My Photo

Welcome to Mannionville

  • Politics, art, movies, television, books, parenting, home repair, caffeine addiction---you name it, we blog it. Since 2004. Call for free estimate.

The Tip Jar


  • Please help keep this blog running strong with your donation

Help Save the Post Office: My snail mail address

  • Lance Mannion
    109 Third St.
    Wallkill, NY 12589
    USA

Save a Blogger From Begging...Buy Stuff


The one, the only

Sister Site

« Comforting cliches | Main | President Underdog Do-Over »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

robertognome

cf: the picture tbogg put up of a girl in guess jeans. Not feminine at all. nope. not a bit sexy. nope. not at..... alll..........sex------y. It's so hard to type with one hand.

May

I never ever wear dresses or skirts, yet...

Linkmeister

I really do think Tbogg has the whole "picture worth a thousand words" concept down pat. Whew!

KC45s

I couldn't bring myself to link to the column. Did he use the term "dirty pillows"? I bet he did. Or will in his follow-up column, "Corsets: Modesty plus torture equals foxiness!"

Still, the laugh is on us. I'd be more amused by the smackdown given to this clown if I didn't know he'll be making a decent living writing the same stuff for National Review after graduation.

Apostate

But I still love you. :)

KEvron

"The wearing of pants by women represents the masculinization of the fairer sex...."

project much, needle dick?

KEvron

velvet goldmine

I once disagreed with Lance by going all Anglophile and declaring his stance on somwthing pure "pants." I should have saved that expression for this, har, har.

Yes, UTex really is kind of laughable and not worth rebutting, as Apostate says. But his freak-out makes for a potentially interesting jumping-off point about the different elements of sensuality that our clothes bring to us.

It's the difference between what the outfit looks like vs. what it feels like to wear it.

I often think that pants are somewhat literal and severe. They turn us -- men and women both -- into a collection of parts, rather than the sum of our parts. We're cut it two. They are at best sexual, but not sensual.

There's just no fluidity, not as much freedom of movement. (This is the opposite of how women are supposed to think of pants, I realize. They are supposed to be liberating.) I often feel so much more creative and engaged in the world, and by the world, in clothes with a flow to them, and it has nothing to do with hiding or revealing my figure. There's just so much more poetry to a dress or something tunic-y. I think I'm a Medievalist at heart.

I would go the original op-ed piece one better and suggest that rather than simply encouraging women to get back to the flowing lines, we should get the men back in them too. Toga! Toga! Toga!

MaryC

I would go the original op-ed piece one better and suggest that rather than simply encouraging women to get back to the flowing lines, we should get the men back in them too.

It works for the Pope.

Really, try to visualise the Pope in a business suit. Loses some of the power and authority he projects, right? Not to mention that the hats just wouldn't work with a suit.

Guys do look more impressive in something long and flowing -- if not a dress, then a cape. Look at monarchs in their ermine-lined robes. Batman and Superman. Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes, swishing his opera cape (but not Basil Rathbone in his silly hat). Every Western movie lawman in his ankle-length duster. Lawrence of Arabiaafter he puts on the white robe.

I'm not counting bathrobes here of course.

velvet goldmine

Mary -- I'd forgotten all about capes and dusters. Now you're talking!

inge

velvet goldmine: Eco recommends a monk's robe as the best garment for a philosopher. Pants, he says, especially jeans, make you aware of your body and distract you from living in the realm of pure thought.

Note, though that he's talking about mental, not physical activities ...

velvet goldmine

Inge: Makes sense. I was thinking about this thread as I was using a leaf vac yesterday. I suppose I was thinking vaguely philosophical thoughts to make the time go by -- but I was glad I was wearing jeans rather than a monk's robe or a Laura Ashley frock, because getting a hem caught in that thing would have, well, sucked.

CJColucci

Concerning capes; Many years ago, Captain America, for a reason I forget, had decided to ditch the Captain America brand and do his super-heroing in another guise. As he put together a costume, he thought a cape would be neat. Then, as he chased a villain (the Swordsman, I believe), he tripped over his cape, fell, and knocked himself out. The villain looked back, said: "You know, I've always wondered why that doesn't happen more often," and dashed off, When Cap came to, he ripped off the cape and said he now understood why the government hadn't included a cape in the Captain America get-up.

Lance

CJ, I didn't know that about Cap. But here's an expert on the inadvisability of capes for superheroes.

ajay

I would go the original op-ed piece one better and suggest that rather than simply encouraging women to get back to the flowing lines, we should get the men back in them too. Toga! Toga! Toga!

Togas are rather draughty for those of us who live in cold climates - also, difficult if you lead an active life. (Try running in one.) Kilts, on the other hand...

velvet goldmine

Ajay, Good points, but I refuse to believe skorts are the answer for humankind. I'd rather stick a spork in my eye.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Data Analysis

  • Data Analysis

Categories

April 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

Movies, Music, Books, Kindles, and more

For All Your Laundry Needs

In Case of Typepad Emergency Break Glass

Be Smart, Buy Books


Blog powered by Typepad