Alex Beneson explains for Slate the concept of waiting on line. It is an interesting, short piece about why we wait on lines, and what the social and legal ramifications are for breaking "the rules."
The last paragraph of the article reads "Some British police have even begun to encourage crash courses in queuing theory for foreign students studying in England. Meanwhile, the Chinese seem to have problems convincing people that lines are necessary in the first place. In February of this year, Chinese officials became so concerned about disorderly crowds at the 2008 Beijing Olympics that they introduced a monthly "wait-in-line day" in an attempt to educate people on how to queue up calmly and efficiently."
This cracked me up, because it is so true. From my personal experience in Asia, lines are for waiting on, not to determine the order in which services are received. The Chinese were very happy to wait on a line indefinitely, but once the bus came, everyone swarmed towards the door. This happened basically any time that a line was required (with the exception of the movie theater and customs). It is so like the Chinese to institute a "wait-in-line day." Patronizing and silly, yet trying to address a real social issue. At least it isn't a human rights issue... yet.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Friday, June 29, 2007
Things That We Care About And Shouldn't
First up: Will Ferrell's The Landlord.
I thought that the video was hilarious. The Post-Chronicle, and others subtly, or in Bill O'Reilly's case, not so subtly, suggest that it's child abuse.
This seems a bit silly to me. After all, who hasn't played with a small child in ways that might be considered demeaning? I know that when my baby brother was an infant we moved his mouth to make him say all sorts of ridiculous things, all that we lacked was a video camera and youtube. Did this scar him for life? Probably not. We also dressed him up in silly ways, and took embarrassing photographs. In fact, a set of photos exist from when I was 2 or 3 where I am wearing a cowboy hat, my mother's boots (they are thigh-high on me), a handkerchief, and underwear. And I did that to MYSELF. Fortunately my parents did not follow through on their threat to show those photos to my prom date. Thank G-d.
Adam McKay (the director and father) says that Pearl is at an age where she will say whatever she's been directed to, but doesn't remember it. I remember when my youngest cousin was at this age. We were teaching him to talk and he'd repeat everything you said (example: My parents love me the least), unless he couldn't pronounce it, in which case he'd clap, as if to show appreciation for your amazing diction (example: flotation device). Were we abusing him? I'd say not. Was it really entertaining for the older cousins? Of course.
When someone calls this type of behavior "Child Abuse" it bothers me. By lumping the two together it cheapens the actual abuse that thousands of unprotected children in the United States alone are subject to every day; starvation, beatings, neglect, and the list goes on. It makes the term "child abuse" seem far less sinister and damaging than it actually is, and on the other side of the same coin is an easy way to heighten the severity of a seemingly harmless incident. Was the video in poor taste? Probably. But if you watch the outtakes you can see that Pearl was not harmed during the film, nor will she, in all likelihood, suffer any lasting negative effects.
So really, get over it.
I thought that the video was hilarious. The Post-Chronicle, and others subtly, or in Bill O'Reilly's case, not so subtly, suggest that it's child abuse.
This seems a bit silly to me. After all, who hasn't played with a small child in ways that might be considered demeaning? I know that when my baby brother was an infant we moved his mouth to make him say all sorts of ridiculous things, all that we lacked was a video camera and youtube. Did this scar him for life? Probably not. We also dressed him up in silly ways, and took embarrassing photographs. In fact, a set of photos exist from when I was 2 or 3 where I am wearing a cowboy hat, my mother's boots (they are thigh-high on me), a handkerchief, and underwear. And I did that to MYSELF. Fortunately my parents did not follow through on their threat to show those photos to my prom date. Thank G-d.
Adam McKay (the director and father) says that Pearl is at an age where she will say whatever she's been directed to, but doesn't remember it. I remember when my youngest cousin was at this age. We were teaching him to talk and he'd repeat everything you said (example: My parents love me the least), unless he couldn't pronounce it, in which case he'd clap, as if to show appreciation for your amazing diction (example: flotation device). Were we abusing him? I'd say not. Was it really entertaining for the older cousins? Of course.
When someone calls this type of behavior "Child Abuse" it bothers me. By lumping the two together it cheapens the actual abuse that thousands of unprotected children in the United States alone are subject to every day; starvation, beatings, neglect, and the list goes on. It makes the term "child abuse" seem far less sinister and damaging than it actually is, and on the other side of the same coin is an easy way to heighten the severity of a seemingly harmless incident. Was the video in poor taste? Probably. But if you watch the outtakes you can see that Pearl was not harmed during the film, nor will she, in all likelihood, suffer any lasting negative effects.
So really, get over it.
Jews and Entertainment
Heather Ferreria left the following comment on my post about Spiderman 3 and it got me thinking:
As a Sephardic Jewish chick also in the film ind., I'd like to know for giggles why Ashkenazi guy directors always love casting Irish Gentiles who look like them as the impossible action lead who gets the unmistakably shiksa dame. Google a photo of Tobey Maguire. Then Google one of Sam Raimi. Place side by side and compare. Then edit in fact that Sam Raimi is hot into shiksa (oh surprise) redheads. Living vicariously, are we much?I'd like just once to see a hot studly Gentile guy director cast his Jewish doppelganger as the intelligent, nebbishly lead who gets the hot, raven-haired intelligent Jewish girl. Think it will ever happen? Ha!I'll take Ed Burns or Edward Norton any day over Woody Allen. I think most of us would. So all my lead actors from now on are going to be goyim! It's time for Jewish girl director revenge!
Now, yesterday I was home sick (I am a big mess without CJ) so I did what any intelligent, homebound person with internet access will do. I trawled the major networks for full episodes of their shows online. This lead me to watch old episodes of NCIS, a CBS show. In case you are unaware, NCIS stands for Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and as we know, I love all things Naval.
Now one of the characters on NCIS is called "Ziva Davide" and she is a former-Mossad agent working for NCIS. Now I'm pretty unclear about this for a number of reasons. Primary among them being that I thought you couldn't work for the US government if you had ever served in a foreign army. Maybe not, though. So, I've provided a picture of her below:
As a Sephardic Jewish chick also in the film ind., I'd like to know for giggles why Ashkenazi guy directors always love casting Irish Gentiles who look like them as the impossible action lead who gets the unmistakably shiksa dame. Google a photo of Tobey Maguire. Then Google one of Sam Raimi. Place side by side and compare. Then edit in fact that Sam Raimi is hot into shiksa (oh surprise) redheads. Living vicariously, are we much?I'd like just once to see a hot studly Gentile guy director cast his Jewish doppelganger as the intelligent, nebbishly lead who gets the hot, raven-haired intelligent Jewish girl. Think it will ever happen? Ha!I'll take Ed Burns or Edward Norton any day over Woody Allen. I think most of us would. So all my lead actors from now on are going to be goyim! It's time for Jewish girl director revenge!
Now, yesterday I was home sick (I am a big mess without CJ) so I did what any intelligent, homebound person with internet access will do. I trawled the major networks for full episodes of their shows online. This lead me to watch old episodes of NCIS, a CBS show. In case you are unaware, NCIS stands for Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and as we know, I love all things Naval.
Now one of the characters on NCIS is called "Ziva Davide" and she is a former-Mossad agent working for NCIS. Now I'm pretty unclear about this for a number of reasons. Primary among them being that I thought you couldn't work for the US government if you had ever served in a foreign army. Maybe not, though. So, I've provided a picture of her below:
Now, this character is played by Cote de Pablo. That's right, an Israeli character is being played by a Chilean woman. Is Hollywood suffering from a lack of Israelis? That seems unlikely, no matter where I go I find Israelis, and I'm not even looking. Anyway, this absurdity came to a head during an episode where there is an ACTUAL Israeli who portrays a rogue Israeli arms dealer. Unsurprisingly "Ziva" was less than pleased with him, however, when she confronts him in Hebrew she can only say one line, and that with a bizarre accent. Seriously, they got a real Israeli for the bit part, but couldn't find a single one for the regular role? Seriously? Israel is a country full of beautiful women. Beautiful, deadly women! Perfect for this show.
It just seems absurd. Maxim knows that Israelis are attractive, if only we could get the rest of the industry on the bandwagon.
On Celebrity
This thought isn't fully developed, so pardon me if I'm a bit scattered.
We all profit others' misfortune. The cheap clothes, food, and toys we buy are mostly produced by underpaid foreign factory workers. I'm not saying this to make you feel guilty, but to point out that none of us are innocent of exploitation. As the Washington Post says, "It isn't easy to be an 'it' girl."
That said, can the media please leave Britney, Lindsay, and to a lesser extent Paris, alone? I'm not saying that they haven't made poor choices, or even that some of those choices aren't deserving of mockery, but at this point, watching the train wreck that is Britney's life is just painful. It seems to me that it would be in the media's best interest, at least in the long term, to leave these women alone, and let them get better. Being in the public eye certainly isn't helping Lindsay get into rehab, or Britney get her act together. And it has only cause Paris to become more and more of an attention whore.
Let's break this down: When JFK Jr. and Diana died it was a tragedy for the tabloids. These examples of American and British royalty were regular tabloid fodder, providing stories that people were interested in, and would read. By the same token, their regular sitings allowed paparazzos to make a fairly good living, selling exclusive pictures to tabloids for thousands of dollars each. Yet when they died (and forgive my crassness here) that cash cow stopped giving milk. It is clear that it is in the tabloids and paparazzos best interests to keep these celebrities alive, yet it is also clear that the American people are all too happy to read about the train wrecks that these girls have become. Yes, pictures of Britney wearing her shirt on her head sell magazines, but they also contributes to her unstable mental state, psychological downturn, and possible death of her career (or herself). Not that I am wishing/predicting her death, but for Lindsay at least, it seems unlikely that if she follows this current path that she'll live to 30.
If Britney's career stalls, then pictures of her will be worth nothing. And this constant media attention isn't helping her to get her act back together. Same with Lindsay, she is still making movies, but she's clearly not doing her best work, and has developed a reputation for being unprofessional on set.
I guess that the paparazzi feel that in the short term they can make money off of these women's pain, and in the long term, if they burn out someone else will take their place. If I thought that it would be in any way effective I'd try to organize a boycott of the major tabloid magazines, but I don't know enough people who purchase them anyway to make an economic dent.
*sigh* Next World Issue please...
UPDATE: US Weekly has banned coverage of Paris for the next week.
We all profit others' misfortune. The cheap clothes, food, and toys we buy are mostly produced by underpaid foreign factory workers. I'm not saying this to make you feel guilty, but to point out that none of us are innocent of exploitation. As the Washington Post says, "It isn't easy to be an 'it' girl."
That said, can the media please leave Britney, Lindsay, and to a lesser extent Paris, alone? I'm not saying that they haven't made poor choices, or even that some of those choices aren't deserving of mockery, but at this point, watching the train wreck that is Britney's life is just painful. It seems to me that it would be in the media's best interest, at least in the long term, to leave these women alone, and let them get better. Being in the public eye certainly isn't helping Lindsay get into rehab, or Britney get her act together. And it has only cause Paris to become more and more of an attention whore.
Let's break this down: When JFK Jr. and Diana died it was a tragedy for the tabloids. These examples of American and British royalty were regular tabloid fodder, providing stories that people were interested in, and would read. By the same token, their regular sitings allowed paparazzos to make a fairly good living, selling exclusive pictures to tabloids for thousands of dollars each. Yet when they died (and forgive my crassness here) that cash cow stopped giving milk. It is clear that it is in the tabloids and paparazzos best interests to keep these celebrities alive, yet it is also clear that the American people are all too happy to read about the train wrecks that these girls have become. Yes, pictures of Britney wearing her shirt on her head sell magazines, but they also contributes to her unstable mental state, psychological downturn, and possible death of her career (or herself). Not that I am wishing/predicting her death, but for Lindsay at least, it seems unlikely that if she follows this current path that she'll live to 30.
If Britney's career stalls, then pictures of her will be worth nothing. And this constant media attention isn't helping her to get her act back together. Same with Lindsay, she is still making movies, but she's clearly not doing her best work, and has developed a reputation for being unprofessional on set.
I guess that the paparazzi feel that in the short term they can make money off of these women's pain, and in the long term, if they burn out someone else will take their place. If I thought that it would be in any way effective I'd try to organize a boycott of the major tabloid magazines, but I don't know enough people who purchase them anyway to make an economic dent.
*sigh* Next World Issue please...
UPDATE: US Weekly has banned coverage of Paris for the next week.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
I Ain't No Hollaback Girl
A recent piece in Slate's Broadsheet (Single Women Eat Babies!) led me to a rather funny article in the New York Post on catcalling, which, in turn, directed me to the activist blog, Holla Back New York City, a blog devoted to empowering women to confront the men who catcall on the street. When I first read about Holla Back in the Post article, I'll admit that I was extremely skeptical. It seemed silly. I thought: what's up with these over-sensitive, uptight women who can't handle being catcalled; everyone gets catcalled; I get catcalled all day; they should just get over it.
But then I reflected a little bit on the course of my day. The truth of the matter is that, although periodically it's nice to hear, "You are so beautiful," or "Gorgeous," said with a sigh as I saunter past, I also often find myself walking hunched, with my head down, trying not to make eye contact, concentrating on ignoring the lewder and more suggestive comments. Prettyboy makes fun of me for dressing conservatively (although I disagree on that point), but what he doesn't realize is that if I dress provocatively in any way, I can't walk down the street without blushing at the aggressive attention I receive.
While there's little wrong with a head nod, and true compliments can be nice to hear from a friend, to be heard from a stranger or an acquaintance (yes, you, creepy men who work at the desk in my office building), they're threatening and embarrassing and I don't know how to respond to them. If I ignore the men I see every day, am I being rude? I don't want to make a hostile work environment, I have to walk into and out of the building several times a day. I don't want to be labeled "bitchy" and my instinct is to smile and say "Thank you," but that just welcomes further familiarity and remarks on the fit of my dresses (and, most recently, a growl as I walked past). As for strangers, I don't want to welcome any further familiarity. I've heard enough scare-stories to know that there's a fine line between safety and danger. I think that that's what men on the street don't realize. They think that saying what they do is harmless. They assume that it's a comment that goes out into the ether, whereas my response is to think: is this guy going to follow me? is he a threat? should I be worried?
I don't mind the looks of appraisal; it's a free country and people are free to leer all they want. In fact, they're free to say whatever they want, too. That's the beauty of free speech. But what recourse do I have? I've realized that it's not that catcalling doesn't bother me, but that I'm so used to it, it's like so much other white noise in this city. So is that it? My only recourse is to ignore the bullies on the streets? Or I could carry around a camera, like filmmaker Maggie Hadleigh-West :
Watching this video, I vacillated between feeling glad that she was putting these men under the spotlight, making them uncomfortable the way that they make me uncomfortable, and wondering if she was going too far. Or if she was just going to be marginalized and dismissed, the way I feel when I speak up and I'm brushed off, out of hand, as a "harpy" or "oversensitive." Just because I'm used to this behavior doesn't make it acceptable. And just because it's not as bad as other horrible and violent things going on, daily, against women world-wide, doesn't mean that we should have to ignore the intrusion on our personal space that occurs repeatedly throughout the day.
But then I reflected a little bit on the course of my day. The truth of the matter is that, although periodically it's nice to hear, "You are so beautiful," or "Gorgeous," said with a sigh as I saunter past, I also often find myself walking hunched, with my head down, trying not to make eye contact, concentrating on ignoring the lewder and more suggestive comments. Prettyboy makes fun of me for dressing conservatively (although I disagree on that point), but what he doesn't realize is that if I dress provocatively in any way, I can't walk down the street without blushing at the aggressive attention I receive.
While there's little wrong with a head nod, and true compliments can be nice to hear from a friend, to be heard from a stranger or an acquaintance (yes, you, creepy men who work at the desk in my office building), they're threatening and embarrassing and I don't know how to respond to them. If I ignore the men I see every day, am I being rude? I don't want to make a hostile work environment, I have to walk into and out of the building several times a day. I don't want to be labeled "bitchy" and my instinct is to smile and say "Thank you," but that just welcomes further familiarity and remarks on the fit of my dresses (and, most recently, a growl as I walked past). As for strangers, I don't want to welcome any further familiarity. I've heard enough scare-stories to know that there's a fine line between safety and danger. I think that that's what men on the street don't realize. They think that saying what they do is harmless. They assume that it's a comment that goes out into the ether, whereas my response is to think: is this guy going to follow me? is he a threat? should I be worried?
I don't mind the looks of appraisal; it's a free country and people are free to leer all they want. In fact, they're free to say whatever they want, too. That's the beauty of free speech. But what recourse do I have? I've realized that it's not that catcalling doesn't bother me, but that I'm so used to it, it's like so much other white noise in this city. So is that it? My only recourse is to ignore the bullies on the streets? Or I could carry around a camera, like filmmaker Maggie Hadleigh-West :
Watching this video, I vacillated between feeling glad that she was putting these men under the spotlight, making them uncomfortable the way that they make me uncomfortable, and wondering if she was going too far. Or if she was just going to be marginalized and dismissed, the way I feel when I speak up and I'm brushed off, out of hand, as a "harpy" or "oversensitive." Just because I'm used to this behavior doesn't make it acceptable. And just because it's not as bad as other horrible and violent things going on, daily, against women world-wide, doesn't mean that we should have to ignore the intrusion on our personal space that occurs repeatedly throughout the day.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Wishing They Could Rewind?
Speaking of wanting a rewind button, check out the lengths these identical twins went to in the vein of 'body art.'
I can't even post the picture, just visit the site, but not during lunch.
(Hat tip to Prettyboy's BFF)
I can't even post the picture, just visit the site, but not during lunch.
(Hat tip to Prettyboy's BFF)
Rewinding
Prettyboy often talks about how nice it would be to have a rewind button. He brings it up in the context of things he would do if he did, in fact, have such a button.
A SFW example:"If I had a rewind button, I would throw this banana cream pie at the stuffy maitre d' to see his reaction." In this scenario, Prettyboy would then be able to hit rewind and the pie would never have been thrown, except in his memory of the event.
I often want a rewind button, as well, largely because I am a big, awkward doofus and I wish I could unsay half the things I've said, untrip all the falls I've made, and unspill all the bowls of cereal/cups of coffee/glasses of orange juice. It's in that reddened, uncomfortable, embarrassed moment immediately following whatever verbal gaffe I've made most recently that I wish against all hope that I could rewind and undo. As a teenager, I once playfully told my Daddio to "shut up," at the outset of the world's longest trip home from a party. He was angrily silent the entire time. Seething. Imagining my punishment. Becoming redder and angrier. And I sat there, helpless, stunned at the intensity of his reaction. So a rewind button, right? Would have been perfect.
What would you do with a rewind button?
In the Interest of Fairness
I was apparently severly mistaken about vanity-sizing. I'd like to apologize to the fashion industry for misreporting.
In the interest of fairness, I'm going to post the entire response to my post on vanity sizing (Downsizing), written by Kathleen, who has her own blog, the Fashion Incubator, which, sigh, I guess I'm going to have to read regularly, since it seems very well-written and it's about fasion (thanks, Kathleen, for the correction and extensive information):
Dear Consumer,
I notice you went to the bother of linking to wiki's vanity sizing entry which is pov questionable, error-rife and mis-cites their own source material. It's a pity you didn't read all their references, particularly the **only one** written BY the "fashion industry" called, _The Myth of Vanity Sizing_. I mean, if you're going to say that people like me think you're stupid, you should at least hear what I have to say for myself. If you had read just one of the articles I've written on vanity sizing, you'd know I don't think you're stupid at all. What amazes me is that you think sizing is about *you* -consumers- your head games that we're trying to make you feel better about yourselves. I don't know who started that myth but it's not! It has nothing to do with *you*. Rather, it has everything to do with internal material utilization processes within the limitations of the manufacturing industry. Iow, what we call "allocation" based on the derivation of sizes with regard to our respective markets.
In fact, I'm glad you're an honors grad because this is very complicated to explain which is why "we" can't explain it readily or easily to the average consumer. I'm glad you're bright because you'll understand what "normalizing to the population" means because that's what we're doing. I'm glad you're an honors grad because I'm assuming you're not intellectually lazy and will follow up with this. By the way, I'm a pattern maker. Not only have I NEVER "vanity sized" anything in my 27 year career, I don't know another pattern maker who has either.
Now, if sizing didn't normalize to the population, we'd still be making clothes designed for people in the 1800's. If manufacturers didn't adjust the sizing of their products (to include buildings, furniture etc) you wouldn't be able to get in the door without ducking. So, with everybody from architects to industrial engineers "vanity sizing" ("normalizing") products in your environment, how come you're not complaining to them that the size of their products haven't remained static? Rather, it's the opposite usually; one specific example is the size of airplane seats, those aren't big enough but guess what, they won't be "normalizing" seat sizes because they have to redesign the entire PLANE! No, I don't think you're stupid or an idiot and as such, I know you'll understand "normalizing to the population" to say nothing of understanding the sizing structure of lines in a designer's stable (explained in my series). Not that you'd know off hand how it's done. Why would you? It's arcane, it's complicated, nobody wants to listen to how the system works, it's easier to kvetch and blame, no heavy lifting involved! Believe me, it is all very very logical. I'm glad you're smart! Most consumers won't bother to read, process or understand. Hey, you'll have a leg up on everyone! You'll know something they don't.
What's stupid is to make the same complaints year after year. I got tired of hearing about it which is why I wrote The myth of vanity sizing series (10) because among other things, sizing evolves, just like people do. Sizing is not a fixed mathematical construct, but a social one (it used to be mathematical but meaning was wrested from pattern engineers before my time) -so there's even a social history component. And an economical one, and a buyer one. Sizing is even dependent upon how a manufacturer organizes and employs their product development system in accordance with the dictates of their retail partners. But most of all, sizing is related to efficient material utilization, which doesn't mean cutting smaller to save fabric when we're obviously discussing the opposite. I'll explain.
Consider: most manufacturers cut a size range of 6-14, nearly all do, if not, 8-16. Now, sales wise, the vast majority of orders are in the center of the size spread. Now, as the average person gets heavier, over time, sales begin to weigh in (excuse the pun) on the upper end of the size range so the size spread is off kilter. Now why does this matter? It matters because of marker design and allocation (arcane as I said). To make an efficient marker (keep fabric waste to a minimum) you need balance. For every size 6, you need a size 14. For every size 8, you need a size 12. The 6/14 and 8/12 balance each other in a marker. So, if you have orders for too many of the larger sizes and not enough of the smaller sizes because people are getting fatter, you don't have balance because now you need 3 size 12's for every size 8 or 2 size 14s for every size 6. So, you change the sizing structure. This way it rebalances. Otherwise, if they didn't do this and the given measures that constitute a given size remained static, the smaller sizes would drop out of the size range altogether. A manufacturer would be cutting lots of 12's and 14's -with pressures on the upper end of the size range, in sizes they don't even offer! If they added those sizes (dropping the smaller sizes, the sales of which are too few to cut in production), they'd end up in plus sizes which means a whole new market, whole new stores, whole new sales reps and even assuming that not "normalizing" to the population would work (in theory) it is just too costly to contemplate if you have established distribution.
Also consider retail. If a manufacturer didn't normalize to the population, their sizes would -over time- "run small". Retailers won't like that, buyers would have to know the line intimately and they just don't. They'd be putting static size 10's on a rack that were in effect, two sizes smaller than the competitor's size 10s. That confuses customers too. For better or worse, they want size 10's across manufacturers to bear some resemblance of consistency. Two sizes smaller isn't.
I don't think you're stupid or intellectually lazy, some of the more salient entries in my sizing series are:
http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/the_myth_of_vanity_sizing.html http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/fit_and_sizing_entropy.html http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/push_manufacturing_subverting_the_fit_feedback_loop.html
http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/sizing_evolution.html
Actually, any of the entries have links at the bottom to the other entries. Don't miss the history of women's sizes entries either (3).
In the interest of fairness, I'm going to post the entire response to my post on vanity sizing (Downsizing), written by Kathleen, who has her own blog, the Fashion Incubator, which, sigh, I guess I'm going to have to read regularly, since it seems very well-written and it's about fasion (thanks, Kathleen, for the correction and extensive information):
Dear Consumer,
I notice you went to the bother of linking to wiki's vanity sizing entry which is pov questionable, error-rife and mis-cites their own source material. It's a pity you didn't read all their references, particularly the **only one** written BY the "fashion industry" called, _The Myth of Vanity Sizing_. I mean, if you're going to say that people like me think you're stupid, you should at least hear what I have to say for myself. If you had read just one of the articles I've written on vanity sizing, you'd know I don't think you're stupid at all. What amazes me is that you think sizing is about *you* -consumers- your head games that we're trying to make you feel better about yourselves. I don't know who started that myth but it's not! It has nothing to do with *you*. Rather, it has everything to do with internal material utilization processes within the limitations of the manufacturing industry. Iow, what we call "allocation" based on the derivation of sizes with regard to our respective markets.
In fact, I'm glad you're an honors grad because this is very complicated to explain which is why "we" can't explain it readily or easily to the average consumer. I'm glad you're bright because you'll understand what "normalizing to the population" means because that's what we're doing. I'm glad you're an honors grad because I'm assuming you're not intellectually lazy and will follow up with this. By the way, I'm a pattern maker. Not only have I NEVER "vanity sized" anything in my 27 year career, I don't know another pattern maker who has either.
Now, if sizing didn't normalize to the population, we'd still be making clothes designed for people in the 1800's. If manufacturers didn't adjust the sizing of their products (to include buildings, furniture etc) you wouldn't be able to get in the door without ducking. So, with everybody from architects to industrial engineers "vanity sizing" ("normalizing") products in your environment, how come you're not complaining to them that the size of their products haven't remained static? Rather, it's the opposite usually; one specific example is the size of airplane seats, those aren't big enough but guess what, they won't be "normalizing" seat sizes because they have to redesign the entire PLANE! No, I don't think you're stupid or an idiot and as such, I know you'll understand "normalizing to the population" to say nothing of understanding the sizing structure of lines in a designer's stable (explained in my series). Not that you'd know off hand how it's done. Why would you? It's arcane, it's complicated, nobody wants to listen to how the system works, it's easier to kvetch and blame, no heavy lifting involved! Believe me, it is all very very logical. I'm glad you're smart! Most consumers won't bother to read, process or understand. Hey, you'll have a leg up on everyone! You'll know something they don't.
What's stupid is to make the same complaints year after year. I got tired of hearing about it which is why I wrote The myth of vanity sizing series (10) because among other things, sizing evolves, just like people do. Sizing is not a fixed mathematical construct, but a social one (it used to be mathematical but meaning was wrested from pattern engineers before my time) -so there's even a social history component. And an economical one, and a buyer one. Sizing is even dependent upon how a manufacturer organizes and employs their product development system in accordance with the dictates of their retail partners. But most of all, sizing is related to efficient material utilization, which doesn't mean cutting smaller to save fabric when we're obviously discussing the opposite. I'll explain.
Consider: most manufacturers cut a size range of 6-14, nearly all do, if not, 8-16. Now, sales wise, the vast majority of orders are in the center of the size spread. Now, as the average person gets heavier, over time, sales begin to weigh in (excuse the pun) on the upper end of the size range so the size spread is off kilter. Now why does this matter? It matters because of marker design and allocation (arcane as I said). To make an efficient marker (keep fabric waste to a minimum) you need balance. For every size 6, you need a size 14. For every size 8, you need a size 12. The 6/14 and 8/12 balance each other in a marker. So, if you have orders for too many of the larger sizes and not enough of the smaller sizes because people are getting fatter, you don't have balance because now you need 3 size 12's for every size 8 or 2 size 14s for every size 6. So, you change the sizing structure. This way it rebalances. Otherwise, if they didn't do this and the given measures that constitute a given size remained static, the smaller sizes would drop out of the size range altogether. A manufacturer would be cutting lots of 12's and 14's -with pressures on the upper end of the size range, in sizes they don't even offer! If they added those sizes (dropping the smaller sizes, the sales of which are too few to cut in production), they'd end up in plus sizes which means a whole new market, whole new stores, whole new sales reps and even assuming that not "normalizing" to the population would work (in theory) it is just too costly to contemplate if you have established distribution.
Also consider retail. If a manufacturer didn't normalize to the population, their sizes would -over time- "run small". Retailers won't like that, buyers would have to know the line intimately and they just don't. They'd be putting static size 10's on a rack that were in effect, two sizes smaller than the competitor's size 10s. That confuses customers too. For better or worse, they want size 10's across manufacturers to bear some resemblance of consistency. Two sizes smaller isn't.
I don't think you're stupid or intellectually lazy, some of the more salient entries in my sizing series are:
http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/the_myth_of_vanity_sizing.html http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/fit_and_sizing_entropy.html http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/push_manufacturing_subverting_the_fit_feedback_loop.html
http://www.fashion-incubator.com/mt/archives/sizing_evolution.html
Actually, any of the entries have links at the bottom to the other entries. Don't miss the history of women's sizes entries either (3).
Jews Loved By: Slate
From The State of the Ninja by Grady Hendrix:
The Israeli affinity for ninjas makes sense when you consider that ninjas are basically supercool Jews. Both practice esoteric traditions that must be kept pure or they'll lose their power, both wear black outfits, and both can destroy much larger and more numerous opponents. The main difference is that while observant Jews spend a lot of time praying, observant ninjas spend a lot of time hiding and killing people
This statement makes me want to go spend some quality time at Real Ultimate Power.
The Israeli affinity for ninjas makes sense when you consider that ninjas are basically supercool Jews. Both practice esoteric traditions that must be kept pure or they'll lose their power, both wear black outfits, and both can destroy much larger and more numerous opponents. The main difference is that while observant Jews spend a lot of time praying, observant ninjas spend a lot of time hiding and killing people
This statement makes me want to go spend some quality time at Real Ultimate Power.
Apartment Hunting, Redux
The roommate and I have decided that since we like our apartment, and hunting sucks, that we'd try to find someone/s to fill our extra room. One of our roommates put up an ad on Craigslist for a one-month sublet that yielded some hilarious results:
Hello.
I read your post on CraigsList and I am interested in your offering. I may not fit your desired roommate as I am male, BUT WAIT... I am a young design professional. I would not be any sort of burden for you I am sure! I am impeccably clean, and very busy. I design handbags @ COACH; working ten hour days, and night classes 3 nights weekly. I will be scarce to say the least. I eat out, so your kosher environment is safe with me! I have no pets. I will not be having any "overnights". I am not one to bring the party home. I spend my weekends in Long Beach Island, and have yet to spend a single weekend in Manhattan since May. I am basically a ghost- seemingly the ideal roommate. Hopefully my chromosome makeup, being what it is, will not be problematic. If I seem like a compatible fit, please respond to this email as I am eager to hear more!
Thanks,
[redacted]
I like that he tells us that he won't be "bringing the party home."
Now both the roommate and I put up ads for a SPECIFICALLY FEMALE roommate. And this is what I got (from a Jewish listserv):
[Redacted]: I am looking for sharing or subletting a furnished apartment in Manhattan. I am a canadian, french, sephardic Jew, kosher and shomer shabbat. I am in my 50's, have 3 married daughters and 3 grandchildren, and mind my own business (consulting engineer and businessman). I get along with most sincere people. It is OK halachicaly to share with two women, plus my girlfriend from Montreal will be with vacationing with me most of the period. I need the dimensions of the room and brightness, noise level and if it has A/C, as I work from home. Please send me pictures of room and kindly highlight your own profile? When can I visit? Great recent sharing references available. Please call ASAP > > [redacted] > > [phone number redacted]
(note: I like how he ASSURES me that it is ok halachically because we are two women. Thanks.)
Me :Hi [redacted], while you sound great, I'm not comfortable sharing with a man. Sorry, I hope that you can find what you're looking for. Best, Annie
[redacted]:I expect that this uncomfort may be quickly eliminated if we meet and prove the value of sincere friendship. I have very high ethics and religious values that I will not compromise! I understand how you feel (and I cannot blame you for being too careful) and will respect your ultimate decision. It does not engage you into anything unless we both want to share your apartment, nothing else! Please call me to discuss. Regards, [redacted], included phone number again
Me: I appreciate your enthusiasm, but aside from the halachic issues of living with a man, I am not comfortable with the day-to-day living situation. For instance, I dress with tzniut, and I would have to be fully dressed at all times in my home, even to go to the bathroom, and that just isn't a situation that I'm comfortable with. I'm sorry, and I wish you luck on your search.
[redacted]: I trust you know what you are doing and wish you to find the best match for you, regardless of how you dress. We only grow when we rise to the occasion, i.e. to make an accommodating changes when we have roomate(s). But we have to focus on what we gain, not what we loose. I do it all the time, considering it as a privilege well appreciated. This is how I stay positively focused. Hatzlaha, Sincerely, [redacted]
(what accomodating changes is he suggesting that I make? Also, can you imagine explaining to my mother that my roommate and I live with a 50-year-old, divorced, French Canadian, Sephardi guy?)
Hello.
I read your post on CraigsList and I am interested in your offering. I may not fit your desired roommate as I am male, BUT WAIT... I am a young design professional. I would not be any sort of burden for you I am sure! I am impeccably clean, and very busy. I design handbags @ COACH; working ten hour days, and night classes 3 nights weekly. I will be scarce to say the least. I eat out, so your kosher environment is safe with me! I have no pets. I will not be having any "overnights". I am not one to bring the party home. I spend my weekends in Long Beach Island, and have yet to spend a single weekend in Manhattan since May. I am basically a ghost- seemingly the ideal roommate. Hopefully my chromosome makeup, being what it is, will not be problematic. If I seem like a compatible fit, please respond to this email as I am eager to hear more!
Thanks,
[redacted]
I like that he tells us that he won't be "bringing the party home."
Now both the roommate and I put up ads for a SPECIFICALLY FEMALE roommate. And this is what I got (from a Jewish listserv):
[Redacted]: I am looking for sharing or subletting a furnished apartment in Manhattan. I am a canadian, french, sephardic Jew, kosher and shomer shabbat. I am in my 50's, have 3 married daughters and 3 grandchildren, and mind my own business (consulting engineer and businessman). I get along with most sincere people. It is OK halachicaly to share with two women, plus my girlfriend from Montreal will be with vacationing with me most of the period. I need the dimensions of the room and brightness, noise level and if it has A/C, as I work from home. Please send me pictures of room and kindly highlight your own profile? When can I visit? Great recent sharing references available. Please call ASAP > > [redacted] > > [phone number redacted]
(note: I like how he ASSURES me that it is ok halachically because we are two women. Thanks.)
Me :Hi [redacted], while you sound great, I'm not comfortable sharing with a man. Sorry, I hope that you can find what you're looking for. Best, Annie
[redacted]:I expect that this uncomfort may be quickly eliminated if we meet and prove the value of sincere friendship. I have very high ethics and religious values that I will not compromise! I understand how you feel (and I cannot blame you for being too careful) and will respect your ultimate decision. It does not engage you into anything unless we both want to share your apartment, nothing else! Please call me to discuss. Regards, [redacted], included phone number again
Me: I appreciate your enthusiasm, but aside from the halachic issues of living with a man, I am not comfortable with the day-to-day living situation. For instance, I dress with tzniut, and I would have to be fully dressed at all times in my home, even to go to the bathroom, and that just isn't a situation that I'm comfortable with. I'm sorry, and I wish you luck on your search.
[redacted]: I trust you know what you are doing and wish you to find the best match for you, regardless of how you dress. We only grow when we rise to the occasion, i.e. to make an accommodating changes when we have roomate(s). But we have to focus on what we gain, not what we loose. I do it all the time, considering it as a privilege well appreciated. This is how I stay positively focused. Hatzlaha, Sincerely, [redacted]
(what accomodating changes is he suggesting that I make? Also, can you imagine explaining to my mother that my roommate and I live with a 50-year-old, divorced, French Canadian, Sephardi guy?)
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
One Last Quick Thing
So it's been a slow day, and I managed to flip through the new Heeb magazine, and I found possibly the most entertaining thing ever.
A "round-table" discussion on the future of the Jewish people by three small children aged 8, 6, and 3. Amazing. Worth reading if only for that.
A "round-table" discussion on the future of the Jewish people by three small children aged 8, 6, and 3. Amazing. Worth reading if only for that.
Jews Love: Pregnancy
Last night I saw Knocked Up with the upstairs neighbor. It was fun, I laughed. I totally agree with all of the criticisms that I've heard about it, mainly that:
1) Those who are pro-choice (pro-abortion) in the movie treat it as a "quick fix" and don't deal at all with the serious nature of the procedure, or the emotional toll it can have on a woman. However, it is an option, and after considering it the main character (Allison) chooses to have the baby, so I would say the movie is overall pro-choice, if occasionally a bit too flip about abortion.
and
2) Jewish boy meets/impregnates non-Jewish, blonde goddess (I don't like to use the s-word when referring to non-Jews, as it is pejorative). I know that Seth Rogan is Jewish, he is sort of nebbishy, a bit chubby, curly hair, a slacker (if intelligent) but did he have to PLAY a Jewish guy? Couldn't we have a nebbishy non-Jew?
This afternoon Harley and I, and another friend met for lunch and went to H&M. Nothing too exciting. As we are checking out, the woman behind the counter looks at me and says: "You know, our store at 34th street has a maternity section." I said thanks, and walked away. SERIOUSLY? Again? I know that I'm wearing a loose dress, but HEY, it's summer, and it is light and airy. WTF.
Harley comforted me by pointing out that I'm generally very slender, so wearing an empire waist dress makes me look pregnant, instead of fat. Ok, fine, whatever, I got over it.
I get back to my desk to see Heeb's THE KIDS ISSUE.
I am going to kill someone.
1) Those who are pro-choice (pro-abortion) in the movie treat it as a "quick fix" and don't deal at all with the serious nature of the procedure, or the emotional toll it can have on a woman. However, it is an option, and after considering it the main character (Allison) chooses to have the baby, so I would say the movie is overall pro-choice, if occasionally a bit too flip about abortion.
and
2) Jewish boy meets/impregnates non-Jewish, blonde goddess (I don't like to use the s-word when referring to non-Jews, as it is pejorative). I know that Seth Rogan is Jewish, he is sort of nebbishy, a bit chubby, curly hair, a slacker (if intelligent) but did he have to PLAY a Jewish guy? Couldn't we have a nebbishy non-Jew?
This afternoon Harley and I, and another friend met for lunch and went to H&M. Nothing too exciting. As we are checking out, the woman behind the counter looks at me and says: "You know, our store at 34th street has a maternity section." I said thanks, and walked away. SERIOUSLY? Again? I know that I'm wearing a loose dress, but HEY, it's summer, and it is light and airy. WTF.
Harley comforted me by pointing out that I'm generally very slender, so wearing an empire waist dress makes me look pregnant, instead of fat. Ok, fine, whatever, I got over it.
I get back to my desk to see Heeb's THE KIDS ISSUE.
I am going to kill someone.
Absurdities of Today
1) Cats in Things They're Not Supposed to Be in Are Amazing:
Yes, yes they are.
2)Best line ever, courtesy of Rottin' In Denmark's Vox:
"How the hell can I get work done when I'm sitting in front of an invention that only exists to distract me? It's like trying to handwrite an essay on a stripper."
Yes, yes they are.
2)Best line ever, courtesy of Rottin' In Denmark's Vox:
"How the hell can I get work done when I'm sitting in front of an invention that only exists to distract me? It's like trying to handwrite an essay on a stripper."
Two Japan-Related Items
1) The US House of Representatives may pass a piece of legislation (with no teeth) that urges Japan to apologize for its use of comfort women during WWII. What's next, the inclusion of the Rape of Nanjing into Japanese history textbooks? Or a ban on major figures visits to Yasukuni?
2) In the post-war era Japan has become so demilitarized that it is currently a pacifist society. In fact, when Japan had, for the first time since WWII Japanese soldiers in Japanese uniforms (sent on a peacekeeping mission, I believe) there was a huge outcry. To combat this, the Japanese have created a kawaii (cute) cartoon version of a Japanese soldier called "Pickles." According to this piece from Reason Magazine:
"Japanese citizens have tended to be suspicious of the SDF, a fact that helps explain Pickles’ back story. A native of the peaceful Paprika Kingdom, he at first didn’t understand the need for his small country’s defense forces. It wasn’t until the neighboring Sesame Kingdom invaded that the prince learned the value of a military. Pickles went from wary skeptic to willing soldier."
Wow. First IDF in Maxim, now SDF in cartoon format. What's next, US Marine Corps in tutus?
2) In the post-war era Japan has become so demilitarized that it is currently a pacifist society. In fact, when Japan had, for the first time since WWII Japanese soldiers in Japanese uniforms (sent on a peacekeeping mission, I believe) there was a huge outcry. To combat this, the Japanese have created a kawaii (cute) cartoon version of a Japanese soldier called "Pickles." According to this piece from Reason Magazine:
"Japanese citizens have tended to be suspicious of the SDF, a fact that helps explain Pickles’ back story. A native of the peaceful Paprika Kingdom, he at first didn’t understand the need for his small country’s defense forces. It wasn’t until the neighboring Sesame Kingdom invaded that the prince learned the value of a military. Pickles went from wary skeptic to willing soldier."
Wow. First IDF in Maxim, now SDF in cartoon format. What's next, US Marine Corps in tutus?
Monday, June 25, 2007
Even Better
If Cab Calloway were still alive, I would write him endless fan mail.
Look how smoothly they tap:
Amazing.
I used to live right near the Cotton Club, so I watched the following nostalgically. (NB: Nostalgic for the music, but not the oppression, the rising threat of Naziism, or the Depression):
And one of my favorite songs of all time:
Imagin loving a man "though he was cokey." Cab, baby, you're missed.
Look how smoothly they tap:
Amazing.
I used to live right near the Cotton Club, so I watched the following nostalgically. (NB: Nostalgic for the music, but not the oppression, the rising threat of Naziism, or the Depression):
And one of my favorite songs of all time:
Imagin loving a man "though he was cokey." Cab, baby, you're missed.
Hello? Are You There, Readers? It's Me, Harley
Where is everyone today? Some days it feels like I'm encountering a great, echoing abyss, into which I'm throwing all my words. Hello hello hello.....?
I've had a killer headache for days now that just won't go away. I think I'll blame it on my sleep meds. Cloudy, groggy, cranky. What's going on over here? Allergies? It's so unlike me, lashing out out the fashion industry and bigots-- ok, that's very much like me, but I hate being cranky pants.
Combined with my brain sluggishness is the unending search for new employment, which can seem stultifying, sometimes. And by sometimes, I mean always. I have skills. I know that someone out there wants these skills. Where are they? Hello hello hello.....?
So, to cheer us all up (because I can feel that you, too, are feeling a little funky), some Leah Siegel and Jeff Taylor:
I've had a killer headache for days now that just won't go away. I think I'll blame it on my sleep meds. Cloudy, groggy, cranky. What's going on over here? Allergies? It's so unlike me, lashing out out the fashion industry and bigots-- ok, that's very much like me, but I hate being cranky pants.
Combined with my brain sluggishness is the unending search for new employment, which can seem stultifying, sometimes. And by sometimes, I mean always. I have skills. I know that someone out there wants these skills. Where are they? Hello hello hello.....?
So, to cheer us all up (because I can feel that you, too, are feeling a little funky), some Leah Siegel and Jeff Taylor:
Be on the Lookout! Dangerous Lesbians Abound!
I'm really digging the letter conceit today. Please excuse me if it gets old.
Dear Nissim Ze'ev,
Other than these women, what is it that make homosexuals so frightening? Why are they dangerous? Because they're not procreating? Is that all? Because you think that they're going to spread their evil ways?
I guess that's it. That's what it seems like. You think that they are going to convert the others to their "way of life." Ugh. Some mornings, I just wish I'd stayed in bed.
And logic won't work on you, either, will it? Logic about "choice," about sexuality being predetermined, to a large extent, by factors beyond our control ("to a large extent" because I hate using absolutes and I'm sure you'd use it as an excuse to find and eradicate the "gay gene")? I cannot fathom you or your way of thinking. It hurts my brain.
Maybe if I speak slowly: Gay... people... not dangerous... do not care about you... or "converting" people.... care about... living freely... with full rights... care about normal things.... want nothing from you...
Damn it. I give up.
You are a poopface stupid head (yes, I have resorted to ad hominem attacks out of sheer exhaustion),
Harley
Dear Nissim Ze'ev,
Other than these women, what is it that make homosexuals so frightening? Why are they dangerous? Because they're not procreating? Is that all? Because you think that they're going to spread their evil ways?
I guess that's it. That's what it seems like. You think that they are going to convert the others to their "way of life." Ugh. Some mornings, I just wish I'd stayed in bed.
And logic won't work on you, either, will it? Logic about "choice," about sexuality being predetermined, to a large extent, by factors beyond our control ("to a large extent" because I hate using absolutes and I'm sure you'd use it as an excuse to find and eradicate the "gay gene")? I cannot fathom you or your way of thinking. It hurts my brain.
Maybe if I speak slowly: Gay... people... not dangerous... do not care about you... or "converting" people.... care about... living freely... with full rights... care about normal things.... want nothing from you...
Damn it. I give up.
You are a poopface stupid head (yes, I have resorted to ad hominem attacks out of sheer exhaustion),
Harley
Jews Love: Music Videos
I discovered this by accident. It has actually changed my life:
Lip Gloss Song by Lil Mama
The message that "it wasn't the lipgloss, it was you all along" is probably my favorite part.
Another school-themed video: Pop, Lock, and Drop by Huey
I both love, and am disturbed by the teeny girl who does the "pop, lock, and drop it."
And a charming old-school video, courtesy of Slate: Aunt Jackie by Jason Fox
Lip Gloss Song by Lil Mama
The message that "it wasn't the lipgloss, it was you all along" is probably my favorite part.
Another school-themed video: Pop, Lock, and Drop by Huey
I both love, and am disturbed by the teeny girl who does the "pop, lock, and drop it."
And a charming old-school video, courtesy of Slate: Aunt Jackie by Jason Fox
Downsizing
Dear Fashion Industry,
Stop treating me like an idiot. I am not an idiot. In fact, I graduated with honors from a prestigious and challenging university. Not only can I read and write, but I can also discern when someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes or, in this case, the ruched chemise. Do you think that I didn't notice that you've started vanity sizing? Do you think that I care about the number attached to the little tag at the back of my dress? What am I going to do? Flash that around to everyone?
Yes, there's a brief moment when I think to myself, "A size 2? I must have lost weight!" But you and I both know that my body size has barely altered since I hit college. I am not a size 2!
Nor does the reduction in the apparent size of the garment improve my ability to find and wear clothing that fits me. In fact, I find that I now need to bring a broader range of sizes into the dressing room (in a most recent trip, from a size 0 to a 6) in order to approximate what my size must be. Seriously, I have some bulging biceps from carrying around all the frickin' hangers!
Stop treating me like an idiot. I am not an idiot. In fact, I graduated with honors from a prestigious and challenging university. Not only can I read and write, but I can also discern when someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes or, in this case, the ruched chemise. Do you think that I didn't notice that you've started vanity sizing? Do you think that I care about the number attached to the little tag at the back of my dress? What am I going to do? Flash that around to everyone?
Yes, there's a brief moment when I think to myself, "A size 2? I must have lost weight!" But you and I both know that my body size has barely altered since I hit college. I am not a size 2!
Nor does the reduction in the apparent size of the garment improve my ability to find and wear clothing that fits me. In fact, I find that I now need to bring a broader range of sizes into the dressing room (in a most recent trip, from a size 0 to a 6) in order to approximate what my size must be. Seriously, I have some bulging biceps from carrying around all the frickin' hangers!
Not a size 2
Seriously, I cannot fathom how stupid you must think I am to care more about a little number on a tag than about the logic of dressing myself. Who cares if I'm a 2, 8, or 16, so long as the clothing fits and makes me look good? It makes no sense! I'm an adult. I'm an adult with a functioning brain.
So stop treating me like an idiot, designers and sizers. I know that size doesn't matter. Damn. Sometimes, you're worse than Congress.
No longer yours,
Harley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
