posted
Do you really need me to spell it out for you Tom? Especially when a lot of people were disputing on your behalf.
Except I suspect you just made the above remark in the exact same sort of semi-sarcastic facetiousness that you made the first remark, and now I'm the one taking you too literally, even though in a certain way you do mean exactly what you said in both cases.
posted
*sigh* The problem is, I was not remotely offended by Tom's first post, but I'm mildly offended by the explanation of it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I'm actually offended by Tom's explanation of it, but it involves things that are very, very much none of my business.
The difference between Tom being racy and Ralphie being racy is that Ralphie teases about herself as much as about other people - she doesn't hold herself above the cheesecake she's ogling. Tom does - he doesn't tease about himself, he most certainly (and rightly) doesn't tease about his wife, but he does tease about other people skanking for his benefit. That's irritating.
So, either he's just teasing and therefore should have no problem including himself in it, or else he's not teasing, and people have quite a nice reason to be offended.
posted
The thing is, Anna, it really ISN'T a dispute -- unless you genuinely think that I've been acting as a stalwart advocate for skimpier clothing.
And while I'll be the first one to admit that I am, in fact, a stalwart advocate for skimpier clothing, I don't take the issue nearly seriously enough to have a DISPUTE over it. *grin*
The people here who're having an argument are having one WITHOUT me; they're directing their complaints towards imaginary people who have yet to post in this thread -- and while I'm sure they're perfectly welcome to do so, it's a rather one-sided "debate" in that sense.
The only "dispute," as I see it, has been over whether or not it's fair to joke about something that someone else takes seriously. While I agree that there are lines which can be drawn in times like these -- joking about the amount of makeup on the corpse of someone's recently-deceased grandmother, for example, is probably not a good idea -- I think it's possible to recognize that the vast majority of human beings draw these lines fairly close to the bone, and not way out in, metaphorically speaking, San Francisco. The "dispute," then, is over whether or not it's safe to tease somebody about an issue you assume to be harmless, and whether it's then necessary to abjectly apologize when that teasing is either misinterpreted or hits a nerve.
Since the thread's about modest clothing, though, I've asked more than once that we try to stick to THAT topic -- since it's much more interesting to me than trying to figure out why a small handful of people take other people's nudity personally.
-----
Here's a corollary to my earlier posts designed to help kat feel better about my position on skimpy clothing, one that I had assumed was implicit: attractive people should be encouraged to wear less. I am assuming that Turin and his lady friend are attractive, since my default assumption for MOST people is that they're attractive. Me, I'm not attractive, and therefore do people the courtesy of wearing clothing -- thus avoiding any situations in which pedestrians, alarmed by the possibility of a beached whale in a downtown area, try to airlift me to the ocean.
posted
Sorry, I can only post on Hatrack from work now or I would have responded sooner. First off, I'm 5'10", which I think boots me out of the petite catagory. I am slim (having dropped two sizes after EnderCon) but am neither small nor waif-like.
Kayla, I think I like the first dress best. Not sure how I would look with the drapey neckline (is that going to bring out my big shoulders or cover them up?) but I think the dress comes together nicely.
I am just realizing after some browsing for dresses that I am much more picky than I thought at first. This one is nice except for the halter style neck, that one is great except for that big bow, no I will not wear that color, and so on...jeez, no wonder my husband hates shopping with me! Normally I hate shopping too, but this is fun because there's no pressure . But now I want my very own little black dress.
We just need to plan a hatrack shopping trip.
Posts: 1676 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Though I guess I shouldn't really expect too much fashion sense from myself since I'm left-handed female engineer.
So, as a right-handed male engineer, should I have more, less, or the same amount of fashion sense as you?
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The "dispute," then, is over whether or not it's safe to tease somebody about an issue you assume to be harmless, and whether it's then necessary to abjectly apologize when that teasing is either misinterpreted or hits a nerve.
Yeah and this is where political correctness gets take to its rediculous extreme. I guess I would fall on the side of giving a sincere apology along the lines of "I'm sorry I didn't know that this was offensive to you." But not an abject one, in that you are sorry for saying it at all and would never say a remark like that again. Because, you really aren't sorry for saying it, you are just sorry that it was construed badly by the other person. And yes, there is probably a deeper fundamental disagreement, but one that may not be fundamental enough to argue about, because you can co-exists more peacefully in the community by tetting it go not arguing about it.
And, speaking of clothing, when is Christy coming down here for our lingere shopping trip?!
posted
"But not an abject one, in that you are sorry for saying it at all and would never say a remark like that again. Because, you really aren't sorry for saying it, you are just sorry that it was construed badly by the other person."
Yeah. That's kind of exactly what I did. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
1) being a female engineer 2) being left handed 3) being a left-handed engineer 4) number of engineers with fashion sense
I know you can definitely find numbers on 1 and 2, 3 might be a little trickier but not too difficult since most lefties go into artistic fields.
#4 has to be less than 30%, so you do the math!
AJ
(just realized since most lefties are artistic their fashion sense might be higher than the rest of the population, but I think the "engineer with fashion sense" statistic overhwelms any of that)
quote: Did you get it all from that book? I definitely think that should go on my must read list. Though I guess I shouldn't really expect too much fashion sense from myself since I'm left-handed female engineer.
I wish I could have gotten it all from a book, but no: a lot of it was trial and error. Things like wearing a white suit and having people ask if I was the Good Humor man, or wearing a fedora and having people call me "Indiana".
But you can learn the basics pretty easily. That book "Color Me Beautiful" would be an excellent start for you in terms of identifying the colors that work for you. Next, identify women with your body type and hair style that you find attractive and notice what they're wearing.
In terms of color, when I buy a shirt or a tie, or anything that goes near my face, I usually hold it up next to my face in the mirror and see how my face looks next to that color. Does it bring out my eyes? Does it make me look pale and sickly? Or green? You don't have to know why a certain color or texture works for you; you just have to know if it does indeed work.
If you know of any fashion magazines that feature normal-looking women (instead of the sticks or the double-Ds), it might help to subscribe ... but only if you like that magazine's sense of style. But keep in mind that the photos in there are airbrushed, and no amount of clothes, diet, and makeup could possibly make you look like the photos. Use them as a suggestion only, and not as a goal.
And finally, experiment. Wear a different combination and look at the eyes of the people around you. How do they respond to you?
Jeff
P.S. This being said, since my layoff, I've been dressing like a total slob. You see, now I work from home, so comfort is more important than style at the moment. Nowadays, a dress up day is when I wear shoes. Posts: 1692 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may have misinterpreted your statement, then, AJ. So, were you saying that the odds of having all of the qualities of femaleness, engineerness, left-handedness, and fashion sense are low? In that case, I'd have to agree with you.
I think the statement as written implies, rather, that your lack of fashion sense is a result of you being female, left-handed, and an engineer. And in that case, I'd have to disagree. Two out of those three qualities are more than likely working for you. Still, you're probably right in that the engineer nature overwhelms the other two.
5'10 and slim is an excellent combination. A lot of fashion models fall into that category, so you, better than most women, might actually have better success looking good in what looks good on the runway or in the catalogs.
Since you're not petite, you don't have to stay completely clear of ornamentation, just so long as you don't overdo it.
"I'm having an accessory crisis." - Steve Martin in Leap of Faith
posted
Yeah but IMO people are more likely to tell guys when they look awful. They don't tell women for fear of hurting their feelings. Steve (my bf) is the only person I know honest enough to tell me to go back and change if I'm wearing some hideous color combination that I haven't even noticed.
For example, I was wearing what I thought was a blue button up shirt, with reddish-brown jeans. However I didn't realize that the overall looking blue shirt was actually tiny black and blue checks and that the both the black, and the hue of blue, clashed with said pants. (I can see Mrs. M cringing now) In fact I got home from work that day when Steve looked at me and said "My god, please tell me you didn't go to work in that!"
And, when I actually looked at it and analyzed it he was right. But, was anybody at work about to tell me that? Heck, no! Though I was probably saved by the fact that I do work with a bunch of guys who aren't terribly fashion conscious themselves. And these are the mistakes I can make with jeans and t-shirts. If I didn't work in a lab and had to dress up for an office every day I'd be really screwed.
What's even sadder is that Steve is also a left handed engineer, and he has more fashion sense than me.
posted
I love fluff threads that turn into discussions of some real issue that nobody suspected was there!
I'm a right handed female engineer but I sort of go for the schoolgirl look. I tend to like clothes that are way too young for me. My nieces love to borrow my clothes, in fact. I feel happy when wearing mid-thigh skirts, either the slim type or pleated plaid ones sort of like my old parochial school uniforms, and ribbed tights. I don't usually wear stockings. Those are for grown ups.
But the last place I worked told me my skirts were too short. I was like shocked that they would say this. That they would be thinking like that about me. I think it must have been because they didn't know me well at the time.
Am I wrong to expect to be allowed to wear things that are not ankle-length without it being taken as a come-on? Isn't this more or less the same idea as the Taliban had by requiring women to wear black tents in public? Something about this seems not right to me. But I can't quite say what.
In the same way, the idea that morals require women to wear very modest clothing seems not quite right to me. Different people have different styles, and comfort levels, no doubt. Yet to make it a moral issue seems off base to me. What do you guys think?
[ September 24, 2003, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Saxy, yeah I think that the combined probabilities of someone being a left-handed-female engineer are such that said person (me ) has a brain sufficiently skewed towards the linear direction that fashion sense is overwhelmed.
Maybe a better way of putting it is that I am the exact opposite of most statistical generalities that would lead towards fashion sense.
Maybe a better way, though I'm not trying for a mathematical proof is
arty lefty - common (likely to have fashion sense) engineer lefty - uncommon (negates any possible fashion sense benefit)
female- common (likely to have fashion sense) engineer female- uncommmon (negates possible fashion sense benefit)
engineer by definition = someone with bad fashion sense
So when you multiply it out my fashion sense which was already at at least at -x due to upbringing turns into (-x)^3 which is hard to overcome!
AJ
Added on this edit because it was a choice between send it or lose it since the IT lady was here for adobe acrobat updates and needed me to shut down everything.
posted
And if it's an important moral issue that women wear modest clothes, is it true of men too? Why don't we seem to hear about that ever? It seems to me that guys just wear whatever they feel comfortable in and don't worry about it. That's sort of how I feel it should be for women too. Why is there such a difference?
I understand that this probably is one of those things that most people feel doesn't need explaining, but since I don't have the instincts or feelings or whatever it is that makes it go without saying, I'd like to hear someone attempt an explanation. Is there one?
[ September 24, 2003, 12:40 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They did have to speak with my boss about the speedo at the company picnic. That was embarassing for everyone.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
ak, it probably had nothing to do with whether they knew you well enough or even with anyone “thinking like that” about you. If the company has a dress code, mid-thigh skirts are most likely too short. But don’t worry, there’s plenty of room for compromise between mid-thigh and ankle length.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Icarus, don't start down that road. At first it's all in jest, but before you know it you won't be able to stop.
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
dkw, wasn't the Taliban's law about the black tent things also just a dress code? What makes a dress code okay or not okay? That's my question. I'm asking a moral question about dress codes and what constitutes modest dress, and why the word "modest" seems to be applied almost exclusively to female clothes and not male.
[ September 24, 2003, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I would say that at my old school acceptable attire for women was much more comfortable than acceptable attire for men, if comfort is now the issue.
Women could wear a skirt or slacks, and a nice shirt. The shirt could be buttoned or not. Shoes could be heeled or flats. Men had to shave daily (or have a well-groomed beard), wear a collar shirt, and wear a tie. If a woman was wearing slacks and socks, nobody would know if she had shaved her legs or not. My skin is very sensitive, and shaving and wearing a tie irritated it to no end.
Of course, everything about that place was irritating. (j/k )
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That it's not about comfort, but about the complicated interplay of sex and gender in our society. Women are perceived primarly sexually, so their clothes are always seen in this light. Even little girl clothes. Men are not seen this way so modesty or lack of is not an issue in their clothes.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, not that post. I'm talking about my comment that men's clothes generally are more modest than women's clothes--which of course speaks to your point regarding the objectification of women and girls. I personally find it very distasteful when I see words written on the seat of little girls' shorts.
I'm gonna make a pair of shorts like that. Mine will say "Big Butt." (j/k )
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I first got to Dallas, I dated someone (briefly. disasterously.) who worked on a different floor (different area - not a co-worker) of the office. Thursdays is the day you can wear a Scout uniform if you have one.
Heaven help me, I now think Scoutmaster uniforms are sexy. I've been scarred for life.
posted
I think that modesty is an issue for men's clothing as well (see kat's swimsuit story ), but the lines are drawn a little higher, er, lower. Well, both, actually.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, I see. I wasn’t commenting on the morality of dress codes, just on your implication that it had something to do with their perception of your character. (Or perhaps only my inference of your implication . . .) If they had a dress code, then how well they knew you was irrelevant.
But on the issue of dress codes, I see a major difference between a corporation having a dress code for employees while at work and a country having a dress code for women all the time. And I don’t think that it has as much to do with morality as professionalism. Some jobs require a uniform. Others require a certain mode of dress, but not quite as stringent as a uniform. If the dress code is extremely restrictive, or definitely biased (ie: if the men were allowed to wear shorts exposing their knees but you weren’t allowed to wear a short skirt) then I could see a problem.
But I do agree with you that using “modest” as a synonym for “less revealing” in women’s clothing is problematic, as is associating it with virtue. I prefer to think in terms of “appropriate for the place/occasion.” I show a lot more skin at the beach then I do at work, and I wear much tighter clothes to work out than I do to go visiting. I don’t think that makes me less modest at some times than others. It just makes me dressed appropriately for the situation.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is the Taliban's rule about not going outside without your tent the exact same thing as the rule about skirt length? Isn't the difference only one of degree? Why do we feel the first is wrong and the second is okay? At what point does it change from being opressive to being a good thing?
I once heard a lady being harshed on at church (not my church) for showing one inch of cleavage, for instance. I thought there was something wrong about that too.
For me the wrongness, I think, comes from it being involuntary. From it being imposed from without. I felt creeped out when they said that to me about my skirts being too short. I wanted to ask what are people doing looking at my legs instead of doing their jobs? Maybe we should put blinders on them instead, since the problem seems to be there.
I want you to know that my thinking about this comes from 45 years of changing dress codes. When I was in primary school girls were required to wear dresses, even on very cold days when our knees would freeze. The serious reason given when I asked a teacher once was that the shapes of the little girls' bottoms seen in pants would distract the boys.
There's something wrong with that whole idea, I feel. From the Taliban to Mrs. Sattewite's 4th grade class to my old workplace.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And once again I applaud both Anne Kate and dkw.
The whole question of "what is appropriate" is a difficult one to judge though. I know I probably often pick inappropriate outfits due to my lack of fashion sense. A burlap bag can be modest but inappropriate.
Last night I went to an Chicago Symphony orchestra concert. We were way up at the top in the gallery. The acoustics are great everywhere, but the gallery is so steep that you can get vertigo looking down at the orchestra. We had quite the bird's eye view. One female violinist was wearing a black dress that from our high vantage point was transparent. I doubt it would have appeared so transparent standing in front of a mirror. But from above you could clearly see her legs through it. I confess that out of morbid curiosity I loooked to see if I could see her underwear. There was a music stand in the way so I couldn't determine if it was visible or not.
So would the jury of Hatrack consider the said dress the woman was wearing inappropriate or not?
quote:The serious reason given when I asked a teacher once was that the shapes of the little girls' bottoms seen in pants would distract the boys.
This may be urban legend, but my husband's sociology teacher at the University of Maryland told his class that when they first allowed women to attend the University, women were not allowed to drink from water fountains because their wet lips would cause unnecessary excitement for the men.
I got a hard time from teachers at my school for the way I dressed, but then, I was dressing with the intent to disrupt and get attention. So maybe it was good that people tried to put a stop to my obnoxious behavior. That's not a conclusion of any kind, mind, just my experience.
Posts: 1676 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Icky, I don't know the answer. Do mens' clothes cover more? Show the shape of the body less? Are womens' clothes always about attractiveness while mens' are not? I honestly have no idea. Mens' clothes can be yummier or less yummy, for sure. But no mens' dress code ever seems to specify things like skirt length that speak to sexuality content.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh yes, and I wore, dark navy slacks, a pink sweater and tennis shoes to the concert. I also had a bright red jacket which is probably a fashion faux pas too but it was warm. Considering the amount of walking I was going to be doing there was no way I was wearing dress shoes. I know I've been told that if you buy expensive enough dress shoes, they will be comfortable, but I have yet to find a female dress shoe that is actually comfortable. I would probably be willing to spend $200 dollars on said pair of shoes too but I haven't seen any yet.
posted
AJ, I don't have the same social instincts as anyone else. But to me the important thing about this chick is how well she played her violin. I can't imagine giving her attire more than passing notice.
Is it what you can see that's important? Or what the person is intending to say? Or both or neither?
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Chicago Symphony Orchestra is one of the more prestigious and best-funded orchestras in the world. I don't think it was a funding issue. The dress looked extremely expensive, not cheap.
posted
AJ - try Aerosoles. I have a pair of brown leather dress sandals with three-inch heels from aerosoles that I wear all day about three times a week because they are so comfortable. Best $70 I ever spent.
And... *hides head in arms* I was totally kidding about funding for the symphony. I'm starting to become sympathetic to Tom's j/k use.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "funding issue" thing was, I'm sure, a joke suggesting that scantily-dressed violinists might lead to an increase in audience interest. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason why I noticed was not because I was being the "fashion police". I know my fashion is deficient and would never presume to judge (and I don't think I have passed judgment on the woman, I've just relayed an incident that happened and asked for Hatrack's opinioin.) I noticed because I was trying to count skirts to figure out the ratio of women to men in the orchestra. For that matter in an orchestra most of the time even female celloists or bassists are allowed to wear black dress slacks though their instruments are held between their legs.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
