If you've ever been a waiter or waitress, you learned how to carry stuff on a tray. The trick to not dumping the entire thing on the floor is to focus on your destination - not your feet, or the stuff on the tray, or people around you.
As I was driving back from Flint this morning, I realized that the same trick for not spilling a tray of food onto innocent people is valuable for other things in life as well. Focusing on your goals keeps you from dropping all of the things you take with you en route. How else can you explain the drive and success rates of parents who return to school while holding down a full-time job and raising a family?
Focusing on the stuff on your tray, however, means that you drop things. Or, that you whine about how much you have to carry. The end result is the same: you don't get where you're going, and you aren't as efficient, effective or fun to work with as those people who sail through the room, their trays loaded with stuff, joking and smiling and generally making life a better place to be.
That's what I want to do this year. I know it might be a little late for new year's resolutions, but I'm going to make this one anyway.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Today's Inbox
This was in my email inbox today, and I was so moved I decided to a) check the source to verify, and b) copy the whole thing to get this out to anyone who happens to wander over here. The original post with comments by the author can be found here. Hats off to J.D. Pendry. This is an amazing composition!! (I apologize for any errors - please visit retired Sgt. Major Pendry's site to see his comments on this post, as well as his other articles).
On Your Hands
Our God and soldiers we alike adore,
Ev’n at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited,
Our God’s forgotten, and our soldiers slighted. – Frances Quarles, 1632
******************
Jimmy Carter, you’re the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You’re the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You’ve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You’re a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof. And said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa John? And the Democrats call you their military expert. Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You’re not a Marine sir. You wouldn’t amount to a pimple on a real Marines butt. You’re a phony and a disgrace. Run away John.
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanimo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster sized pictures from Abu Grhaib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraq’s torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news this week Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated real torture for you again. If you truly supported our troops, you’d show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of the perpetrators of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You’re a bloated fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al ad nauseam. Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied. That the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers. That we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers – the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we’ll run away again and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.
American news media, the New York Times particularly. Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can’t strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
You are America’s axis of idiots. Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don’t ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home, as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies. Yes, I’m questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I’m also questioning why you’re stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don’t deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war – this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.
No Commander in Chief, you don’t get off the hook either. Our country has two enemies. Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It’s your obligation to support them by confronting the axis of idiots. America must hear it from you that these people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot.
They need you to do it now.
Copyright © J.D. Pendry 2006
On Your Hands
Our God and soldiers we alike adore,
Ev’n at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited,
Our God’s forgotten, and our soldiers slighted. – Frances Quarles, 1632
******************
Jimmy Carter, you’re the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You’re the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You’ve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You’re a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof. And said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa John? And the Democrats call you their military expert. Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You’re not a Marine sir. You wouldn’t amount to a pimple on a real Marines butt. You’re a phony and a disgrace. Run away John.
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanimo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster sized pictures from Abu Grhaib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraq’s torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news this week Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated real torture for you again. If you truly supported our troops, you’d show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of the perpetrators of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You’re a bloated fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al ad nauseam. Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied. That the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers. That we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers – the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we’ll run away again and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.
American news media, the New York Times particularly. Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can’t strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.
You are America’s axis of idiots. Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don’t ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home, as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies. Yes, I’m questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I’m also questioning why you’re stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don’t deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war – this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.
No Commander in Chief, you don’t get off the hook either. Our country has two enemies. Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It’s your obligation to support them by confronting the axis of idiots. America must hear it from you that these people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot.
They need you to do it now.
Copyright © J.D. Pendry 2006
Monday, February 12, 2007
One man's jerk is another man's pit bull.....
Aaahhh, the arrogance of perspective.
One of the current catch-phrases of the practice of law is that we are to maintain civility - hard to accomplish in advocacy at times, but that's the goal. It isn't a legal obligation - which is probably just as well since it can be difficult to legislate nuance - but for whatever reason, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan thinks enough of the concept of civility to adopt "civility principles" which include directives on how attorneys and judges ought to behave. These apparently are only suggestions.
One of the principles I dealt with today reads, "We will consult other counsel regarding scheduling matters in a good-faith effort to avoid scheduling conflicts." So explain to me how this warrants another attorney - who seems to have a problem with losing to a girl - arbitrarily scheduling depositions without any prior notice or consultation with me about the date?
In trying to sort this out - which took 2 hours, thank you very much!! - I did what any other smart attorney would do when faced with a brick wall: I climbed over his head. Granted, his senior partner didn't help much, but at least I got the date he had scheduled these depositions.
Which just goes to show you: one man's jerk is another man's pit bull. This guy is getting rewarded for being a you-know-what, so he keeps doing it. Civility be damned.
I said that he seems to have a problem with losing to a girl because I've beaten him - twice - in this case. On top of that, the judge denied part of his request for fees. So not only did he get beaten by a girl - I LOVE saying that!! :) - but he lost money, too.
[I should point out that technically, he lost because he tried to force his clients' creditors to accept what his clients felt like paying in a bankruptcy case, and the judge wouldn't approve any of his multiple proposals. Still, it's fun to say "he got beaten by a girl...." If I could, I'd dance around and sing it: "You got beat by a giiiiirrrrl! You got beat by a giiiiirrrrl! (in a sing-song, playground voice)"]
What was the title of my post again?? :)
One of the current catch-phrases of the practice of law is that we are to maintain civility - hard to accomplish in advocacy at times, but that's the goal. It isn't a legal obligation - which is probably just as well since it can be difficult to legislate nuance - but for whatever reason, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan thinks enough of the concept of civility to adopt "civility principles" which include directives on how attorneys and judges ought to behave. These apparently are only suggestions.
One of the principles I dealt with today reads, "We will consult other counsel regarding scheduling matters in a good-faith effort to avoid scheduling conflicts." So explain to me how this warrants another attorney - who seems to have a problem with losing to a girl - arbitrarily scheduling depositions without any prior notice or consultation with me about the date?
In trying to sort this out - which took 2 hours, thank you very much!! - I did what any other smart attorney would do when faced with a brick wall: I climbed over his head. Granted, his senior partner didn't help much, but at least I got the date he had scheduled these depositions.
Which just goes to show you: one man's jerk is another man's pit bull. This guy is getting rewarded for being a you-know-what, so he keeps doing it. Civility be damned.
I said that he seems to have a problem with losing to a girl because I've beaten him - twice - in this case. On top of that, the judge denied part of his request for fees. So not only did he get beaten by a girl - I LOVE saying that!! :) - but he lost money, too.
[I should point out that technically, he lost because he tried to force his clients' creditors to accept what his clients felt like paying in a bankruptcy case, and the judge wouldn't approve any of his multiple proposals. Still, it's fun to say "he got beaten by a girl...." If I could, I'd dance around and sing it: "You got beat by a giiiiirrrrl! You got beat by a giiiiirrrrl! (in a sing-song, playground voice)"]
What was the title of my post again?? :)
Thursday, February 8, 2007
One of Those Days.....
Work is a four-letter word for a reason.
I talked to someone yesterday who very candidly told me that he worked because he could make money doing it. He doesn't really like his job, although he doesn't hate it. What he most enjoys about it is that his kids work with him in his business, so he gets to see them every day and watch them grow and develop in their skills and business sense.
In a way, that was the most refreshing conversation I've had with anyone in decades.
Why is it that there is such pressure to demonstrate that one's chosen career is enjoyable? Is it because of the sacrifices a career demands and we want to justify our choices? Or is it because most of us aren't wealthy enough to tell the truth when we're asked the question, "do you like what you do?"
Why do I do what I do? Do I like my job? Does it really matter if I do?
I suppose I do this job because it's the one in which I can make the most money just by doing what I have been trained to do. Most days, I'm OK with my job. On some days, I really love it; on others, I barely tolerate it. I don't suppose it matters to anyone but me if I like my job - sure, it probably makes life at work more tolerable for those with whom I work if I like my job. Nobody likes to work around a grouch.
There are other things I could do, and do very well, but I don't do them. Instead, I work day after day at a job that, while it offers some good things, nevertheless sucks the life out of me a little bit at a time. I come home at the end of the day drained - I get up later than I should because I really don't want to go to work, and then I don't sleep well because of the accumulated stress.
My weekends are MY time - they're the only time I can sleep late, relax with my dog, do errands and chores and generally re-charge my batteries, but I have a certain amount of face-time to commit to the office to make my billable hour quota and to demonstrate the level of commitment I have to the firm and its goals.
The thing is, I feel trapped. Trapped by the need for the income stream the job provides to pay existing obligations and to plan for the future, trapped by the mantle of accomplishment and "success" a law degree and a good job convey. Yes, I could just walk away - I could walk away, sell my condo (although probably not that successfully in this market), get a job that pays less, move into something smaller (renting, probably, rather than buying), and "trade down", but that is only noble in the movies.
Reality still intrudes.
What really makes all of this effort worthwhile?
The one who dies with the most toys still dies. How do you make time to enjoy life when the treadmill keeps increasing in speed and difficulty? I've tried jumping off periodically, but I don't have the energy to catch up that I used to have, and it seems a more efficient use of my energy to try to stay on the same treadmill instead of jumping from one to another.
Plus, the older I get, the less likely it is that I will find one I like - there are so many people out there looking. Younger, with more energy and more sense of who they are and what they want than I ever had. And the thing is, they get it! When I was growing up, I learned that you paid your dues by succeeding at stuff that nobody else wanted to do, and then you got rewarded with better assignments and more money.
Nowadays, kids - KIDS!! - look at you and say, "I'm not doing that" and they go someplace else where they get to do what they want for more money. They get rewarded for being selective instead of doing the work. What happened to paying dues?
Anyway.
I started this with the heading "one of those days." That's just what it is, and it will pass.
I talked to someone yesterday who very candidly told me that he worked because he could make money doing it. He doesn't really like his job, although he doesn't hate it. What he most enjoys about it is that his kids work with him in his business, so he gets to see them every day and watch them grow and develop in their skills and business sense.
In a way, that was the most refreshing conversation I've had with anyone in decades.
Why is it that there is such pressure to demonstrate that one's chosen career is enjoyable? Is it because of the sacrifices a career demands and we want to justify our choices? Or is it because most of us aren't wealthy enough to tell the truth when we're asked the question, "do you like what you do?"
Why do I do what I do? Do I like my job? Does it really matter if I do?
I suppose I do this job because it's the one in which I can make the most money just by doing what I have been trained to do. Most days, I'm OK with my job. On some days, I really love it; on others, I barely tolerate it. I don't suppose it matters to anyone but me if I like my job - sure, it probably makes life at work more tolerable for those with whom I work if I like my job. Nobody likes to work around a grouch.
There are other things I could do, and do very well, but I don't do them. Instead, I work day after day at a job that, while it offers some good things, nevertheless sucks the life out of me a little bit at a time. I come home at the end of the day drained - I get up later than I should because I really don't want to go to work, and then I don't sleep well because of the accumulated stress.
My weekends are MY time - they're the only time I can sleep late, relax with my dog, do errands and chores and generally re-charge my batteries, but I have a certain amount of face-time to commit to the office to make my billable hour quota and to demonstrate the level of commitment I have to the firm and its goals.
The thing is, I feel trapped. Trapped by the need for the income stream the job provides to pay existing obligations and to plan for the future, trapped by the mantle of accomplishment and "success" a law degree and a good job convey. Yes, I could just walk away - I could walk away, sell my condo (although probably not that successfully in this market), get a job that pays less, move into something smaller (renting, probably, rather than buying), and "trade down", but that is only noble in the movies.
Reality still intrudes.
What really makes all of this effort worthwhile?
The one who dies with the most toys still dies. How do you make time to enjoy life when the treadmill keeps increasing in speed and difficulty? I've tried jumping off periodically, but I don't have the energy to catch up that I used to have, and it seems a more efficient use of my energy to try to stay on the same treadmill instead of jumping from one to another.
Plus, the older I get, the less likely it is that I will find one I like - there are so many people out there looking. Younger, with more energy and more sense of who they are and what they want than I ever had. And the thing is, they get it! When I was growing up, I learned that you paid your dues by succeeding at stuff that nobody else wanted to do, and then you got rewarded with better assignments and more money.
Nowadays, kids - KIDS!! - look at you and say, "I'm not doing that" and they go someplace else where they get to do what they want for more money. They get rewarded for being selective instead of doing the work. What happened to paying dues?
Anyway.
I started this with the heading "one of those days." That's just what it is, and it will pass.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Monday Morning
Sorry for the absence - I've been sick again, and when I'm sick, I make less sense than usual.
As a result, I am going to post a few air pilot jokes my sister sent me this morning - enjoy!! :)
Tower: "TWA 2341, for noise abatement turn right 45 Degrees." TWA 2341: "Center, we are at 35,000 feet. How much noise can we make up here?" Tower: "Sir, have you ever heard the noise a 747 makes when it hits a 727?"
*******
From an unknown aircraft waiting in a very long takeoff queue: "I'm f...ing bored!" Ground Traffic Control: "Last aircraft transmitting, identify yourself immediately!" Unknown aircraft: "I said I was f...ing bored, not f...ing stupid!"
*******
A Pan Am 727 flight, waiting for start clearance in Munich , overheard the following: Lufthansa (in German): " Ground, what is our start clearance time?" Ground (in English): "If you want an answer you must speak in English." Lufthansa (in English): "I am a German, flying a German airplane, in Germany . Why must I speak English?" Unknown voice from another plane (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody war!"
*******
The German air controllers at Frankfurt Airport are renowned as a short-tempered lot. They not only expect one to know one's gate parking location, but how to get there without any assistance from them. So it was with some amusement that we (a Pan Am 747) listened to the following exchange between Frankfurt ground control and a British Airways 747, call sign Speedbird 206:
Speedbird 206: "Frankfurt , Speedbird 206 clear of active runway."
Ground: "Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven."
The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop.
Ground: "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?"
Speedbird 206: "Stand by, Ground, I'm looking up our gate location now."
Ground (with quite arrogant impatience): "Speedbird 206, have you not been to Frankfurt before?"
Speedbird 206 (coolly): "Yes, twice in 1944, but it was dark, -- And I didn't land."
Gotta love those flyboys......
As a result, I am going to post a few air pilot jokes my sister sent me this morning - enjoy!! :)
Tower: "TWA 2341, for noise abatement turn right 45 Degrees." TWA 2341: "Center, we are at 35,000 feet. How much noise can we make up here?" Tower: "Sir, have you ever heard the noise a 747 makes when it hits a 727?"
*******
From an unknown aircraft waiting in a very long takeoff queue: "I'm f...ing bored!" Ground Traffic Control: "Last aircraft transmitting, identify yourself immediately!" Unknown aircraft: "I said I was f...ing bored, not f...ing stupid!"
*******
A Pan Am 727 flight, waiting for start clearance in Munich , overheard the following: Lufthansa (in German): " Ground, what is our start clearance time?" Ground (in English): "If you want an answer you must speak in English." Lufthansa (in English): "I am a German, flying a German airplane, in Germany . Why must I speak English?" Unknown voice from another plane (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody war!"
*******
The German air controllers at Frankfurt Airport are renowned as a short-tempered lot. They not only expect one to know one's gate parking location, but how to get there without any assistance from them. So it was with some amusement that we (a Pan Am 747) listened to the following exchange between Frankfurt ground control and a British Airways 747, call sign Speedbird 206:
Speedbird 206: "Frankfurt , Speedbird 206 clear of active runway."
Ground: "Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven."
The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop.
Ground: "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?"
Speedbird 206: "Stand by, Ground, I'm looking up our gate location now."
Ground (with quite arrogant impatience): "Speedbird 206, have you not been to Frankfurt before?"
Speedbird 206 (coolly): "Yes, twice in 1944, but it was dark, -- And I didn't land."
Gotta love those flyboys......
Sunday, November 19, 2006
One Rant For Tall Women Everywhere
Imagine you have been out running errands all day. It's cold - bitterly cold - outside. The wind has been slicing through every seam in your coat it could find, and your feet feel like you've been trudging through the icy, slush-filled puddles of the arctic.
You go home, get a nice hot bath, and when you put on your favorite pair of flannel PJs, you notice (with horror) that your pants are 2 inches too short. You pull them off, rummage through your pajama drawer, pull out another pair and... they're 2 inches too short, too.
"Nuts," you think. "I'll find my long underwear and wear those until I'm warm." Except, the lovely silk long underwear pants you bought are, alas, 3 inches too short as well. You frantically pull item after item out of your dressers, closets, even your dirty clothes hamper, only to discover that EVERYTHING is too short - the pants, the shirt-sleeves, even the shirts are all belly shirts (and while one or two would be fine, you didn't want to have an entire wardrobe of them). You reach for your winter coat, and - ACKKKK! It's too short, too!!
Welcome to my world.
Everywhere I look, lots and lots of lovely warm flannel items, pajama pants, etc., all with inseams of 28 inches. Sometimes I get lucky, and I can find them with a 32" inseam, but when your inseam is 35", well, it just doesn't feel so freakin' lucky! I'm tired of looking like a refugee from Revenge of the Nerds camp.
Thanks to Lee, I have jeans that fit. They are comfortable, long enough (until I wash them, after which I am afraid they might no longer be...longer), and they don't sit so low on my torso that I look like a plumber when I sit down. Or stand up. Or do anything except pose like a manequin in a clothing store. Unfortunately, the Lee people don't make sleepwear, or long underwear, or corduroy pants, or sweaters or anything else I could wear to work. And they're about the only ones.
Eddie Bauer used to be my friend, but alas. He got caught up in the mistaken belief that women stopped having hips and thighs. The pants he makes now are for women with no butts and pencil-thin thighs who apparently do nothing but stand in one place for hours without moving. Same at Land's End. (Don't get me started on L.L. Bean - that's a tale for another day).
Let me say it in simple words that even a clothing designer might understand: real women have hips. We have curvy thighs. We have waists. We do not like clothing designers who think we are stick figures and make clothes for said stick figures. We do not all wear a size 4. You're supposed to be talented designers - here's a challenge: design clothing that real women can wear. Yes, I know it will be difficult. You will have to make clothing that actually fits a woman's body, not a scrawny 11-year-old boy's body, but I think you can do it if you put your mind to it.
Please keep in mind that tall clothing for women is not just regular sized clothing with longer sleeves and legs, although those are helpful. Tall women can have longer rises, which means that pants and swimsuits and other things that have to fit properly "down there" need to be longer from the "down there" point to the waist to avoid injury or embarrassment. That doesn't mean "make 'Mom' pants and sell them as tall clothing." No. That means make clothing that fits those with longer rises.
Tall women also - and you should like this part - can have larger breasts and still be a size 6 or 8 or 10 in the body. In my younger days, I actually had a size 6 waist, even though I was a 32DD. Try to find clothes that fit and don't make you look like a linebacker with that profile..... In order for things to fit in the chesticle area, I had to go up, like, 2 or 3 sizes (because of the shoulders, too), only the waist part was blousing around me like a parachute because the bottom of the shirt/blouse wasn't quite long enough to stay tucked into the waist of my slacks or skirt or whatever I was wearing.
While I'm on that subject, there should be more items of clothing for tall women than just pants with longer inseams and jackets with longer arms. Tall women may have slightly wider shoulders (duh - bigger frames!), and no, going up a size is not the answer! If you think that works, try wearing a jacket that fits in the shoulders but is 2 sizes bigger everywhere else, and then look in a mirror. "Frankensuit" is the word you're looking for to describe what you see, and it is NOT pretty!
The other important thing to remember is that the waist in a dress for a tall woman is going to be in a different spot than a waist in a dress for a shorter woman. If you don't believe me, go to the petite section and find a dress. Then go to the misses' department and find the same dress. The "waist" of the dress will be in a different spot for the different sizes, right?
THEN WHAT IN BLUE BLAZES makes you think that just making the hem longer will make it a "tall" dress???????
Santa, here is what I want for Christmas. Every item in the L.L. Bean, Eddie Bauer, Land's End, Brooks Brothers and other catalogs/stores that sell reasonably-priced, work-worthy clothing to be also available in "real" tall sizes.
And while you're at it, could I please have some nice flannel jammies that are long enough?
You go home, get a nice hot bath, and when you put on your favorite pair of flannel PJs, you notice (with horror) that your pants are 2 inches too short. You pull them off, rummage through your pajama drawer, pull out another pair and... they're 2 inches too short, too.
"Nuts," you think. "I'll find my long underwear and wear those until I'm warm." Except, the lovely silk long underwear pants you bought are, alas, 3 inches too short as well. You frantically pull item after item out of your dressers, closets, even your dirty clothes hamper, only to discover that EVERYTHING is too short - the pants, the shirt-sleeves, even the shirts are all belly shirts (and while one or two would be fine, you didn't want to have an entire wardrobe of them). You reach for your winter coat, and - ACKKKK! It's too short, too!!
Welcome to my world.
Everywhere I look, lots and lots of lovely warm flannel items, pajama pants, etc., all with inseams of 28 inches. Sometimes I get lucky, and I can find them with a 32" inseam, but when your inseam is 35", well, it just doesn't feel so freakin' lucky! I'm tired of looking like a refugee from Revenge of the Nerds camp.
Thanks to Lee, I have jeans that fit. They are comfortable, long enough (until I wash them, after which I am afraid they might no longer be...longer), and they don't sit so low on my torso that I look like a plumber when I sit down. Or stand up. Or do anything except pose like a manequin in a clothing store. Unfortunately, the Lee people don't make sleepwear, or long underwear, or corduroy pants, or sweaters or anything else I could wear to work. And they're about the only ones.
Eddie Bauer used to be my friend, but alas. He got caught up in the mistaken belief that women stopped having hips and thighs. The pants he makes now are for women with no butts and pencil-thin thighs who apparently do nothing but stand in one place for hours without moving. Same at Land's End. (Don't get me started on L.L. Bean - that's a tale for another day).
Let me say it in simple words that even a clothing designer might understand: real women have hips. We have curvy thighs. We have waists. We do not like clothing designers who think we are stick figures and make clothes for said stick figures. We do not all wear a size 4. You're supposed to be talented designers - here's a challenge: design clothing that real women can wear. Yes, I know it will be difficult. You will have to make clothing that actually fits a woman's body, not a scrawny 11-year-old boy's body, but I think you can do it if you put your mind to it.
Please keep in mind that tall clothing for women is not just regular sized clothing with longer sleeves and legs, although those are helpful. Tall women can have longer rises, which means that pants and swimsuits and other things that have to fit properly "down there" need to be longer from the "down there" point to the waist to avoid injury or embarrassment. That doesn't mean "make 'Mom' pants and sell them as tall clothing." No. That means make clothing that fits those with longer rises.
Tall women also - and you should like this part - can have larger breasts and still be a size 6 or 8 or 10 in the body. In my younger days, I actually had a size 6 waist, even though I was a 32DD. Try to find clothes that fit and don't make you look like a linebacker with that profile..... In order for things to fit in the chesticle area, I had to go up, like, 2 or 3 sizes (because of the shoulders, too), only the waist part was blousing around me like a parachute because the bottom of the shirt/blouse wasn't quite long enough to stay tucked into the waist of my slacks or skirt or whatever I was wearing.
While I'm on that subject, there should be more items of clothing for tall women than just pants with longer inseams and jackets with longer arms. Tall women may have slightly wider shoulders (duh - bigger frames!), and no, going up a size is not the answer! If you think that works, try wearing a jacket that fits in the shoulders but is 2 sizes bigger everywhere else, and then look in a mirror. "Frankensuit" is the word you're looking for to describe what you see, and it is NOT pretty!
The other important thing to remember is that the waist in a dress for a tall woman is going to be in a different spot than a waist in a dress for a shorter woman. If you don't believe me, go to the petite section and find a dress. Then go to the misses' department and find the same dress. The "waist" of the dress will be in a different spot for the different sizes, right?
THEN WHAT IN BLUE BLAZES makes you think that just making the hem longer will make it a "tall" dress???????
Santa, here is what I want for Christmas. Every item in the L.L. Bean, Eddie Bauer, Land's End, Brooks Brothers and other catalogs/stores that sell reasonably-priced, work-worthy clothing to be also available in "real" tall sizes.
And while you're at it, could I please have some nice flannel jammies that are long enough?
Thursday, October 19, 2006
What's new, pussycat?
This isn't new, but I heard this on the radio this morning and almost choked - Tom Jones sings "Kiss":
[Video removed from YouTube due to a copyright claim by Universal Music Publishing Group].
After seeing the video clip, I remember seeing something about it at the time, but OMG! How funny is it to listen to a white guy from Wales singing ... well, Prince? :)
Enjoy the cheese!!
[Video removed from YouTube due to a copyright claim by Universal Music Publishing Group].
After seeing the video clip, I remember seeing something about it at the time, but OMG! How funny is it to listen to a white guy from Wales singing ... well, Prince? :)
Enjoy the cheese!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
