Saturday, May 10, 2008

Why is practicality optional for women's clothing???

<RANT>

I study in Ringwood, where it is jolly freezing. It's like Ringwood has its own weather system, at least 10 degrees colder than the rest of Melbourne. The heating at college is inadequate (and I'm being nice by not picking a stronger adjective there), so much so I end up wearing my winter coat and scarf inside the classroom to keep warm. The place is so cold that we are gaining our own penguin colony. Well, maybe not quite, but you get the idea.

I have made suggestions to the SRC that this should now be top of the priority list since they have sorted out the abysmal coffee situation in the last few weeks by installing a Lavazza coffee machine (Mmmm!). But I'm resigned to the fact that this will probably only happen when I graduate in 2012.

But bearing in mind how chilly it's going to get, and is already getting, I set off yesterday to buy some warm clothing so that I do not come down with hypothermia mid-Christology lecture. Now my wonderful boyfriend has these really warm Bonds hoodies, and knowing that Bonds makes hoodies for chicks as well, I thought awesome, that'll do the trick.

So I set off to Kmart to check 'em out, only to discover that the men's ones have nice polar fleece lining (thus their warmth) but the ladies ones DON'T!!

This to me is beyond illogical. Firstly, blokes have a larger muscle mass than women which means that doing absolutely NOTHING they burn more calories, thus producing more body heat. So they start out with a biological advantage. Secondly, then you add the Bonds polar fleeced hoodie and they are all set. Compared to us ladies who start out with the disadvantage of producing less body heat and THEN add a thin and flimsy Bonds ladies' hoodie that does NOTHING to keep us warm.

Oh, but that's alright, because they had a women's "Vintage Style" hoodie which was a bit longer. Vintage style my left foot!!

What I want to know is this, why is practicality optional in women's clothing??????

Ah yes, because of fashion, because we want to look "good". Personally, I don't think I look particularly "good" rolling on the floor in the foetal position trying to warm up my torso so that blood returns to my extremities so that I regain feeling in my hands and feet, even if I am wearing the latest must-have.

I think it's all a ploy. The reason we are taught that we would want to look "good" is so that men will be attracted to us. But then when they get their hands on us, they just want the clothes off anyway. So here's my conspiracy theory, it's all part of a ploy to get us to the point that we think, "hey these clothes are so impractical, we may as well forget wearing them all together, afterall we'll be just as warm in the nude." Grrrrr... It's all an attempt to get to a place where practicality isn't optional for women's clothing, but that women's clothing IS optional!!!!

Which is all cos of the fashion industry being in bed with the porn industry that has turned women into sexual objects. Men be warned, this whole "metro-sexual" thingy that seems to be happening will result in the same thing for you. Say goodbye to clothes that are practical, that actually cover the things that should be covered, and keep warm/cool the bits that need it. You'll be wearing lace knickers before you know it!

Ah for the days when men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri!


God bless,
Bec

</RANT>

1 comment:

Peter said...

Hey, Bec, you could try moving to a more hospitable climate. (aah, beautiful one day, perfect the next)