Oh, slate. Oh you wacky bunch of folks!
You fucked up, buckaroos. Your jeans piece missed the mark, bigtime. You can't talk about jeans without talking like class. You can't, really, talk about clothes without talking about class; but especially not jeans.
Designers did not just declare jeans socially correct, and thus they were, into infinity. That's an oversimplification, Designers recognized a trend and exploited it; and it was this trend that has continued to this day. Jeans are no longer the pants of the american worker. They haven't been for half a century. Jeans are the pants of leisure; owning a pair of investment jeans clearly declares membership in the leisure class.
I own three pairs of jeans I wear now. One I bought in my senior year of high school; perfectly broken in, one my mother bought for me last spring, having gotten sick of seeing my underpants through the seat of the first jeans, and one I just bought at the gap outlet, which are a rant unto themselves.
I wear my jeans approximately never. I have one day, maximum two days a week that I'm eligible to wear jeans. I can't wear them to work. We're not allowed. Jeans would be extraordinarily practical in my job- they're thick enough to take a scalding spill without transferring the burn to your thighs. They don't rip or tear during physical work, hold their shape despite frequent washings. Dark jeans barely show a stain. But we have to wear khaki pants. The dress code even specifically states that khaki colorder jeans are not appropriate.
Why can't I wear my jeans? My easily obtained, comfortable, practical jeans?
Class dissonance. I'm a member of the serving class while at work. I can't wear recreational pants, middle class pants. Pants that, when I took off my apron, would make me blend into the pack of suburban moms, college kids, and casual day lawyers that swarm on a friday afternoon.
Jeans are too personal. They're something you wear when you're being yourself. They're something that, based on the cut and the condition, reveal a little about you. They reveal gender, even bring sexuality into topstitched relief. My jeans are faded, a little torn. There is gesso on the knee from when I had the time to paint. They're cut low, but not too low, and make my bum look like the bum of a college student. In fact, make me look like me; not an employee.
And so they're not allowed. And they're not allowed working in drugstores, in chocolate shops, as a waitress (unless they're required, more on that later), as a plumber (fucking absurd), floor-washer, dishwasher, and so on. Even the most rudimentary dress code dissallows two things- jeans and sneakers. The explanation is that they're unprofessional. As if these jobs themselves are concerned with the professional appearance of their workers. Polo shirts and khakis are the uniform of a progressive kindergarten, not skilled employment. These dress codes delineate the server from the served. So jeans, the pants that everyone wants to wear, and those with free time can afford to wear, are out.
And by being out for me, they're in for you. Completely dissasociated from blue-collar origins (do we even have a blue-collar in the US anymore?), they belong now to two groups- those who do not work, and those whose work does not dictate exactly what they must wear. The leisure class, priveleged college students, and highly skilled workers in professional jobs. (Cosmo and glamour keep running articles on how to dress your jeans for the office- I can only dream). You can buy embellished jeans, perfectly cut jeans, custom jeans- jeans that subtly talk about who you are and what you want to be seen as. Cargo Pockets for the populist. Embroidery for the imaginary bohemian. Cuffs for the hipster, trouser cut for the crease and ironers. Low in the back for the high school student, low in the front for the no-carb, tobacco, coke and pilates fitness nut. Kabbalah jeans for the needs-to-believe in something bigger (that madonna also believes in). High waistband for a gut to hide, no waistband for those who still believe in Mariah Carey. You can wear anything you want to be.
As long as you can afford it, and you have a place to wear it.
And that's obvious, if you've ever been a person who can't wear jeans.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
It's so hard to have a principle.
I need a breadbox.
My kitchen would be so much more organized if I had a breadbox.
Further; I want this breadbox
But it comes from Target.
Goddamn. It's so cute and I could put my bread in it. And when people asked where bread was, I could say "in my shiny red box, motherfucker".
To Do:
Force Target to give up shameful practice, buy breadbox, invite friends over for bread and leave them wondering where it is.
My kitchen would be so much more organized if I had a breadbox.
Further; I want this breadbox
But it comes from Target.
Goddamn. It's so cute and I could put my bread in it. And when people asked where bread was, I could say "in my shiny red box, motherfucker".
To Do:
Force Target to give up shameful practice, buy breadbox, invite friends over for bread and leave them wondering where it is.
Monday, November 07, 2005
Zombies
People don't believe me when I say that I feel like the zombies are coming.
They think I'm being hipper than thou, ironic, whatever.
But I wake up, sometimes at 4, 4:30 in the morning, stagger out to my car, and I'm scared. I really need to get into my car as fast as possible, assure myself there's nothing in the back seat, and lock the doors. Because today might be the day the zombies come.
Of course, eventually the sun comes up. And I forget about zombies for a while.
Let me clarify: I don't think the zombies are coming. I don't think the dead are about to walk the earth. I don't think that I need to put a large blunt object in my car, just in case some rage virus (meh?) or fallen satellite (classic!) or barrel full of toxic liquid zombie parts (I'll give you a dollar if you get that reference) releases a plague of dead-eyed recently undead brain craving individuals into the Boston Metro Area.
But when I'm alone, and the light is that sick green two hours from dawn moosh that only assholes refer to as "moonlight", and it's cold, and it's quiet, yeah- I feel like the zombies are coming.
Of course the Zombies aren't coming.
It's an issue of directionality, I think. This fear reaction, physiological arousal, etc, upon finding yourself alone in the dark, this hyper-awareness in a situation that is safe, is common. Maybe it's universal to feel arousal in everyday situations that we know, cognitively, logically, are safe. Maybe it's one of the oldest human feelings. We're monkeys walking around out there, staggering around a world that has only been safe on a consistent basis for decades.
They think I'm being hipper than thou, ironic, whatever.
But I wake up, sometimes at 4, 4:30 in the morning, stagger out to my car, and I'm scared. I really need to get into my car as fast as possible, assure myself there's nothing in the back seat, and lock the doors. Because today might be the day the zombies come.
Of course, eventually the sun comes up. And I forget about zombies for a while.
Let me clarify: I don't think the zombies are coming. I don't think the dead are about to walk the earth. I don't think that I need to put a large blunt object in my car, just in case some rage virus (meh?) or fallen satellite (classic!) or barrel full of toxic liquid zombie parts (I'll give you a dollar if you get that reference) releases a plague of dead-eyed recently undead brain craving individuals into the Boston Metro Area.
But when I'm alone, and the light is that sick green two hours from dawn moosh that only assholes refer to as "moonlight", and it's cold, and it's quiet, yeah- I feel like the zombies are coming.
Of course the Zombies aren't coming.
It's an issue of directionality, I think. This fear reaction, physiological arousal, etc, upon finding yourself alone in the dark, this hyper-awareness in a situation that is safe, is common. Maybe it's universal to feel arousal in everyday situations that we know, cognitively, logically, are safe. Maybe it's one of the oldest human feelings. We're monkeys walking around out there, staggering around a world that has only been safe on a consistent basis for decades.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
International No-Panties Day to End Child Marriage
Teenage girls and college coed types are offended by certain shirts offered by the retailer Abercrombie and Fitch. These shirts feature sayings such as "Available for Parties" and "I make you look fat" (Picture gallery linked from here). So, responding to pressure from the "girlcott" (how's that for a bubblegum neologism?), Abercrombie has pulled the offending shirts from their line.
Homo homo homo.
Wank wank wank.
I'll admit, some of the sayings could be offensive to people from the rationally brittle to the reasonably thin-skinned. And no one should be forced to wear those shirts if they don't get the joke. Certainly, they're inappropriate for most workplaces, as the humor would make people uncomfortable. If they were banned from secondary schools, that would be fine. Both schools and workplaces have a reasonable interest in making all individuals reasonably comfortable in their environment, and if they must do that through certain behavioral constraints, that's the way it will go.
And that's fine. I personally hate dress codes. I'd love to put out T-Shirts with a certain offensive slogan very, very dear to my heart. (maybe soon I will!). I was something fairly offensive for Halloween, but I didn't outdo my friend T. I really resent the choady dress code for my work. (Tomorrow, if I have time, I'll blog about the socio-sexual-economic implications of tucked in shirts with mandatory casual wear).
I like activism. And I believe in boycotts as a tool of activism. It breaks my heart to think about not being able to buy from Target, especially when I need a tea kettle and an electric blanket. But I just don't believe that a pharmacist should be able to interfere with a woman's personal health decisions. And I believe that corporate policies that allow pharmacists to make moral judgments that supercede their patients' are wrong, and should result in economic hardships for the corporations. I worry about the repurcussions of this corporate policy. A woman may end up pregnant because of someone else's decision, someone else's morality. She may have to have an abortion, or carry through with an unwanted pregnancy. (how likely is a place without a pro-choice pharmacist to have a doctor willing to perform abortions?) And that's why I may boycott Target.
This "girlcott" of Abercrombie and Fitch is different. The principle of the 'girlcott' is that they don't like the shirt. If Abercrombie and Fitch continued to sell the shirts, only people who wanted the shirts would buy them. Buying a shirt you don't like, and don't want, is stupid. All products are boycotted by girls who don't like them. That's how selling works. If you want something, you buy it. If you don't like something, or a brand that sells something, you don't buy it. If many people consider a given product stupid, useless, or tasteless, it will fade away.
So why propose a hugely public boycott of a product because of alledged poor taste?
Because you don't want it available for someone else to buy.
Which is fucktarded.
And shouldn't be encouraged.
1. Self-congratulatory tone.
2. Exaggerated idea of impact + import of cause.
3. Happy-time-we shall-overcome impression of group unity.
It's a T-Shirt! (Well, several T-Shirts). It's degrading? Degrading? To have simply, kitschy sentences, worn by someone, by choice, on their body?. I suppose the statements aren't positive. They won't elevate anything or anyone. Degrading is a superior court judge unable to distinguish a married woman from a child. That's degrading. But degrading doesn't mean anything anymore. Degrading has started to mean a sentiment that doesn't treat people with either mewling deference or 'you go girl' universal endorsdulation.
And the message from pop culture that this "girlcott" is meant to fight?. That girls get by on appearances, manipulate men with sexuality, and blondes (especially slutty blondes) beat brunettes. Basically, it's goodole objectification of women. Or, to cut through the buzzwords even more, it's the sexualization of women based on superficial sexual characteristics. These seeeeexxxxy coeds have gone willlld because it's been implied that they are fluffy, wispy, intellectually inconsequential people to be indulged as items of entertainment or sexual pleasure.
In an attempt to make themselves taken seriously in the public sphere, these young activists have organized a boycott. That they call a girlcott. Advice, chickies, for free even- If you want to be taken seriously, try not to name your political actions anything that would look really cute written in pink glittery bubble letters.
"Girlcott"- 'We like, totally want to say that we're against objectification and stuff, like, so take us seriously! but we didn't want that gross boy word in there! Ew!"
And remember girls, if you don't like something, if it hurts your big bad meaningful feminist feelings, do something cute and media friendly, and it will go away!
Of course, that is what happened.
Anybody want to do a "Pro-Choice Girls Gone Wild!" video? How about "College Girls Confidential: All proceeds go seal ICKY obstetric fistulas in the third world". Lets take off our shirts for better health care!
Spread Beav' For A Living Wage!
My ass + Your Tongue = Increased access to college prep courses in rural counties!
International No-Panties Day for an End to Child Marriage!
Homo homo homo.
Wank wank wank.
I'll admit, some of the sayings could be offensive to people from the rationally brittle to the reasonably thin-skinned. And no one should be forced to wear those shirts if they don't get the joke. Certainly, they're inappropriate for most workplaces, as the humor would make people uncomfortable. If they were banned from secondary schools, that would be fine. Both schools and workplaces have a reasonable interest in making all individuals reasonably comfortable in their environment, and if they must do that through certain behavioral constraints, that's the way it will go.
And that's fine. I personally hate dress codes. I'd love to put out T-Shirts with a certain offensive slogan very, very dear to my heart. (maybe soon I will!). I was something fairly offensive for Halloween, but I didn't outdo my friend T. I really resent the choady dress code for my work. (Tomorrow, if I have time, I'll blog about the socio-sexual-economic implications of tucked in shirts with mandatory casual wear).
I like activism. And I believe in boycotts as a tool of activism. It breaks my heart to think about not being able to buy from Target, especially when I need a tea kettle and an electric blanket. But I just don't believe that a pharmacist should be able to interfere with a woman's personal health decisions. And I believe that corporate policies that allow pharmacists to make moral judgments that supercede their patients' are wrong, and should result in economic hardships for the corporations. I worry about the repurcussions of this corporate policy. A woman may end up pregnant because of someone else's decision, someone else's morality. She may have to have an abortion, or carry through with an unwanted pregnancy. (how likely is a place without a pro-choice pharmacist to have a doctor willing to perform abortions?) And that's why I may boycott Target.
This "girlcott" of Abercrombie and Fitch is different. The principle of the 'girlcott' is that they don't like the shirt. If Abercrombie and Fitch continued to sell the shirts, only people who wanted the shirts would buy them. Buying a shirt you don't like, and don't want, is stupid. All products are boycotted by girls who don't like them. That's how selling works. If you want something, you buy it. If you don't like something, or a brand that sells something, you don't buy it. If many people consider a given product stupid, useless, or tasteless, it will fade away.
So why propose a hugely public boycott of a product because of alledged poor taste?
Because you don't want it available for someone else to buy.
Which is fucktarded.
And shouldn't be encouraged.
"We're telling [girls] to think about the fact that they're being degraded," Emma Blackman-Mathis, the 16-year-old co-chair of the group, told RedEye on Tuesday. "We're all going to come together in this one effort to fight this message that we're getting from pop culture.How's that for happy horseshit? It's got all the hallmarks of happy horseshit-
1. Self-congratulatory tone.
2. Exaggerated idea of impact + import of cause.
3. Happy-time-we shall-overcome impression of group unity.
It's a T-Shirt! (Well, several T-Shirts). It's degrading? Degrading? To have simply, kitschy sentences, worn by someone, by choice, on their body?. I suppose the statements aren't positive. They won't elevate anything or anyone. Degrading is a superior court judge unable to distinguish a married woman from a child. That's degrading. But degrading doesn't mean anything anymore. Degrading has started to mean a sentiment that doesn't treat people with either mewling deference or 'you go girl' universal endorsdulation.
And the message from pop culture that this "girlcott" is meant to fight?. That girls get by on appearances, manipulate men with sexuality, and blondes (especially slutty blondes) beat brunettes. Basically, it's goodole objectification of women. Or, to cut through the buzzwords even more, it's the sexualization of women based on superficial sexual characteristics. These seeeeexxxxy coeds have gone willlld because it's been implied that they are fluffy, wispy, intellectually inconsequential people to be indulged as items of entertainment or sexual pleasure.
In an attempt to make themselves taken seriously in the public sphere, these young activists have organized a boycott. That they call a girlcott. Advice, chickies, for free even- If you want to be taken seriously, try not to name your political actions anything that would look really cute written in pink glittery bubble letters.
"Girlcott"- 'We like, totally want to say that we're against objectification and stuff, like, so take us seriously! but we didn't want that gross boy word in there! Ew!"
And remember girls, if you don't like something, if it hurts your big bad meaningful feminist feelings, do something cute and media friendly, and it will go away!
Of course, that is what happened.
Anybody want to do a "Pro-Choice Girls Gone Wild!" video? How about "College Girls Confidential: All proceeds go seal ICKY obstetric fistulas in the third world". Lets take off our shirts for better health care!
Spread Beav' For A Living Wage!
My ass + Your Tongue = Increased access to college prep courses in rural counties!
International No-Panties Day for an End to Child Marriage!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
