<< So, besides all the cultural baggage that goes with the image we
choose to present to the world, there's this inherent impracticality issue
as well. A person could have any number of finely tuned gray cells inside
that pretty, tightly wrapped, and wobbly package, but that's certainly not
what they're choosing to present. And, on some deep nasty little level of
myself, I find it difficult to respect people who make that choice on a
daily basis - at the very least I'm going to make some gross assumptions
about their lack of common sense if they're wearing a clothes that don't
fit the weather, or the job they're trying to do.>>
For whatever it's worth, my femme friends (straight and gay) who like
wobbly heels don't wear them to work when it's snowing: they wear
sensible boots, and then change. Practicality and ornament needn't cancel
one another out entirely. And I know plenty of women who wear frills and
heels who can also hold their own *extremely* well in any business or
intellectual discussion. They present their intelligence through what
they say, not what they wear. And, on some deep nasty little level of
myself, I find it difficult to respect people who'd respect me if I were
wearing overalls and galoshes, but assume that I was a "bimbo" if I were
wearing a ball-gown and sequinned slippers. In my book, that's
suspiciously sexist . . . just my $.02!
The point of my original post (which I must not have worded well, since so
many people seem to have missed it), is that a particular woman's brain
structure doesn't change according to what she's wearing. If I'm smart in
galoshes, I'm smart in heels; if I'm an idiot in a strapless gown, donning
overalls won't up my IQ any.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:23 PDT