Althouse: Things called curious that are not actually curious.

May 14, 2015

Things called curious that are not actually curious.

"... there is curiously no code about how much skin male prom-goers can show."

From the comments: "This article reminded me of this cartoon."

39 comments:

Anonymous said...: Why has prom lost its article? Today you hear "go to Prom" rather than "go to _the_ Prom."

Peter; 5/14/15, 9:19 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: ... there is curiously no code about how much skin male prom-goers can show.

We know this how? Have any guys gotten into the prom wearing an outfit with spaghetti straps, or a bare back, or showing too much leg?

The fact that men's fashion does not bump up against the dress code does not mean that there is no corresponding dress code.

Unless you show me the actual, written dress code, or show a practice of men being allowed to attend prom in an outfit that would get a woman thrown out, then you got nothing.; 5/14/15, 9:24 AM
Darrell said...: Laslo banked on that.; 5/14/15, 9:25 AM
rhhardin said...: Display doesn't work unless something is also concealed.; 5/14/15, 9:26 AM
mccullough said...: The prom is an outdated social passage. Schools should get rid of proms and require bland unisex uniforms for school.; 5/14/15, 9:26 AM
Kylos said...: I think the article disappeared mostly because you are reading a British paper.; 5/14/15, 9:31 AM
Brando said...: Generally, rules and laws are passed in response to something that needs to be prohibited or regulated (in the eyes of those passing the laws). This is why a state may not have a law against incest not because everyone's so pro-incest there, but because incest was so rare that it wasn't seen as a problem that needed addressing.

So they don't have rules about how much skin the boys can show at proms. They probably also don't have rules against bringing your own chainsaw to the prom, either. Is this because of pro-chainsaw forces? Or could it be that Jessica Valenti is an overpaid idiot?; 5/14/15, 9:31 AM
Trashhauler said...: I couldn't afford to go to the Prom. I blame this lack of privilege for all the subsequent social failings I've suffered in the last 46 years.; 5/14/15, 9:40 AM
chickelit said...: Steven Tyler used to wear pants like that back in his Aerosmith days and before he started de-Jeener-ating.; 5/14/15, 9:43 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: A tight qiana shirt, with four or five buttons unbuttoned, and a zodiac pendant over a hairy chest.

You should be daaan-cing, yeah.; 5/14/15, 9:53 AM
MayBee said...: Eric the Fruit Bat- I love you for remembering Qiana.; 5/14/15, 10:15 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Wasn't Qiana just Dupont's new trademark after Nylon became generic?; 5/14/15, 10:18 AM
MayBee said...: Althouse- it was nylon, but it was silkier than just nylon.

It had its own ads!; 5/14/15, 10:31 AM
Jaq said...: The ideal state of affairs for the left is that whatever is not explicitly allowed is forbidden. So it is natural that such a regulation would be needed, because, under the current state of affairs, boys are required to wear buras to the prom. No controlling authority yet authorizing the show of any skin whatsoever.; 5/14/15, 10:52 AM
Shanna said...: Generally, rules and laws are passed in response to something that needs to be prohibited or regulated

Male formal attire doesn't show skin. Female formalwear does. This has been true at least since Jane Austen days, really.

I think some of these rules are going a bit far, but I suspect some of the girls were going a bit far so I'm kind of in the middle. But to ban stuff that Grace Kelly would have worn (strapless) or jane austen or other ladies seems excessive.

And I suspect the people making some of these rules (spaghetti straps aren't allowed?) have never tried to shop for a dress that fits them.; 5/14/15, 11:02 AM
MayBee said...: And I suspect the people making some of these rules (spaghetti straps aren't allowed?) have never tried to shop for a dress that fits them.

When my kids did Cotillion, those were the rules. 1" straps for girls, nylons always.; 5/14/15, 11:19 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "Althouse- it was nylon, but it was silkier than just nylon."

It was high-quality nylon.

"It had its own ads!"

Yes, that was Dupont doing rebranding.; 5/14/15, 11:21 AM
Ann Althouse said...: My father worked for Dupont, by the way. So did his father.

"Better Living Through Chemistry."

That felt like a great idea back then.

The synthetic fabrics were referred to as "miracle fabrics."

Then the whole natural fibers thing came along and it became low class to wear anything synthetic.; 5/14/15, 11:23 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
Benjamin: Yes, sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening
Benjamin: Yes, I am.
Mr. McGuire: Plastics.; 5/14/15, 11:33 AM
Sigivald said...: Curiously there's no need for such a code!

It's like there are cultural differences between men and women or some inexplicable, unpredictable thing like that that nobody could have possibly thought about before typing those words!

(Ignorance got it right, I think.); 5/14/15, 11:43 AM
George Grady said...: I always had the impression that nylon was the thread, but qiana was the fabric. You know, qiana is to nylon as denim is to cotton.; 5/14/15, 11:51 AM
MayBee said...: Then the whole natural fibers thing came along and it became low class to wear anything synthetic

Yes!
And now we are back to performance fabrics and microfiber.; 5/14/15, 11:52 AM
mccullough said...: Taffeta prom dresses look good and aren't as hard to access as they would seem; 5/14/15, 11:59 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "And now we are back to performance fabrics and microfiber."

Microfiber = polyester, rebranded.

Polyester was the generic name for the Dupont brand that didn't become generic: Dacron.; 5/14/15, 12:37 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Wikipedia says: "Qiana is a silky nylon fiber developed in 1962 at the DuPont Experimental Station by Stanley Brooke Speck. The fiber was christened Qiana when introduced by DuPont in 1968."

So it's a fiber, but a particular fiber.

My father's father worked at the Experimental Station.; 5/14/15, 12:39 PM
buwaya said...: "That felt like a great idea back then. "

It still is.
Its surprising where you can find synthetics of all kinds.
There's also a big world out there. 7+ billion people all needing clothing and textile goods of all sorts, and getting more of it than they've ever had.
In the meantime there aren't that many more sheep around, though cotton production has been expanding steadily.; 5/14/15, 12:47 PM
Wilbur said...: I remember there used to be a home permanent product named "Prom".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB2pS2xfuhg; 5/14/15, 12:53 PM
Known Unknown said...: Man is Jessica Valenti predictable.; 5/14/15, 12:54 PM
southcentralpa said...: no "men in shorts" tag???; 5/14/15, 1:19 PM
MayBee said...: I feel like a woman named Qiana would name her daughter Quinoa.; 5/14/15, 1:54 PM
MayBee said...: Oh Althouse, I hope you had a Qiana prom dress.; 5/14/15, 1:55 PM
SweatBee said...: And I suspect the people making some of these rules (spaghetti straps aren't allowed?) have never tried to shop for a dress that fits them.

Probably 90% of women do not look their best in strapless and spaghetti strap dresses. It is difficult to get a flattering or proper fit in those things. There's the "back fat," the armpit overhang, the chest-flattening effect, the uniboob effect, the weird thing that happens where from the side you can tell that the top of the bodice is awkwardly sticking out a couple of inches from the person's body, the "linebacker who just got out of the shower and popped on a towel" look if you happen to have square-shaped shoulders, the ones that look like they're going to fall off if the person doesn't move just perfectly, and the list goes on and on...

Strapless dresses usually look like they are wearing the person instead of the other way around.

So why is that all you see when you walk into a formal dress shop? Because strapless and spaghetti strap dresses are cheaper to manufacture than other styles.; 5/14/15, 2:26 PM
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...: Shanna said...

But to ban stuff that Grace Kelly would have worn (strapless) or jane austen or other ladies seems excessive.

I think the schools would be overjoyed if these girls dressed like Grace Kelly, Marylin Monroe, or Sophia Loren. I also think everyone around here is not taking "strapless" or "backless" in there modern-day meaning, which is actually "assless".

(Except Lazlo, of course); 5/14/15, 4:38 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I did not go to the prom. It was a hippie thing to do.

In fact, I've never been to any event where formalwear was worn.; 5/14/15, 5:41 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Not a hiipie thing to do, I mean.; 5/14/15, 5:41 PM
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...: Mom2Es,

I dunno. Anne-Sophie Mutter always wears strapless, and they look perfect to me. Then again, she can afford serious tailoring if need be.

Ann, I went to my prom, and once to an SF Symphony opening gala, and before that to a few Juilliard concerts where my mom endlessly coiffed and primped me. But I say stuff formal wear. You don't need to go as far as I do (T-shirt and jeans, most of the time) to think the whole concept is a mite silly.; 5/14/15, 5:49 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Young women compete for the attention of young men by showing skin. The opposite is not true.; 5/14/15, 7:30 PM
Fritz said...: Terry said...
Young women compete for the attention of young men by showing skin. The opposite is not true.

The equivalent is flashing a wad of money.; 5/14/15, 8:12 PM
ken in tx said...: I had a Qiana shirt in the early 80s. Girls I danced with in clubs would rub their hands, and sometimes other parts, across my chest, and say, "I love your shirt." I loved the attention. I wore that shirt out.; 5/14/15, 8:19 PM