skirtcafe.org

Here's a moderately interesting article, written this past February so it's reasonably fresh:

http://cornelldailysun.com/index.php?q=node/21494

It's written by a columnist with the androgenous name of "Dana", so I'm not sure if this person is male or female, but the writing style seems to indicate the latter.

I dumped a comment onto it, and we'll see if it gets published.

Good article. Considering it's not an in-depth look at the subject, it deals very well with the uneven access to fashion freedom for males as compared to females.

The comments are good too.

Dana is, I believe, a womenswear fashion writer for a newspaper and I am pretty confident she is female. But there has been comment made about her piece un the Cornell Sun:

http://cornellsun.com/index.php?q=node/21601

Stu

Stu wrote:Dana is, I believe, a womenswear fashion writer for a newspaper and I am pretty confident she is female. But there has been comment made about her piece un the Cornell Sun:

http://cornellsun.com/index.php?q=node/21601

Where are Aerosmith when you need 'em?

Unfortunately, that article just reinforces the original author's thesis -- that is, that women do wear made-for-men clothing on a very frequent basis. What needs to happen is for some brave soul to stand up and point out that clothes do not have a gender to them, and to drop the stereotyping, especially the completely specious one that a bloke wearing anything other than tr*users is a homosexual.

I'd like to ask Dana to simply define "women's clothes". I don't think any of my straight or semi-pleated skirts look like "women's clothes". They certainly don't when I am wearing them. No one in his/her right mind would confuse ME with a female, even WITH my ponytail. In my opinion, the "only" clothes that are definitely "women's" are bras, panties without flies, shapers to give the ideal womanly shape etc. In other words, items that specifically fit a female shape. :bouncy:

I won't reply to her article because you have to log in and make an account to do so. I have enough spam mail, don't need to set myself up for any more. :shake: :whiteflag

Since1982 wrote: I won't reply to her article because you have to log in and make an account to do so....

Skip, you can reply without registering. It kinda sorta looks like you are registering but it's not. I replied without registering. I can't remember if it required an email address or not -- but if it did I would have just done like I always do and used a bogus one.

I thought it was generally a fairly reasonable article and have added a comment.

I was intrigued that it took three attempts for the server at the other end to solve the maths question correctly! I'm pretty confident that I did not add 3 + 9 together incorrectly, nor 9 + 6.... perhaps there is a case for wondering about the standards of education.

Have fun,


Ian.