Target? Bulls-Eye.

Fashion and trends are a strange phenomenon.  Dating back almost as long as the birth of the nation, every twenty years or so brings about a drastic change in clothing styles.  However, 1992 up to the present has ushered in few profound differences aside from technologically.  How can a period that has given life to personal computers, cell phones, mp3 players, email, social media and ‘i’ everything also be such a stagnant time for something as rudimentary as textiles and buttons?  Not even mass globalization has managed to have much of an effect on burgeoning cuts and colors.

Many use the obvious Madonna/ Lady Gaga comparison as a way to showcase just how little has changed pre-Clinton administration.  The fact is, such examples are everywhere.  As entertainment magazines push their Nirvana 20^th Anniversary issues off the shelves, one pauses briefly to realize not much has shifted post Cobain’s tragic death.  Pretty Woman and Jurassic Park could, and have been re-released with different characters and a glossier sheen today without any distinct complexities or decade-revealing clues.  Julia Roberts is no different than Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blonde: a classic underdog who achieves unlikely dreams with the help of one of two people (usually the leading men) who believe in them.  Jurassic Park is Avatar without the recent tech-savvy.  One might argue that My Fair Lady and King Kong were part of the same vein as the former.  Concerning basic plot line, this is a fairly accurate statement; however, it is inconceivable that anyone would mistake either of the oldest films as occurring in any other time period than they did.  Such is not the case regarding the previous examples—it is as if no time passed between them.

There has been speculation that the lack of distinctive change in pop culture, namely music and films, can be attributed to the lengthy careers that stars have attained through studio deals and iron-clad contracts.  Yet, has this not always been the case to a certain extent?  If someone was an icon fifty years ago, they were in the spotlight for longer than their 15 minutes.  Popularity sells and thus will be in demand for as long as it is what the public wants.  Before Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt, there was Robert De Niro and Jack Nicholson, and earlier Frank Sinatra and John Wayne—not to mention the female leads!  What’s different is the length of time the same exact acting style and appearance are remaining desirable on a mass level.  Earlier actors and performers had to mold to what the trends insisted.  The best example of the new age, Groundhog Day style mentality is Jennifer Aniston.  Nothing about Aniston, from her silky straight dirty blonde coif to her self-deprecating, if not downright awkward ‘pretty’ girl humor, has been tampered with since her days as Rachel Greene on Friends.  Clearly Jen has benefited from following the age-old ‘if it ain’t broke’ mentality shared by many of her counterparts.

The newest form of innovation involves nothing completely original, but instead borrows from a myriad of old styles, themes, concept and successes.  Hip-hop, even from its earliest days has been an art of collaboration and heavy sampling.  The heightened popularity of house music, remixes, djs and performers like Girl Talk—who have built their fame entirely on piecing together samples of other artists’ work—speaks for itself.  Maybe there really is not anything new under the sun, but does that mean everyone in the fashion, design and entertainment industry should completely throw in the towel?  Perhaps the jeans and t-shirts sensibility is the only place left to turn to for comfort and predictability amid the rest of the tumultuous political and economic landscape.  Designers working throughout the 1980s and prior to that time were creating in a vacuum; the nation’s socioeconomic landscape was much simpler.  Along with the internet and ipads came a constant connect and awareness which holds power but also instills a weariness and at times, a fear.  Pair such a widespread knowledge with a world that moves equally fast, and people on the whole no longer yearn for progression in every facet of life. 

Some arenas have been best determined more stagnant, and it naturally follows that clothing—something which tyrannical leaders or the DOW cannot force us to change—would stay much as it had been before: before technology started to outrun the human intellect.  Even the way in which Americans protest the negative changes occurring around them is on replay, as the Occupy movement bears a striking resemblance to the late 1960s and 70s counterculture era.  And the ultimate irony?  As fashion and culture lay scarcely touched, style enthusiasts seem more involved and enthused than ever before in the publicity and hype of that which is ‘nouveau’.  Perhaps blogging and twitter accounts have made it all too easy to share our opinions; and yet, who are these authors but messengers of what has been labeled cool and desirable by corporations. 

The Targets, Victoria Secrets, Starbucks, IO Metros and Banana Republics: these are the brands by whom trends are ignited and just as easily, stifled.  When such a small pool of stores holds as much influence as these and other mall/ strip mall giants, it only makes sense that corporate heads would push to maintain that monopoly by constantly reassuring the public that their way is the best way and needs no renovation.  Are comfort and economics edging out the genuine newness that Americans have always been known for; or, is it maybe just the fact that the status quo pleases the masses for the time being and no one is suffering for it?  Cliches aside, time will truly tell where fashion ventures or does not venture.

Here's to you J-Aniston...don't think that just b/c you're boring I haven't seen every episode of Friends 20 times.  I watch for Phoebe and Joey, but still...

Thanks to Miss Brittany Koole and Vanity Fair magazine for her/ their suggestion to write on such an engrossing topic; for some of her very own wisdom and wit, do see: 'To be titled at some point when I'm feeling creative...'.  As always I greatly encourage any and all comments and feedback.  Y-O-U are my W-H-Y!  Here's to a wonderful weekend--it's almost here so power on :)  Merry almost Merry and I'll see some of you cuties soon!

XO XHOE,

Carls-in-Charge

Surviving Judgement

Hi blog family!  Today’s story is inspired by a tip from one of my favorite readers and best friends, Miss Devin Payne J  Hope you all had a short and painless Monday.  I went shopping with the fabulous Adrianne Iberg and played with my dog…what can I say, life it hard. ;)  Tomorrow it’s back to work with a yearly contract-renewal meeting for the Levitt Shell, an awesome local music venue which was completely renovated in 2008—about 50 years after Elvis gave one of his first concerts there.  Memphis ride or die, y’all.  And now for our feature presentation:

As most of the world honors a day in which to commemorate HIV and AIDS education, November 23rd, it is apparent that ignorance still exists and in circles that have access to all the knowledge available.  The recent denied admittance of a middle school child is a very poignant example of the mental block millions of people still experience regarding HIV.  Born with the virus, the young man is able to stay healthy by taking vitamins and five daily pills.  Even though the 13-year-old boy is an accomplished student athlete and on the honor roll—he already speaks two foreign languages, the private Philadelphia boarding school refuses to allow him to attend due to his HIV-positive status. 

         The boy and his family filed a lawsuit against the school which in turn filed a federal a federal court request to approve their decision.  Administrators argue that the health and safety of the over 1800 current students is the main issue behind their decision.  The Milton-Hershey School is unlike most other boarding schools, as it is completely tuition-free and intended for low-income households.  Because students live together in dorms with 10 to 12 other peers, the school argues "no child can be assumed to always make responsible decisions which protect the well being of others," according to Yahoo! Shine.

         The flaw in the school’s argument involves the transmission of the disease, as only direct contact with certain bodily fluids—those not exposed in daily circumstances—can cause another party to become infected.  Further, the National Association of State Boards of Education has voiced its expert opinion that no risks exist for those in day care, school or sports with an HIV positive or AIDS afflicted person.  Milton-Hersh cannot point to any contractual documentation asserting health safety issues either; its statement only addresses “need, motivation, and personal character.”

         Despite the school appearing private, students are accepted based on merit and anyone who meets the outlined standards is supposed to be deemed eligible.  It does not seem fair that someone who already has to face a debilitating disease—one which they themselves had no part in contracting—also has to be faced with the disappointment of being denied an education they have worked hard to receive.  This young man never got to choose a life with HIV; shouldn’t he be allowed to at least choose where to go to school, in order to have the brightest future?  Adolescents such as himself are an inspiration, not a burden to society.

         For more on this story visit Philadelphia NBC news affiliate’s page at: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/health/Hershey-School-HIV-Lawsuit-Boy-134802368.html.

         Thanks for reading!  As a newly-initiated member of the Pinterest phenomenon, I give you one of my top ‘pin picks’:

Love you all, CAR-CAR <3

Change you can believe in

As I search for interesting, as well as important and meaningful topics to pursue both myself and for the benefit of my audience, I come across lawsuits, efforts for cheaper public education and health topics including birth control.  Women worldwide have freedoms and options that even their greatest enemies cannot take away.  And then there’s Afghanistan, the middle-eastern prison home to millions of bright and capable women who will never have the chance to live up to their potential.  No law can protect these individuals, because the government is instead in place to stifle any type of independence and personal growth.  What is even more difficult to fathom is the fact that these countries have so much wealth and first world resources yet continue to regard and treat women in the region as sub-human entities. 

            While many of these countries are attempting to form some semblance of a democracy, these discrepancies in gender equality become all the more blatant and out-of-place.  This July there was a march in Kabul to speak out against the sexual harassment and gender inequality rampant in the nation, organized by a young woman currently studying in Pennsylvania, and the co-founder of Young Women for Change.  Protests such as this are extremely rare, as women are not a priority in the culture and even made out to be the villains themselves and to blame for harassment instances.  Women of all ages, including the most conservative and old-fashioned, are frequently the target of men young and old when walking to work or to worship.  “Even my mother, who is a 40-plus teacher always dressed in her school uniform, arrives home upset almost every day because of the disgusting comments she receives”.

            The group that led the march, Young Women for Change, had only held its first meeting two months prior to the march, and already had arranged a crowd of fifty supporters to march alongside.  With the aid of police, it seems that these marches will only grow in strength and influence, giving women the first palpable effort to believe in.  YWFC has been welcomed by many unexpected followers; from the first meeting, triple the expected number of people were in attendance—women of all ages, ethnicities, and even a group of Afghan-Americans via Skype. 

            Despite a surprisingly positive turnout, the founding members had to face such blatant discrimination as being turned away from meetings at Kabul-a public-University for no reason other than that they were all women.  The founders persevered however, and formed a campaign of sorts which incorporated posters, flyers, radio ads, various social media outlets, and TV interviews and debates—all culminating with the first-ever walk promoting street harassment awareness.  Founder Noorjahan Akbar, only 20 years old, was quoted in the New York Times discussing her newfound love of the country she has always called home.

“Thursday, July 14, 2011 was the first day I felt like I belonged to the city I have lived in for most of my life.  Despite Afghanistan’s history of war, and its news filled with suicide attacks, violence, Talibanism and corruption, I had found something to be proud of in my country.”

The organization now boasts a monthly lecture series, Afghan library building efforts, research grants and a male advocacy branch.  To say that this non-profit and young woman are inspirational is a understatement.  For the first time in history, the nations with the worst history of degrading and undermining half of their population may just have the chance to come to a democratic and peaceful state.  If it takes comities and police aid to allow women to safely walk the streets, then these small steps are much more than that.

           If you’d like to help in the effort, you can join the facebook page at: www.facebook.com/ywc.af.

Thanks as always for reading!