You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context. This is NOT about transvestism or crossdressing.
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1650
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Pdxfashionpioneer »

Greetings,

I guess we've run this thread so far off the rails that we're now into such freewheeling fashion freedom, we've lost the fashion part. Which is perfectly okay because when it comes to personal passions, history is right up there with fashions.

There's no way on Earth the South would accept Indiana! There were a couple of Hoosiers who are particularly reviled South of the Mason-Dixon Line, Gens. Grant and Sherman.

It wasn't a hunger for power that drove Abraham Lincoln, it was a desire to preserve the United States and its Constitution. As a lawyer friend pointed out, there is no escape clause in the Constitution so allowing the Confederate States to secede would be tantamount to letting any other state secede for any reason that might strike their fancy, as South Carolina had threatened to during Andrew Jackson's Presidency. He was less of a fan of that notion than Lincoln so South Carolina backed down.

As to the possibility of the US and the CSA surviving as separate nations, read Reunion by my lawyer friend Michael Metroke, published by Outskirts Press, available on Amazon. It's a counterfactual novel of the Post-Civil War US starting from the premise that the South won the war and what would have happened in the aftermath. It's a good read, even though it took a little while for it to hit its stride. Once it does (within 3 chapters) you won't put it down.

But I digress, Mike makes a strong case for the economic necessity of the nation reuniting. The South couldn't survive without the North and life was more difficult for Northern manufacturers, especially in the textile industries, without the South.

As to the numbers of people who might have lived without the war, it's a good question that's totally unanswerable. How many more blacks would have died from the abuses of slavery? How many Southerners would have died of malnutrition as their economy went into a death spiral? What if, as things went downhill in the South, there had been a slave uprising?

Because the economies of the North and South would have been stunted, how many more people would either not have been born or would have died in childhood? The Civil War, like most wars, drove advances in medicine and wound care and, more importantly, public health. Without those advances how many more people would have died from what were then accepted as natural causes?

In his Second Inaugural Address Lincoln hypothesized that Americans might have to repay drop for drop the blood drawn by the slaveowners' lash. He guessed that we hadn't yet so it's quite possible that the continuation of slavery alone would have cost at least as many lives as the Civil War itself.

Medical Advice: To maintain your natural life expectancy do not suggest to Oregonians and probably not Washingtonians either that Canada is at California's Northern border. If you were to say such a thing in either of those West Coast States, it would probably be the last thing you said.

I have to say though, the prospect of all of you whackjob Trumpettes finally leaving us enlightened denizens of the Left Coast in peace has some appeal. If we combine Oregon's economy, which right now has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country despite our being a magnet for young people, with that of Washington and then add the world's 6th largest economy, who exactly would get the lesser part of that deal??? Intriguing! :wink:

Finally Moon, as far as learning how to make sweet tea goes, I've drunk enough of it to know that's the last thing I want to learn! My eating habits are bad enough without adding that to the mix! Honestly, I enjoyed the time I spent in the South when I was consulting, especially Louisiana, and liked the people I met, but I draw the line at sweet tea. My Dad was debilitated in his retirement by late onset diabetes. No thanks, I'll find my own way to go! :lol:
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by oldsalt1 »

[quote="Pdxfashionpioneer"]Greetings,

I have to say though, the prospect of all of you whackjob Trumpettes finally leaving us enlightened denizens of the Left Coast in peace has some appeal. If we combine Oregon's economy, which right now has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country despite our being a magnet for young people, with that of Washington and then add the world's 6th largest economy, who exactly would get the lesser part of that deal??? Intriguing! :wink:

Why is it that the enlightened liberals can't make a comment about the other side with out resorting to name calling,

When I was in college one of my poly sci professors said that when someone resorts to name calling it is either because they don't know what they are talking about or have nothing to say

Wackjob Trumpett aka oldsalt
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Jim »

oldsalt1 wrote: Why is it that the enlightened liberals can't make a comment about the other side with out resorting to name calling,

When I was in college one of my poly sci professors said that when someone resorts to name calling it is either because they don't know what they are talking about or have nothing to say

Wackjob Trumpett aka oldsalt
While my politics are probably closer to Dave's, I agree with you about name calling. But name calling is not limited to the liberals. Do you need examples?
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by crfriend »

Jim wrote:[... N]ame calling is not limited to the liberals. Do you need examples?
Here's a meta-question: "When did the terms "liberal" and "conservative", alike, become slurs instead of reasoned words used to express "naturally progressive" and "naturally restrained"? What of those whom are progressive in some areas yet restrained in others?

In other news, This is a very strong indicator that we're in a world of sh!t unless something can be done. A president can't go around sacking folks who happen to disagree with him on matters of law; if this stands, we've got an autocracy on our hands never-mind an oligarchy. So much for separation of powers.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Ray
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:03 am
Location: West Midlands, England, UK

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Ray »

Carl - and others from the USA:

Can you give me some guidance on where best to pick up USA-based news? I know that Fox News, for example, has a strong bias so that's out. I'm less aware of outlets having a bias the other way but I see no point in reading these either.

Are there newspapers, websites etc that are perceived as reasonably impartial? I'm seeking to understand what's going on in your country (I can say - impartially - that there are issues of some concern as perceived in Europe) in the most open way. It's early days, but I have looked at the Washington Post and the Boston Globe, and have quickly looked at USA Today.

Any and all advice gratefully received.

Ray
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by crfriend »

Ray wrote:Can you give me some guidance on where best to pick up USA-based news? I know that Fox News, for example, has a strong bias so that's out. I'm less aware of outlets having a bias the other way but I see no point in reading these either.
As far as I am aware there is no single source in the USA that's entirely unbiased; they all have editorial leanings and will subtly -- or not so subtly -- colour things so. Basic facts are usually pretty cut-and-dry; the devil lurks in the details and the editorialising. The trick is to find a number of sources and compare/contrast all of those to each other, and what you're after is somewhere in the middle.

What we have here is the president of the country, who lawfully holds the office, firing the acting Attorney General of the United States for publicly disagreeing with him on the matter of Constitutional legality of his recent Executive Order by stating that she would recommend against enforcing the Order until the legality of it was confirmed. The president apparently took personal offence at this and played the "You're fired!" card -- and will now put somebody in who will not question his actions going forward. This is how autocracies are born.

Historically -- and Constitutionally -- the three branches of power in the US government have always been able to act as brakes on other branches when things got out of hand from legal perspectives. The president can put the brakes on the legislature in the form of the veto; the Supreme Court can put the brakes on both if something patently illegal gets through the other two branches, and the legislature can put the brakes on the presidency by overriding vetoes or simply refusing to fund the demand made by the president.

The rest of the Justice Department is a bit murkier, and the president may actually be within his rights to fire an Attorney General -- although that's usually reserved for very serious matters indeed, not a simple disagreement on legality. However, it's bad precedent -- and helped bring down one president in the 1970s. That this firing was over something so non-serious points up just how dangerous, and possibly unstable, this current president really is.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
trainspotter48
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: West of England

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by trainspotter48 »

Carl,

I think you have just summed up what we on the other side of the pond have been suspecting since the beginning of the campaigning!!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by moonshadow »

Jim wrote:While my politics are probably closer to Dave's, I agree with you about name calling. But name calling is not limited to the liberals. Do you need examples?
Jim and oldsalt, I may be wrong, but I don't think Dave meant anything ill by this comments. As for the remarks leading up to it, while I can't speak for Carl, Al, and the others who commented, mine, while perhaps being a bit on the sassy and sarcastic side were meant in good fun and not to offend. I suspect Dave was simply reciprocating with some friendly ribbing. I chuckled a few times at reading it. :)

You'll recall I was the first to engage in "name calling" when I called west coasters "freaks and weirdos". Of course I meant it in fun spirit, and am proud to be a "freak and weirdo" living among "normal people" here on the east. :bom:
Ray wrote:Can you give me some guidance on where best to pick up USA-based news? I know that Fox News, for example, has a strong bias so that's out. I'm less aware of outlets having a bias the other way but I see no point in reading these either.
In all honesty, anything by the associated press seems to be pretty cut and dry. A lot of papers get their national news from that. I've watched a few 6:30 nightly news broadcast on TV, (any network, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, etc) and it seemed to be "just the facts", as you only get 30 minutes to tell what's going on the world over, you generally don't have time for political commentary.

Regional papers seem to just stick to what's going on and avoid a lot of commentary, saving it for it's opinion page. Avoid well known national papers like the New York TImes, Washington Post, etc As far as good papers go, in all honestly my sampling is small, but when I was growing up the big paper in our region was the Roanoke Times and The News and Advance (Lynchburg VA). Here locally where I live now I believe the major regional paper is the Bristol Herald Courier. However I believe I may be close enough to Roanoke to get theirs too.

The Roanoke Times, being of the largest city in Southwestern Virginia has been accused of leaning liberal, but I don't think so. I think it's just ultra conservatives being overly sensitive when the paper reports something negative about their leader, which at the time when I heard of this accusation, was Bush. I recall growing up as a teenager during the Clinton impeachment when the paper reported on it... crickets from my dad who is a DARK RED conservative. I suspect they will come under fire again with Trump at the helm, as Trump will certainly be involved in his fair share of controversies.

Basically as far as news go in the U.S., if it starts to engage in a lot of commentary and exchanging of opinions.... it's crap!
The moment the news host start to "talk about it"... change the channel. :wink:
crfriend wrote:In other news, This is a very strong indicator that we're in a world of sh!t unless something can be done. A president can't go around sacking folks who happen to disagree with him on matters of law; if this stands, we've got an autocracy on our hands never-mind an oligarchy. So much for separation of powers.
Scary... What's downright hypocritical is the "rights" condemnation of the overuse of presidential executive orders when a democrat is holding the office of president, meanwhile Trump seems to be wearing that executive order pen out! Of course in all fairness, our nation is so polarized right now, regardless of who is in power, the other side's going to criticize everything he (or she) does.

The problem with a "Muslim ban" is it's easy to beat. It's a matter of religion and the fact is, if I were a Muslim extremist who was bent on terrorizing the U.S. couldn't I not just claim to be a Christian and gain access? It's not like a ban on race or sex, whereas you can clearly tell if someone is Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc. I could be a Muslim and nobody would ever know....

That's the scary thing about religious ideals, walls, no matter how high and thick, and bans CAN NOT keep them out! You may keep the Arabs out, but you can't keep the ideals out. All it takes is a white sympathizer (and they DO exist) and the whole house of cards collapses!

Trumps actions on this matter could result in breeding terrorism right here in the U.S. among the Muslims already legally living here. Lets face it, this is a hostile and insulting act, and if Trump were implementing this on Christian refugees then American Christians would be demanding his [Trumps] head on a plate! We're not winning any friends in the Muslim community now, both here and abroad.

I may not be the POTUS or major world leader, but I've diffused my fair share of confrontations that could have escalated into violence by simply talking to those involved, learning their point of view, politely explaining mine, and above all compromising with compassion! Why can't our leaders do this?
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by oldsalt1 »

I am not getting into a political discussion The odds on this blog are against me . But first this is not a Muslim ban it is for individuals from 7 specific countries. And If you check these same 7 countries were listed
as problem areas by the OBAMA administration . AS far as firing the AG I agree with PRESIDENT TRUMP It is her job to enforce the laws of this country. Not pass he personal politically motivated personal opinion on them

BY the way 325,000 people entered the country only 109 were held stopped. The protesters at the airports caused more delays and problems than the law
Disaffected.citizen
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:16 am
Location: UK

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Disaffected.citizen »

As I'm from the UK, I don't fully understand your legislature; however (and please correct me if I'm wrong), is it not the case that an Executive Order from the President is not a law?

I also seem to recall in this case that several senior judges questioned the constitutional legality of the said order and that it is to be reviewed. Again, please correct me if I am wrong, citing references.

In such instance, surely the acting Attorney General was acting both within the realms of law, and prudently (something accountants should know about) by withholding defence of an Executive Order yet to be proven legally valid.
Last edited by Disaffected.citizen on Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Disaffected.citizen
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:16 am
Location: UK

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Disaffected.citizen »

Now, back somewhere on topic.....

I haven't worn a skirt in public in five years; long story that I'm not particularly inclined to aire here. In fact, I rarely muster the energy to put a skirt on indoors, these days. I do, however, have many skirts and several dresses in my closet.

So, a very basic question here....

I have to attend a one day driver education course; no idea who else will be there. Although highly doubtful that I'll do so, but I'm considering a skirt for once! Thoughts gentlemen, please.
partlyscot
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by partlyscot »

oldsalt1 wrote:I am not getting into a political discussion The odds on this blog are against me . But first this is not a Muslim ban it is for individuals from 7 specific countries. And If you check these same 7 countries were listed
as problem areas by the OBAMA administration . AS far as firing the AG I agree with PRESIDENT TRUMP It is her job to enforce the laws of this country. Not pass he personal politically motivated personal opinion on them
It IS a Muslim ban, the wording allowing for discretion for "religious minorities within those countries" shows that, but it is not even an effective one if they really wanted it. Saudi Arabia is not on the list, most of the 9/11 terrorists came from SA.

This is pure theatrical theatre, it is meant as a distraction and a test of how far they can overcome the checks and balances. Working well so far.

This is the problem.

http://imgur.com/MT2PeJ5
oldsalt1 wrote:BY the way 325,000 people entered the country only 109 were held stopped. The protesters at the airports caused more delays and problems than the law
You need to cross check your facts when you are only getting them from one source.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170131154 ... out-90000/

All politicians "Spin" the facts, but this administration and it's liking for "alternative facts" has gone well beyond that, we are into uncharted territory as far as "Spin" is concerned. it is lies, and propaganda of the worst sort. Word is, that there are regulations coming to remove some LGBQT protections coming. I can see the wording on those being as vague, stupid and meaningless as the ones issued so far. I don't think you identify as such, but I wonder what your response will be if it affects your ability to wear a a skirt in public?

Name calling on this forum is not going to help, but it is damn hard not to start screaming watching this go down. I am serious, the next few weeks and days will impact all of us for many years to come.
partlyscot
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by partlyscot »

Disaffected.citizen wrote:Now, back somewhere on topic.....

I haven't worn a skirt in public in five years; long story that I'm not particularly inclined to aire here. In fact, I rarely muster the energy to put a skirt on indoors, these days. I do, however, have many skirts and several dresses in my closet.

So, a very basic question here....

I have to attend a one day driver education course; no idea who else will be there. Although highly doubtful that I'll do so, but I'm considering a skirt for once! Thoughts gentlemen, please.
Where are you located? What's the general attitude? Is it possible or likely that the opinions of those holding the course could impact you likelihood of passing such course? For me, I wouldn't even hesitate, unless it was likely I would be crawling under the car. A classroom environment or actually driving would be far more comfortable in a skirt. Do be careful about sitting facing the lecturer, or getting into and out cars of course. :D
Disaffected.citizen
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:16 am
Location: UK

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by Disaffected.citizen »

partlyscot wrote:
Disaffected.citizen wrote:Now, back somewhere on topic.....

I haven't worn a skirt in public in five years; long story that I'm not particularly inclined to aire here. In fact, I rarely muster the energy to put a skirt on indoors, these days. I do, however, have many skirts and several dresses in my closet.

So, a very basic question here....

I have to attend a one day driver education course; no idea who else will be there. Although highly doubtful that I'll do so, but I'm considering a skirt for once! Thoughts gentlemen, please.
Where are you located? What's the general attitude? Is it possible or likely that the opinions of those holding the course could impact you likelihood of passing such course? For me, I wouldn't even hesitate, unless it was likely I would be crawling under the car. A classroom environment or actually driving would be far more comfortable in a skirt. Do be careful about sitting facing the lecturer, or getting into and out cars of course. :D
There's no pass/fail and certainly no crawling underneath a vehicle. There is a driving element.

Five years ago I wouldn't have hesitated; but now....

If I do wear a skirt or dress, I'll be sure to post about it as it will be a landmark event.
partlyscot
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: You've got somewhere to go, have anything to wear?

Post by partlyscot »

Disaffected.citizen wrote:There's no pass/fail and certainly no crawling underneath a vehicle. There is a driving element.

Five years ago I wouldn't have hesitated; but now....

If I do wear a skirt or dress, I'll be sure to post about it as it will be a landmark event.
Well, are you likely to feel significant embarrassment? Are you likely to meet these people again? Will it detract from whatever you feel you will get from the event? For me, I would go skirted unless it meant that it materially affects whatever benefits I'm looking for from the event.
Locked