That's my big resolution.

Blogging, tweeting, all that stuff.

Aside from getting down to my actual ideal weight.

Which resolution do you suppose will be easier?

We'll see.

Here is a fashion-themed demotivator I made yesterday:

If you aren't familiar with "demotivators" they are parodies of popular motivational posters.

You can see a lot of them at demotivatorsite.com

If you read even just a few fashion news stories on the internet, chances are you'll come across commenters saying things like, "Who cares about these glitzy fake people when there are real issues in the world?"

Aside from how irked I get at the suggestion that anyone on this Earth is not a "real" person, I have to wonder how fashion is any more superficial than say, sports, popular music, or big budget movies?

There are all sorts of supposedly unimportant things that people devote large amounts of attention to. And even people who do pay most of their attention to things like politics or the economy need some form of recreation. Some will choose that recreation to be mostly in fashion, others mostly in sports, and still others are into all of it. And if these forms of recreation are to exist, someone has to do them. If fashion is going to exist, fashion designers, models, photographers, etc, all have to exist. And prominent people in fashion deserve just as much attention as sports stars.

Heh. 3.1 Phillip Lim has this stylish cardigan- I've never seen anything like it before, and can't imagine where they got the style name from. (Rolls eyes)

Yeah, spelling it with K's instead of C's makes it OK, I guess.

SRSLY, dudes, it's fine to be inspired, but must you make it so obvious what you are copying?

I understand that most Americans are getting heavier. And I understand that bigger people need bigger clothes. And I understand stores are stocking more of such sizes. But I wasn't realizing at first that this meant they'd also stock fewer of the smaller sizes.

Fashion Bug, where clothes have often run a bit large to begin with, now has all styles they carry in sizes 6 through 32. This is good news for some, but not for others. Especially since I was just there, and can tell you not much in my local store is stocked in sizes 6-10, and I am now pretty much an 8 there. But another problem for me, is, regardless of size, my shape and small frame is better suited to juniors clothes, and that department is gone. GONE! No juniors at all. Gone. Yeah. Oh, and definitely no kids' clothes.

This time last year, I had to buy some 14's, and this was just too much for me. It can be a good size for plenty of women. But not for someone with basically a child-sized frame. When I was skinny, I wore a lot of children's clothes. Not juniors, but children's. So, the only way I'm used to wearing "size 14" is if it has kittycats and smiley-faces and rainbows on it. And, yeah, some adult clothes are like that, too, but I digress...  I was too heavy, for my own self, I was too heavy. My knees and back were hurting all the time, and the whole bit. I was miserable. And yeah, I admit, I did not like the way I looked AT ALL. It's not cool to admit that anymore, but it's the truth!

So I decided in May I had to lose weight, and have lost about 25 pounds. Which in general makes me happy, until I go to one of my trusted stores, and find almost nothing fits me because it's too big! I feel like I'm a size 2 again, not an 8!

OK, I know the place was never high fashion, but it was decent quality, with at least a few stylish elements, at an affordable price. And no matter how much I want designer clothes, affordability is important! Very important! Being able to build the basics of a wardrobe at a store like this is what allows one to make the occasional splurge on something with a big name attached to it.

And, yes, I know there are other options that still exist- but it is upsetting to see any door close to you, isn't it? I've been experiencing this all over lately with small sized shoes- oh, that is a topic I could go ON and ON about...

Christian V. Siriano black cotton 'Posh' puff sleeve blouse

$590.00 at Bluefly

The most frustrating thing about liking clothes, of course, is that so many pretty things just cost more than you can afford to spend at the moment, at least on just one item.

Now, I really like the blouse, but on the other hand, here are some shoes by the same guy, that I mostly have to go "WTF?"

Especially because, even though I wear heels, these look unusually dangerous to walk in.

Saw these over at

http://projectrungay.blogspot.com/2009/09/christian-siriano-payless-spri...

Jeans with mesh comprising most of the front of the leg. They can be found on Shopbop.

http://www.shopbop.com/sophie-skinny-jeans-siwy/vp/v=1/845524441851875.h...

Maybe they'd look better if they were just a tad longer? I don't know.

I'd be afraid they'd tear easily.

Maybe I shouldn't find this funny, but I do. It's underpants. Panties. An item with a $12 retail price. Only $11 each if you buy three of them. Which I did.

Of course I understand the general importance of the Certificate of Authenticity, and obviously would not make a truly major purchase of designer goods without it, but really, does anyone other than myself care whether or not my underpants are authentic? If I am truthful, I must admit it is likely no one else will see them, anyway. At least not on me.

But because they really are cute, here they are by themselves.

You can get them at Barenecessities.com if you like them.

I have to write about this again, now!
Thanks this time go out to Lesley M.M. Blume. She apparently thinks Karl Lagerfeld finds her, personally, ugly for being a feminist, possibly due to a humor deficiency.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lesley-m-m-blume/karl-lagerfeld-called-me_...

First of all, I have to say, titling her post "Karl Lagerfeld called me 'ugly'" is nothing short of sensationalism. And self-important.
She's referring to that article in Harper's Bazaar where Mr. Lagerfeld "channelled" Coco Chanel.  http://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/fashion-articles/coco-chanel-karl-l...
In said article, Mr. Lagerfeld answers a number of interview questions while pretending to be Coco Chanel. He mentions nothing about Ms. Blume. (It is even possible that he may not know who she is. I wonder if Claudia Schiffer does? How big is she in France? ** )
It is obvious from the get-go that the proceedings are not to be taken very seriously. I am not fanatical enough to have read everything there is to read about Karl Lagerfeld, but I have read enough that, if he were known to be a psychic medium, I would likely have run across it. I have not. Thus, I conclude- the entire piece is humor, and dare I say even a gimmick, as it is done in anticipation of the release of "Coco Avant Chanel", the movie about Ms. Chanel's life before she made it big.

The only Q&A she quotes from the article is,
" ' Harper's Bazaar:  Your clothing liberated women in the 1920s. Are you still a feminist?
Lagerfeld-as-Chanel: I was never a feminist because I was never ugly enough for that.' "

Then she immediately starts in with the familiar aggrieved feminist shtick, "This quip rankled me on many levels: as a woman, as a fashion consumer, as a writer for both adult and young women. It is a spiteful, irrelevant observation: one's appearance has nothing to do with one's relationship to feminism." This is standard outraged victim stuff. Oh, this terrible man victimized her, and all women, so let's get angry. Let's point our fingers at the male oppressor!

Never mind that it is a common joke that feminists are ugly (and angry). A joke told by as many women as men, I'd say.
Never mind that this man is at least 70 years old, and originally from Germany, which also has to be taken in context.
I don't expect a 70+ German man to have the same definition and understanding of feminism as I do. Why would she?

And more importantly, she ignores other parts of the exchange, which make it obviously humor, like,
"Harper's Bazaar: What's the new Chanel classic?
Coco Chanel: As apparently my old jacket is still around, done by this idiot Karl, I have to help him find a new idea."
Now, did you catch that? Karl Lagerfeld called himself an idiot! We obviously need to help him with this self-esteem problem! Oh, I'm feeling so Emo now, imagining him crying alone at night... What? It's a joke? Wow. Who could ever guess?
Maybe because we also have this:
"Harper'sBazaar: Do you still smoke and tan?
Coco Chanel: I am afraid yes, because the attitude of smoking looked great on me, as did a tan."
This is a funny line, and it's fairly clear Karl does not mean this for himself, for though he often looks tanned, it is relatively well-known that he does not smoke- or drink alcohol, for that matter.
Anyway, I think you get my point. This is clearly not Karl as Karl, therefore he did not really say any of these things.

Now here's why I'm writing on this topic again: To Ms. Blume's blog entry about this on Huffington Post I commented, "Ms. Blume, do you mind if I call you humorless?"
She responded fairly quickly, "Hmmm. You could but it wouldn't be true."
Then I said, "Sometimes the truth is what we know it to be, sometimes the truth is what we decide it to be."
This second comment passed moderation at first, then in another couple minutes when I refreshed to see if anyone said anything else, was gone. That kind of irked me.
If it hadn't passed moderation in the first place, I'd just say, Oh well.
But when it goes up and then comes down, I start wondering why.
I realize it could be a computer glitch. Which would make it petty of me to respond to being censored, if I really wasn't.
But her victim attitude about this humorous fluff piece still irks me, whether I was truly censored or not. So I write.

It's funny. I have a history of being made fun of, called a freak. In the past, I have even been told I should be shot, for being a witch. I am the very type of person one would expect to take this "ugly" thing personally- yet I did not. My first thought, instead, was, "Oh great. Someone is going to take this out of context and make an issue of it." I was, of course, correct. Even though I have no social life, and tend to isolate myself, I somehow know far more about people than one would think. Maybe it is because I had to learn a lot to survive? I have definitely had to observe and study people.

Obviously Ms. Blume is known and has credentials, while I am unknown and have none, but I still feel entitled to write this criticism. Goodness knows, that's what the internet seems to be for.

But I'm definitely going to follow her on Twitter now. That's how my sense of humor works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



** This is meant to be a joke referencing something Karl Lagerfeld said about Heidi Klum- that he hadn't heard of her, nor had Claudia Schiffer, and she was never big in France.

Anna Wintour was quite nice and pleasant on David Letterman. Even the way she criticized his socks was in a humorous way, rather than a bitchy one. She was classy. She was also funny. I liked her. But I've liked her on 60 Minutes, and in interviews I've read too.
I'm sure if I were working for her, I would not be so happy about it, but I'm not a person who enjoys working for others to begin with. I don't even like working for a nice person. I'd rather be my own boss. I am sure that she isn't warm and fuzzy, but she can't be as bad as her fictional counterpart.
Anyway, I honestly think her reputation for being a bitch is totally sexist. A man in business is absolutely expected to be ruthless, and even downright mean to the competition. But this is the double standard women as bosses face in general.

Naturally she was there to promote both the documentary "the September Issue" and Fashion's Night Out.
I really wish I could get to NYC for this.

Some people say she has been bad for American Vogue, because it is not as creative as French Vogue, etc. And it is true that French Vogue, and Carine Roitfield is better. But you can't always have everything. American Vogue may not be as innovative as the European editions, and I know there are way too many ads in it, but I still like to look at it. And getting the European versions here in the States is too expensive. Sometimes you have to look at the Vogue you have, not the Vogue you wish you had!

Anyway, it's better than some of the other lady mags out there.