Does anybody mind if I pass out?

Willow ,'Beneath You'


Natter 43: I Love My Dead Gay Whale Crosspost.  

Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.


§ ita § - Mar 09, 2006 12:21:02 pm PST #3083 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I am however wearing a dress today, which seems to be confusing a lot of people.

The one dress I wear to work is maroon velvet with no place for pockets. The insouciance must come from the footwear. Or the fact that I'm almost head-to-toe in velvet, I suppose.


Toddson - Mar 09, 2006 12:27:29 pm PST #3084 of 10001
Friends don't let friends read "Atlas Shrugged"

I rather like the pockets, and I imagine it would be nice to have a place to tuck some necessities without having to carry a purse. I think they just have to be careful with the placement and how they end up sticking their hands in them.

I also remember reading - years and years ago - something by, I believe, Samuel R. Delaney in which a woman complained that in having her rank (royal to commoner?) reduced meant she could no longer have pockets in her clothes.


sarameg - Mar 09, 2006 12:35:05 pm PST #3085 of 10001

Just survived the weird focus group/outside review/ whatever meeting.

I think all the issues brought up can be summed tidily as the Management is the problem

Alternatively, Bureaucracy is teh SUCK.

Oh, with a side of Everyone hates the CIO.

It was interesting.


Steph L. - Mar 09, 2006 12:53:15 pm PST #3086 of 10001
I look more rad than Lutheranism

Okay, yes, I stand corrected. You don't not love the pocket, you merely wish to deny women in formalwear their God-given right to look jaunty and insouciant.

I love the pocket! In non-formal wear, in kangaroos, Hot Pockets, Lean Pockets, pocket doors -- the pocket is a beautiful and convenient thing!

But formalwear! It's....*formal*!

It is entirely my intent to flame this into a Buffista battle to stand alongside prescriptivist/descriptionist, Atkins, and the composition of chili.

Bring it, pocket hoor!!!


§ ita § - Mar 09, 2006 12:56:14 pm PST #3087 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

It's not fair to have the kerfuffle without erinaceous.


msbelle - Mar 09, 2006 1:00:42 pm PST #3088 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

in what crazy world does formal exclude pockets?

oh right, noodles in chili.


Atropa - Mar 09, 2006 1:03:11 pm PST #3089 of 10001
The artist formerly associated with cupcakes.

Pockets? What are these pocket things you people are speaking of?

... okay, even though my wardrobe is almost completely devoid of pockets, I think pockets built into the side seams of full skirts (or dresses with full skirts) is a Good Idea. Far more elegant than sticking your lipstick & ID down the front of your corset.


billytea - Mar 09, 2006 1:05:49 pm PST #3090 of 10001
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.

Far more elegant than sticking your lipstick & ID down the front of your corset.

Or affixing it to a headband.


Steph L. - Mar 09, 2006 1:06:03 pm PST #3091 of 10001
I look more rad than Lutheranism

oh right, noodles in chili.

Noodles UNDER chili. The difference is subtle, yet important. Like pockets in formal gowns.


msbelle - Mar 09, 2006 1:08:04 pm PST #3092 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

it's subtley wrong.