Stockholming, Week 4, and Some Talk of Underthings

I knew I should have Stockholmed yesterday. I gotta be honest--yesterday I looked (IMO) hot, and I very rarely think I look hot. It was a pretty simple outfit, with a black sparkly pencil skirt from Torrid, a white cardy as a blouse, nude hose, and some cutout black suede slingbacks with a stacked heel and python patent detail. Hot. But today is not bad.

Last week, though? Last week was bad. Look at this. Just look!

Yeah, it's not pretty. Flat hair, pale makeup, bad collar, red bathroom. Overall ugh. I promise that most of the week was better.  But seriously--puffed cap sleeves that cut off above the widest part of my arm and are too big for the arm when the rest of the shirt is too small for me. Ugh. Damned Old Navy sales, seducing me into bad fashion choices with the lure of $10 shirts. I just have to learn to pass up cheap for quality (at least once I reach goal weight; until then, it's like short-selling on stocks).

Today's outfit's ok...the cardigan is missing a button, which means that it closes just above the widest part of my waist, and the hairs a little wonky, but overall I'm in a pretty good state of mind about my clothing choices. 

Looking at the pictures, though, brings to mind one thing (guys, stop reading here): appropriate undergarments. It actually came to me yesterday at the gym, listening to a cute new HS grad talking about her dress. Apparently she couldn't wear her sundress with anything but nude underwear because the underwear shows through the thin, white, cotton dress. I was aghast. I wanted to ask if she had ever heard of a slip, because really? The thought of wearing a white skirt without a slip brings back viciously fun memories of a horrid bridesmaid in just such a dress, posing for photos in front of a picture window--her flowered thong was quite lovely in the pics, I'm sure. But I wouldn't wish that on this little girl. Standing in the locker room, I couldn't see the underwear but I could see where the red tank she was wearing under the sundress ended, and it was so uncute. I felt bad for her, and all it would take is a slip.

I guess it's always about the right undergear. My issue is that, as I lose weight, I feel better and fitter, and think I look better (concurrence received from friends and intended), some outfits--like the ones above--show that without the right undergarment, losing the weight in some areas just highlights how much there is to lose other places. More-defined muscles seem to highlight the chubbed areas more than when the whole was chub. So, I guess, until I hit goal, it's time to learn from Steel Magnolias.

Clairee: "Looks like two pigs, fightin' under a blanket!"
Truvy: "I haven't left the house without Lycra on these thighs since I was fourteen."
Clairee: "You were brought up right."

Sigh. One more motivation to reach goal.

Fauxmenism: Lady Pants

You should probably know that I consider myself a feminist. I do. I tend to be a rather conservative feminist, though. My brand of feminism is one that thinks that legally, men and women are equal. In general terms (because let's face it, there are exceptions to every rule) men and women are socially, physically, psychologically, and emotionally complementary. I don't have to do--or even be able to do--everything that men can do to be a man's equal, any more than he has to want/be able to do everything I can to be equal. My brand of feminism is one that is pro-woman, not anti-man; I think women can be womanly and strong instead of wannabemanly. I distrust a feminism that:

• thinks I have to be proabortion to be a proper feminist
• disdains stay-at-home-mothers
• disdains career women who also have families
• thinks all men are out to get all women
• thinks that everything is hunky dory and that all gender-based inequality has been resolved
• tells me what to believe rather than demanding that I figure out what I believe and giving me the tools to do so
• tells me that I can have it all without making any sacrifices: there are opportunity costs for everything
• thinks that simply being a female qualifies any woman to do something well (e.g., a woman president will automatically be better thank a male)
• thinks that being female doesn't change what said woman brings to the table (life experience is always influenced by gender, race, age, and ability--your experience is what you bring to the table, and people who dismiss that are are either delusional or just stupid)

That said, I acknowledge that people who believe any or all of those things believe themselves to be feminists, and more power to them (unless they support Sarah Palin, in which case, no. Just no.). They are not examples of fauxmenists.

Fauxmenism is what I call anything that is lady-specific but not really worth arguing about at all. It's the kind of thing that you can blow up to be gender-bias, but really is just stupid, and that's what I'll be hitting on for Fauxmenism entries.

The first one: Lady Pants. As those of you who have worn or removed lady pants know, lady pants (and shirts, for that matter) open left.  As in, you use your left hand. But not jeans. No, jeans zip up on the right. Because they started out as menswear, and men have traditionally dressed themselves while women dressed each other, due to the cumbersome nature of women's clothing throughout history. (Really, though, wealthy men were just as likely to have someone else dress them, so it should be a class thing, not a gender thing.) I've heard the arguement about shirts, that it's so guy, who traditionally escort girls on the right, can't peek through the gaposis, but I think that's more a side effect than a goal.

I guess my point here, though, is that most women dress themselves these days, even if some should really let someone else pull the outfits together. So why is it that there's still a difference between the closures? Why, at the very least, don't we have some consistency on the closure front? Because I have to be honest...I have, in the past, forgotten to zip the Lady Pants altogether (only one pair, and I'm pretty sure it's because they have a wide waistband that has 4 buttons itself, and I thinking I'm done once the buttons are done. All I'm asking is for some consistency.

The real reason, though, that this is an issue that every fauxmenist should take up is this, which I found while doing exhaustive research on the Internets. When asked why women's and men's clothing closures were different, this was the response:

Men's clothes button from the right because most men are right-handed.
And most women's clothes button from the left is because most men are right-handed.

Uhuh.  I knew you'd feel me. Let the rage ensue.