gives me pause because it IS so class-bound. At least the women who go on the show usually appear to come out of it with their self-esteem in decent shape, and sometimes they seem to have been dressing sloppily because they had no money to buy new clothes (which does make the ritual “your wardrobe is awful, what were you thinking” segment a little ooky, but whatever) or because they genuinely felt like crap about themselves. And yes, anything to cut down the dictatorship of the size tag, as if it were a sign of superior moral fibre to have a 12 on the inside of your pants instead of a 14, especially when a 14 now would have been labelled a 16 five years ago.
(I’m very small. I have been vanity-sized out of existence in several chains. I have to spend more money on tailoring than I think is warranted. I’m a little annoyed.)
And, you know, knowing how to do all this stuff “properly”…it’s a valuable skill. I’m just not sure whether it should be quite as valuable as it is.
beaver = densely furry animal with teeth
That explains it!
Hold on … I need to pull up my skirt and chop down this tree …
Dude, that’s true of almost every facet of human civilisation. Food doesn’t have to taste good to function. Buildings could pretty much all be plain boxes with no more windows than are needed for minimal ventilation. Art is impractical. So what?
What’s offensive about What Not to Wear to me is that there is anyone out there whose biggest problem is, to concede to thread usage, their collection of bulky sweatshirts with cartoon characters on them.
What we put on television reflects and supports what we value and what our principles are as a society. What Not to Wear promotes the idea that a woman’s biggest problem is likely to be the way she looks.
How about a show called “What Assholes Not to Talk To Lest They Regale You With Moronic Stories About What Big Shots They Are?” That would be a useful show.
APS
Professional conversations regarding fashion and the casual v. formal dilemmas alway leave me a bit bored. I like to people watch, but never is it a matter of “classy” or “overdressed” so much as “does that look good on her (or him)?” Yes, my friends and I get cruel and laugh at exposed thongs and too-tight pants and awful tattoos and hair and makeup. But we also admire daring ensembles, things that shouldn’t work but do, and the people whose attitudes make things work. It all goes to show that being attractive is a formula where clothing is only one part. Some people somehow look good with bad tattoos and mullets. Not anyone I’d consider dating, but there’s generally someone for them.
As for Austin having a casual dress code, I’d argue that Tucson has it beat. We “enforce” shorts, flipflops, and tshirts during the Summer and jeans and tshirts in the other season (called “Notsummer”.) Our formal shirts are guayaberas (also called “Mexican wedding shirts”,) in the unlikely event that ties are required we can wear a bola tie, and I could wear sandals year round if I didn’t work at a prison. Can’t wear my kilt to work, either, but I wouldn’t anyway because there would be too many inmates dropping things on the floor to see the answer to that old question.
And just like clothing, genital nomenclature is up to the individuals. My ex hated “cunt” while the current flame likes to talk about my “cock” being there (which makes me mildly uncomfortable, but I’m just not as much of a talker as she, and clearly she enjoys it so I put up with it for my own selfish ends.) The ex liked “pussy”, a term which makes the non-ex indifferent, and I just don’t like the -y ending. On that similar vein, Ms. ex hated “panties” and I agreed with her, but now I’m with a lingerie store manager and “panties” is her trade. To each her own. I’ll get used to it. Unless I don’t. And “beaver” just reminds me of Larry Mathers and running home from school to see if that or The Addams Family was on.
Todd:
If it’s on your body, it’s a personal statement. Like all other consumer goods, clothes are a marker of social status. That’s not a fight you can opt out of.
That seems a bit simplistic. You could say the same thing about cars, except… it isn’t really true. There are lots of ways to establish your social status other than consumption. The guy on my block who dresses the nicest and the neighborhood patriarch aren’t the same guy, at least not in my neighborhood.
flashheart:
Why should we? Or, more personally, why should I? I don’t give a shit how much “cool” I am for random strangers to look at. I care about my comfort. And given some of the truly fucked-up aspects of Japanese culture (particularly around gender), I really don’t see why it should be a model for Western culture.You want to be a fashionista, fine. Leave me alone.
I’m from New York City, and I thought we invented dirty people. No, I’d curse someone the fuck out (something else I thought we had invented, along with whole wheat pizza, tho I could be mistaken on at least one of those) if they gave me a hard time for my hoodie & t-shirt (I have to admit, I haven’t worn jeans in years, but mostly because I completely disagree with this insane notion that they’re somehow the most comfortable thing in the universe).
“A direct descendant of the Audrey Hepburn gamine and the bra-eschewing hippie chick…”
I like this line because the only way that can be true is if Audrey Hepburn reproduced with the bra-eschewing hippie chick.
I’ve had some experience with beavers of both sorts and I have to say, the comparison is apt, at least when it comes to the thick, tough, protective pelt. For the record, I’ve yet to meet one of either that smelled fishy (the animals smell pleasantly of poplar shavings and wet earth). I’ve never found the euphemism offensive so much as silly. Does anyone actually use it except as a double-entendre?
Speaking of beavers, mine is a big fan of fresh air, which is why this low-maintenance tomboy is an avid collector of (comfy, cotton) dresses. It’s still effing WINTER in effing Canada, though, so the uniform of the day is jeans, t-shirt, runners, and hooded cardigan. As soon as the ground thaws, dresses and sandals all the way.
Why put up with the hassle, when the men’s clothing industry has figured out how to give the consumer what they want?
Hips. *sigh* Although oddly, despite being a D/DD I have dress shirts swiped from my father years ago that fit me wonderfully when all the women’s shirts I look at gap across the bust. Dad’s not a big guy - tall but skinny as heck - so I don’t get it. Ah, well.
Were I possessed of any fashion design talent, or more business ability than the tiny bit I have, I would open a women’s clothing store that sized the way men’s stores do. And if you were buying a suit, tailoring would be included just as it is in most good men’s stores. We’d have to add a couple measurements for curve sakes — pants would be sold by waist, inseam, and hip. Shirts by sleeve and bust - don’t know that we need the collar measurement as most women don’t button-up due to not wearing ties. But this is my fantasy…
my otter brings all the boys to the yard, holler!
:) gotta love the otters. I didn’t think I’d ever have the good fortune to weigh in on WNTW on a real, actual, blog-I-respect… but lo, the lord doth provideth. So, I think the arguments about class are spot-on… that said, I still want to be nominated. There’s too strong a streak of American identity wrapped up in not only the style, but also the cut of the clothing during such stressful times as job or prom queen candidacy to set aside $5,000 of NY fashion bounty for moral reasons. As a plus-size gal-about-town my reliance on le Target has been frustrating because a) cute professional, preppy if you will, stores don’t love fat ladies and b) all the shit at target is ill-fitting at best. While WNTW seems to have some genuine issues with dealing the fat (and/or possibly working class) lady a fair chance at fashionista bliss, I think it’s in large part due to the reluctance of the fashion forward to gird our girthy loins.
2 cents from a hot TX mamacita
Apparently when Annie Liebovitz photographed Kieth Haring they decided to make him up like one of his paintings– nude, covered in white body paint with black markings. After some work in the studio they thought it would be fun to take him out to the streets of New York, since after all he got his start as a street artist. So there’s Annie Liebovitz taking pictures of a nude man in body paint, and no one gave them a second look.
I’ve always hated the connotation that women who wear jeans and t-shirts have low self-esteem, don’t care for themselves, and have a bad self-image. For one thing, jeans and a t-shirt don’t say any of that unless they’re dirty or uncomfortable or ill-fitting.
Wow, if you’re t-shirt doesn’t fit well enough, it’s all true, then? Fuck you too.
Holy Jesus but that was insulting.l
LS, I have a similar fantasy clothes-that-fit shop that sizes us by principal components analysis. And it’s all online, and it remembers my sizes and preferences so it can suggest new garments that suit me and go with my existing wardrobe.
Meanwhile back in reality, I’ve recently discovered that sewing snap fasteners in between shirt buttons can solve the gaps-across-the-bust problem for me.
LS, I don’t care where you open it, I’m shopping at that store! As someone who’s chesty, but not hippy, who has friends who are hippy but not chesty, that sounds perfect. We practically have to buy two suits and swap the pieces right now…
I have to say, possibly the least feminist thought I’ve ever had was, “damnit. I wish she’d shave. My tongue bar keeps getting caught.” Which is not particularly pleasant, for either party. (I could remove it, but it’s so useful beyond that…)Clothing is art; art can be a status marker, especially when it’s tied to personal expression. Clothing is both, but that doesn’t fundamentally mean that we ought to disregard its artistic qualities.
As an aside: I really want to find a mech-E who can help design a completely automated system for constructing clothing. Put it online, watch the fashion world explode. It would be awesome.
Yup, LS, men’s shirts have loads more room. I’m DDD AND big shouldered, so it’s very hard for me to find tops I like that were made for women. Fortunately, I don’t mind wearing menswear, so my husband gives me all the shirts that are too tight for him. Very comfortable.
Hey, LS … we sorta have that store here in Japan. Free tailoring (for inseam only, though) and pants sized in inches or centimeters (the dress pants in cm., the jeans in in.) for waist and inseam.
But.
I have three different sizes of pants even still. My skinny jeans are a 29, my bootcut jeans are 28, and my baggy jeans are a 27. I tried buying bootcut jans in a 29 way back, thinking they’d fit just the same as the skinny jeans … and … SURPRISE! They were huge.
The dress pants are fairly consistent. Sorta. More so than the jeans, anyway. But it could be because I have a curvy figure, so my ass is far bigger than my waist than the average Japanese woman’s is, and the cut of the jeans might factor into all of that.
I really want a store that tailors shirts for free. Then I’d have no problems. But even US brands in Japan are kind of cut for a Japanese audience. Which means it’s all basically Juniors sizing. (My body has NEVER had Juniors proportions, even when I was 13.)
And I have to agree about Japanese people being more stylish than US people are (in general). At my uni, you’d never see people in flip-flops and pjs. I dunno, I’ve just never understood the mindset of a person who doesn’t want to look nice (I’m related to people like this, who think wrinkled pants and chin scruff are A-OK to wear to work at an elementary school). No one’s saying you have to be uncomfortable. We’re just reminding you that other people do have to look at you. And in situations where you need to be taken seriously, I probably won’t take you seriously if you look like you just rolled outta bed. Juuuust my two cents.
I so want to get on “What Not To Wear”. If I have to pretend to like ugly clothes for a week while they follow me around to get a TV show to buy me $5,000 worth of expensive clothes, so be it.
Clothes are a necessity that are purchased when needed and serve the specific function of providing covering from the elements. Beyond that, they are a huge waste of time and money.
Nonense. If that was true, Texans would walk around naked with flip-flip 6 months out of the year.
You know, I would love to have a large disposable income to buy all of the clothes I have ever wanted. It would be nice too to have time daily to shop and update said improved wardrobe.
But I work fulltime. I have bills. I get up very very early and so I dont have 1 or 2 hours to spend styling my hair, I value the 6 hours of sleep I can get.
I think its great that people who love fashion have people out there who can appreciate the time they’ve put into an ensemble, I don’t think it’s okay to make judgements about people who don’t place looking cool as a priority.
Why does everyone have to be so critical of everyone else?
PS- I only get to wear jeans on Casual Friday so it is kind of like a happy suprise that the office looks forward to all week.
In regards to those discussing fitting issues for women’s clothing, I’ll point out that Land’s End has started producing custom-fit jeans and slacks via some sort of automated process. You get to specify 17 different parameters (waist, hip, inseam, height, weight, bra size, shoe size(?),…) in addition to several more that determine the styling. They’re not cheap at $70 a pair (except compared to custom tailoring, I guess), but the person I know who tried them was very happy with the result, and she has a very hard time finding jeans that fit her normally.
I don’t think that’s really fair to the majority of people who’ve posted on this thread. I think that if you actually look at what’s been said, most people have not been that judgmental.
Also, saying that you don’t have time “daily” to shop because you “work fulltime” is a backhanded way of calling people who care about clothes lazy and frivolous, which to me smacks of a certain reflexive misogyny.
Not everyone works fulltime. My very stylish sister is unable to work for a number of reasons. She does however have time to be out and about looking for new stuff.
I don’t begrudge this, I simply stated that I don’t have that opportunity. As I said, I for one will take that extra hour of sleep, and wear my hair in a simple do. I don’t think it is bad when people make the commitment to get up earlier, and we all know that is not a lazy decision.
I think you read a little too much into what I said.
I definatly don’t think everyone who has time to shop is lazy and frivolous. I enjoy fashion. Like I said, we have different priorities. Lets not beat each other up about it.
Besides, how does what I said smack of reflexive misogyny… Gender never entered what I said. And I’m still not sure how it would be refexive if it had…
Clothing and fashion are generally regarded as “feminine” concerns. Suggesting that people who actually care about clothes must have a lot of extra time and money on their hands, therefore, strikes me as a little sexist.
Are you assuming that most of the women on this thread actually spend two hours doing their hair each day? Because I don’t get the sense they’re that different from me, and I spend about fifteen minutes on hair and makeup. Which is not to say that you should feel obliged to spend any time at all; you should absolutely spend your time as you see fit, but don’t suggest that people who make different decisions must not “work fulltime” or “have bills.”
Shorter, I hope unmoderated me: that’s great, so please don’t suggest that people who care about this stuff don’t “work fulltime” or “have bills.”
LS, I want to shop at your store too.
I have big hips, ass, and breasts, and a proportionally tiny waist (all on a large scale–I weigh around 180). Plus I’m tall. Finding clothes that fit is horrible. Pants are almost always too short, even the tall sizes, and if they fit in the waist, then the hips are too small. If they fit in the hips, the waist is way too big. And low rise pants tend to fall off. Shirts never button over the breasts and if I get them to fit in the chest, the shoulders are too big. And because of the size difference between waist and hips, all pants tend to fall down a bit and all tops ride up, so I have my post childbirth belly hanging out unless I constantly adjust my clothes.
In summer, I find that skirts with t-shirts or tanks and sundresses are much more comfortable than pants. But since I live in the cold, frozen north, I’m stuck with pants for most of the year.
And yeah, if I had to pretend to like ugly clothes for a few weeks to get on WNTW and have a free shopping spree full of stuff that actually fits, I’d do it in a minute.
What if you think you look best in jeans and a t-shirt? What if you find jeans and a t-shirt most comfortable for you, and you naturally function better when you’re comfortable? etc. Most people- men AND women, particularly women of my mom’s generation- seem to think that women ought to dress for everyone EXCEPT themselves.
My dad hates that I wear jeans and a t-shirt (or some other casual shirt) and sneakers all the time, even though I’m never sloppy-looking — I think he associates those clothes items with boys’ playclothes in the ’50s.
What we put on television reflects and supports what we value and what our principles are as a society. What Not to Wear promotes the idea that a woman’s biggest problem is likely to be the way she looks.
Sort of. A huge theme on the show is that the women are getting ready to go out into workplaces where they will need to be taken seriously, but their current clothes make people think they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Is it unfair that people who see a woman in ill-fitting clothes in most workplaces assume that person can’t do her job? Of course. But, unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect utopia where everyone is judged solely on objective criteria generated by their job performance. If you dress sloppy at work — and it goes for guys, too — your boss is going to think that you don’t care about the job.
There’s talking about how things should be and then there’s talking about the way things are. Insisting that people should dress however they want while ignoring the fact that doing so can directly impact whether or not they advance at work is pretty class-based in itself, since it assumes that everyone has enough money that it doesn’t matter if they get a raise or not.
I would like to add that after 2 years in Japan, I have come to the inevitable conclusion that English-speaking Westerners of all sexes and ages are sloppy, daggy and really ought to do something about their appearance.
I lived in Japan for nearly 4 years, and my observation was the Japanese people dress smartly (and very conservatively, except for college students) because their workplaces can basically dictate every last aspect of their appearance, down to hair colour and style.
Of course, what the workplaces demand is very, very conservative, pretty much identikit business dress for the men while the women, of course, are basically required to dress like office totty and wear skirts (and also tights in the humid-as-all-fuck-summers, ugh) and heels and all that uncomfortable stuff. Of course, many western men LOVE this, because it appeals to their sense that women should cater to their tastes at all times by dressing as ‘femininely’ aka ‘restrictively and uncomfortably as possible.
My overall impression of Japanese dress style was though simply one of conformity, which of course reflects the emphasis on strict conformity of traditional Japanese society. It was not unusual to look down the subway car of a morning or evening and see 200 OLs (that’s office ladies for the unitiated) wearing 200 nearly-identical outfits and 200 near-indenttical hairstyles and colours. You also have to factor in that Japanese people live with their parents until death or marriage -whichever comes first- and therefore tend to have an awful lot of disposable income that would otherwise be spent on things like rent to spend on designer clothes and bags and the expensive and high-maintainance hair colours and straight perms and so on.
I personally found the conformity of Japanese clothing styles incredibly dull after a while. Yes, some of the young people dress all interesting and wacky-like, but that’s because they have precisely 4 years of college in between high school and the rigid conformity of the workplace to get it out of their systems.
Interesting. I can’t read any Asian languages so I can’t confirm this for myself, but I’m told that East Asian fashion magazines don’t say things like “bows are in right now”; they say things like “Store X has THIS shirt with a bow on it, which you should wear with THIS skirt from Store Y and THIS pair of shoes from Store Z.”
What if you think you look best in jeans and a t-shirt? What if you find jeans and a t-shirt most comfortable for you, and you naturally function better when you’re comfortable? etc. Most people- men AND women, particularly women of my mom’s generation- seem to think that women ought to dress for everyone EXCEPT themselves.
I am the lone girly girl in a family of tomboys. My mom and sisters (and most of my cousins, etc.) hate dressing up, and since we lived in a fairly rural area, casual was pretty strictly socially enforced. I love wearing dresses and skirts (I hate pants–part of it is the fit issues that I have, but it’s mostly because I just find skirts to be way more comfortable) and I got teased mercilessly for it growing up by family and friends. So I have pretty much the opposite issues.
That said, we should be able to dress however we want and are comfortable. I don’t think it’s fair that we, especially women, can’t dress however we feel most comfortable without someone making an issue of it. Or that bosses make assumptions about how serious we take our jobs based solely on what kind of clothes we wear. But, this is the world we live in and we just do whatever we can to get by.
MissPrism:
Now that’s the store I want to shop at. It wouldn’t even have to actually manufacture the clothes, just have some way of measuring them to get the relevant measurements and attach a size that actually contains meaning (3d scanner?)
topometropolis:
I went “oooh!” at this and went to check it out, but I am unimpressed. You give them a bunch of sizes (which doesn’t really help when sizes are variable) and some subjective stuff like “curvy” etc. To the point where your hip measurements are optional. >_> I do have faith in the size database mapping these to actual measurements, but I would have a lot more faith in just… measurements.
Also their only leg choices are “straight” and “tapered” which is my problem with Lands End jeans in general, since if they’re not flared I can’t get my boots under. Bah.
Well, it’s the name of Caltech sports teams. A football team with me as a lineman is a pretty pathetic sort of team.
Other than that–I’m with you.
I think it derives in the ad’s context from beards, by the way.
What about the commercial for the sleep aid with the guy’s dreams personified? The talking beaver telling him his dreams “miss him” makes me laugh out loud. But I’m still trying to figure out why he dreams of Abe Lincoln…does he dream of being president? Or maybe just dreaming of money?
I never considered “beaver” to be an derogatory nickname. I figured it was more or less comparable to “pussy”–slangy, euphemistic, but not inherently contemptuous.
You wouldn’t guess, seeing it on a wet beaver…but beaver fur is incredibly soft and luxurious.
Felted beaver hats were considered the height of men’s fashion in Europe and America for about 200 years.
Yup. yup. yup.
And maybe it’s just me, but I think that the british version is much better at this. They are a lot clearer about explaining that their main focus is going to be on styles that work with the guest’s body type, not against it. How s/he will be perceived by others - at work, especially. Not as much of the trying to fit the guests into a mold.
Not that there isn’t quite a bit of that as well, it’s just also a lot more obvious that Trinny and Susannah try to work some of the guest’s personal style and preferences into their advice. They focus more on how the guests have been trying so hard to fit in (or have completely given up on doing so) that they have ended up making the problem bigger than it really is.
I think it also helps that the two hosts have very different body shapes themselves, and that neither of their bodies, while still more conventionally beautiful than the average woman’s, are cookie cutter hollywood bodies. Which means there is usually a moment (often several) where one or the other of them says something along the lines of “and you have [blank], like me, so…” Which helps to reinforce the idea that this is simply about making the clothes work for you, rather than pretending you have a body you don’t, or working so hard to make sure you are wearing the “in” clothes.
I also remember there always being a point at which the guest/victim was ambushed, but then given the chance to turn the offer down. While that’s obviously always what happens whether they show it or not, the fact that they showed the guest accepting the deal made it seem less like they were being picked on and more like they were being given an opportunity. They do have the chance to say “no.” It’s a bit of a false choice, because there’s obviously a lot of pressure to say yes, but simply creating that suspense for the viewer helps to take away some of the “you must do this” vibe that always comes with advice. I could be wrong, because I haven’t watched it as often, but I can’t remember watching any scenes like this in the US version.
The U.S. version includes that as well.
I find it more than a little interesting that we’re having a all people-should-wear-what-they-want-to-wear-and-screw-what-society-thinks moment, but (re the Duggars referenced in a post below) we’ve also collectively laughed at the Duggars in the thread below for their outdated hair and lack of fashion sense. Can’t have it both ways — if a woman’s lack of obeisance to the Patriarchy of Beauty is a good thing, then it doesn’t much matter whether it’s in the form of ripped Dead Kennedys t-shirts and army boots, or in the form of poofy bangs and shapeless tent dresses coordinated with one’s daughters.
A huge theme on the show is that the women are getting ready to go out into workplaces where they will need to be taken seriously, but their current clothes make people think they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Is it unfair that people who see a woman in ill-fitting clothes in most workplaces assume that person can’t do her job?
This made me think about something. This may be coming up only because they rarely feature men on the show, and never in this trope (it’s usually more the extreme OMG NO YOU DI’INT! stuff, for them). But do men have trouble with this in the same way women do, or in the same way women are depicted to?
One of the things I do identify with about WNTW is that, like many of the women featured, I’m at the beginning of a career, and trying to figure out how to ‘dress for success’ while still being comfortable and having my own sense of style. It’s hard for me, too, because I work in a creative field where ‘just buy 2 or 3 really fab suits’ isn’t going to cut it.
But I’ve never heard men talking about this, or visibly going through this. Why is this such a big deal for women, and not so much for men? Aside, of course, from the simple fact that women are expected to be decorative at all times and men barely even have to be well-groomed.
Do men secretly think these very same thoughts but just not have a space to air them?
“beaver” = meh
“pussy” = cats rule!
“otter” = very cute mammal, could give “pussy” a run for its money
‘C’ word (US usage) = offensive, irritating
‘C’ word (UK usage) = usually hilarious
clothing (used to keep warm) = useful
clothing (used for physical protection) = useful
clothing (and fashion, used to freak out the squares) = entertaining
clothing (makes the person) = yeah, whatever
BSG (by the one eye of Tigh!) = its go time
But I’ve never heard men talking about this, or visibly going through this. Why is this such a big deal for women, and not so much for men?
Because men have a uniform.
Seriously. Look around your office sometime, and you will notice that the men, no matter how “creatively,” all dress alike. They have a uniform, whether that uniform is a business suit with a tie in banking or a Hawaiian shirt and shorts in computer programming. Look at Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple. It’s headline time if he wears anything other than a black mock turtleneck and jeans.
Women, on the other hand, have too many options. Pants or skirts? Dresses? Jeans? Blouse or sweater? Jacket or cardigan? And, unlike men, women don’t tend to watch each other to figure out what they should be wearing so they can wear exactly the same thing as everyone else. We actually want to be a little bit creative and self-expressive.
Men at work absolutely do have a uniform. And they complain constantly about ties and suits and how easy the ladies have it but at least they don’t have to constantly second-guess themselves over whether their shirt’s too low cut/clothes too “girly”/skirt’s too short/dress will blow up in the wind etc. etc. ad infinitum.
I have some real issues going on at the moment with regards to clothing so am going to comment even though the thread’s a bit past it’s best before date now.
My parents, particularly my mother, go on at me about wearing the same clothes all the time when they see me, which is only on weekends. Some of these clothes have some wear and tear going on. What I’ve finally concluded about why I react so strongly to this is that it’s bullying. They are trying to bully me into wearing what they want me to wear. They don’t recognise that as a person in my own right, especially on her weekends, I have the right to dress any fucking way I want to and that includes comfortably. I am certainly able to dress to the code (eg. I would dress nicely for a family dinner or something). Also, I have an eating disorder, so I take most comments about my attire very badly, and in some cases more to heart than would someone who didn’t have an ED.
What gets me is that my parents don’t realise that, as someone who has a great sense of style, a fondness for bright colours and a decent enough face/body, I attract a fair amount of attention walking down the street on workdays in my nice outfits. I don’t say this to boast, it’s just that my parents really do not get that I don’t want to be watched, looked at, “given the eye” etc all the time. I actually don’t want to deal with any of that shit *any* of the time, but I have to dress well for work so what can you do? Sometimes I’d just like to walk down the street and be invisible and not be evaluated like a piece of meat.
My workplace is also sexist as hell and I’ve had men comment on my appearance there regularly, as they do most of the women. So yeah, on my weekends, I don’t want any of that kind of attention and I only glam up for a Saturday night out.
It fucking completely sucks being a young woman in this nasty ass patriarchy sometimes, and there are certainly times when I can’t wait to hit my later years when I get the invisibility so generously bestowed on older women in our society (note: sarcasm - I of course hate that older women become practically invisible same as I hate that young women are treated like meat.)
Anyway, I needed to get this out in a feminist realm. I am so unbelievably tired of people around me having opinions on how I should dress. I can look great with little effort and I chose my clothes to suit the occasion. So why when I chose to be a dag out of a desire for comfort or invisiblity does it have an impact on so many people. Oh yeah. I blame the fucking patriarchy.