20 July 2011
The last two images are from She Hit Pause Studios, on sale at Gilt for the next few hours.
19 July 2011
It was the perfect antidote to Erica Jong's piece in the New York Times a couple weeks back, where she chastises mothers of today for our rejection of Jong's generation of feminism. According to her, "We (Jong's generation) idealized open marriage; our daughters are back to idealizing monogamy. We were unable to extinguish the lust for propriety." Apparently our "lust for propriety" runs so deep that "our current orgy of multiple maternity does indeed leave little room for sexuality."
What Jong fails to grasp is that feminism has changed. Monogamy includes far more perks for women now than it may have a couple generations ago. Marriages are often partnerships between equals, allowing women to be more than just mothers and men to be more than just breadwinners. A valid concern, though, would be that both men and women lose sight of their commitment to each other as they focus so much attention on their children and their careers.
So back to Joanna's post. She addresses the issue, saying:
13 July 2011
It's still a work in progress, but I was able to get a ton done in the past couple weeks thanks to an extended visit from my mother. I wish I had taken some "before" pictures, so you'll have to trust me when I tell you it was puke central in here. I'll post some pictures of its current state soon, but first I'll share some of my inspiration, via my Pinterest.
p.s. We're still scouring thrift stores and flea markets for certain items, i.e. fixtures to throw on the fireplace (see 3rd photo) to make it look less horrible. If you have any leads, let me know!
12 July 2011
Their cover editorial this month is va-va-voom at its finest. The racy content of it pages might shock the average American, but the ample-figured models managed to give the ultra-jaded fashion crowd a little start as well.
Well salute to that! I think sex in the media can be tasteful and non-exploitative if done right, but it's baffling that most models fit into a very narrow definition of what's sexy. Don't get me wrong - I think that tall, skinny models are good in fashion shoots that evoke, like, swans or robots. But why do we use these same models for what I think of as Bombshell photos? Photos that are meant to call to mind old Hollywood glamour, or a sexy boudoir. There's nothing sexy about lingerie when it looks like it's on an abnormally tall 12-year old boy.
It seems the only place for other body types is in ad campaigns featuring "real women" (a.k.a. frumps). Or if they're not in some homage to homeliness, they're covered in tattoos. A little ink is fine, but the implication is that anything over a size 2 is "alternative." Seriously - I want to see a curvy woman, but I want to see her in couture!
My favorite thing about this editorial is that it genuinely appears to be about the clothes and the sexiness of the women wearing them - not about their size. Here are a couple of the tamer shots...
Aren't they hot? And not in a "that woman is hot for her size" way, but in a "that woman is hot" way.
Sadly, I doubt that this will be the start of a new era in fashion. This same magazine did an all black issue before, but I haven't noticed any surge in black models. Giving non-white models or curvy models their one month of glory doesn't exactly bang a huge dent in the status quo. But hopefully a handful of arbiters will appreciate the effort as much as I do, and get things moving in the right direction.
06 July 2011
I couldn’t agree more. Even as a jaded high schooler I looked forward to family dinners, and was in heaven when I spent a semester of college in Paris, where I divided my time between meeting boys and eating 4-hour meals.
So it's no big surprise that I'm looking forward to the publication of Kinfolk, an online/print magazine (coming 7/15) and blog (now) dedicated to gathering and entertaining. Not in an over-the-top or ostentatious way, but in a manner that is "simple, uncomplicated, and less contrived." In other words, back to the basics of talking and eating.
01 July 2011
That's why I'm in love with the recent trend of pairing a nice, safe, go-with-everything-flaw-concealing sweater with a bolder print on bottom. I'm also a huge fan of any kind of transformational layering, i.e. the sweater over a tight dress at work and ditched for evening.
I love the idea of this look with a chunky cable knit sweater, but the very thought is making me sweat. Better to take a cue from Phillip Lim and Celine, above, and go with something more delicate and lightweight.
I dare you to find a better option than one of these two sweaters from Pure Cashmere. They look gorgeous, and I'm totally impressed with Pure's dedication to sustainability and fair practices. They detail every step of their process on their website, which is worth a peek. I'm usually skeptical of claims like these (greenwashing, anyone?) but Pure is refreshingly thorough and transparent. They cover everything from how trade works in the cashmere industry (which I did not know) to the fact that they haven't come up with a way to use renewable energy in Mongolia (honesty?!). The only thing I can't vouch for is how they feel. Buy me one and I'll let you know!