news-record.com

OPINION

Clothing trends toward the skimpy

Friday, June 4, 2010
(Updated 5:30 pm)

Sex appeal must be in the eye of the beholder.

When I am brave enough to venture out to a mall, I find myself sitting on a bench beholding the current wonders of the fashion world.

Fashion designers of women’s clothing must be making a fortune on what they are selling today, using less and less fabric.

Do we define a sexy woman as one who keeps it under wraps, one who lets it all hang out or as Spandex gone wild?

Of course, the answer is based on your personal preference. No matter, I just sit back and watch the sideshow pass in revue and have myself a laugh or two as I observe what seems to be the new trend — show me the skin, baby.

Sex seems to have become the dominant factor that influences everything we do today. Most commercials now feature more skin than product. Half-naked or as tight as you can get it without popping the seams seems to be the prevailing style.

I don’t understand why cotton farmers aren’t going out of business.

When I was growing up, young ladies had no choice but to keep covered up. Back then, cloth was bought by the yard and not by the inch.

And no, they didn’t have more to cover up.

Years ago, while visiting the Biltmore House in Asheville, I noticed the chairs in the various sitting areas had legs unusually close to the floor. My curiosity got the best of me, so I asked the tour guide why. She explained that back in those days, women kept their legs and ankles covered so as not to drive men wild. For this reason, chair legs were shortened so when a lady sat down, her dress would cover her ankles.

Just think of the death rate if some of the men back then could sit with me in a mall for a few minutes today. I guess today’s spandex is the equivalent of exposed ankles in 1900.

Every so many generations, we seem to regress back to the days of the loin cloth to protect and cover very little skin.

Personally, I find the age of the tunic and toga sexy, yet practical. Because you could basically only see the head, hands and feet of the person wearing such outfits, I wonder how they determined which women were sexy? Was it based on color, style or amount of cloth worn? Perhaps it was the curiosity of wondering what lay beneath those many yards of cloth.

To me, skirts and dresses are sexy. In other words, I find a woman in a two- or three-piece skirt suit sexy and worthy of a second look. I often compliment women regarding the outfit they are wearing, and most appreciate it.

When I was growing up, girls kept everything under many yards of fabric. They secured themselves under layers and wrapped it all in an outer layer.

No low-cut sweaters and blouses or anything else that might expose a body part. No tight pants. I can hear William Penn High School Principal Sam Burford now: “Little girl, doesn’t your mama know your size?”

Back then, skin was covered from the neck down to the fancy socks they wore. Oh yes, the curves were there, but the outfits sent a warning message to drive the speed limit or suffer grave consequences — Dad’s revenge. (Men over 60 are reading this and nodding their heads because they remember.)

When I look through my 1956, ’57, and ’58 William Penn yearbooks, I see my definition of sexy from the beginning to the end. The only skin that I see showing is by the dance group, cheerleaders and majorettes. The outfits the girls wore were tasteful and no one looked like they were wiped down in Vaseline and jammed into a half yard of Spandex.

I remember well the cardigan sweaters that girls seemed to favor. Not only did they cover everything from the neck down to the waist, but simply by adding a button-on collar, you could have a new look every day of the week. Cardigan sweaters, long skirts and dresses worked for this author and fit his definition of sexy.

Don’t get me wrong. It was nice seeing young women in shorts, swimsuits and hot pants, but the look itself spelled trouble. That vision of a dad’s shotgun made that a not-so-sexy look. That’s why I am still around to watch the Spandex parade today and have a laugh or two.

According to dumblaws.com, Charlotte has a law that says, “Women must have their bodies covered by at least 16 yards of cloth at all times.” Take that, Spandex! Wonder how many arrests are being made in Charlotte daily?

When he’s not “people watching” at a mall, Glenn Chavis researches and writes about High Point’s black history. Contact him at Storytime40@aol.com.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search