Dyslexics vs. Anorexics!

Ahhh...the attack of the spelling police once again.
Ella is not a great speller, but she exhibits a far more important trait..individuality.
She is exactly right, but probably for the wrong reasons.
Girls and women, like mindless gutless sheep, all flock to the stores and the fashion gurus to get the current fashions. Women, not all but most, callow inane creatures that they are, march in lock step with each other down the shopping aisles, looking for the magic elixirs hanging on the racks.
Ella's argument sounds like it's religiously inspired. I don't agree with that. My argument isn't a religious or moral one, but one of intelligence and the dumbing down of people in general and in this case, women.
Instead of thinking for themselves and developing individuality(a dirty word), developing their minds, the ability to cipher, think, extrapolate, in short to actually think, the take the easy, non-thinking, shallow, clownish path of surrendering to fashion and concentrating on making their devastating mugs more appealing. Shallow, vain, idiotic, childish.
This is the danger of pop culture, fashion, music and movies and all its idiocy. It's not a problem of morals, it's a problem of intelligence and a people so silly they abdicate their duty to think and be rational beings and instead spend their time in front of mirrors applying eyeliner and the latest fashion-guru approved lipstick....
nauseating...
(But what do you really think)

Tom Clem: "I have no patience for a many who can only spell a word one way."

Spelling is about snobbery, but fashion has consequences. I rather deal with women who spell badly than women who parade around in erotic naivete, which is what you're talking about here.

Actually, it's a smart woman who spends time in front of the mirror, due to men's evolved preferences for beauty. It's just best if you also manage to get in a few pages of reading from Ethnology Today while you're blowdrying your hair.

About 1.5 years ago a young Mormon in Rancho Cucamonga with far more developed spelling and personal expression skills took a similar approach with the Nordstrom at the Montclair Plaza. It was either graduation or prom that started it. She and her friends wanted clothes that looked good but had difficulty finding items she liked that also met her religion's modesty requirement. She contacted the manager in the Brass Plum (I think that's the name of the youth/teen department of Nordstrom) and set up a meeting to discuss her concerns. The manager later arranged a meeting with the girl, a few of her friends and buyers from the different lines carried by Nordstrom. They held a workshop, and a couple of months later new clothes that were more appropriate to these girls' needs began arriving. Nordstrom also held a 'modesty' fashion show (for lack of a better term) that was such a huge draw they had to turn people away. Girls and their mothers attended. They've held a couple more events since. (I think one of the girls involved ended up with an internship down the line.)

After the whole thing settled, the girl was written up in several Christian and Mormon newsletters and magazines (she was also written up by the LA Times)giving advice on how others can replicate her success in their communities.

I watched the whole thing unfold and thought it was great. She and her friends saw what they wanted, figured out how to put together their message, learned which were the key people to talk to, and they did not give up. (My summary collapses many months of effort on their part.) And they got results. These teens used their brains to figure out the system and how to use it to bring about what they saw as a needed benefit to their community. And I think in some ways they were correct. (My one complaint about their actions was that all centered on Nordstrom, which is out of reach for teen girls who lack that level of disposable income.)

Here's the thing. Though this CNN girl and the one I'm talking about were each motivated in part by religion, there are tons of teen girls out there who are not religiously motivated. They would also like to look good without having to expose entirely too much flesh. They are uncomfortable in the tight, low cut, hip hugging outfits, but since that's what's immediately available, they try to work with it. They're not prudes, they're just not that comfy with their own bodies yet. They want to hide a bit, but they don't want to swim around in sack T-shirts and big jeans.

There is nothing wrong with being aware of fashion, of wanting to wear clothes that look nice. There's nothing wrong with learning how to present yourself. I think that a girl who knows enough of her own mind to figure out a way to attempt to get the fashionistas to listen to her is fantastic. So many girls hate themselves and their flesh; they compare themselves to the starlets and find themselves lacking. So many teen girls think they have no power at all, or are crippled from fear of making a mistake and being criticized. These girls show they can try.

Fashion and the desire to look decent (as in nice outfits, not as in Decent Enough For Jesus) may be a baffling concept to the person who posted the first note above (I'm sorry the little box won't let me scroll up...I'm not being rude I just can't get back to your name). But I get it. And I don't think the actions of these girls who try to make the market give them what they want -- as opposed to what the stores think they should have -- is a sign of vapid, slack-jawed, idiots incapable of forming their own identity. Doing this is another step toward shaping their own selves. I think they're smart (well the Rancho girls were smart...not sure about this CNN girl going only by her spelling) and a bit gutsy. How sad that some people are unable to see past their own assumptions and notice the real girl working beneath the stereotype some other assigned to her.

Yes, Crid you're right, spelling is about snobbery and conformity. But so is Paris and 4 star restaurants.
It's a smart woman who spends time in front of mirror---
Wrong wrong wrong. This is exactly how you shouldn't build a human being. The way to get strong healthy individuals, freethinking individuals, individuals that have the intellectual and intestinal fortitude to actually think for themselves, is just the opposite.
There are a few points here.
Yes men have evolved to prefer beauty---so what?
Does this mean that women should follow the dictates of men and become Stepford wives for them? This is in essence what women do, by the way. By spending disproportionate amounts of time fixing up their fetching kissers they NEGLECT their empty little heads.
Next point- do you really think these beauty products work? It's all nonsense. You either are pretty or you are not. period. Women of course don't know this but men do. Women will spend large parts of thier incomes and time trying to chase this dream. Women forgedaboutit!!! All you do is waste all your time chasing this dream. It's jsut another illusion people chase to try to fill the huge emptiness inside themselves.
Here's something novel---you really want strong women- give them self-esteem by believing in themselves and their own abilities, not as subservient Stepford wives trying to please a man.
This is the way you build strong people.
It's also a matter of degree. Everybody wants to look their best. But really, women are so overboard here it is truly pathetic.

I know, I know...here's how the story goes. We women know what men want so we give it to them. We're actually being smart. We can then manipulate the game and win in the end. But i say the cost is too much. When you reduce yourself to empty headed painted birds the loss in self-esteem is too great a cost. I could literally go on and on here, there are so many aspects. But try just one more.
Why does the woman heve to Stepfordize herself? To get a man? WHY? why is having a man so terribly important to women in the first place? Because their self-esteem has never been developed to begin with. Thus, they find their self-esteem in their RELATIONSHIP. As long as women play this game they will always be on the losing end of the master/slave relationship. This isn't only evolutionary, it's also cultural.

One of the primary and overriding problems we face today is the general weakness of human beings. Any time we are living in delusions or chasing fantasies or believing in gods that don't exist we weaken and de-empower ourselves. This is just another area where people, in this case women, do nothing but endlessly and continually weaken themselves.
Doing it this way, the woman is NEVER ever satisfied with herself. She is always chasing the new this or that. She always feels less than, inferior to where or what she "could be." By the way, this is one of the many sins of modern talking cure psychology. Creating paradigms of what you should or could be. The same applies here. You're never quite enough, pretty enough, this enough, that enough. It only serves to weaken people. The only way people will ever be strong is to accept themselves for what they are. All the rest of this is nonsense and most importantly a large financial enterprise pandering to women.
All this plays into further illusions we have in our society about what happiness is.
But I must move on, other people are desperately awaiting my tuition regarding their problems.

Women are generally weak and subservient, but they don't have to be. No gods no masters.

Why does a girl have to choose between good spelling and dressing like a hooker? Any 11-year-old American girl who doesn't like showing a little skin has got a problem, and the problem is spelled (pay attention now, Ella):

L -- A -- R -- D.

Yes, Ella is not only stupid. She's FAT!

ELLA GUNDERSON IS A BIG FAT LARDASS, AND SHE CAN'T SPELL.

And she's just jealous of HOT CHICK WRITERS like Amy Alkon, Lena Cuisina, and Helen Fuckin' Gurley Brown.

H(f)GB is only attractive in theory; If, after seven decades, your breasts still need surgery in order to do their voodoo, the problem isn't the breasts.

> ...it's a smart woman who spends time in front
> of the mirror, due to men's evolved
> preferences for beauty...

That shows three smelly presumptions:

1. That we're talking about adults. I thought the subject was essentially pre-sexual young women. I want PSYW's to know how eroticism works, but not participate in it. Much in pop fashion hustles them through the turnstyle before they're ready for the ride, and a terrible price is paid.

2. Time spent in front of the mirror is, for most women and men too, hours of infantile narcissism. Fuck that! Grow up and think about someone else instead of that 2 oz. deposit of fat under your jawline (without which you'd be Julia Roberts/Tom Cruise).

3. Most of the "preferences" women consider during Mirror Time are in no sense "evolved." They're the most tragically primitive sort of groupthink imaginable.

Isn't it fun to post while drinking?

PS- Chris, you kill too many pixels when you post.

> ...spelling is about snobbery and conformity.
> But so is Paris and 4 star restaurants.

All these demons are easily avoided so far! Ask me how.

Crid, I actually use "evolved" in the correct sense, meaning "a product of adaptations." Men evolved (adapted) to prefer beautiful women (young, clear skin, symmetrical features, hourglass figure), which is why women seek to be beautiful.

As for the lady above, Nordstrom isn't the only store on the planet. I know other kids who don't seem to have a problem not dressing in whatever terribly "sinful" clothes they were offering. Perhaps her time would have been better spent, not acting as junior fashion police (all the while lacking in literacy), but by shopping at stores that have clothes that suit her prudery...giving herself time to learn how to spell and write. I think her embarrassing illiteracy will have a far greater impact on her life than other girls' fashion predilictions. PS I'm anti-prudery. The idea that sex is dirty and evil is more religious claptrap. I've been a harlot my whole life, and I don't see "the devil" in my rear view mirror or anything. (Or anywhere.) Because I'm not insane! Or hellbent on believin in crap just because I'm told to utterly in lieu of proof.

Keep telling yourself that, and some day you'll start to believe it.

Telling myself...what?

That you're not insane.

Oh...well, I'm sane in my insanity. And now I'm going to sleep.

"I want PSYW's to know how eroticism works [...]"

Crid, this is the most un-sexy thing I've ever read. How eroticism "works"? There's really nothing laborious about eroticism, unless you're rubbing your titties up against a businessman in a strip joint.

"Much in pop fashion hustles them through the turnstyle before they're ready for the ride"

Getting off with another person usually has an element of clumsiness in it. Why should it be any different for the young?

"and a terrible price is paid."

What? Now you're writing ad copy for the United Negro College Fund?

Crid-other than your pixel comment you are essentially right-
these silly women are only fooling themselves
vain, silly, narcissistic nonsense. the worst possible advice you could give to young women.

Mirror mirror on the wall
I'm a silly woman y'all
staring vainly at this lump
hoping a man will come to hump
I'm 40 but I act like twelve
cause I'm a goddess can't you telve
we must pander to those men
to get a squirt of that semen.

i'm new to this story so i came in rather unprepared for all that i read here.

i was kind of confused by the religious argument that got thrown into the mix here. apparently chris knew that this girl was religious from another source. all i read was this young girl saying she didn't prefer her belly and/or arse hanging out of her jeans.

i am also at a loss in this new age where slutty = sexy. i don't think that all men want a woman who parades around in her underwear. i think it is foolish and naive for women and girls to wear such things in the real world.

i believe clothes should FIT. what a concept! i'm not a prude, but i am modest. a little skin is a lot sexier than all the skin - that's just desperate. "please want me! i'm good in the sack... or at least i look it! LOVE ME... or at least do me. whatever."

women shoudln't concern themselves so much over whether or not they're gotten, but rather WHO they're gotten by.

Chris -- i love the poem! Lena

Tami -- but what about drag queens? should we should show a little or A LOT of skin? please advise! it's friday and I'm fixing to get my groove on TONIGHT! hugz, Lena

This isn't about clothes, it's about making an argument against something. I think even ignorant people should stand up for something they believe in, as did this little girl. Unfortunately, and she will soon learn this, a person's argument becomes less impressive when they can't spell or use proper English. The message is lost when it's not expressed properly. Amy's right, first thing's first. #1 - Educate yourself and learn to communicate.
#2 - Express yourself and worry about what other people are doing (if you so wish).

> you're writing ad copy for the United
> Negro College Fund?

Only if...

> hugz(!)

...You're writing for Tiger Beat.

So here we are making fun of each other's expressive habits, which is really what this thing seems to be about. Oppressive, snobbish people will use always find an excuse to avoid the issue on the table. But the girl WAS able to express herself clearly: The trendmonger forces of fashion are sexualizing daughters recklessly.

I'm not inclined to panic about this, but can anyone deny that it's true?

> Crid, this is the most un-sexy thing I've
> ever read.

No prob, titillation wasn't the goal.

> There's really nothing laborious about
> eroticism...

There is when it goes wrong, or happens to the wrong person.

lena: i think cross-dressers should show as much skin as possible. that way, hopefully, heterosexual men won't be tricked into anything scandalously salacious.

i hope you have fun tonight. btw - i thought you were a girl. is lena your transi name then?

Hi Tami --

I'm not quite a boy, and I'm not quite a girl. I had a sex change operation a couple of years ago, but a few days later the wound between my legs closed up. Suddenly I noticed a one-inch mound of flesh where my penis used to be. So, in terms of gender, I've been a total disaster zone ever since. It's like the Berlin Wall between my legs was torn down and there's nothing to replace it but rubble.

A big Tiger Beat hug on ya!
Lena

Tami-you're very bright and think for yourself-an endangered species
and Lena-glad you liked my poem-since you did
I feel in the mood for another one. See if you like it

There sits Lena, cloistered hind the walls of academia,
Hiding, cause her ideas suffer from unbridled anemia
Thoughts and notions not only wrong, but downright
hee-nous,
Cause her only real thoughts are about sucking on Ron Jeremy's penis.

I love it! But who is Ron Jeremy? And how big is his member?

Sorry
A semi famous male porn star

Chris -- "Heinous" rhymes with another word that is surely in your poetic lexicon. Why did you have to go to the trouble of "hee-nous"? -- Leenous

lena-analyzing poetic choices?
why and to what end?
i chose it simply because i felt like it at that particular moment-nothing more.
yes i suppose venus ryhmes with penis
but hee-nous was such a nice word to describe your views, i just couldn't pass it up

but more to the point-
could picasso explain why he chose an apple instead of an orange?
what great artist can explain his choices to a well...ah..how should i put this.. the ordinary folk, the great unwashed, the commoners, that great wasteland of perfectly good DNA we refer to as the people?

American girls aspire to a standard of beauty dictated by gay men in the fashion business. The idea that this concept of beauty is connected to evolution is as silly as the idea of women on the African plain applying Clinique to improve their reproductive chances some 100,000 years ago.

You Hollywood people are slaves to fashion.

I'm not sure her spelling is something to be too terribly worried about. She is 11, after all. I expect a few mistakes are to be expected when one is still in grade school.

Still, I applaud her for her individuality. She sees modern styles of low-riding jeans as abhorrent (which they are)a nd is deciding to be her own person. Good for her, I say. At her age, it's very tempting to be one of the "in" crowd, but she's willing to break with the prevailing trend.

Speaking for myself, I couldn't be part of the "in" crowd if I wanted to be.

Chris wrote: "could picasso explain why he chose an apple instead of an orange?
what great artist can explain his choices to a well...ah..how should i put this.. the ordinary folk, the great unwashed, the commoners, that great wasteland of perfectly good DNA we refer to as the people?"

He'd probably have an easier time of explaining it to the hoi-polloi than to... ah, how should I put this?... the imaginary elite, the self-deluded, the snobs... that great wasteland of perfectly good DNA we refer to as the beautiful people.

Pat
you're right about Ella
it's about individuality
and no I'm not part of the so-called beautiful
people, but I do laugh in their face

Darling Paris-sucking Amy and Lena(nothing left in betweena) are part of the so-called beautiful people. Upon spotting such people I usually squirt them with squirt guns, call them foul names
and flick my peas at them from my spoon.

Richard ñ

Your post reminds me of an observation that Henry Louis Gates made in the New Yorker a couple of years ago:

ìThe racist believes that blacks are incapable of running anything by themselves. The anti-Semite believes (in one popular bit of folklore) that thirteen rabbis rule the world.î

I'd add: "The homophobe believes that American girls aspire to a standard of beauty dictated by gay men in the fashion business."

But maybe youíre right. Two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of spending a couple of free hours at the Art Institute of Chicago, looking at its incredible collection of paintings from the Renaissance and the Neoclassical period. If gay men are dictating standards of beauty to American girls, I'd venture to say that it's part of a great tradition.

Lena

> I'm not sure her spelling is something to
> be too terribly worried about.

It pains me to agree, but there you are.

> The homophobe believes that American girls
> aspire to a standard of beauty dictated by
> gay men in the fashion business.

Bzzt! Bzzt! Straw man!

Richard was in a hurry. The full argument goes like this: couture-tards and other fashion-heads are often senselessly wealthy people who insulate themselves from the smelly rough-and touble of genuine humanity. Thus insulated from beauty's often backhanded serendipity, they turn to those charming, sexually unintimidating gay men... Verbal, emotional, chatty types who take their money for stupid clothes, giving them the illusion of having worked to experience the height of human attraction.

And so year after year, the runway models look like boys, 'cause that's what the designer likes. Unless you have another explanation...

It must be a relief to dismiss the beliefs of your ideological contestants as psychological illness ('homophobic'). But it ain't noble or sensible.

I hope you at least made time for the modern wing at the AIC.

Tumble. Rough-and-tumble. I'm in a hurry here.