Bunch of Arse!!!

Time for some Argufying and Grumbulating, as my Dad would say

Bunch of Arse! - one of the more eloquent expressions my brother, Graham, always used (and probably still does) when something really pissed him off. Needless to say, it seems incredibly apt for this rant - both figuratively and literally - because it's exactly the ridiculous abundance of arse everywhere, flopping below super-short-shorts and crotch-level hemlines all over Vancouver this summer, that is annoying me no end!

Obviously there are millions of men who, with drooly tongues hanging out, would vehemently contradict me here and demand a LOT of photographic/video evidence. But I can honestly tell you that I, personally, am sick of having to witness so many females - of varying shapes and sizes - parading their crotch and their pert, dimpley, wibbly-wobbly or otherwise, arse cheeks all over the place on a daily basis as this summer's 'hottest' trend. Since I work downtown, I know for a fact that many of them are actually going to the office dressed like that! They're certainly not all working at peeler bars. Seriously - are these fashionistas all so hopelessly insecure and void of brains, personality, intellect and the bare minimum (excuse the pun) of decorum, that they believe hanging out their arse cheeks for everyone to endure is the best way to be noticed? Alas, I know that's a rhetorical question - of course they do! How very sad. Is this really what we've come to? Is this the new 'equality'? Well, hopefully not because the last thing I need to witness is a similar trend of men's dingley-dangley bits flopping, flapping and dingle-dangling everywhere. Ewwww no thank you. And that's not even being sexist because, in case you're still in any doubt, I'd really rather not see women's bits on parade either thank you very much. Call me crazy and old-fashioned n'all that......

And how bitterly ironic then to hear the ongoing legal saga of Lululemon, provider of your (ridiculously over-priced) staple Kitsilano-babe wear, being sued for it's "see-through pants", especially since - see-through or not - they still give better rear-end coverage than most summer clothing out there right now.

Perhaps I simply missed the memo that declared women/girls should start going out in their underwear. Although, in many cases, even underwear would be more modest than much (too much) of what I've seen lately! Heck, I have Victoria Secret briefs that cover more than most of these micro-shorts and so-called 'dresses' and the flimsy lingerie now commonplace on the street, at work, on public transit, at the grocery store.....

A relatively modest take
on most of the streetwear
lingerie I've witnessed

Just the other morning I was heading to catch the bus to work and a woman of about 35 or so was walking ahead of me and tugging frantically at the hem of her "dress" - the length of your average blouse - to cover her bum, which was on full view as she tried to lady-run her way to the approaching bus. And as I quickly passed her (for obvious reasons) I fought the urge to say, "Pssst! You forgot your skirt. Your arse is all hanging out back there." Needless to say, she missed the bus and I can only hope she went home to finish getting dressed while waiting for the next one.

The ultimate fashion victims, that I'm seeing in frighteningly increasing numbers, are those wearing ugly, shredded, denim cut-offs so barely-there that even their front pockets hang below the leg-length, flapping around like redundant toilet paper and emphasizing the crotch. Because if it's all hanging out at the back, you can bet your bottom dollar there's a pretty nasty view from the front too.

Sooo sick of seeing this....and worse!

Or, to add insult to injury, there's always the above look coupled with chunky, slovenly UGG boots! Ughhh!

No this is not me but it is the 'look'
that I'm seeing everywhere lately.

Coming in close behind (get it?) is the soft-porn hideousness of the t-shirt/blouse-and-no-bottoms look (as mentioned earlier). Well, bottoms are included but only of the fleshy variety. Maybe I imagined it, but surely women used to at least add a skirt or trousers or something between their belly-button and shoes. Didn't they??? With the amount of flesh on display that has already seared my retinas around Vancouver, 'twould appear I'm hopelessly out of touch, because they sure aren't wearing anything to cover their lower half lately. And that includes the mandatory thong (aka g-string) bikinis prevalent on the volleyball courts that monopolize Vancouver's beaches.

As I mentioned in a recent post, this same god-awful bunch of arse trend is being sold in most stores and to girls as young as 3 - quite literally! Now tell me that's not perverse! What do the strong, forthright, bra-burning heroes of the Women's Liberation Movement make of all this? Surely, alive or twisting in their graves, they must despair of having wasted so much time and effort in fighting an admirable battle to bring us this far only to have us slide all the way backwards.....or, to be more specific, to turn years of equal rights efforts completely on their arse?

I don't get it. I juuuust don't get it. It goes intellectually way beneath my comprehension - a level of intelligence that I'm thankfully just too smart to grasp. How can women ever legitimately expect to be taken seriously when they simply parade themselves as slutty, dumb-ass, slabs of meat. Pampering to a bunch of fashion and marketing gurus (predominantly male at a guess) who decided we should all model ourselves on the utterly pointless existence of the Kardashian clan. And, as this New York Times article also agrees, you can tell within seconds of perusing the average children's/girl's clothing department, they're aiming to start them younger and younger. It's pretty disgusting - on so many levels!

Probably just as well that I don't have a daughter - I swear I'd be dressing her in a burka by now!