I can't tell which way this post is goinna go, but in any case I'm glad that you've brought it upon us for discussion.

I would be happier with this title and a picture of a dress that looked fashionable, and not determinedly trendy.

This is the post ineffable_me has been waiting a looooong time for. Enjoy it, sweetie, this is your moment! :)

According to Jessa Crispin, I'm likely a mensa member then!

amen.

"Show me a woman with a good three inches of cleavage on display, and I'll show you a woman who, rightly or wrongly, has little faith in her powers of conversation."

Whatever. Slut Machine? Maybe she doesn't show 3 inches, but still.

" -should you feel guilty about liking the Jovovich-Hawk collection for Target?"

Uh, no?

Obviously you're an idiot if you peg someone as superficial for liking fashion. We all dress ourselves and manage our appearance to varying degrees. And of COURSE there's a discrepancy between the spreads in Vogue and "reality." Am I the only one who looks at fashion as art AND a commodity?

This is something I've struggled with myself. If I wear ridiculously high heels and spend way too much time shopping for handbags, will people still take me seriously?

Yes, you should feel guilty for liking the Jovovich-Hawk line. Because most of that shit is ugly. But other than that, no. Liking fashion is awesome and so is being smart. I consider myself a smartie pants, and I love having cute bags to go with my brains.

@moonagirl: Do you care if they do?

Half the fun in life is discovering that people don't fit into stereotypes. It's fun being the surprise.

This reminds me that I need to renew my subscription to W.

I generally admire women who work in fashion as it is a really, really tough profession.

That being said, and being said from someone currently wearing sweats, glasses and a ponytail, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with being interested in fashion. I am more often offended by the materialism than the desire to "look good," not that I have to worry about crossing that line, as I can hardly afford any of the expensive stuff...

For me, at least, it's about values. So long as the desire to look good doesn't overwhelm your desires for other qualities, like being ethical, learning new things, being a good friend, I see no real problem.

My mom always told me, "A smart person knows clothes speak just as loudly as her mouth." She also taught me that "If you've got it, flaunt it," and "Shirts that show your belly make you look cheap." She's one of the smartest people I know and about to be a doctor (of philosophy) and is incredibly well-dressed.

@ineffable.me: Spontaneous dance party, babe!

omg black model!?

The only reason that "smart" women feel guilty about liking fashion is because fashion makes us feel guilty about being ourselves. I like a cute bag as much as the next girl, but it is harder to enjoy when the woman modeling it is 1 foot taller and 50 pounds lighter than I am.

Show me a normal woman in a cute outfit? Makes me want to go shopping and love my body. But the fashion industry bombards me with unattainable images and I hate feeding the industry that actively works to make me hate myself.

the whole notion that fashion = stupidity really bothers me. as the post said, there's nothing wrong with taking pride in your appearance and enjoying the process of finding clothes and accessories you love, then finding new and interesting ways to wear them. i get enjoyment out of that.

the other day i got some $180 pants from diesel that i absolutely LOVE. my mom couldn't believe i was spending that much money on pants, but if they mean a lot to me and i choose to spend my money on them, what's the problem?

The answer is, of course, no. Women who are into fashion aren't inherently idiotic, just like not everyone who attends an Ivy League school is a genius.
And I doubt that uniforms would be the solution to problems, at least not sweatshops or bullying, but they would probably cancel out fashion magazines which would leave a lot of women desperately trying to find something else to attach all their problems to.

@Archetype: no, you're not the only one to view it as both.

great post.

I loved one dress from Jovovich-Hawk so much, I bought it in black AND cream. And I just won an award for an essay I wrote on Christina Rosetti's "Goblin Market." so, yeah.

And even though bullying and other problems would stop if we all wore uniforms and robes, I have to think we'd have a ton of creative/individuality problems, yes?

If you are truly intelligent how can you buy designer goods with extortionate prices that feed on the exploitation of women and children who work in terrible conditions and for meagre pay. You can dress well indeed, but shilling out thousands of dollars for an it bag - has Naomi Klein taught us nothing?

BTW I assume we don't have to wear the above dress to be fashionable, where would I keep my specs cleaner?

@ineffable.me: I know, it was rhetorical :-) I get easily irked by these assumptions.....I know you do as well.

@PrettyKitties: I am rocking some of that J-H shit too. Love it.

@mepo: I LOVE Naomi Klein. That said, fashion is not just about designer clothing.

For an article that is meant to dismiss people judging each other, Crispin comes off a hella judgy.
Just because I prefer to rock a messy ponytail and gym clothes most of the time doesn't mean I don't appreciate fashionistas. It's a legitimate art form and I'm jealous of people who have that innate fashion sense that I seem to lack.

Party on, you stylish bitches!

The smart girl in bad clothes stereotype drives me nuts. For a long while, it seemed the better I looked, the slower and louder people felt they needed to speak to me. Or even worse, speak exclusively to my fiancee (who looks brainy) even though I'm standing right there.

I like fashion. I also like intelligent discussion. I don't think they have to choose one or the other.

However, if fashion becomes ALL you care about - then you just might be stupid.

I've always made a BIG distinction between people who love trends and love fashion. And I tend to lump the latter group into the " critically thinking, artistically expressive" category. This is kind of a sweeping overgeneralization -- you can obv love trends AND fashion, and loving fashion doesn't make you smart y default. I don't know - am I the only one who thinks that a lot of women claim to love fashion but really just dig labels and the class assumptions they inspire? Cuz I do find these women to be inherently idiotic.
Does any of what I've written even make sense?!

@Rhody: No, the only reason that "smart" women feel bad about being into fashion is because they've bought into the anti-fashion feminist diatribe that's just bullshit. Smart women are able to differentiate between images in a magazine and real life, and are able to take control of their bodies and claim responsibility for their actions.

At the same time, speaking as a bespectacled brunette, sometimes the brunettes in glasses and last season's outfits aren't taken seriously either. There's a certain level of polish and fashion sense that seems almost necessary, if not to convey intelligence, at least competence.

On the one hand, I understand that it's about "loving to get dressed, to get dressed up; it's realizing that your clothes can reflect your thoughts, your mood, your passions," but on the other hand, this "self-expression" is achieved through the purchase of material goods, whose life cycles, as Dodai points out, often involve sweatshops in their production. It's a sticky one...

We wouldn't have to feel guilty about liking fashion and shopping if women's interests weren't constructed as "frivilous" whilst men's, no matter how asinine & immature, are considered legit and important.
Yet again, it all comes back to feminism for me.

@Archetype: That statement is problematic because many women do not possess the ability to display three inches of cleavage. Still, I cannot understand why that much cleavage is desired by anyone except men.

@Rhody: i'm with you on that one. flipping throught vogue is only satisfying for the photography aspect of it. it does NOT inspire me to buy things. seeing a normal girl rocking an outfit that she looks comfortable in makes me happy and feel like i can be comfortable in my own skin, too.

Hmm, very interesting issue, although I can't quite buy the final word on this being,

"Show me a woman with a good three inches of cleavage on display, and I'll show you a woman who, rightly or wrongly, has little faith in her powers of conversation.'"

Isn't that just a different iteration of the same generalization about a certain appearance meaning something definitive (/negative) about the woman sporting it?

...I'm going to head over to Target & think about this while I shop the Jovovich-Hawk collection.

Okay, I fit the description in the first paragraph and I have a brain. . .so why does it irk me so much?

@SarahMC: Very true. I also wouldn't feel so guilty if I didn't spend a couple of hours of my workday browsing online shops.

Fashion is an art form. It's unfortunate that the art gets watered down through "famous designers" like LC.

@mepo: "If you are truly intelligent how can you buy designer goods with extortionate prices that feed on the exploitation of women and children who work in terrible conditions and for meagre pay."

Cheap clothes are most likely to be made by random sweatshops and little kids than "designer goods". Not to mention that if that's the only thing you pay attention to when you buy things, that would leave out all sorts of electronic goods, housewares and god knows what else.

The piece portrayed in the photo is something Helena Bonham Carter would consider wearing....she literally wears her eccentricity.

I believe fashion is completely dictated by an individual's personality and lifestyle as well as the influence of media among other things. While there are times I indulge in dressing like the aforementioned Ms. Carter most times I secretly envy actresses & socilaities who're able to afford the luxuries of modern fashion and often find myself scouraging the closest TARGET for afforable, luxury brand rip-offs.

I grew up not able to buy the clothes I wanted, and too chubby to wear a lot of the cute stuff. Now I work my ass off, have the money, and the clothes fit. It's a form of therapy, it makes me happy, and I can recognize that. I think in no way does this make me unintelligent. If that's the case, anybody who collects anything as a hobby is also idiotic. Or goes to nice dinners, drinks nice wine, whatever. Life is too short and you have to do what you enjoy.

What bothers me is that if she has to ask the question, it means that either she or the women to whom she's referring aren't all that smart. Intelligent people know that there is more than one way to be intelligent, and that they are found in all fields and all kinds of colleges. That is, if one is intelligent and not also small-minded and mean-spirited, and there are plenty of those going around: people who believe on some level that if they say someone else is smart, it takes away from their own smartness, because there's only so much of that to go around.

If only, though, if only more of them were concerned about the needs of those of us who know we'll never be super-cute, but just want to be comfortable and look put-together, and like we shopped sometime in the last ten years. I'm not sure that the conversation we're having is as necessary as the one I wish we were having.

I like bookslut, but a little sanctimonious of an article, no? "Freeman namedrops Andrea Dworkin and poet Joseph Parisi as often as she does Anna Wintour..." Yeah, that totally sounds like someone who can tell me if I look "cheap" in the changing room.

Um, ok, liking fashion does not make anyone stupid. However, there is a willful ignorance about sweatshops and environmental abuses that bothers me when people talk about fashion. Why can't we discuss both the cut of a dress and who made the dress?

This is becoming more annoying to me as I'm trying to find affordable, CUTE non-sweatshop clothing. I wish fashion magazines would talk about ethics, but I guess that's not their role in the machine.

@mepo: Thats assuming intelligent people inheriently ethical. One can be intelligent and unethical, or suscribe to a different set of ethics.

I've personally noticed that I'm taken more seriously (and feel "smarter") on the days when I'm not dressed as a shlub.

Today is not one of those days.

@SarahMC: Yes. And this is highlighted by the fact that fashion magazines are automatically labeled as "women's interest" whereas car, technology and sports magazines are labeled as such. I think if there was a way to disconnect the two in the eyes of society/media whatever, it would be much less of an issue.
I don't see anyone arguing about how car magazines are stupid because they show expensive cars that no man can ever afford and that they're trying to steal men's money or oppress them or whatever. But a fashion magazine automatically becomes the guiding bible of ALL women and they need to be controlled so the poor little women wont be influenced by such evils.

I think the reason that women get labeled as stupid because they like fashion is the bullshit label-whore culture that's sprung up around it. Oooo, LV means I'm rich! Chanel means I'm classy! Manolos mean I'm sexy and fun! No, it means you probably spent too much money on a purse or a pair of shoes that will be out of style before you've paid them off. Label-whoring becomes stupid when you spend your rent money on something frivolous. You might LOOK like you're rich, but you still go home to no electricity and an eviction notice. Or more credit card debt than you'll ever pay off. Do you really need a $5000 purse? Of course not.

I like fashion but I am in no way a fashion maven. I shop sales. Clearance racks excite me. (Today I'm wearing a shirt dress from Express that I got on clearance for $20)I like Marshalls and TJ Maxx. I buy things that I like and try to look put together and classy. That's my thing, other people like the hipster look, that's their thing. I don't think it means we're stupid or vapid.

You know, I really like fashion and everything, but it does take up a large amount of brain space. I wear makeup and enjoy doing so, but it does add at least a half an hour to my morning routine.

I've realized this in the past couple of months and have drastically cut down the attention I give to trends and looking flawless. Kudos to all of you who can effortlessly dress on trend and paint your face in the wink of an eye, but I'm going to have to be the devil's advocate here. We want to have it both ways, but as a culture we waste far too much precious time and energy on this stuff.

@Iconocleft: It makes total sense. Victoria Beckham? For me fashion has always been about expressing myself. Even if I could afford half the shit in Vogue it would still be about that and not aspiring to some unrealistic class ideal or what they are telling me I should have for this season. It's all about what you have and can afford within your means and making it work for you.

i like to fancy myself "a smart girl." i wear my (blond) hair in a ponytail and frequently wear nondescript clothes to work. however, i do enjoy fashion, but i can't participate much because i'm poor. and if people think that only stupid girls like fashion, they should spend a few days on the campus of my alma mater. every single person there is supposed to be some sort of genius, and most of the females are fashion whores. they usually have wealthy parents to foot the bill for their fashion addictions. but still. these are tomorrow's leaders and CEOs and they are wearing manolos. so suck it, bad stereotypes!

@eXXX: everything involves some kind of exploitation of someone else in a poorer country. this isnt specific to the fashion industry, it's specific to capitalism.

@Archetype: Part of the reason I love fashion is part of the reason I love architecture. These things can have high levels of artistry that can excite, inspire, frighten and enlighten us. But they can also be basic and utilitarian. And at the end of the day, no matter how high the level of artistry, if they do not function as clothes or building, they are worthless.

And, unlike other art forms in museums, they do not exist as works of art separate from their status as commodities.