Fashion faux pas |
by Gina Dalfonzo |
Is it just me, or is there something slightly grotesque about writing a fashion piece on women who have never had any real choice about what they wore?
(Image © AP)
Note: No one at The Point, BreakPoint Online, or Prison Fellowship is responsible for the content of any of the blogs listed above, except where noted. A blog’s presence does not necessarily imply endorsement. |
« The Point Radio: No Family Left Behind | Main | Sacred Cows Make Good Burgers »
Fashion faux pas |
by Gina Dalfonzo |
Is it just me, or is there something slightly grotesque about writing a fashion piece on women who have never had any real choice about what they wore?
(Image © AP)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c635553ef00e5521792f28834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fashion faux pas:
The comments to this entry are closed.
Sad picture, but don't they remind you of a horror movie like the *Stepford Wives* run amuck.
I know I'm streching it a bit, but from the picture, I'd say they are all brainwashed or abused.
Posted by: Kim Moreland | April 28, 2008 at 09:11 AM
Reminds me of a recent slur in these postings comparing their attire to homeschoolers, an alleged similarity I personally failed to apprehend. The commentariat tries to keep its hypocrisy under wraps, but it seems to keep bubbling up at the most awkward moments. For decades conservatives been lambasted for judging men by their appearance: the tattoo artists who turn their bodies into a cheap Salvador Dali knock-off, the hip hop crew with striped boxers and waistlines down to their thighs, or the freaks parading in downtown SF.
Now, out of nowhere it seems, it suddenly becomes PC to insult someone's choice of attire. Between this and Jeremiah Wright's rehabilitation of racial stereotyping (see today's press conference), the rules are changing faster than I can keep up.
Posted by: Steve | April 28, 2008 at 11:29 AM
I'm told by my wife and daughters that after going straight from puberty to childbearing, and having three or four children by the age of twenty, a woman might feel relieved to be able to avoid showing off her figure.
I'd love to know why the various LDS groups are infused with such desperate nostalgia for the 1800s. I understand that they are firmly attached to their history, but why desire to stop the clock?
And I'll note in passing that BYU is sometimes snarkily referred to as "Breed 'em Young University". I.e., even in monogamous Mormon relationships, there's great pressure to get married and start producing children ASAP. This "fundamentalist" sect merely takes that idea to an extreme.
Posted by: LeeQuod | April 28, 2008 at 12:14 PM
"femininity -- the kind that is carried as a burden, rather than admired."
I think this reveals the author's biases more than it illuminates FLDS teachings.
Isn't it odd that several of the little girls of friends have commented on the "pretty dresses" they've seen on television and the magazine covers. Maybe they instinctively recognize that modesty *is* pretty and feminine. What's wrong with "LHOP style"?
I thought the piece was snarky and superficial, in just the way jr. high girls sniff at the unfashionably dressed peer.
I was under the impression that Americans didn't, as a rule, judge books by covers. Not anymore in our identity-politics obsessed culture, I guess. You've got your slummy mummies, your yummy mummies and your "amateurishly constructed...prison inmates."
If only she knew how many times I have busted a gut over the ridiculous get-ups that parade down fashion runways.
Posted by: Susannah | April 30, 2008 at 12:41 AM
I mean, how many of these women are crying themselves to sleep tonight?
And Ms. Givhan is snickering over their clothes?
Posted by: Susannah | April 30, 2008 at 12:55 AM