Fashioning Manipulation

 I am engaging in what Jess calls Monogomous Dressing, which I do frequently.  I am once again wearing The Most Versatile Dress I've Ever Owned because I wore it last week when I visited my mom in Kansas City and promised myself that that would be the last time I wore it before I got it dry cleaned.  Well, what's one more time? Especially since I'll just be spending my afternoon in the library writing and students aren't exactly known for smelling great.  But that's what the Chanel No. Five is for.

dress - Corey Lynn Calter/Anthro (remixed)

cardi - GAP (giftcarded  & remixed)

tights - Assets/Target

boots - Plenty by Tracy Reese via Piperlime (remixed)

necklace - Urban Outfitters (remixed)

earrings - Anthro (remixed)

scarf and sunglasses - H&M (remixed)

 I'm at least a month overdue for a trim and because I have an important interview and a conference coming up I'm freaking out about the length of my hair again.  In the fall, I contemplated cutting a lot of it off because longer hair makes me look younger and generally connotes youth.  I tend to place a lot of anxiety on my hair because its changeable and I can't change my height, which has the biggest impact about the perception of my age and academic authority upon seeing me (as opposed to conversing with me).  For a few days last week I was convinced that I needed to cut off at least five inches otherwise my paper will not be well received and I will bomb the interview.  Then, Sara linked to a hair-do-how-to and since I saw that I've calmed down a bit and decided that I will continue to keep it long but start experimenting more with ways of putting it up that aren't a haphazard ponytail tuck thingie, i.e. Gym Hair.

Had I not been visiting my mom last Friday I would also have participated in Modly Chic's Friend Friday on Feminism. Many thanks to Katy for her questions and to the participating bloggers who took them on (and also, a congrats to Katy on the DIY publication of her YA novel, Aurora Undefined.) As it's Tuesday, I'm not going to respond to this now, but I was especially delighted to see questions 1 and 4, which were "Do you think there is an incompatibility between feminism and a love for fashion?" and "How is your self-image and the way you carry yourself informed by your beliefs?" All I will say is that there must be some critical navigation and self-introspection when it comes to feminism and fashion, even fashion is a verb and has a DIY quality to it. 

And I liked the other question even better because it cast a wide net about the intersection of fashion and our beliefs, convictions, politics, and ethics and about the place of visible public subjectivit(ies)y.  It's something I think a lot about as an academic and as an instructor, both in terms of research and self-fashioning.  My research into spectatorship and visual culture can also make me hyper aware of how things are "read" by others and how little control we have over reception and perception, hence my apprehension about my height, hair, and age in academic settings.  I think our knowledge of the wide variety of ways in which our appearances can be received actually causes more manipulation and dissembling through fashion than it does "authentic self-expression."  Not that that's necessarily a negative thing.  I wear pearls in the university classroom but have never worn them to teach  ESL (English as as Second Language).  Alternatively, I often forgo wearing a Miraculous Medal, which I wear on a nearly daily basis, in high stakes situations when I am initially meeting others (interviews, conferences, first day of class), but I've never taken it off for ESL.  I would be incredibly naive and self-deceiving if I said that the difference is simply accessorizing preferences from one day and time to the next.

What sartorial or accessorizing choices do you find yourself manipulating?  Do you have a "neutral" outfit that you wear when you want the focus off of yourself? Academics, is there anything you took off or put on for job talks or interviews?

Tea Time With SFE

 In the past I have used mugs to obfuscate my face for outfit shots.  Today, I'm drinking tea out of necessity because after a few nice days it's back down to 41(5)  degrees outside and I'm now an outdoor only kinda girl and you can't really photograph your outfit with a coat on.  It is making me jealous of all of the shots that Jentine, Kendi, Jen, Emily, Lisa, and Katy are posting from the Texas Style Conference in Austin which looks like it has lovely March weather.  Not like the upper Midwest.

 dress - Moth/Anthro (eBayed & remixed)

sweater - GAP (thrifted)

owl necklace - etsy (gifted & remixed)

amber earrings - Corocoran Gallery, DC (remixed)

tights - Anthro/Eloise (remixed)

scarf - H&M (remixed)

boots - Plenty by Tracy Reese via Piperlime

I'm also debuting my new black boots which replace the ones that died at the beginning of the month.  I tried on countless pairs, but finally settled on these when they went on super sale.  They're perfect for the weather and I'd probably be in my wellies again if I didn't have them. (And thank you all again for your recommendations!)

 

Today the weather is really crummy, but I'm amazed at how good the color comes out when there's a cloud covering.  I photographed in the middle of the day but even if it doesn't have the effect of morning or Golden Hour, there's still there's no streaky light across my photos.  I wonder if I can always use rainy days to my advantage?

A friend of mine asked me about my motivation for style blogging last night and I couldn't really give him a straight answer about why I started (other than Ray asking me to), but I know that right now my main motivations are a sense of community with other style bloggers and an increasing interest in auto-photography, which always makes me think of Cindy Sherman.  I've thought about the blogs I like to read and about how important both prose and layout is.  Looking back on my initial outfit shots starting in September, it occurs to me how horrible those were for readers! Seriously, it makes me cringe to see this post. Sure, I was camera shy and I hadn't figured out how to access the newest form of blogger that allows posting in XL, but to really give an account of sartorial choices you actually need to be able to see them.

Erin Go Bragh

My apologies about the blur, but I thought it seemed more hagiographical than the ones that were clear:

 cardi - GAP (remixed)

green glass earrings - Anthro

skirt - Ann Taylor (eBayed)

scarf - street vendor in Santiago (remixed)

sandals - Bear Tracks (remixed)

clover/hairpin - Anthro (gifted)

Guinness - sacred

So, what do we think?  How did my emulation of St. Patrick turn out? Of course,  I know that my hairpin has four leaves and I'm only supposed to have three in order to represent the Trinity. But I figured it was worth a shot. 

Despite my dark hair and olive skin, I'm actually 1/4 Irish and SME is 3/4.  We both grew up celebrating St. Patty's Day in various ways. And then we met at a university where at least 50% of the population could claim some degree of Irish descent and this day was always a crazy day full of the carnivalesque.  I do remember being offered a Guinness on my way to class at 10 a.m. one year. And then there was the year that I had two beers in my bag and they were gone sometime between Mass and a late afternoon class.  I'm sure the sort of behavior Irish Americans engage in on this most hallowed of days could be explained by a cultural theorist in terms of diasporic identity and traumatic memory.  But I don't see the need for that. I'm always happy to put on green and drink beer with friends.  In fact, I've already started:  Erin Go Bragh!

Do you wear green on St. Pat's?  What about you Italian Americans on St. Joseph's Day (March 19)--do you wear red?

Dressing Like A Feminist?

N.B. *This is in response to the Feminist Fashion Blogger event call that asked, How do you express your feminism in the way you dress?*

The IFC series Portlandia recently depicted the conflict between second-wave radical feminists, who were represented as frumpy flakes, and a young post-feminist or budding third-wave feminist, who wore short denim cut-offs and took pole-dancing classes.  The joke, of course, was about what a feminist was supposed to look like or at least how you know you're looking at a feminist.  You know, in an "indigenous pantsuit."

 I think this dialogue about fashion and feminism that Franca and other FFB members have started is great, especially because there's such a history of gate-keeping about what a feminist does and does not look like.  Must I defend my regular, earnest, and non-ironic wearing of makeup, a miraculous medal, and Anthropologie/Urban Outfitters to be a feminist? What about looking attractive in anything that might be considered target practice for the heterosexual male gaze? Recall, for example, the flack Liz Phair got for wearing only a slip on the cover of Rolling Stone. Her response?  She had self-fashioned with her own slip, something she wore on stage and something that she wore out to dinner.  There is nothing wrong with questioning how we navigate fashion and feminism.  Pointed questions can, in fact, be very good, but the condemnation of fashion choices without productive dialogue assumes that the wearer is just too dumb to understand how she (or he, but it's usually a she) has violated some singular universal code of feminist fashion(ing) ethics.

sweater - Limited via Marshalls (remixed)

arrow skirt - Fei/Anthro via Ebay 

leggings - Fylo (MIL-hand me down & remixed)

Fleur de Lys earrings - gifted (remixed)

scarf - street vendor in Santiago, Spain (remixed)

shades - H&M (remixed)

shoes - J-41 (remixed)

I really do think it is necessary to be acquainted with the wearer to know how exactly she expresses feminism through fashion, because there's no way you can tell I'm a feminist by looking at me. One of the major emphases of this blog is that fashion is a verb and not a noun dictated by someone else; fashion is to self-fashion and part of that is rejecting bizarre expectations about what the female body, especially, should look like.  I chose to photograph this outfit because I know that a women's fashion magazine stylist would never do this:  this skirt, leggings, and shoes on my body type make my legs look stubby and do not lengthen me.  And while I know that rejecting all the ways I could "lengthen" my 5'0" curvy frame is a fucking cardinal sin in their book, it is part of a pathology that I find ridiculous.

Special Occasion Pieces & Versatility

I'm working a fundraiser/gala on Saturday night.  Had I known how much of a pain in the ass this would become I would have never volunteered, but it's an organization that SME and I belong to and because we cannot donate money, we're donating time.  But because I do not currently own either a gown or a cocktail dress, it's also going to cost me money.  Also, problematic is that I will be on my fee for 4+ hours and that I have been warned about 3 times now by the organizers how important sensible footwear is.  Currently, my formal footwear are stiletto gold Steve Maddens  and equally unsuitable silver sandal BPs. They would be great for attending this event--not working it on my feet.
So, on Saturday I took a shopping trip with a friend and scored this dress for $45 at Nordstrom Rack:

dress - Eci (via Nordstrom Rack)

pardon the sports bra - soon off to the gym

I don't love it, but I really don't want to spend money on something that won't be worn that often. It's comfortable, it has a bit of pizazz and I could wear it to rehearsal dinners, weddings, or even an evening out. I could actually see it becoming a go-to dress for certain occasions.  But it still has its limitations.

One of these limitations is the gold accents (which also mean that it can't be worn to a funeral).  With this dress I also have to buy new black or gold shoes that are both fancy and walking shoes. I have looked at countless stores and online shops, but for a suitable pair of, say, Rockports, it will cost me another $120.  Granted, a pair of sleek black pumps wouldn't be bad for my wardrobe--especially considering how few shoes I have.

Detail of gold accent:  It's actually a zipper with rhinestones and it reminds me of swirl shapes of The Starry Night (that probably just made the Art Historian Chics vomit).

But another limitation is the fact that I'm on a budget and I'd rather spend that limited cash on a new and badly needed pair of jeans, another belt, a J.Crew necklace, or a metallic sweater jacket from BR.  And I was already resolved to not spend any more money for the month because I already purchased two pairs of shoes to make up for some recent losses. On top of all that I'm still building a more professional/professartorial wardrobe.  If I could wear it, say, to give a paper, then I'd feel less sick about spending money on a dress. For example, something like dress currently available at Ann Taylor for $98 pictured below and available here (and they're currently having a buy one, get one 50% off sale):

I go to two national conferences a year and the weather for one of them dictates lighter ware and it is always difficult for me to put together outfits for that one.  This dress, which comes in a petite, will look great with a cardigan for teaching/conferences and can be dressed up or down.  Although it is on the plain side, I could add a brooch to the knot on a hip, jewelry, sexy tights with black polka dots (such as the ones that Julia of Polka Dot Biker Shorts wore on the night she got engaged--congrats!), and pair it with my vintage-y black Clarks (which are not as fancy as I'd like but can withstand 6 hours of walking). It wouldn't be the best outfit for a gala, but my goal is to blend in, not be fabulously conspicuous.  And the Ann Taylor dress would be a real addition to my wardrobe as evidenced by the various ways that S. of Narrowly Tailored has styled her own Ann Taylor jersey knit dress.

What say you Style Nation? Should I rethink wearing those Clarks to a fancy affair? Do I need a fancier dress? How have you handled such conundra in the past? Any suggestions for wear I can find a blingy brooch by Friday?

Natural Light: A Conversion Story

I've been enjoying Hello, Monkeyface's "self-caught" series on self-photography and fashion-blogging (Tara B. of Little Girl Big Closet has also written a 5-part series).  I assumed that I couldn't produce photos like I see on other blogs because I don't have a DSLR or a great lens, but then I found out that some bloggers who have great photos, such as Shy of Chesterfield, use point-and-shoots.  Their photos are better than mine, in general, because they photograph in natural light...and I tend to photograph in indoors with a flash. So, I tried my back steps the other day:

sweater - Forever 21 (thrifted)

sweater skirt - Lux/Urban Outfitters (thrifted)

tights - Assets/Target (remixed)

scarf - boutique (remixed)

amber earrings - Corcoran Gallery, DC (remixed)

fairy necklace - Top Shop (gifted)

shoes - J-41 (remixed)

I've done nothing to these photos.  No cropping.  No messing with the shadows or exposure.  No flash.  And this was taken during sundown when I didn't think there would be enough light. But the thing that struck me the most was:  LOOK AT THE COLOR! I couldn't believe it. (You might be thinking, Duh, SFE.  It's natural light!  But I didn't get it until I saw the light).

The only problem was that I couldn't fit my entire body into a single frame, but a tripod can fix that.

After I took these I compared them to the photos I took a week before when I first tried out this newly thrifted skirt:

black sweater - Limited via Marshalls (remixed)

scarf - London street vendor (remixed)

owl necklace - etsy (giftted and remixed)

tights - Simply Vera via Kohls (gifted)

black boots - LOFT (remixed)

This photo was taken after sundown in my dining room with a flash.  My clothes compete with the white walls and the crap on my dining room table. The photo HAD to be cropped. And the color is all wrong.  This particular skirt is not best viewed against brick, but natural lighting and a lack of clutter produce a much better photo.

I'm convinced this is a better way.  Although I won't always be able to self-photograph outside, I think I might start experimenting more and, in the spirit of Independent Fashion Blogging, working with what I have, even if it is a point-and-shoot.

I'm curious, though, for those of you who made the switch to DSLR, what event prompted you to do it?

SFE's Feminist Style Iconography: Tori Amos, Anne Shirley, and American Girl

I missed out on Feminist Style Icon day, organized by the fabulous Franca of Oranges and Apples, on account of getting that stupid essay out to a journal yesterday as well as the fact that I was wracking my brains trying to figure out who my Feminist Style Icons are.  Franca and LHdM had great ones.  And it was especially hard to think of which feminists influenced me in terms of style as opposed to challenging how I think, act, and interact. This was so difficult for me that I could only think of works of fiction, which I will get to in a minute. But, really, the biggest and most overwhelming influence on me since the age of 12 has been Tori Amos. Perhaps it's cliche, but it's true.

 I remember the exact moment I first heard Tori Amos--I was in the living room of family friends in Ohio and a 10-second clip of her playing "Caught a Lite Sneeze" on the harpsichord came on the TV to advertise for her MTV Unplugged appearance.  It was the Spring of 1996. There was something about the combination of her voice, the orchestration of her music, and that baroque instrument. Boys for Pele is her most difficult album for most listeners, but is and always will be my favorite. Without getting too analytical, it is everything that feminist revisionist art should be.  Not mention that her feminism didn't stop with her music, but also founded RAINN.

 

Both her music and her style combine elements from different periods and they purposefully play with iconography.  Even in her deconstruction there is a playfulness to it. And whenever I lecture on Mary Stuart, I always show this photo, which might be my favorite:

But prior to my sudden enrapture by a single song, my feminist style icons as a girl were Anne of Green Gables and the American Girl characters.  Maybe the young women in these books never actually articulated a feminist stance, but they fought for what they believed in and they didn't reject thinking about social and political conflict.  And I loved Anne's self-fashioning.  She was feisty, intelligent, a competitive student, and an eventual educator, but she still insisted on puffed sleeves and organza should the occasion call for it.

And while I did NOT have a desire to get married or have children when I was a girl or a teenager (again, these were not positive associations for me), I knew if I did, I must find a Gilbert Blythe--a partner whose love for me is rooted in friendship and comedy as much as it is in eros.

Like Katie, I am a military brat and the American Girl books were big on the bases when I was young.  Although I am conflicted about the brand now, I loved and will always love those books.  I credit the narratives of historical fiction through the gaze of single young woman combined with the "Looking Back," section at the end of the books for encouraging my academic interest in history as well as my political commitments. As a girl, I was deeply affected by the "Looking Back" section of Samantha Learns A Lesson, which discussed child labor practices during and after the industrial revolution.  For some of us, the books that force us to attend to issues of capitalism, labor, and social justice are the works of Dickens; for me I needed to see Samantha's boots, jackets, and sailor suit along with them. 

 

SFE channels her childhood and styles it up for a Volunteer Appreciation party

dress - Anthro/Girls from Savoy (remixed)

cardi - GAP (remixed)

gold glass earrings - Anthro (remixed)

floret necklace - gifted/MIL (remixed)

navy tights - LOFT (remixed)

gold shoes - Steve Madden

And I knew the moment I first saw it that I loved the cut and print of the Twinkle Twinkle dress because of Molly McIntire's Miss Victory costume from Changes for Molly. It was the vintage '40s cut plus the stars that had me at hello. What do you think?

Or, am I the only one who sees it? What about you?  Any feminist style icons from fiction?

Booted!

Why is SFE wearing those stupid wellies again? you might be asking.  What sort of horrible place does she live in that requires her to continue to forgo wearing normal shoes?

 black sweater dress - Viola/Anthro (remixed)

Bow & Angle belt - Anthro (eBayed)

amber earrings - Corcoran Gallery, DC (remixed)

tights - Accessorize (ages ago and remixed)

scarf - London street vendor (remixed)

wellies - Capelli via Marshalls (remixed)

Monday started out great.  I tried out my first belt (see above and below), loved how much it improved an outfit I've already tried before, and was really excited to take a photo to show all of you! I worked at my favorite coffee shop and continued the overhaul of an essay that's due today and then, as I was walking to an appointment on campus I slipped on a patch of ice and did this:

 

Low/Mid-Calf Black LOFT boots, Oct 2010 - Feb 2011

There is no fixing it.  And I'm now down to four pairs of shoes for this time of year:  vintage-y black Clarks maryjanes, brown New York & Co. maryjane pumps, green Faryl Robin pumps, and my comfy cranberry J-41 walking shoes. By far, these boots were the most versatile and weather-appropriate footwear I owned and they will surely be missed.

 Before the black boots broke I was already down a pair of boots.  In October I had to throw out a pair of brown half-calf dress Dibas that I wore into the ground over a six year period.  Since then I had been searching for gray boots to replace them, and last week I settled on Miz Mooz Skye ankle boots, but I had to send them back because the way they were cut rubbed the ankle bone in a bad, bad way. And then last night, between editing, I took a quick inventory of Piperlime's black half-calf boots and had these Tracy Reese's in my shopping bag but by the time I tried to check out they were sold out of my size! Why did I hesitate?!?

 So, I am hoping for some help from you dear readers and here are a few things that make this difficult:  I need half-calf boots in black and half-calf or ankle in a neutral/color.  That already takes out a good chunk of available boots which tend to be "knee-high" (a description that like the "flesh" colored crayon  only applies to what is considered a normative population).  They need to have a thicker heel that is preferably between 3 and 3.5 inches. And they have to be comfortable.  I live in an urban area and I suffer from the memory of wearing tall and painful shoes across cities and campuses.  I can't even pass a Bakers or a sale at Aldo without cringing because between the ages of 16 and 21 I made a regular habit of buying $20-$50 high heels and walking miles in them.  And although $150+ is really out of my price range, I'd love to hear any and all of your recommendations in case I run into a great pair on sale or on eBay. Also, those Dibas I had did not look that well structured but they proved to be sturdy and took me over cobblestones and icy streets for years.  What's your favorite pair of boots that surprised you?

Granola, Class, and Feminism: A Reply to Anonymous

dress - Corey Lynn Calter/Anthro (remixed)

cardi - GAP

tights - LOFT (remixed)

boots - LOFT (remixed)

earrings & hairpin - Anthro (gifted & remixed)

necklace - Target (remixed)

Yesterday, in reply to my feminist manifesto of sorts, in which I said, "I am a feminist, but not because it is a marker of consumer-driven identity like granola-girl (no meat; tofu; organic peanut butter; organic cotton);  I am a feminist because it is an ethical stance,"Anonymous wrote the following:

Why do you assume "granola girls" automatically only identify in terms of consumption? What makes it impossible for the choices they make to be motivated by an ethical stance, as you say your feminism is? (For example, people who don't eat meat often choose this in an attempt to avoid the "systematic oppression of others" that you mention...) And is it impossible for a "granola girl" to also be a feminist? 

This is an excellent question, Anonymous.  Allow me to clarify (in between posting outfit photos in which I added brighter colors to the Most Versatile Dress I've Ever Owned) because my reply to you was really just too long for the comments section.

Before I respond, however, I must ask:  Are you sure you're not one of my friends that's screwing with me under an anonymous moniker? I say that because I used the "granola girl" example because I and others have used that term to describes myself even though"look" far less granola now than I have in the past.

 

I don't think that granola girls "automatically only identify in terms of consumption" if they identify in terms of consumption at all. For the most part, we tend not to think of ourselves in this way. Nor do I think being granola precludes feminism. Obviously. But I also don't think that analyzing something through production/consumption/non-consumption categories has a negative valence--in my work it is a common way that I analyze historical records. 

While there are various approaches and debates about what feminism is and what a feminist ought to do, it would be difficult for me to hear someone say that she identifies or stands in solidarity with granola/crunchiness but also drove a hummer, ate imported red meat everyday, never recycled, and would rather die than change in the locker room at the gym if she hasn't shaved/waxed recently. I would think that the speaker misunderstood the common usage of the term because so much of what is understood by granola has to do with outward habits of consumption/nonconsumption. I would also assume that someone misunderstood feminism if he called himself a feminist but found traditional gender roles personally "nice" and so he wished everyone else would conform to them. 

In common speech, "granola" tends to refer to a lifestyle.  That lifestyle might be the result of ethical decisions, habit, preference, or necessity (or some combination of the above). The term might be used to describe a college feminist, a large Catholic or Mormon family, or the habits of young urban people with disposable income who start shopping at Whole Foods because it's closer to their apartment, find that they actually prefer the taste of organic peanut butter, look into why it tastes better, and conclude that that method of farming is the best one, and then eventually join a co-op. Habits and values are often intertwined, but they are not the same thing. 

The same has been said about feminism and this is why I chose this example.  For you, being granola might be an ethical stance; for others, it might be about class taste or desire.  Some see feminism as a by-product of middle class education and experiences or as an equation that is completed when a number of a la carte issues, class formed norms, and consumptive habits are added up:  subscribing to BUST, donating to domestic violence shelters, and purchasing and affixing a PFLAG sticker to your Mac or your car. I don't see feminism this way.  I see it as a coherent paradigm and an ethical stance outward from which stem actions, habits, and consumptive choices. Others might advocate for crunchiness to be understood as a coherent ethical stance, but that is not my project--neither as a feminist or a granola girl.

Tweed For Simone: SFE is a feminist

Simone de Beauvoir favored blouses and tweed pants for young feminists.  I've modified de Beauvoir's tweed and am happy to say that my general preference for skirts and dresses is only that:  preference.

new teal cardi - GAP (gift-carded)

skirt - Express, ages ago (remixed)

tights - Assets/Target (remixed)

gold floret earrings - gift from in-laws (remixed)

green beaded necklace - target (remixed)

pumps - Faryl Robin (remixed)

Feminism is a dynamic emancipatory movement that has historically been dedicated to freeing women from social, cultural, economic, and legal oppression.  I am grateful for the hard work and sacrifice of first and second wave feminists (including ye olde punching bag, Catharine MacKinnon) and I am also grateful to come of age during the third wave. The feminism I identify with is defined in broader terms: It seeks to eradicate and destroy what Adrienne Rich, Monique Wittig, and Judith Butler have identified as a matrix of "compulsory heterosexuality."

Compulsory heterosexuality effects all of us, men and women, queer or straight.  It describes the workings of a patriarchal system in which men have a "natural" and "normal" dominant sexual relationship to and only with women.  This asymmetrical and hierarchical relationship has a prescribed set of gendered roles, behaviors, and performances that also must be followed, although the particulars of them might change over time. Expressions, behaviors, or relationships that deviate from that structure are punished in order to reinforce and maintain norms.  This system requires that, at all times, men and women fit (or contort or distort) their selves into a prefabricated template of gender-appropriate behaviors, wants, desires, and expectations.

Compulsory heterosexuality makes heterosexual couples question how it will be received if a mother goes to work and her husband stays home with the children instead of asking, What is best for our family? Compulsory heterosexuality requires that men act in the role of provider; it denigrates the man who undertakes a caretaker role. Yes, even if he coaches Little League on the weekends. 

Compulsory heterosexuality says that there's something wrong with women like LHdM who freely expresses that she doesn't think she wants to have children; compulsory heterosexuality colors my desire for children as "natural" rather than the conclusions of a reflective woman. 

We see compulsory heterosexuality expressed in everyday linguistic use:  "There are two doctors and a lady doctor eating lunch over there" or "Last week I had lunch with my gay friend, Matthew." Not a doctor, a lady doctor; not a friend, a gay friend.  A marker of difference and deviance: a tomboy, a career woman.

Of course, those are fairly benign examples, but they are examples, nonetheless, of how the matrix is maintained. If you would like to see the more powerful force of socio-cultural regulation then perhaps you'd like to catch up on a short list of acts of violence against LGBT people? Of course, that list doesn't include the everyday verbal abuse, harassment, bullying, sham legal proceedings, and continued denial of rights to homosexuals.  It doesn't include the shameful utterance, "Don't be a homo." Or the frumpy woman who called a friend of mine "Fag!" on the street of a "progressive" metropolis last week.

 

SFE is greeted by the dark shadow of the Abominable Patriarchy

I am a feminist, but not because it is a marker of consumer-driven identity like granola-girl (no meat; tofu; organic peanut butter; organic cotton);  I am a feminist because it is an ethical stance. Due to natural inclinations of my own temperament I tend towards the philosophical: What is it to live a good life? What is necessary for the Other to live a good life? What is the Common Good?  It is difficult to live a good life when it is an oppressed life, but is it impossible to live a good life if you involve yourself in the systematic oppression of others.  Upholding the aforementioned system of oppression does that. There is no Great Patriarchy Abominable Snowman out there who's out to get us all. Individual social actors either choose to uphold or resist/topple this structure through our everyday interpersonal, political, and extraordinary acts.

That said, a few particulars about me: My parents expected me to excel academically in all areas, to stand on my own two feet, and not be socially or economically dependent on anyone.  But they both have deeply rooted gender-normative ideas.  Had I wanted to change my surname when I married, it would have been difficult for me because it's not a positive association. Women who grew up in more feminist households seem more apt to consider name-changing in terms of preference, desire, and choice--in other words, how I consider wearing pants v. skirts.

I'm wearier of the assumptions of liberal feminism (also see here) than most women my age.  I have a libertarian streak and worry that when government funding is involved then so is politically motivated government regulation, which can infringe on certain freedoms.

I admire those who make bold judgments and actually make statements about gender and sexuality, even if I disagree with them on some major points. This includes Camille Paglia, Caitlin Flanagan, and Neil LaBute.  Worse than seeming "judgie" is never making judgments.

Words matter and so does representation; visibility and circulation can do wonders to change and challenge perceived norms.  Learning to say "fuck off" is an underrated virtue.

Post-feminism pisses me off.

Muting the Flash!

I've been having difficulty styling the skirt that everyone seems to have a crush on because it seems so, well, FLASHY!  Which is great if you're going out for drinks in a low-lit bar, but what about wearing it to the library or a lecture?

 SFE channels Wendy Brandes' pose

sweater - GAP (remixed)

skirt - GAP (remixed)

tights - LOFT (remixed)

earrings - Corcoran Gallery, DC (remixed)

scarf - London street vendor

shoes - J-41via Zappos (remixed)

I have been racking my brains to figure out how to mute the skirt and finally had a eureka moment in the bathroom the other day--I was flipping through the J.Crew catalog. Over the past few years, you may have noticed, J.Crew stylists have paired flashy accessories and clothing pieces with earth tone knits, Breton stripes, and neutral leather. For example, see the following taken from their website:

The skirt might remind you of a disco ball, but the rest of the styling distracts from that association. Using this sort of concept as I guide, I paired the skirt with same navy blue sweater as before but chose gray tights, casual shoes, and picked up on the flat cranberry hue of the shoes in the scarf.  The result  made the skirt appropriate for attendance at a morning/afternoon colloquium at my university for three reasons:  color, shape, and style. 

Color:  Sparkly silver thread runs throughout the skirt which makes it flashy. I toned that down with navy and a drabbier cranberry on both my feet and around my neck. I also forewent any other silver:  my legs were gray and my earrings were amber, rather than gold, glass, silver, or rhinestones.  When the light hit my legs, the opaque gray soaked that up and when it hit my earrings, it went right through them. The only reflective flash was the skirt and no other piece picked up on this; rather, everything else resisted or diverted the light.

Shape:  I do not have the body type of a J.Crew model and that is fine. But one thing that will make this skirt look immediately more nighttime than daytime is my curviness.  If I paired the skirt with heels, then my booty would have been elevated and I would have walked in a way that also drew more attention to the skirt.  Not only did my shoes help mute the effect of the skirt through the color, but the clog-like build of them kept me from strutting.

Style:  The shoe + tights combo here kept the outfit casual--it is an outfit for walking, public transit, and coffee shops. I also wore little makeup and neither curled my hair nor blow-dryed it straight. It was left natural and I pulled it back. If I were going out for dinner, I would have worn heels, smoky eye makeup, and paired it with flashier accessories.

I probably wouldn't have worn this if I were faculty, but as a grad student in an urban area, it wasn't inappropriate.  And actually, I'm really thankful for this time in ABD land in which I can still have a bit more freedom in my sartorial choices.

Do you have any advice on other ways I might mute the skirt? Also, how do you mute your own flasher/nighttime pieces?

Paring Down: Case Study #3

In my last post in this series I discussed a few reasons that an item should go, such as:

1. Do not wear
2. Do not like
3. Does not fit (body or wardrobe)
4. Should not wear

To recap, the way I figure these things out is by wearing the item in question.  In the first case, I wore the woodpecker sweater skirt and found out that even though I loved the look of it I felt uncomfortable wearing it. The first three categories applied. In the second case, I concluded that I could not wear the flowy tent-like top the way I was wearing it.  I'm currently holding onto it, but I might sell it on eBay to make room for and enable the buying of a more flattering top. This is the good thing about Anthro items: the resale value on eBay is pretty good.Well, let us move onto a truly embarrassing case:

  

cashmere teal sweater - Moth/Anthro 

black slip - Jockey (remixed)

black skirt - H & M (remixed)

tights - Eloise/Anthro 

earrings - defunct boutique in KC (remixed)

green beads necklace - Target (remixed)

scarf - H & M (remixed)

black wellies - Capelli via Marshalls (remixed)

Why such a dramatic pose?  Am I channeling Raphael's St Catherine of Alexandria (which, to complete your unsolicited iconography lesson of the day, strongly resembles the woman on the cover of a mid-90s Smashing Pumpkins album)? No, I am not in ecstasy.  I am thinking, Why, God, did I do this to myself?

I know I should have gotten rid of this sweater a year ago, but I couldn't.  Look how perfect this particular shade of teal looks on me! Look at it against shades of light green! And it matches every bottom imaginable:  black, brown, jeans, gray! Why do I need to get rid of it?

Did you see it, yet?

There it is.  Public shaming complete.  SFE's #1 rule for paring down: If you think you can't get rid of an item, wear it.  After a day of having to keep my arms clamped by my sides, I am ready to throw it into the rubbish bin (unless any of you have some amazing way to re-knit over the tearing in the armpits, which got even worse yesterday). And the worst thing about this was that I didn't really have time to come home and change, but I had to before SME and I headed to small party. And I didn't have time to change my entire outfit, so I just switched out my sweater, necklace, and boots:

  

cardi - Anthro/Sparrow (remixed)

necklace - Anthro

boots - LOFT (remixed)

Had I not been in a hurry I don't think I would have worn the black, white, and blue tights with the necklace and top.  I probably would've gone with the mauve, white, and red version of them, but I'm glad I varied my look.

 necklace has been doubled

Are any of you secretly holding onto embarrassingly threadbared items because you're too attached to them?

Layering and the Perils of DIY Fashion Blogging

On Wednesday I photographed my outfit before I went off to a lecture (see below left).  I've been trying to play with layering with sweater material, which can be tricky.  I tried this before back in January with the same dress, but I wasn't that pleased with the result.  This time I layered a brown long-sleeved tee under the red dress that you've seen here at least once a month before.  I am also displeased with constantly wearing my wellies and I've thought about wearing the shoes I'd like to wear with my outfits, but this is actually what I am wearing to slog through snow, slush, and puddles of grossness.

dress:  Anthro/Moth via eBay (remixed here and here)

wellies: Carpelli via Marshalls (remixed a million freakin' times b/c of weather, ugh)

earrings:  same boutique where I got the brown/red/purple scarf

          Left: long-sleeved brown tee:  LOFT                        

sepia floral tights: Anthro/Eloise (remixed)

scarf - H & M (remixed)

gold floret necklace - gifted MIL (remixed)

hat: GAP - gifted MIL

Right: brown cardi: Ann Taylor (remixed)

    brown tights: Assets/Target 

scarf:  World Market (remixed)

choker - Accessorize UK (gifted years ago)

When I saw the photos the next day I liked the palette (red, brown, teal) but not the result.  SME also said I looked school marmish. There was a Jumper Effect of my layering. Avoid this at all costs.

 

Then, on Thursday, I got ready to attend an event, but didn't photograph before I left the house because I was running late. So, I grabbed my camera and left the house. The event in question was a silly party in the office of a senior scholar.  Before long, I had imbibed multiple PBRs and was wearing a glow stick like a halo on my head.  I helped clean up and then... I FORGOT MY CAMERA! I realized this when I was on my way home. A colleague assured me it would be safe on Senior Scholar's Desk.  Safe, of course, but that's not what I was panicking about:  What if Senior Scholar wanted to return the camera to its owner (me) and had to look through the photos to find out who the owner was?  SS would be sure to discover about 15 photos of me posing in the red dress (I was having trouble with the flash and blurriness on School Marm Day).  Needless to say, the Thursday Outfit never got documented, I skipped out on Friend Friday, and I forced SME to drive me to school at 8:30 on Friday morning so I could recover the camera before Senior Scholar looked through them.

I was still unhappy with the School Marm outfit, however, so I re-styled the red dress for a performance I attended last night. The scarf is essential to this outfit (and to keeping me warm). Compare with a shot sans scarf:

The weight of this scarf (and not the lighter teal one) actually lays against the fabric, separating the top of me from a fuller skirt. Not only does it bring everything together in terms of color, but without a belt, the scarf makes the shape and proportionality more appealing. 

How about you?  Have your outfit photos ever been discovered? If so, by a senior scholar or a boss?