Dear Vivienne Westwood,
I'm sorry to have to be the one to inform you of this, but I can keep silent no longer. Sure, you were "all that" when punk broke, you and your carefully-ripped t-shirts and designer-perv rubber wear, but that was over twenty years ago. It is clear that your mad designer skilz jumped the shark just about the same time "Goody Two-Shoes" dropped off the Top Ten list. NO ONE is going to buy boobs for men to wear, especially boobs that look as if someone cut the ends off a pair of those cone-shaped paper cups and stuck them underneath the sweater at the last minute. The most garish, fakola stage trannies are laughing at your so-called "falsies" as I write. Even they wouldn't wear something that amateurish. And not even the femmest homosexual on the planet will buy and wear something called a "blouson." Y-chromosomes are y-chromosomes, and every single one in his body will rise up in protest to prevent such a fashion catastrophe. So give it up, luv. It's time to retire.
Sincerely,
Andrea Harris
(Via Anne Wilson.)
Posted by Andrea Harris at January 15, 2003 08:29 PMDamn. I'm experiencing that creeping senility thing again. I saw another amusing-in-a-sick-kind-of-way booby story today - one of those weird Japanese things - and now I can't remember where I saw it.
Posted by: Lynn at January 15, 2003 at 10:33 PMI don't want to hurt that guy's feelings, but Ted Kennedy has WAY nicer tits.
Posted by: Steve H. at January 15, 2003 at 10:43 PMOh Lynn -- there was a picture somewhere (I can't remember where either) showing a couple of Japanese people wearing "nipple scarves." At least, that is what the commenter said they were. They kind of looked like saggy fake boobs attached to a scarf that you could hang around your neck so that the boobs hung in front. Why you would do such a thing I have no idea.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 16, 2003 at 12:16 AMIs there an epidemic of insanity going around?
Posted by: Michael Lonie at January 16, 2003 at 03:06 AMIf Eldridge Cleaver's codpiece fashions didn't catch on, I don't think men will go for prosthetic boobwear.
Posted by: Joanne Jacobs at January 16, 2003 at 05:23 AMWhat? My stylin' E.C. pants AREN'T in style anymore? Why didn't someone tell me this? Boy, is my face red! Man, now I gotta go shopping at lunch time.
Posted by: Chip Haynes at January 16, 2003 at 08:09 AMFound it! That's not where I orginally saw it but it was one of the first in the list. I hadn't thought to search for "nipple scarves." (and we wonder where those weird Google referrals come from!)
Posted by: Lynn at January 16, 2003 at 09:12 AMI had the journalistic integrity to run an expose of the great Japanese nipple scarf controversy – and nobody remembers where they saw it. Sigh.. just another ink-stained wretch, toiling away in anonymity.
The Japanese scarves were a weird, but everyone knew that they were a joke. I don’t think Vivienne Westwood is joking.
Didn’t some fashionista introduce kilts for men a few years back? That didn't catch on.
Posted by: mary at January 16, 2003 at 09:28 AMI first found it here, on Tom Tomorrow’s site. He didn’t know what to say about it either.
Posted by: mary at January 16, 2003 at 09:37 AMThe only place kilts look proper is at a Scottish wedding. In Scotland. On a Scotchman.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 16, 2003 at 09:52 AMI mean "Scotsman." I still haven't finished my first cup of coffee.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 16, 2003 at 09:53 AMOr on the British Army's Highland Regiments (the Germans in WWI called them "deadly grannies" or something like that).
Posted by: David Jaroslav at January 16, 2003 at 10:12 AMMan, I am SO sorry I viewed those images this close to lunch. MY EYES! MY EYES! That had to be about the dumbest "fashion statement" I've seen in a long, long time. Like, ever. Idiots. Flaming brain-dead idiots.
Posted by: Chip Haynes at January 16, 2003 at 11:15 AMBarthelme was there first! Snow White, p.96, on buffalo humps:
You know, Klipshorn was right I think when he spoke of the
`blanketing' effect of ordinary language, referring, as I recall, to the
part that sort of, you know, `fills in' between the other parts. That part,
the `filling' you might say, of which the expression `you might say' is
a good example, is to me the most interesting part, and of course it
might also be called the `stuffing' I suppose, and there is probably
also, in addition, some other word that would do as well, to describe
it, or maybe a number of them. But the quality this `stuffing' has,
that the other parts of verbality do not have, is two-parted, perhaps:
(1) and `endless' quality and (2) a `sludge' quality. Of course that
is possibly two qualities but I prefer to think of them as different
aspects of a single quality, if you can think that way. The `endless'
aspect of `stuffing' is that it goes on and on, in many different
forms, and in fact our exchanges are in large measure composed of it,
in larger measure even, perhaps, than they are composed of that which
is not `stuffing.' The `sludge' quality is the heaviness that this
`stuff' has, similar to the heavier motor oils, a kind of downward pull
but still fluid, if you follow me, and I can't help thinking that this
downwardness is valuable, although it's hard to say how, right at the
moment. So, summing up, there is a relation between what I have been
saying and what we're doing here at the plant with these plastic
buffalo humps. Now you're probably familiar with the fact that the
per-capita production of trash in this country is up from 2.75
pounds per day in 1920 to 4.5 pounds per day in 1965, the last year
for which we have figures, and is increasing at the rate of about
four percent per year. Now that rate will probably go up, because it's
been going up, and I hazard that we may very well soon reach a point
where it's 100 percent, right? And there can no longer be any question
of `disposing' of it, because it's all there is, and we will simply
have to learn how to `dig' it--that's slang, but peculiarly
appropriate here. So that's why we're in humps, right now, more really
from a philosophical point of view than because we find them a great
moneymaker. They are `trash,' and what in fact could be more useless
and trashlike? It's that we want to be on the leading edge of this
trash phenomenon, the everted sphere of the future, and that's why
we pay particular attention, too, to those aspects of language that
may be seen as a model of the trash phenomenon. And it's certainly been
a pleasure showing you around the plant this afternoon, and meeting
you, and talking to you about these things, which are really more
important, I believe, than people tend to think. Would you like
a cold Coke from the Coke machine now, before you go?
Ron, do you think you could have your methamphetamine meltdowns on someone else's blog? Thanks.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 16, 2003 at 06:21 PMI think Heinlein had a term for what's currently happening: The Crazy Years. I read some of his older stuff about what happened during The Crazy Years (future history stuff) and I feel right at home. Actually, Heinlein severely underestimated just how asinine things could really get. Not even he could have foreseen Hesiod.
Posted by: David Perron at January 21, 2003 at 12:09 AMwhere can I buy a few of those nipple scarves. We have a surprise birthday coming up for a co-worker and we would like to get a few to wear the night we take her out...would appreciate name of place to order and price..as soon as possible..much thanks!
Posted by: linda venturini at April 9, 2003 at 02:33 PM