Conference turris::womannotes-v3

Kath... everyone in the immediate area is wondering what *IS* she failing to
smother her laughter about!??!!!?!?!

an additional item:

the fun of wearing a miniskirt to high school in winter, when it's 8degF.

    Thank you Thank you Thank you!  My eyes are all blurry now from trying
    not to hoot out loud1  I mean, really, how *do* you explain to (male)
    people that you are in convulsions because of a tampon?!
    
    
    
    (*8
    
    
    E Grace

    Lite?
    
    m.
    

    
    	re: Kath
    
    	I just had one of my engineers come in and say "you're laughing,
    	can I read it?"   I told him no....
    
    	Thank you very much for posting that!  Even if my sides do hurt!
    
    	JJ
    

    
    
    Well, I'm glad people got a laugh out of it (believe me, it was
    well-worth the time to type it in, I was laughing so hard).
    
    Given the current situation in our building, this article couldn't have
    been written at a better time.
    
    I sent it to a few women in the building and they were all dying with
    laughter.  
    
    ;-)
    
    kath

    Hmm,
    
    I guess I just don't have a sense of humor today.
    
    I mean I know there can be a lot of humor in the things that happen
    *to* us; I mean, I died laughing while I was writing my research
    paper on the Dalkon Shield.  
    
    I'd better go find some glass to chew.
    
    M.
    

    Kath,
    
    That was great.  Keep them comming.  ;-)
    
    Allison

    Maia,

    You aren't the only one. Sometimes I think all this stockings, heels
    and stuff is a trap. So women will keep worrying about them and never
    get to the more serious stuff.

    manisha 
    feeling unusually cynical today

    
    - .1
    
    Spike heels in particular - a real scream!
    
    D.

    Oh, let's not forget the hilarity of being at a fancy restaurant
    and suddenly finding out that your milk has come down and is
    now all over your blouse.  That one was a lot of fun.
    
    M.
    
    
    

    What???? No mention of the bra strap slipping down your shoulder and
    then you can't find a descreet time and place to reach inside your
    blouse to pull it up and then the other strap falls down.
    
    Or my favorite, when you start to sweat and that little trickle starts
    to run down right between your breasts and drives you crazy because you
    want to wipe it, but don't want be seen in public playing with your
    breasts.
    
    Mary

    -d
    
    for that you get your hands slapped!
    
    bj

    
    Maybe .17 is supposed to be an example of one of the indignities of
    being a woman -- having your indignities (and other experiences, for
    that matter) defined for you -- and suffering the resulting anger if
    you don't accept the definition?
    
    Nah, that would be too serious for a "lite" topic.
    
    Justine

    
    
    -d (.19)
    
    The whole point about "indignities" is that they hurt us and bother us. 
    It's something that we might laugh about later in life, but that
    laughter is almost always made with a slight hesitation in it.
    
    You could be joking, but it's like teasing someone in a spot that's
    sore to them.  You should expect to be suitably chastised for it.  And
    you should expect that the object of your tease probably won't find
    it that funny.
    
    While this is a "lite" topic, it's also a touchy one.  Women don't need
    to be made to feel any more vulnerable to these things than they
    already are.  Especially when they are, by default, very personal in
    nature.
    
    kath

    Leaving the rest room with the hem of your skirt tucked into the
    waistband of your pantyhose in back.  Happened to a friend of mine.

Having a bladder the size of a walnut and having to met continual trips to
the "Ladies Room" while all the men are snickering because you went just
10 minutes ago...

D!

    re .19 -d, as a man who participates in this conference, I almost see
    this particular topic as an FWO string. Yes it is LITE, but even though
    I may get a chuckle out of it and may see the satire and biting wit in
    it, I really shouldn't try to add to it. The title is The Indignities
    of Being a Woman. I'm not a woman and cannot suffer those indignities. 
    While I may comiserate with them (the women) and do my darndest to
    prevent them (the indignities) from happening, I just can't really know
    what it's lke to go through. I may understand (or try to) but I can't
    really know. Therefor, I shouldn't try to add to list. This in itself,
    I feel, is an indignity that shouldn't be heaped upon anyone. 
    
    -d, I'm not angry with you or shouting. THis is, as usual, JMHO. I may
    be wrong. I'm just disagreeing with you. I hope that is OK as I've read
    a lot of intelligent, well thought out notes by you and respect your
    oppinion.
    
    Phil

-d, I didn't get mad.  I think what -d wrote may have inadvertently pushed some
hot buttons but I don't think it was out of line, in this topic.  The folks who
objected, well they surprised me by doing so.  Now, I have left scars on a man
who quite without invitation took such a liberty as was described, but in my
perception what -d said was in jest, in line with the lite tone of what had gone
before.

    > Having a bladder the size of a walnut
    
    You think that's bad. 
    What about having a bladder the size of a pea?  :-) :-) :-)
    
    Mary

    > While this is a "lite" topic, it's also a touchy one.
                                                ^^^^^^
    Good choice of words, Kath :-)
    
    I guess I missed the offending replys,  Rats!!!!
    
    Mary (who rarely takes life too seriously)

    I have a warped sense of humor and I loved it!
    
    Although I must admit to liking stockings, but hating pantyhose!
    
    
                                L.J.

    
    This stuff is hilarious.
    I guess I am the rebellious kind. I learn to say no to
       - any kinds of nylons (except for once or twice a year ocassions)
       - high heels
       - any "disgusting" forms of contraception
       - slips 
       - any kind of clothing that is made for birds...
    I hope some day I can feel myself of bras, tampons and pads...
    I wonder who invented all these "not very sensible" things in the
    first place.
    
    
    
    
    Eva

    I'm with you, Eva!
    
    I'll admit to wearing panythose, and the absurd shoes that go with
    them, on the once-or-twice-a-year occasions when protocol requires
    them.  Same goes for uncomfortable underwear (for example, the
    girdle!).  I thought that article was hilarious!  However, so many
    people around here were out sick yesterday that there wasn't anyone
    around at lunch time to wonder why I was rolling on the floor in my
    cube...(and today I have a sore throat myself - this place is
    plague-ridden!).
    
    /Charlotte

    
    
    
    
    Actually, you know I LOVE wearing hose (especially stockings with
    garters).  And I love the way high heels make my feet/legs look--OH so
    sleek.  And I LOVE lace stockings of any kind.....and skirts,
    especially straight ones that fall right above the knee.....
    
    Ohhhh!  I LOVE the feel of all this, but I also HATE it all at the same
    time.  Is that allowable?  ;-)
    
    kath

    yes, kath, *I* think it is.  Of course, judging by recent comments in
    this string, I'm definately PI, so my opinion may not mean anything.
    
    
    E Grace

Kath, of COURSE it's all right.  The whole point of considering women's issues
at all is to widen our range of choices.  We don't do that by declaring some
things that were within the range that we were restricted to Evil, Politically
Incorrect, or Reactionary.  And also, quoting PietHein here:

	It isn't enough to exasperate others
	You have to remember to gladden yourself!

Sara

     re.31
    
    Of course, it's ok. I like the looks of the stocking and high heels
    but I can't seem to squeeze the lower half of my body comfortably
    into them ;-) 
    Actually, I think wearing the high heels and nylons
    restrict my movement/freedom quite a bit. I mean, in heels, I really
    have to watch where I'm going ;-) and what I'm doing. I really have
    to be ladylike in such shoes else I'll pay in injuries...
    For some reasons, my nylons seem to last only one or two wears, 
    it's ridiculous.
    I also have sweatty feet, so nylons don't do too good for me
    unless they make them with terry cloth soles :-)
    Wonder why they haven't perfected cotton pantyhose yet...My mother
    used to wear silk stockings, I wonder if they work any better...
    Maybe someday I'll design top quality comfortable lingerie....
    there is definitely a big market out there...
    
    
    
    Eva

    There are as far as I can tell only two excuses for stiletto heels,
    neother of which has anything to do with trying to walk anywhere in
    them:
    
    1) They make you taller (I'm nearly 6' already).  I love Rita's rmark
    about "vertically challenged"!!  (Rita, do you wear 4" heels??)
    
    2) They make your ankles and legs look sexy by tilting your ankle to a
    graceful, if awkward, angle.
    
    Even when I *have* to wear stockings, I wear flats or the shortest
    heels I can find in my size with arch supports (but they still hurt my
    feet in a short while).  I got married in white folk-dancing shoes -
    sort of like square-dancing shoes but in white, laced with a silk
    ribbon - you can DANCE in those, never mind walk in them.
    
    I wear "nursing shoes" to work - I walk to work, so there's no way I
    would wear spike heels; I'd never make it across the parking lot in
    them, let alone to my place.
    
    /Charlotte

the last time I wore heels more than a half-inch high, I paid twice as much for
the shoes than for the dress I had on.  About 2/3 through the evening, the heel
broke completely off the left shoe.  Try walking on only ONE 4" heel!

My husband is a foot taller than I am.  When we got married, I risked my life in
heels so we would look a bit less like Mutt and Jeff.  You shoulda seen us try
to dance, it was too funny! (It didn't help that we'd never danced together
before that.)

High heels are thought to look nice, but if you wear them too much you can lose
your Achilles tendons.  And I wobble, too.

    I generally wear heels a work...i just so use to them I've always worn
    them and I am very comfortable in heels...I hate nylons...it will be
    great when spring and summer come so I don't have to wear anything on
    my legs.....
    
    When I was younger and did a lot of dancing I also wore heels and it
    was easy and I never had a problem...not sure at this age if I wouldn't
    fall flat on my face...
    
    denise

    
     My ex always said that Jockey for women were the best fitting
    underware she had ever worn.
    

jockey underwear: the best!  Hanes for Her is pretty good, too.

re:heels. I have seen a lot of reference to "four-inch heels" in this 
notes file, usually from men.  Okay people, open that desk drawer and pull
out a ruler. Yup, that's right.  Now look at exactly how long *4 inches*
is.  (for those without a ruler, take a standard size piece of paper, and
imagine the short side folded in half.  That's 4 inches.) Now imagine a heel 
that big.  that's a PRETTY BIG HEEL.

Most high-heeled shoes that women wear to work and other "practical places"
are more on the order of 1-2 inches.  Even those amazing high heels that
some women dress up (totter around) in are usually no more than 3 inches high.
4 inch heels are those kind of heels that women in porno mags wear, the kind
that make you stand on the very, very, very tippy-toes, because the heel is
practically as long as your foot!

D!

    
    
    Silk Stockings vs Nylons
    
    
    Silk is a natural fiber, it allows the skin to breathe.  Which means
    that it doesn't cause the body to sweat as much (unless, of course,
    you're Carla! ;-) ).....  
    
    Of course, you have to be able to AFFORD to buy silk stockings all the
    time.  
    
    <sigh>
    
    
    Did you know that they developed RUNLESS panty hose YEARS ago and
    decided never to market them because they wouldn't "make money" from
    it?
    
    kath

     re. 40
    
    About the runless pantyhose - geez, it makes me mad...
    So, they want women to be "suckers"? Well, they lost my business.
    Believe it or not, if I don't have to deal with the frustration
    of runs, I might even wear them more often and thus spend more
    money on them (buy different colors and different patterns, etc).
    I don't understand these manufacturer's mentality. I mean, they could
    sell these runless nylons for a lot more and make up for less
    business...
    
    
    Eva

        re .39, -< 4 inch heels?  not *really*! >-
        
>> re:heels. I have seen a lot of reference to "four-inch heels" in this 
>> notes file, usually from men.  Okay people, open that desk drawer and pull
>> out a ruler.
        
        Who are you going to believe, the men or the ruler? :-)
        
        Dan

    There *is* a company that sells runless pantyhose.  They are available
    as a mail-order item.
    
    E Grace

    
    	The Fredericks of Hollywood catalog carries shoes with 5" heels.
    		
    	For some reason the punchline "This is 6 inches" keeps running
    	through my head.
    
    						clb
    

    re. 4-inch heels
    
    
    My standard business pumps are the 9-West Mara [1.5"] and Christen
    [2.25"].  These are not high.
    
    I have a relatively short foot [size 5-1/2, 7.5" long], and I am able
    to navigate just fine in some of my "statement making" shoes with heels
    of up to 4" -- really -- although they aren't recommended for rock
    climbing or wet squishy lawns.  For reasons having nothing to do with
    height I wouldn't wear these shoes around anywone who could possibly
    have an effect upon my career at Digital.
    
    I have not point of reference as to porn mags.  Somehow, I've never
    found myself looking at the shoes ...
    
    re. run-less nylons
    
    Unless this product has been improved considerably, they are a bum
    deal.
    
    They don't run, but they do get holes.  Wicked, mean, cutting holes
    that leave body parts that might swell out from them desparately in
    need of amputation ... or serious drugs.
    
    They are expensive and don't breath so well either.
    
      Annie

    comes from using males as ruler-figures

    Silk stockings really aren't that expensive...only about $10
    a pair, but I've found them to be more durable than whatever it
    is they make the other ones out of.
    
    And they do make all the difference in the world...the feel better,
    breathe better and look better.
    
    Try 'em, you'll like 'em.
    
    
    
    
                                  L.J.

>             <<< Note 750.39 by TLE::DBANG::carroll >>>
 
>       -< 4 inch heels?  not *really*! >-


	Yes !  Really !


>Most high-heeled shoes that women wear to work and other "practical places"
>are more on the order of 1-2 inches.  Even those amazing high heels that

	I beg to differ with you. The high_heeled shoes that I wear to	
	work are 3 inches.

>some women dress up (totter around) in are usually no more than 3 inches high.
	
	I don't *totter* !


>4 inch heels are those kind of heels that women in porno mags wear, the kind

	This is an offensive statement to women who DO wear 4 inch
	heels.

	
	kits

    
    re. 47
    
    Where do you find silk stockings and what brand do you prefer? 
    Good nylon ones cost about $6 so $10 is not too bad. 
    Do they make silk pantyhose? I don't like the idea of wearing 
    so many layers (panties, garter, slip and then the dress).
    
    Eva

    
    RE heels
    
    My feelings towards wearing high-heeled shoes has been a direct
    reflection of my feelings towards myself and my own freedom.
    
    At first, I just wore them. I screwed up my back, warped the shape
    of my feet, and hurt myself with them but it never occurred to me
    to question wearing them. They were simply "the right thing" to
    wear for business, and often for leisure ("to look nice for my
    date"). 
    
    Then my views changed. I learned a lot, started to question, 
    dared to admit that wearing heels hurt me, and I realised that
    some womyn said NO to this pain.
    At this point I actually had a man that I was dating say that
    the fact that I no longer wore heels "for him" in my leisure
    time made him feel devalued. I was very surprised - and thought
    about it all the more. I was down to 1.5" heels for work by then,
    and flats out of work most of the time.
    
    Then I got radical. I came to the US - met womyn who don't even
    own heeled shoes, and listened to their views. I went into flat
    shoes then, and I have not worn heels regularly since.
    I admitted that they hurt me, and I owned my own freedom to
    stride out with both my feet firmly on the ground. It felt great.
    Still does.
    
    'gail
    
    

    re:.35: "    2) They make your ankles and legs look sexy by tilting
    your ankle to a graceful, if awkward, angle."
    
    I think part of the sexy look is because in order to walk in them
    the calf muscle tightens up into a little knot and cannot sag.
    
    Yes it looks nice, but I don't think it's a criterion for getting
    to know someone.
    
    ed

kits, 

I admire women who do not totter in heels!  It's not a skill I am motivated
enough to practice, but it is one I wonder at.  It must require a poised
balance I just don't know how to do. *I* both teeter and totter in heels!

For me, barefoot is best, and is what I like best.  I have a pair of slip-on 
mocs that are the next best thing; sadly, they have a hole in the toe!

Sara

   >> -< Ginger did everything Fred did, but backwards in heels! >-
    
    	Not only backwards.
    	Part of dance training (ballroom and latin american) is learning to
    	move forward and backward using the heel. Easy enough for us guys,
    	somewhat less easy for our dance partners.
    	The funny thing is though, that some women have a perfect movement
    	when dancing on high heels but can hardly *walk* on them.
    
    	Charles

    'gail,
    
    I had a similar experience with heels, I just wore them because that's
    what women wore.  I never questioned it, but they did hurt.  I used to
    get cramps in my toes every evening after taking them off.
    
    Then I started dating a guy and when I complained to him about how much
    they hurt, he asked me "then why do you wear them?"  It made a lot of
    sense.  I got some comfortable shoes and started wearing pants to work.
    And I married the guy :-)
    
    Mary

    me too! I'm vertically challenged (I just love that phrase ;-) and can
    do with extra height. So I bought one inch heels. But even that made my
    feet ache every night. I used them for over a year hoping to get used
    to them. Never worked. After that I gave up.
    
    Comfort is more important than looking good.
    manisha

    
    The dancing shoes with heels that Capezio makes are extremely
    comfortable, if you feel as though you must wear heels.  The ones 
    I saw (don't know if they have any other styles) look like Mary-Janes 
    with a somewhat chunky heel, and they're not "fashionable", but if I 
    felt I had to wear heels, that's what I'd wear.
    
    The last time I wore "4 inch heels" I fell down a flight of stairs.
    Didn't break anything but I had some technicolor bruises all along one
    side of the leg that took the weight.  It's flats for me, now.
    
    My mother, a spike-heel wearer for most of her adult life, now has
    deformed feet.  She has bunions that make shoe fitting very difficult.
    It also took her a very long time (on the order of years) before she
    could wear low or flat shoes.  She had to gradually decrease the heel 
    height (I guess to gradually stretch the Achilles tendon).
    
    CQ

    
    Re: last few
    
    Reading these tales of self-inflicted pain, injury and deformation
    reminds me acutely of foot-binding.....
    
    Mary - I love the fact that your mate turned you off wearing heels
    (or, rather, turned you on to your own comfort) whereas mine tried to 
    keep me in mine. Maybe that's why you married yours and I left mine! :-)
                                                                        
    'gail

	I can't quite understand the pain in wearing high
	heeled shoes. I'm in my forties, and have been
	wearing them for many years. I have no problem
	switching from 4 inch heels to flat shoes or
	sneakers from day to day, depending on what
	my activities are. 

	I've just recovered from a torn muscle in my
	calf from a fall on the ice three months ago.
	I was able to put on a pair of heels and walk
	in them just and easily and comfortably as flat
	shoes.

	My feet are healthy and not deformed. 

	kits

    I only wear heels as part of a costume, mostly at SF cons, or if I have
    to wear a skirt or dress for some evening gala or "do".  Or if I have
    to wear my "business suit".  If lower heels or flats'll do I'll wear
    them.  Higher heels I consider "special effects" and my dwell time in
    them is reduced to 2 hours (less if I have to dance or climb stairs).
    
    Not only do HIGH heels tighten the calf and elongate the leg, they
    cantilever the pelvis forward and cause a sway to the step.  
    
    Likewise I only wear hose if I wear a skirt/dress which is just
    below the knee or higher.  
    
    jeans'n'reeboks'forever
    
    -Jody

I am driven to object to .61.  I am offended by such a flippant
response to rape and beating.  Women (and very rarely, men) are subjected to
the degradation of rape; I don't see rape as one of the LITE: indignities of
being a woman.  And I don't see humor in making a joke of beatings.  These
statements, even if made in a sardonic tone, echo too closely of the "lie back
and enjoy it", "she asked for it" school of thought.

Sara

    I think .61 was intended to be thought provoking, in light of all the
    previously light-hearted difficulties of being a woman, I think Dorian
    was trying to remind us that being a woman is "inconvenient" in how we
    are treated, or mistreated, as women....
    
    forgive me if I misinterpreted, but I do not believe Dorian would make
    light of abuse.
    
    -Jody
    

    re.61
    
    Dorian,
    
    That hurt like hell.  No doubt it was supposed to do so.
    [no, I do not believe that it was personally directed]
    
    It felt like you were trivialising and ridiculing _me_.
    
    In point of fact, no one castigated me for my messy hair, my torn
    clothing, or my ugly bruises and scratches.  
    
      Annie

    .62
    
    That's the whole point...indignities of women, to women, about women
    are not LITE.  This string is insulting to us.
    
    M.
    

maybe my sensitivities are just not heightened enough.  I see a difference in
LITEness between
	"eeewww, don't you just hate itchy slips"
and
	"oh, I'm being raped, I'll have to visit the beauty parlor again"
Sara

    When I read it, I could not help but think of the woman who was
    arrested for indecent exposure when she went to the police department
    to file her rape complaint.  It seems her clothes weren't appropriately
    arraged.
    
    It made me think sick, and sad- with a mix of shame and anger thrown
    in.  Not exactly LITE:  But then...I am new to this conference. 
    Maybe they do things differently here.
    
    Cindi :~ <

I'm sorry I offended anybody, I honestly didn't mean to. I should have at 
least put <set sarcasm on>. To me, the phrase "indignities of being a 
woman" goes to the very core of woman's oppression. To a great extent I see
women as having had their dignity systematically taken away from them by
various patr. institutions over the past several thousand years. So I have
a hard time taking this topic in a 'lite' vein. I certainly wasn't making
'lite' of rape and battering. On the contrary, I was trying to suggest that
I see these as a more extreme form of the same indignity -- or more
accurately, the same lack of acknowledgment of the dignity of women -- that
is manifested in much milder form in the clothing, cosmetics, etc. that we
as women are pressured by the media, e.g. into wearing but that many agree
are silly or uncomfortable or hazardous to our health or whatever. 

I chose an extreme example to try to make a point. But to me the "indignity of
being a woman" is a spectrum, with a heavy end as well as a lite one. My 
fear is that if we laughingly accept compromising our dignity in lite ways, 
we'll have to do the same in heavy ways.

Dorian                               

>    Not only do HIGH heels tighten the calf and elongate the leg, they
>    cantilever the pelvis forward and cause a sway to the step.  

	Which in turn puts more pressure on the lower back.



	-Andy

<set heavy sarcasm on>

How about when you're being raped, and your hair gets all messy, and you 
can't fix it 'cause your hands are tied? Or how about after you've been
battered, those ugly bruises show up? A girl could die of shame. 

<back to lite>

D.

    I think there's a place in this conference to talk about your slip
    creeping up due to static and also a place to talk about abuse.  This
    note is for the former, not the latter.
    
    imho,
    Marge

    Dorian,
    
    Despite the the form (for me it was splash, click, and ouch) keep 
    .61 in it wasn't a lite subject, but it was presented lite.  There
    are more.
    
    My variation of indignities:
    
    	After about 30 minutes of presentation about product behavour
    	during the last four years I was applauded for my hypothesis
    	by my boss.  I was presenting facts!  (The click was deafening!)
    
    Allison

    
    
    RE: .61
    
    indignity (n):   Something that offends one's pride or sense of
    	dignity; affront.
    
    
    
    There IS a difference here.  This note addresses those things that we
    do to OURSELVES (maybe because society tells us it's something we
    "ought" to do, maybe not) which wound our pride/sense of dignity.
    
    This note does NOT address circumstances that are beyond our control,
    those situations where we are brutally forced/beaten/abused/mistreated
    physically.  
    
    I can CHOOSE to wear high heels or pantyhose, I can CHOOSE to use
    tampons instead of pads, I can CHOOSE to shave or wear a bra or use
    underarm deodorant.....
    
    ......however, I had NO choice when I was raped.
    
    
    
    kathy

    But sometimes you CAN'T choose what to wear.  I've been in jobs where I
    *had* to wear a skirt and heels, which meant I *had* to wear pantyhose. 
    I was uncomfortable.  I felt disempowered by being forced to do these
    things, rather than being allowed to choose.  It would have been my
    choice not to do these things at that time - and the fact that I had to
    offended my sense of dignity, and was an affront.
    
    I am sorry the brining up of other "indignities" is greatly offensive
    to you, but I can see how it fits in here to some degree.
    
    -Jody
    

    
    
    
    It's not really the same, though, Jody.  Yes, you DO have the choice of
    not working in that job if you don't want to wear pantyhose.
    
    And the fact that you DO wear them, might be an inconvenience, but's
    not to a life-threatening ultimate violation of your body like rape is.
    
    
    Rape is NOT an "indignity"......  it's a complete and utter violation
    of your inner sanctity/self.   It's a physical, mental and emotional
    violation.......................................................
    
    
    When I typed this article in, my intent was (and I think it was also
    the intent of the article) to highlight those things that we DO choose
    to do as women, but that BOTHER us.
    
    I'm sure that men would claim wearing jock-straps as an indignity of a
    man.......but it's something they must choose to do or accept the
    alternatives.  I can't "accept" alternatives when I'm raped....there
    are no ALTERNATE CHOICES.
    
    None.
    
    kathy

    If you want to talk indignities, back in the early 70's, I worked in
    garages. All of the local auto parts delivery stores had started hiring
    women as delivery persons. One of the stores' managers told this one
    poor woman that if she came into work wearing a bra she would be fired.
    This was what she told me.  She complied like it was no big deal. I
    thought that even saying such a thing in jest was horrendous.
    
    I don't know what happened. I got out of auto repair before she stopped
    working there. 
    
    I know it's not LITE, and I know it's not as horrendous as the rapes
    some of the women here have been forced into. It is still horrendous. 
    
    Maybe we should take the LITE out of the title or put in something
    about LITE or UNLITE.
    
    Phil

    
    I guess I'm a misfit in the grand scheme of life.  
    
    I see crotch sag in pantyhose as being a pain-in-the-butt type of thing
    that comes from wearing pantyhose.  You take the pantyhose off when you
    get home.  The problem goes away and you live your life as usual.
    
    I see rape/abuse as being a life shattering experience that one does
    not ask for.  You can never take the rape off when you get home.  It
    stays with you for the rest of your life and it becomes virtually
    impossible to live your life the way you did before the incident.
    
    I would not draw a line connecting crotch sag with rape.  I can't
    identify.  I don't feel restricted in life because of crotch sag.
    
    Lisa

    Somewhere in the back of my mind is this thought that I'm not feminine
    enough. Periodically, I would do things that might make me more
    feminine. I did not realise then why I was doing them. I thought I was
    doing them because I like to or because I wanted to look good. I
    certainly did not think I was doing them to fit a certain role.

    First, it was the sandals with heels. Lasted for about a year. Then it
    was plucking my eye-brows. I have very bushy eyebrows and a number of
    women/girls had mentioned how much better I would look if I plucked
    them. I was seventeen, didn't know any better. That lasted for about 2
    months. I did not have the patience for it. I wore feminine clothes,
    jewelry and long hair. And I shaved my legs whenever I was going to
    wear skirt/dress.
    
    These days I just tell myself firmly that I am a female. So whatever I
    do is by definition feminine. It works more often than not. I do like
    dresses and jewelry and long hair. But I also have to admit that there
    is an element of living upto expectations in it.
    
    One summer I worked part-time with a school-owned catering business.
    That was the only time I wore pantyhose regularly. I hated it. My skin
    feels very raw and exposed when I shave. And the nylon against the skin
    just made it worse. But I badly needed the money. Being a foreign
    student, I had to work on campus. There were very few summer-jobs. I
    did not feel like I had a choice. Sure I could have left my studies and
    gone home. That does not feel like a choice to me.
    
    manisha

>>4 inch heels are those kind of heels that women in porno mags wear, the kind
>
>	This is an offensive statement to women who DO wear 4 inch
>	heels.

Why???

I can't imagine, but lemme guess.  some thoughts.

- You think women in porno mags *don't* wear 4-inch heels.  Well, if you
  can bring me evidence, I'll be glad to look. However I have read quite a
  bit of porno in my time, and I'll tell you that the models are almost always
  wearing very high (about 4 inch) heels.

- You think the fact that you wear four inch heels and porno stars wear 4
  inch heels makes you a porno star.  answer 1: do I need to demonstrate
  the logical fallacy here.  answer 2: well, are you a porno star?  if not,   
  then you've disproven that theory anyway.

- You think that there is something wrong with porno stars and think that
  I shouldn't have told everyone in here that they wear 4-inch heels because
  they might think that you are a porno star.  Answer 1: see answer 1 above.
  answer 2: what's wrong with porno stars?  They are people too. 

D! who would *love* to be able to wear 4-inch heels on occasion (but can't,
   due to bad feet and back) and would also love to look like a porno star
   (but can't, due to about 30 extra pounds an a body like a Mack truck.)

>I am a female. So whatever I do is by definition feminine

Actually this should have gone in "quotable women".

D!

    re.61 [redux/re-edit]
    
    It still doesn't work for me.  I honestly believed that you _were_
    being sarcastic, even before you said so and hence re-edited. 
    Certainly, I didn't mean to request removal or re-phrasing or any
    action on your part.  I was not offended, either.  I merely felt like
    someone had thrown a bucket of fresh blood in my face.  Different
    feeling all together [and obviously one that I shall be working on].
    
    Somehow the silliness of being a bit mussed and the reality of rape
    are things I cannot reconcile.
    
    A good deal of what was presented in the article <clicked> for me. 
    Certainly, putting my feet up in the stirrups and avoiding looking at a
    speculum is an indignity that I've experienced.  This is one that I
    can't feel was visited upon me by expectations beyond my own -- I
    expect that I will keep going in the interests of my health.  Not
    having a tampon when my system gets out of sync is not diginified
    either -- even less dignified is the corrosive effect of menstrual
    blood if allowed to dry and chafe at these times.  Indeed, I _could_
    choose to have all menstruation-associated plumbing removed and resort
    to hormone therapy; but I don't believe that I will.
    
    Much has been made of the visitations of expectations.  But I believe
    that this can be overdone.  An awareness of where my programming is
    coming from is _vastly_ important to me; however, I do not choose to
    give up the things that please me like silk next to my skin and shoes
    in pretty colours and full skirts that do not impede my movement or
    rip up my thighs like jeans or the sensation of soft hair against my
    back -- simply because there is some goal congruence.  And I can't see
    embracing that which is not pleasing to me based upon some new ideology
    or order.  That would accomplish nothing more than placing myself under
    obedience to a _different_ tyranny.
    
    I applaud and commend women who choose to live and act in a fashion
    that is consistent with their comfort, their goals, and their idiom. I
    demand the same courtesy.
    
      Annie
    

    reading articles like .0 always brings up that conflict: they're funny,
    yet they are reminders of inequality.
    
    it's like enjoying beer and diet soda commercials: *i* find the women
    enormously attractive and like to lech after them - and at the same
    time, i'm repulsed by the use of women's bodies to sell beer to men, or
    the social tyranny forcing women to diet.
    
    re dress: adopting male dress is no better than wearing female dress. 
    i've done it.  but who wants to exchange one uniform for another?  do
    YOU want to have to wear a tie to work every day?  how about the dry
    cleaning bills for those $X00 suits?  or having the shirts cleaned,
    ironed, and starched?
    
    uniforms suck.  if you are lucky enough to choose, you choose among the
    jobs with the least objectionable uniforms.  that's one of many reasons
    i'm an engineer instead of using my education as a technical
    head-hunter who would have to don the corporate uniform.
    
    but i enjoy mini dresses, heels, stockings, and even makeup.  so i wear
    them on occasion.  i dress up for dates - with men or women, friend or
    romantic.  that doesn't take away my feminazi liscence.
    
    lee t

    
                                        
    	re: .61 (Dorian)                                         
    
    	You expressed my first reaction to this topic after reading 
    	several of the replies.  The word "indignity" is reminiscent
    	of the legal precedents stating a woman must defend her honor
        and dignity with utmost resistance for a rape to have occurred.
    
        And hasn't the word "dignity" always been associated with 
    	virginal ladylike 'dignified' qualities?
    
    	I think the basic difference between those of us who don't see
    	this as a LITE topic and those who insist we grin and bear it
        and find humor in it is:  
    
    	Some see the "indignities" as being on a continuum like this:
    
    	[---+------------    ...           -----------------+---]
         the probs assoc                         being less able to resist
         with wearing heels                      assault because of heels
    
    
    	And it bothers me that I can't recall what was said to me 
        in the hospital about my appearance by a police officer...
    
    	Maybe I'll have a nightmare about it tonight and remember. 
     
    						nancy b.
    

    
    RE .81
    
    Good points, Lee.
    
    It is always easier to follow something (dress codes, lifestyle,
    anything!) than to be true to your Self and forge a unique path....
    
    'gail
    

"Bloomers:

"Nineteenth-century pantsuit, designed by Elizabeth Smith Miller. Loose 
trousers, gathered at the ankles and worn under a skirt. They were designed 
in 1850, and promoted by Amelia Bloomer, editor of the women's temperance 
and women's suffrage paper, The Lily, and other women who campaigned for 
'rational dress' for women. 'Between 1850 and 1860 feminists enjoyed 
freedom from long, heavy, hampering skirts that swept the ground. Wearers 
of the bloomer became the butt of jokes, cartoons, and ridiculing 
comment.'...The costume was so ridiculed by press and pulpit that Elizabeth 
Cady Stanton reported 'that to escape constant observation, criticism, 
ridicule, and persecution, one after another [of the women] gladly went 
back to the old [clothing], and sacrificed freedom of movement...I have 
never wondered since that Chinese women allow their daughters' feet to be 
encased in iron shoes, not that the Hindoo widows walk calmly to the 
funeral pyre.'"

	-- article in The Feminist Dictionary, 1985

the following reply is from a member of the community who wishes to
remain anonymous

Bonnie J 
=wn= comod

_______________________________________________________________

    Re: 750.81

    > it's like enjoying beer and diet soda commercials: *i* find the women
    > enormously attractive and like to lech after them - and at the same
    > time, i'm repulsed by the use of women's bodies to sell beer to men, or
    > the social tyranny forcing women to diet.

    How did you determine that the beer companies are using women's bodies
    just to pander to men?  I see a fair number of pretty attractive men in
    most beer commercials these days, and I see women holding glasses or
    cans or bottles.  Enough of my women friends like beer that I'm prepared
    to think the commercials are selling to them, too.

    I think there are other reasons that people "like" this topic and
    may not "like" more serious topics.
    
    It's easy to have an opinion on heels, stockings, tampons, and the
    other so-called indignities of being a woman.  A noter can say what she
    wants and her opinion is valid.
    
    (A small aside here, I think the writer used the word indignity very
    trivially.  But I presume the article came from some headline in the 
    mainstream press and that crap would work there.  It doesn't here.)
    
    But the real indignities of being a woman are more difficult. They require
    anger, rage, and hard thinking.  And when you reply to a topic on a
    real indignity you sometimes get pushed back on.  
    
    At least I know I sometimes don't reply because I feel like I need more
    facts or substance to my reply.  I'm in awe of a lot of noters.  You're
    terrific!
    
    judy

    re: some replies back
    
    (Incidentally, it is very difficult in this notes conference to 
    know who one is talking to...by name or by sex, for so many in 
    here are "arrogant" enough to think that everyone knows who
    "G" is or who "B" is, etc.  Why don't some of you take the extra
    three or four keystrokes and sign your names?  In short, not
    that it makes any difference to you, I don't like replies that 
    don't have signed first names...)
    
    I disagree with your definition, but only by degrees:
    
         Anything a man does is male behavior.
    
         Anything a woman does is female behavior.
    
         Both men and women have *both* masculine and feminine "energies."
    Expressing an "energy" does not reveal the sex of the person.
    
    Frederick
    

    Sorry, Frederick.
    
    
    E

    I'm entering this for a member of our community who wishes to be
    anonymous at this time.
    
    Justine
    ========================================================================


    I'm sorry, but I can't see how it fits in here.   When I speak at an AA
    meeting, I laugh at the things that happened and the way I thought when I
    was drinking.  They were not funny at the time; they were horrifying.


    	THIS DOES NOT DISEMPOWER ME!	

    Rather, it keeps me sane.  Not everything has to be lived to the beat
    of a dirge.  I'm tired of being told that I'm not a *real* feminist if
    I laugh at these things.  


    I choose *not* to live "in" anger all the time, even if I do live
    "with" anger often.  I do what I can to change things, and laugh at the 
    foibles of the world


    Sheesh!

    
    
    RE: .87 (Fredrick)
    
    >I don't like replies that don't have signed first names...)
    
    Just out of curiosity.  Why?
    
    Are you trying to determine the sex of the individual?  Does the
    person's identity have anything to do with the content of the note.
    
    
    Actually, I, for one, wished that we all had "code-names" in NOTES. 
    And that the code names could not be identifiable/traceable (except by
    moderators) to a specific individual or gender-type.  Then it would
    take away ALL that unnecessary qualification we add internally, in our
    minds, to a note based on who said it.
    
    kath

    re: .88 (E)
    
          Well, as far as I can tell, E Grace, you are the *only*
    exception...but if there were an Evelyn and an Erna and an
    Esther and all signed "E", your particular identity would get
    somewhat lost in the shuffle, don't you think?  Add to that
    the possibility of an Edward, Edgar, Ernie and Etienne, and
    then where would you be?
    
    re: .90 ("Kath"--)
    
          And to continue with that thought, if your goal is to
    have a sanitized, roboticized, antiseptic notesfile, wherein 
    everyone is based solely on "thought" projection, then perhaps
    you would be legitimized.  On the other hand, though I am here
    as a "background" male (hopefully,) this conference is for women,
    wherein *by definition* you would probably prefer to know the
    gender of the speaker.  I'm sorry, but since I've only been 
    reading the notes in this file for a couple of weeks, I cannot
    tell when I see a "B" for a signature, e.g., whether that's a
    Bonnie or a Bob.  Do I treat Bonnie and Bob differently?  Yes,
    definitely.  I have always treated men and women differently,
    do so now, and intend to in the future.  This does not mean that
    one is held somehow superior to the other, it simply means that
    there are different contextual situations that are more appropriately
    dealt with by knowing the gender of the person.  Each occupies a
    particular form, i.e., one has a female form and the other a male
    form, therefore even if the CONTENT is the same and the CONTEXT
    is the same, the end result is different due to the different FORM.
         So, "Kath," if you or anyone else disagrees, as is entirely
    within reason to do, that's okay...but just understand that for
    many who aren't necessarily a part of the womannotes "clique", 
    those unsigned or "inadequately" signed notes are rather a pain...
    and since there has been no support thus far for my view, I speak
    for myself.
         That's all.  Proceed with whatever you feel is correct for
    yourself...
    
    
    Frederick (and "Kath", there is an "E" between the Fred and rick  ;-) )
    

    ME?!  Get lost in the shuffle?!  Not likely.
    
    
    >    Frederick (and "Kath", there is an "E" between the Fred and rick  ;-) )
    
    
    Is Not!
    
    
    E

    RE.91>Do I treat Bonnie and Bob differently? Yes...
    
    Maybe that's the point? Why should it matter? This isn't a 
    meat-market singles bar, after all. What difference does it
    really make? If I think your idea is good, or disgusting,
    I'll tell you, regardless of your gender. 
    
    Dana (who finally has a use for the gender-neutral name ;-) )

    re: Dana (.93)
    
          The difference depends on the content, Dana.  If you
    are talking to me about the pain of wearing stockings with
    holes in them, then I'd like to assume you know what you are
    talking about.  If you are talking about the threat of rape,
    then I'd like to know that you might have a point with which
    I am not familiar (first hand.)  
          I am aware that talking Pro-choice versus abortion is
    a very righteous and limited point of view when this expression
    comes from a male...why?  Because males cannot carry a fetus or
    an embryo.  Only a female can and therefore it is not in a male's
    proper domain to attempt to "control."  (Please understand that
    I don't include opinions in this...that is, *everyone* is entitled
    to an opinion.)  Similarly, while women aren't the ones who have
    to go to battle, though I will listen and can respect their opinions,
    I will consider their views about having to face death with 
    considerably less value than the view of someone who has to make
    that choice (especially when the say "yes, *we* should fight.")
         Does it make a difference, Dana?  Much of the time, yes.
    
    Frederick
     

    I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out how wearing pantyhose, or high
    heels, or tight jeans that you have to zip up the ankles are symptoms
    of women being oppressed.  Its not as if there aren't more than a few
    situations were dress code conventions are applied to men as much as,
    or almost as much as, women.  When I joined Digital, a tie was
    considered very important.  I have more than a few reviews where my one
    black mark was a refusal to wear a tie.  My choice; I also could have
    moved up to engineering (oops, wait a minute, I did move up to
    engineering ;^).
    
    There are a lot of women who chose to flaunt these conventions, just as
    there are a lot of women who chose to dress up.  Maybe its peer
    pressure (esp for teen set), maybe its because they *want to*.  I've
    suggested to girlfriends that they not wear makeup, or nylons, etc.  It
    was often their *choice* that they do wear them.  Fine either way, no
    one was oppressing them to do so and I think they'd be rather insulted
    for people to insinuate that patriarchal oppression was why they were
    wearing these garments.
    
    Jim

    May I suggest that many, many women do not realize that the 'choices'
    they make are instigated by the patriarchy, by the media?  They think
    they're making their own decisions, they haven't yet realized the
    covert coercion that they are subject to each day.  I think of
    "Seventeen" magazine that is, on the surface, a nice, innocent magazine
    for young girls.  However, as you flip through the magazine the
    underlying and unceasing message is "you're not good enough the way
    you are; change your hair, lose weight, gain weight, your eyes can
    be blue, brown, purple."  Never a message of "I like you just the way
    you are." (Thanks, Mr. Rogers!)  So by the time these young teenagers
    become women, they're conditioned to look for way of 'changing
    themselves' because they know that who they are is not good enough.
    
    Argh.
    
    I can't help notice also, in this string, how often a note contains
    the words, 'my boyfriend, SO, husband told me I didn't have to wear...
    blah, blah, blah, but I do anyway...'
    
    ??
    Maia
    

RE: .93

>This isn't a
>meat-market singles bar, after all


Could'a fooled me!

Bobbi "deadlines have no sex, only gender" Fox

    re.96
    
    Maia,
    
    I have to agree that much of what you say is true.  There is a media
    barrage and there are some pretty sorry messages and norms out there.
    
    I hated Seventeen magazine when I was a kid -- all that fluff and
    clothes and teeth and make-up, when what I wanted was something
    substantive like empowerment techniques and coping with rapid change. 
    
    However, when I read your response I found myself wondering if you
    would characterise a woman like myself as a brain-washed automaton for
    having contact lens in three different colours [although I mostly wear
    my glasses] and preferring the ease of movement afforded by loose
    dresses over the contriction of trousers [no I don't wear them tight].
    
    For years I wore jeans and pretended that I was comfortable in them;
    all the while building up calluses on my inner thighs.  Why?  I 'chose'
    to do so because it was 'young' and 'real' and 'unpretentious.'  The
    media and the Aquarian Order told me so.  I reality, I was finally
    forced to admit that what I was doing was uncomfortable and fake and
    conspicuously 'unpretentious.'  The patriarchy [may it be crushed under
    its own ponderous weight] doesn't own the monopoly on 'covert
    coercion.'
    
    Regardless of what the world thinks, I think I'm quite beautiful. 
    Certainly I didn't arrive at that conclusion based upon a resemblance
    to some media norm.  If people don't love me for myself, I tend not to
    spend time with them.  While I've been described as ego-strong [is this
    a euphemism for 'arrogant' ...?] I do have a healthy dose of skepticism
    -- if _no_one were to love me for myself, I _might_ consider changing a
    few things... ;^)
    
      Annie

I looked back at the original article about the "indignities of being a
woman," and it seems clear that the indignities the author is talking about 
have been defined as such, and/or imposed on women, by males, who would never
arrange things so that *they* would have to endure such indignities. It 
seems to me that for women to respond to all this "litely" is almost like
being locked in a chastity belt while your husband is away, and giggling
about that indignity - the humiliation, discomfort, pain, infection, etc. 

Also - re the following excerpts from the original article - who *says*
*anything* to do with a woman's menstrual cycle is "an inherent source of
indignity"? Who *put* women's feet in obstetrical stirrups? 
    
>    Instruments, pieces of apparel, and tools of daily life that no male in
>    his right mind would ever design for himself.  Procedures that would
>    send a chill through the soul of even the most hardened he-man.  And
>    small moments that remind us, time and again, of how downright
>    uncomfortable it can be to live in a world that was largely shaped by
>    men -- by people, in short, who've never had to wrestle their way into
>    a pair of nylons, teeter across brick sidewalks in high heels, or look
>    up from a cold table at a strange man wielding a speculum.  
    

>    MENSTRUATION

>    Again, no surprise here.  A woman's menstrual cycle is the
>    physiological counterpart of her stockings, an inherent source of
>    indignity.  

    
>    SEX, CONTRACEPTION, and FEMALE HEALTH

>    Again, many, many candidates.  Our top contenders:
    
>    �  the phrase, "Just put your feet in the stirrups and scoot
>    down...that's right....a little further....a little further...just a
>    little further."
 

Maybe there's a difference between treating male-imposed/male-defined
indignities "litely," which to me implies accepting them, and directing,
say, irony or sarcasm at them, with the hope of getting out from under
them. My feeling about the article and the way it was presented was that
the former was intended. 

D.   
    

    
    
    RE: .99
    
    I believe a woman invented pantyhose.
    
    k

    re. who *put* women's feet into obstetrical stirrups?
    
    In the earliest incarnations, Midwives.  Anything that helps hold the
    heels up near the buttocks or gets a good bend in the knees is a nifty
    help in the birthing process.  [having gone through labour and delivery
    with and without, I say this from first hand authority] Women figured
    this one out long before men became involved in the birthing process
    and designed any number of variations on the theme -- stools, slings,
    blocks, stirrups.
    
    I chose to give birth on both occasions. I was very proud of my
    efforts. I didn't find it a particularly dignified process.
    
    re. who *says* menstruation is an 'inherent source of indignity'?
    
    Yup. I agree this over states the case.
    
    However, I submit that it's just about as frustrating to drop a clot on
    the bathmat as it is to spill chocolate pudding on a clean
    table cloth.  Neither process is fraught with grace and dignity, both
    have a tendency to cause stains -- _I_ gotta laugh.
    
    re. the original article
    
    I thought it was in poor taste when I read it here.  I stopped Rick
    dead when he began reading it to me from the Phoenix this past Sunday.
    I was disappointed that the Phoenix published it; and I let them know. 
    Now they probably think I'm a humourless, homely woman ... BFD.
    
    

    Annie,
    
    I agree; I didn't find the article humorous.  I blame this on the
    author, because with proper writing, each item could bring at least
    a wry smile to every lip.  Also, by sly use of historical references,
    it would have been possible to indicate the source of these little
    indignities, which I (and perhaps others) would have found more, uh,
    satisfactory.
    
    						Ann B.

    Goodness, you people are all so *serious* this week!
    
    I guess the uncertainty in the air is getting to us all!
    
    /Charlotte

it might (or might not) be of interest that the author of the base-note
is also the author of the article on "Why Women Should be Called Girls"
which I quoted in the Language Topic a couple of weeks ago.

D!

    Yes D! I had noticed that. Which is probably why I had a knee-jerk
    reaction to it.
    
    manisha 

    re .85
    
>    How did you determine that the beer companies are using women's bodies
>    just to pander to men?  
    
    you're right - the ones which popped into my mind were from my college
    days a few years ago, when there were mmany fewer luscious male bodies
    being exploited alongside the women's...
    
    lt

    From what I hear, the Bud commercials still deal in just one flavor of
    pandering.
    
    Ray

    If two women are doing same job with one always dressed in typical
    business attire (suit) and the other more casual, why is the first
    one always considered the better worker?? Why so much emphasis on
    dress in stead of work?
    
    For those of us who happen to be naturally endowed with large
    breasts, life is awful.  When you talk with a man you always
    know where he's looking.  Very hard to find blouses that fit 
    without gaping due to lack of buttons at the right spot.  JUst
    try to wear the drape style dress without many safety pins!!!
    
    Worse was what happened to a friend of my, equally endowed.  Her
    boss (not Digital) had the nerve to tell her 1) start wearing 
    loser clothes and 2) suggested breast reduction surgery!!! SHe
    found a better job and quit.
    
    Bra manufacturers have yet to make one with enough support 
    for us top-heavy women.  Do you know how uncomfortable it is
    to have your bra constantly being pulled downward??  Means
    lots of trips to the ladies room to correct.
    
    As for slipping bra straps, try a T-back bra.  At least solved
    that problem.
    
    Lid
    

re: .108
    
>   For those of us who happen to be naturally endowed with large
>    breasts, life is awful.  When you talk with a man you always
>    know where he's looking.  Very hard to find blouses that fit 
>    without gaping due to lack of buttons at the right spot.  JUst
>    try to wear the drape style dress without many safety pins!!!
    
    I used to wear a 40DD, so I can identify!  I recently overheard a
    comment I could have used when people were staring at my chest,
    
    "nice day, aren't they?"
    
    Jayne Mansfield, who was not only utterly bodacious but also had a 140
    IQ, had a test for men who said they weren't staring at her chest all
    the time.  She'd look down at the floor and ask them to tell her what
    color her eyes were.  Few if any could!
    
    ;)
    
    -Jody

    re.108 'lack of buttons in the right spot'
    
    As I make many of my own clothes, I can put buttons where they please
    me.  I have found that buttons placed in this 'right spot' have a
    tendency to either come undone or *gasp* become tiny projectiles
    [especially embarrasing when they impact upon the teeth, cheek, or
    other body parts of those with which one is conversing].  Personally
    I prefer gaps. [but then I could get all the support I'll ever need
    from a couple of band-aids -- believe me, I'm not complaining!!]
    
    re.109 'what colour are my eyes?'
    
    I've had mixed results asking this question of men who've _just_  told
    me eyes are compelling.  But the principle is sound.
    
    
    

I know that generously built women have to put up with more of this, but as a
small woman I know from experience that breast size has little to do with it.
If a man is geek enough that he cannot keep his eyes above the level of your
shoulders during a work conversation, believe me the problem is with his, um, 
well the problem is with him and not with your breasts.  I cannot be more
specific than this, that the man in question was rather abruptly reminded that
my eyes are up *here*, and he would do well to remember it.  It worked, for a
while.

Sara

    
    Horizontally positioned buttonholes work better than vertically
    positioned ones.  You can hardly ever find these on ready made blouses
    or shirts but for those of you who sew...
    
    CQ

re:        <<< Note 750.109 by LEZAH::BOBBITT "dance, the storm is over" >>>

>>    "nice day, aren't they?"
    
hehe...now there's a good one...I'm writing that down!!

I usually tell men they're just kleenex..for some odd reason I had actually
had a kleenex stuffed in my shirt once..I pulled it out and showed a guy
that didn't beleive...he went away after that :-).

Jenna  

    >If two women are doing same job with one always dressed in typical
    >business attire (suit) and the other more casual, why is the first
    >one always considered the better worker?? Why so much emphasis on
    >dress in stead of work?
    
    I know it's not solving the problem, but it's not an exclusive women
    problem.
    
    Charles Mallo
        

    
    I feel pressure on me to dress "as a female business person".
    This requires conforming to two "clubs" - female and business.
    If I wore a suit and tie like the male business club, that would
    not be acceptable. If I dressed in casual female clothes, that
    wouldn't do it either.
    I don't like doing it, but it's a part of the job and I accepted
    it when I chose this career.
    
    I suspect that clothing is important because it plays a large
    part in the first impression you create on others. In areas
    where you interface to customers, this is key. The customer
    is looking for someone they can trust to do business with,
    that they can identify as part of their "business club", and
    someone who will be able to identify with them and their business
    needs and culture.
    Clothing is an important source of signals as to whether you
    will "fit" or not.
    
    
    

    .115
    
    Aw c'mon. Call it a patriarchy.
    
    D.

    re .115:  Thanks.  I'll take converts one at a time!  mdh
    
            <<< IKE22::$1$DKB100:[NOTESFILES]WOMANNOTES-V3.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< Topics of Interest to Women >-
================================================================================
Note 757.20               Defining CHOICE, and freedom.                 20 of 25
CSSE32::M_DAVIS "Marge Davis Hallyburton"            14 lines   4-APR-1991 16:30
                         -< Lend `them' no credence. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re 750.96:
    >May I suggest that many, many women do not realize that the 'choices'
    >they make are instigated by the patriarchy, by the media?  
    
    Has it occurred to you that simply acknowledging the so-called
    patriarchy, that you are, in effect, empowering such an entity? 
    I prefer to choose whom to empower.  That includes my husband and my
    family and a few very close friends whom I respect.  I do not empower
    some nebulous entity.
    
    mdh
     
    
    

    - .1
    
    If I understand what you're saying - I see this from the exact opposite
    point of view. By naming it, you are empowering yourself to deal with
    it. Like "sexism" and "wife-battering." Naming it helps call attention to 
    the fact that (like patriarchy) it exists. Then you're in a better 
    position to try to do something about it.
    
    D.

    Just a different viewpoint.  I refuse to acknowledge "it" exists,
    therefore it has no bearing in my actions. Either one has validity...
    just what works for you.
    
    grins,

    
    why do you refuse to acknowledge "it" exists?
    
    - another topic perhaps ...
    
    D.

    See also the freedom note.  Gail put in a wonderful lyric from Ferron:
    "Before you plead for freedom, you just agree to be enruled."  That's
    the spirit in which I refuse to acknowledge the aforesaid entity.  They
    simply have no power in my life.
    
    Yes, let's take it to the choice note.

    I just read 750. and was laughing right out loud!
    
    Thanks for making my day!
    
    
    Jackie
    

    re: 34
    
    A little late, but I hope not too out of date...
    I do believe that you CAN buy cotton lisle/spandex blend pantyhose 
    from Fogal, here in NY.  They also make fine wool pantyhose.  Be
    prepared to pay a week's wages for them (just kidding, but I think
    they do run as high as $45 per pair -- of course they wouldn't be
    likely to run). If you'd like Fogal's address or phone, send mail.
    Glad to oblige.
    
    Paula

    WOOL panty hose??  Yipes!
    
    /Charlotte

    
    
    Someone sent me an anonymous reply for this string via interoffice
    Mail.  Dear Anon, I would be happy to post your reply for you, but I
    (or one of the mods) have to know who you are first.  I'm sorry, but
    we're not willing to post something unless at least one of us knows
    who it came from.  Please send me VAXMail if you'd like to pursue this.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Justine -- Womannotes Comod