Recently in Fashion Category
On Wednesday night, I was honored to be a guest on CUNY TV's Brian Lehrer Live, a weekly current events show filmed here in New York. I was there, along with Marisa Meltzer, the author of Girl Power: the Nineties Revolution in Music and Rob Walker, who writes the NYT's "Consumed" column and is also the author of Buying In: What We Buy and Who We Are. I was there to talk about the YouTube phenomenon that is the haul video. If you've never seen a haul video, it's basically a person doing on camera what you usually do when you come back from a shopping trip: excitedly show what you've bought to anyone who'll listen. Except in a haul video, you show it in front of your webcam and then post it on YouTube for an audience of thousands. Most haul videos are made by teenage girls, and most of the items been shown off are clothing or makeup, though a thorough browsing of the genre reveals that there are haul videos about a whole range of products, including groceries.
It was a really interesting discussion, one that touched on issues of consumerism, teenage belonging and self-identity and on the cultural emphasis placed on women's beauty and the products we're encouraged to buy to achieve it. As you can imagine, I've been thinking a lot about haul videos in the last few days, and I think there are a few noteworthy things going on here.
Margaret Cho and Girlyman's Young James Dean from dapperQ on Vimeo.
I'm very excited to share with you all this new website, created by Susan Herr with help from Dana Variano, called DapperQ. The tag line is "transgressing men's fashion." The site is only a month old, but after poking around and talking with Dana and Susan, it sounds like it's going to be a resource and community for all the folks out there who are masculine presenting, or want to play with gender norms in fashion or just can't find their style reflected in the mainstream.
There is an emphasis on the queer community (the original tagline was "queering men's fashion") but their mission goes beyond the boundaries of sexual orientation and gender identity.
As a genderqueer person myself, who has serious problems finding clothes that fit my gender presentation and my body, I'm psyched to see a new and well developed resource like this one. The video above is just one example of the content over at dapperQ.
You can also find them on facebook and twitter.
Transcript for the video above after the jump.
Awards season is upon us. Much like political campaigning, awards season never truly ends, but every January the ramp up to the Oscars begins, and even serious news outlets can't seem to prevent themselves from gushing about gowns (I'm looking at you, New York Times).
I have a confession. I love awards season. I love awkward red carpet chit chat and clearly rehearsed "this is so unexpected!" acceptance speeches and yes, I love looking at pictures of people in stunning dresses and dapper tuxes.
But this year, I have a few awards season wishes.
First, I would love to see a little less opulence and a little more awareness on the red carpet. Our country has been through a lot in the last year, and while Hollywood is where we often turn to escape from the grim reality of real life in America, it would be refreshing to see an acknowledgment that, outside of Tinseltown, millions of Americans are struggling to make ends meet.
I'd love to see a little less focus on what actresses are wearing, and a little more attention paid to the work they've done this year. Women like Catherine Bigelow, Gabourey Sidibe, Meryl Streep, Natalie Portman and Mo'Nique, to name just a few, have made some real contributions to acting and directing this year. And while awards seasons inherently carries with it some focus on how these women present themselves on the red carpet, wouldn't it be nice to celebrate their talent and hard work, instead of focusing solely on their gowns, hair, make up and jewelry? Wouldn't it be nice to hear red carpet hosts ask those actresses about how they prepared for their roles, rather than how they prepared for the awards ceremony?
Finally, if we must talk fashion, I'd love to see a ban on the body snark that so often comes along with it. It's easy, when we talk about gowns and tuxes in a critical way, to talk about the bodies wearing them in the same tone. It's difficult to draw the line between commenting on a woman's style and commenting on her size or shape, but it can, and should, be done. For those of us who can't get through awards season without talking about the fashion, the women at Go Fug Yourself set an excellent (and very funny) example for how to talk about red carpet fashion, without the body snark.
Oh, and my last awards season wish? I really want a woman to win Best Director. In the eighty-two years that the Academy has been handing out Oscars, they've never once given a Best Director statuette to a woman. My money's on The Hurt Locker's Catherine Bigelow.
Do you have any wishes for awards season? Leave them in comments!
The New York Times reported yesterday that massive clothing chain H&M is damaging perfectly good, unworn clothing before throwing it away. From the article:
This week, a manager in the H&M store on 34th Street said inquiries about its disposal practices had to be made to its United States headquarters. However, various officials did not respond to 10 inquiries made Tuesday by phone and e-mail.
My own research finds that H&M claims the following on its website:
What do you do with surplus clothes?
We donate clothes that do not meet H&M's quality requirements to charity organisations like Oxfam, Caritas, the Red Cross and Terre des Hommes. Each store is itself responsible for clothes that are returned to it. Often there is an agreement that the clothes will be passed on to a suitable local charity organisation. Naturally we never give away clothing that does not comply with our safety requirements and Chemical Restrictions. Such items are destroyed.
Yet, sources told the New York Times that clothing that appears totally safe is throw away nightly, after being made unwearable. This, of course, at a time when--as the article notes--"It is winter. A third of the city is poor."
Why, you might ask, is this a feminist issue? Because women and children are disproportionately vulnerable in times of recession and disproportionately targeted by advertising aimed to sell clothing from massive corporate conglomerates, because the class disparity in this country can not be cleaved from racism, sexism etc., because our interdependence is undeniable.
If you're as disgusted with H&M's behavior as I am, contact them at their New York headquarters: 212-564-9922.
I turned 30 a few days ago, as Jessica sweetly noted. Suffice it to say that the dawn of my third decade corresponded with a whole shitload of personal upheaval--as Miriam and Samhita reminded me, my Saturn Returns. I don't go in for new agey stuff all that much (a product of daughter rebellion, mostly), but I swear it has felt like all of that astrological stuff is more than just hooey as of late.
But I digress, I wanted to write about hair. I did that thing that so many people do when their lives change--I tried to externalize it in some symbolic way. This is not my tendency. When I studied abroad in South Africa and almost everyone of my friend got a tattoo, I resisted. I pierced my nose and kept the little stud in for about half a minute in college. But mostly, I look the same as I did when I was about four--long, curly, frizzy hair, not much makeup, a sense of style best described as simple and sometimes playful, but without too much thought.
But this year, I cut off about 10 inches of hair (admittedly, my hair is still not that short). Normally, this would really freak me out. I find women with short hair super attractive, so it's not that. I think I just carried my hair around with me kind of like a security blanket. It's what I've always known. It makes me feel like me. So cutting it off was sort of an acknowledgment that I'm not totally sure who I am these days (in a good way), and there is no real safety (again, don't start worrying...this has also been an empowering realization), and so I might as well go through life a little lighter (both literally and metaphorically).
I would be remiss if I didn't do a bit of gender analysis here, of course. I also think that having long hair, as a cis gendered, fairly straight woman, feels safe in a certain kind of way. There are men who really like short hair, but in my experience the majority of men like long hair. And in the larger culture, of course, long hair denotes femininity and youth and other things glamorized and glorified in our gender binary culture. Cutting off my hair also felt like a bit of a fuck you to that system (I'm not claiming I should get any big radical credit here...I know it's minuscule in comparison to other radical acts.) I want to be with people who can find non-traditional femininity, or masculine femininity, or whatever the hell you want to call it, sexy too.
When I realized I could donate my hair, it was an awesome added bonus. I didn't grow it out intending to give it away, but when I realized that my new lease could provide one for someone else, that felt even better.
So far I don't miss it. In fact, I feel sexy. I feel quick. I can get out of the shower and be ready in about five minutes (the only thing holding me back from this speed had always been untangling my notoriously tangly hair). I feel new.
The International Center of Photography has an amazing exhibit up right now called Dress Codes. While the framing is technically fashion, the show is really about image--chock full of interesting art about gender, beauty, race, and the body, among other favorite feminist topics. They describe its range:
The theme of fashion encompasses a diverse range of practices and ideas, including explorations of identity and affiliation; the production, distribution, and consumption of images and goods; contemporaneity; age; gender; and global industry. The themes of the Triennial express the exuberance, wit, and astute social observation taking place within contemporary image-making. These artists variously explore fashion--whether in everyday dress, haute couture, street fashion, or uniforms--as a celebration of individuality, personal identity, and self-expression, and as cultural, religious, social, and political statements.
The most compelling piece, in my opinion, was a video installation done by Australian artist David Rosetzky in which the amazing Cate Blanchett talks about performance while doing various physical movements in a big, open warehouse. She dresses and undresses, dances with the knowledge that she is being watched, moves her hands in a sort of beautiful interpretative swirl, walks and pauses, walks again etc. All the while, she talks about her approach to performance in truly surprising ways. For example, she admits that doesn't really fall in love with the characters she portrays, as so many artists claim to, that in fact she finds that her best work comes when she is a bit indifferent to them. There is something so vulnerable, so artful about the whole piece. She ends by talking about the "constant pull between wanting to be seen and not wanting to be seen."
Other artists to watch who are included in the exhibit: Miyako Ishiuchi, Pinar Yolacana, Mickalene Thomas, Olga Chernysheva, Lorna Simpson, Cindy Sherman, and good ol' Barbara Kruger.
I'm not a big follower of fashion, or a wearer of high heels, but these shoes are out of control. Apparently they are, unsurprisingly, the invention of the male designer, Alexander McQueen.
Last week, around the first day of fall, this tweet was going around courtesy of Sinclair Sexsmith, sex blogger and gender writer.
RT @mrsexsmith: tomorrow is equinox; it'll officially be fall, season for which my wardrobe was made. Yay sweaters & jackets!
I agreed with his tweet (strongly) and have been thinking more about how true this is as the weather has gotten steadily colder.
I love fall. It is hands down my favorite season. I do love the leaves, and the feeling of cool crisp air, and the newness of the season. But the main reason I love it is that the fall wardrobe is so much more me than any other season.
Pants, jackets, sweaters, vests. I love them all, and feel super comfortable in my fall clothing. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way about the season and clothing it brings, but for me it is definitely about gender presentation. When I dress up, I mostly wear long sleeve button down shirts and pants. Not much variety on that, regardless of the weather, so when it's hot out I sweat a lot and am uncomfortable. I also don't wear tank tops really, definitely no skirts or dresses for me.
I feel most comfortable--most safe even--wearing layers, sweaters over long sleeve shirts, jackets and vests. It's also much easier to find clothing that fits with my gender presentation in the fall. Even women's clothing is a little more gender neutral (although I mostly wear men's clothing these days). The silhouette created by this wardrobe is also more comfortable for me, less tight fitting, more square.
Related:
H&M Tomboy Chic
Black Tie Blues
I've noticed a trend in recent years, for stores like Gap and Old Navy to introduce baggier style jeans for women and call them "Boyfriend" jeans. You know, like you just slipped on a pair of your male lover's pants and look how great they look on you? But let's be clear, you don't actually want to wear men's pants. Since wearing men's clothing might make people think you're a lesbian (which you're obviously not), let's make sure everyone knows you are just trying your boyfriend's jeans on.
Ugh.
I have much more to say about gendered clothing and the difficulties of finding clothes that don't stick strictly to norms about gender, but I have a different issue to take on here.
Apparently boyfriend jeans are not just for adult women anymore. Gap now has "boyfriend" jeans for young girls, all the way down to age 4.
The must-have boyfriend jean with the comfy-cool style you're little fashionista loves, made just for her. Add ballet flats and a soft T for a sweet look, you'll both adore.
Not only do four year olds not need boyfriends, they don't need weird labeling so they can wear baggy jeans, or whatever else Gap thinks these jeans need to labeled for.
Check out Katha Pollit's piece about UN press officer and general badass Lubna Hussein, who is standing up against the sexist Sudanese government. Hussein was one of the 13 women charged under Sudan's Article 152 Criminal Code, prohibiting "indecent" dress, on July 3rd. Their crime? Um, pants. 10 of the 13 women accepted a plea bargain, but not Hussein. Pollit reports:
Lubna Hussein and two others insisted on going to trial-- even though losing in court will mean forty lashes and a much bigger fine. In fact, Hussein resigned her UN post so as not to have immunity -- she wants to win this battle on principle, not a technicality, and have the dress-code law abolished. 'I will take my case to the upper court, even to the constitutional court,' she told The Guardian . 'And if they find me guilty, I am ready to receive not only 40 lashes, I am ready for 40,000 lashes. If all women must be flogged for what they wear, I am ready to be flogged 40,000 times.'
Support Hussein and her crew here.
At 12pm CDT (1pm EDT, 1800 GMT) Shark-Fu will be on BBC World's Have Your Say discussing race and the fashion industry.
Or catch the episode on their podcast.
I knew not to be too excited about this article about plus size fashion when the accompanying picture was a young woman in a frozen food aisle. In the words of Seth Meyer and Amy Poehler, REALLY, NEW YORK TIMES?! You publish a story on "big girls" who--what a shock!--are interested in looking cute, and then promptly choose to lead the whole thing off with an image that insinuates that they're favorite hang spot is the supermarket. Really?!
The piece details all the different clothing stores that have recently started plus size fashion lines, including Top Shop, Forever 21, and H&M (subsequently dropped for reasons unknown). There's a market, it turns out, for women above a size 10 to buy clothing. Who would have thunk it?
A few really annoying things...most of these lines are still only available online, which suggests that a) the stores don't want "big girls" shopping it up in store or b) the stores assume that "big girls" don't want to have a shopping experience like everyone else, that they're oh-so-ashamed. Either way, it's insulting. (I know the stores claim they just don't have room for all their merchandise, but I call bullshit on that).
Annie Maribona, the founder and part owner of Fat Fancy, a new boutique in Portland, Oregon, told the Times: "When you're fat you stand out anyway. It's really important to go all the way and do something fun or even outrageous with your clothes."
Um, I'm all for anyone of any size doing something fun or even outrageous with their style, but this sort of makes it sound like bigger girls have to present as freak shows in order to adhere to the public's expectation. It's fine if a larger woman likes to dress in "outrageous" colors or styles--more power to her--but she shouldn't feel like she has to "go all the way" unless it's authentic to her tastes and personality.
Thank goodness Maribona redeems herself in the short snippet on fat acceptance:
More than tokenism, such fashion and media tactics seem born of a conviction that larger young women have become more self-accepting. "They are inclined to show off the parts of their bodies they love," said Ms. Sack, the Chicago retailer. Pushing the trend is a broad movement of fat acceptance among academics, anti-bias activists and some psychologists. "It's important to reclaim 'fat' as a descriptive, as even something positive," argued Ms. Maribona of Fat Fancy.
But of course they follow that right up with the requisite fat shaming expert:
But others point to serious health consequences of being overweight. Andrea Marks, a specialist in adolescent medicine in Manhattan, suspects that "the vast majority of overweight girls are not so happy."
Sigh. Why is an article about the clothing industry finally recognizing that larger women can be fashion-forward including a doctor dooming them to unhappiness? Would an article about a new kind of bar that men love to go to also include an expert reminding them that alcohol consumption leads to health consequences and increased risk of depression? No.
Why can't we live in a world where there is no need to segregate larger sizes of clothing as if they were specialized when really they are average or not far from it? Why are larger women talked about as if they are a different species of human being, as if it is surprising that they'd like to look good or find clothing that fits them in the stores near their homes?
For real information about fashion-forward styles for larger women, check out:
Young, Fat, and Fabulous
Manolo for the Big Girl
Frocks and Frou Frou
The Rotund
Joy Nash
And check out community poster RMJ on the subject.
Thanks to Wendy and Marjorie for the awesome links, and reader Ali for the heads up.
I am sorry, when I get rained on the last thing I feel is sexy. Classy stuff.
Thanks to cmasson for the heads up.
Update: Sorry here is the link and it looks like this was created by students in advertising school.
So I'm not going to pretend to understand the first thing about high fashion. I've been to a Cynthia Rowley show once, because a friend of mine from college works with her and I thought it would be a good adventure. It was startlingly brief and, yes, the women were strikingly thin. But I generally try not to stick my nose where it doesn't belong. I like thrift store shopping and bargain hunting. I'm just not cut out for the fancy stuff.
But even I recognize that this New York Times critic is slangin' some serious bullshit in this round-up of the recent Paris fashion shows:
The most successful collections address females with great respect, accepting them in their totality, acknowledging the emotional complexity of their desire to seduce and be seduced. A central theme of this season is what it means to be a woman in a post-feminist, post-consumerist, post-political society: independent of what men want and think.
Um, excuse me. Post-feminist? Post consumerist? Post-political? Has this journalist been in a cave for the last two years while an entire nation got insane over the presidential election, folks consume like it's going out of style (even in a recession), and our blog--among so many other amazing others-- has such a devoted and wide following? Someone please explain.
I recently came across a copy of the H&M Magazine (h/t to Tanya), and on the cover was the title Hype: Unisex. Get the Boyfriend Look! The article is here.
The basic premise is this "the metrosexual man is old news, and now it's the women's turn--the tomboy has come to stay." The feature does a good job of talking about the history of women's fashion and the moments when women (like Coco Chanel) subverted norms by introducing traditionally masculine items of clothing into her designs. But the first subhead for the article tells the whole story: Straight from your boyfriend's closet.
This is about using masculine fashion elements in a normative way--just make sure you look like you borrowed your boyfriend's jeans sweetie! They also mentioned a few queer women (like Samantha Ronson, Lindsay Lohan's infamous girlfriend and DJ) without talking about how these trends might connect to being queer. This is about fashion, after all.
It's not surprising to see a fashion magazine dealing with the gender categories and even fashion gender bending in such a normative way. This also gets at a discussion that occurred in the comments of Professor Foxy's column this weekend about the acceptability of cross dressing in women versus men.
At least when it comes to fashion, it is definitely more acceptable for women to appropriate elements of men's fashion. Pants for example, suits, baseball caps and even ties. But there is a moment when this crosses an unspoken line from acceptable to transgressive. I think it's the moment when any hint of boyfriend leaves the picture. H&M tell us "Don't forget to add your own special feminine touch." What happens when there is no feminine touch?
As someone who wears mostly men's clothing, I can tell when I've crossed the line. It can create some not so safe or pleasant situations. It's a similar situation for men, although I think the line is closer and better policed. Pink may be the new black, but don't even think about wearing a skirt. Even these moments of gender fluidity still fundamentally reinforce heteronormativity and the gender binary.
