Paper Proposal: The Miniskirt

Description

The miniskirt is a tube of fabric that sits on the hips of the wearer and hits at mid-thigh. It is made of stretch denim; the fabric is 99% cotton and 1% spandex, with the spandex giving the denim just enough stretch to be comfortable and conform to the wearer’s shape. The skirt is dark blue with distressed fading on thighs and whiskering (horizontal bands of faded fabric where the fabric has wrinkled over time) at the lower hips. The skirt does not look worn, so the distressing was most likely factory-made to produce an already worn-in look. The skirt has tan contrast stitching, with seams down the front and back and a back yoke. The stitching is noticeable, giving the skirt a casual look, but it is not overly bold. The skirt is a bit rough to the touch and has slightly raised vertical ridges.

The skirt has a wide hem and waistband, and the waistband is interrupted by six belt loops – one on each hip in the front, one on each side slightly towards the back of the skirt, and two in the back center of the waistband. It has five pockets: two rounded front pockets, a small slit change pocket on right side, and two back pockets. The back pockets give the skirt a more unique look, with pointed bottoms and flaps that snap closed. The front pockets are held together with dark bronze grommets at the corners. The skirt features a short zippered fly with a bronze YKK brand zipper. The waistband fastens with a faded bronze button on the outside and a clear plastic button on the inside.

The skirt contains writing in several places. The brand name, “American Eagle,” is embroidered on the back inner waistband in tan cursive. The front waistband button and back pocket snaps each feature the words “AE since 1977” in the same cursive style. The skirt also features two tags, hidden from view on the inside of the skirt. A small tag is attached to the back inner waistband and contains the skirt’s size. Another slightly larger tag is attached to the inner front waistband above the left pocket and contains washing instructions in both French and English.

The skirt is machine washable and can be put in the dryer on a low setting. It was made in China. The even stitching and uniform features show that it was mass-produced; however, there are several loose stitches and the garment does not seem to be of terribly high quality. The tags have faded to a grey-blue and the ink has run slightly, showing that the skirt has been washed at least a few times. The inside of the skirt is a grayish-tan color and has an unfinished quality. The overall styling of the skirt is simple, and the round buttons, cursive writing, and the hip-hugging fabric and cut of the skirt give it a curvy aesthetic.


Central Questions
1) How does the miniskirt express identity? (Age, Gender, Ethnicity, Religion, Personal Values, Taste/Aesthetic) What messages does it send, intentionally and unintentionally?

2) Can the miniskirt be generalized? Do they all function in basically the same way, or do different fabrics and styles fundamentally change the message of the skirt?

3) Does wearing a miniskirt keep women from being taken seriously? (Especially in the professional world, but also in cases like the Southwest Airlines incident).

4) Are mini-skirts a tool of feminism (women having the power to express their sexuality), or are they a tool of patriarchy (men gazing at women). How does each group view and use the miniskirt?

5) What effects does wearing a mini-skirt have on the wearer and on those around her?


Argument

The miniskirt was originally worn in the 1960s as an expression of feminism and uninhibited sexuality. Third-wave feminists of the late 1990s and early 2000s see the miniskirt in a similar way. However, the culture at large disagrees, and wearing a miniskirt sends a message that is the antithesis of feministic. On the surface, it invites the sexual attention of men, turning the wearer into nothing more than an aesthetic object. However, more damagingly, the miniskirt sends a message that the wearer is young and not serious enough for “the real world.” This is especially problematic in a business setting: while men might appreciate a young colleague’s sexy work outfits, they may cost her the benefit of being taken seriously in the workplace and damage her ability to rise in the ranks of the corporate world.


Annotated Bibliography

Costello, Carrie Yang. “Changing Clothes: Gender Inequality and Professional Socialization.” NWSA Journal, 16.2 (Summer 2004): 138-155.

This article discusses how clothing demonstrates identity in a professional setting. It discusses a young law student named Lydia who begins her training wearing short skirts but switches to a more androgynous look. It is especially interesting because it compares Lydia to the character of Ally McBeal, a TV lawyer who was famous for wearing very short miniskirts and sexing up professional dress in the late 1990s.

Frankel, Susannah. “Get shorty: the mini’s back.” The Independent. 31 January, 2001.

This article provides an interesting look at the miniskirt at the turn of the 21st century. Frankel touches on both the history and debate surrounding the miniskirt in her article, as well as looking at some current trends.

Hammers, Michele L. “Cautionary Tales of Liberation and Female Professionalsm: The Case Against Ally McBeal.” Western Journal of Communication. 69.2 (April 2005): 167-182.

This article uses the TV show Ally McBeal as a case study to examine how female identity in the working world has been played out in recent years. It discusses feminism and portrayal of the female body in the professional world, concluding that women such as Ally McBeal are not, in fact, in control of their sexuality, but are, on the contrary, playing into the patriarchal system.

“Miniskirt.” Icons: A Portrait of England. 27 February 2008. http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/miniskirt

This website provides a comprehensive history and analysis of the miniskirt. Articles cover topics such as the miniskirt and women’s lib and the creator of the miniskirt, Mary Quant. The site also features lots of images.

Nicks, Joan. “Hemlines.” St. James Encyclopedia for Pop Culture. Gale Group, 2002.

This article gives a brief history of skirt lengths. It discusses how skirts have been represented in popular culture since the 1950s, such as Lucy of “I Love Lucy” and Harriet of “The Adventures of Ozzy and Harriet.” It culminates with a discussion about the late 1990s TV character Ally McBeal.

Schoetz, David. “Underdressed Passenger or Overreacting Airline?” ABCNews.com. September, 2007. http://abcnews.go.com/US/Travel/story?id=3571435&page=1

This news article from ABC News discusses the case of Kyla Ebbert, the young woman who was recently kicked off of a Southwest Airlines flight for wearing a skirt that was deemed too short. It shows how the miniskirt is still a controversial fashion item in our society.

Wilson, Elizabeth. Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity. Rutgers University Press: New Brunswick, New Jersey, 2003.

This book explores the function of fashion in the modern era, rejecting older theories and explaining that modern society uses clothing to express different messages than it did previously. Chapters explore topics such as fashion and eroticism, gender and identity, and fashion and popular culture. Although the miniskirt is only explicitly mentioned a few times, the arguments made by the authors about the aesthetics and meaning of modern fashion are certainly applicable to the miniskirt.

Assorted clothing websites:
Aeropostale
American Eagle
Charlotte Russe
Kohl’s
Nordstrom
Old Navy

These are some examples of the skirts that are currently for sale at several American retail chains. Looking at the current trends shows the miniskirt’s popularity right now as well as who is wearing it and how it is being marketed.

Pod People

I’m sitting behind the counter working at the UMBC Registrar’s Office when a student glides through the door, nodding his head to an invisible beat. I call out, “Can I help you?” but the student’s eyes are glazed over and he isn’t even looking my way. Two thin wires snake out of his pea coat and disappear under his matching scarf, and I sigh with recognition as I ask again. He looks up, surprised, and fumbles in his pocket to turn off the iPod I know is lurking within. The small, white buds continue to dangle from his ears as I attempt to solve his registration problem; he doesn’t bother to remove them, knowing that once he leaves, he will immediately turn up the music again.

iPods are one of the most annoying, overhyped gadgets ever created. They were cool at first, back when they actually were one of the best-functioning mp3 players for the price. However, as technology has continued to evolve, the iPod has not kept up. Sure, they have introduced new models, like the iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano, and the newest, the iPod Touch. However, these models have not added any features that are important enough to justify their ridiculous prices. Other players offer more storage space for a much lower price. Additionally, iPods only allow users to play certain file types, mainly ones sold by their companion music download site, iTunes. Users also must use the iTunes software in order to upload music files onto their iPod. In the name of “ease of use,” Apple has greatly limited the functionality of the iPod in the hopes that it can be mastered by everyone from the hipster college student walking around campus to the soccer mom who wants a soundtrack for her afternoon yoga session.

And it’s the “iPod mentality” that many iPod users have that is so annoying. The word “iPod” has become synonymous with “mp3 player” for many Americans, providing an unfortunate amount of free advertising for Apple. There are plenty of people out there who don’t even know that other brands of mp3 players exist, let alone do any research to see if a different player might better suit their needs. The iPod has become so overhyped that people assume that

a) their life will not be complete if they don’t have their music with them at all times;
b) having an iPod gives them license to tune out the world and be rude to those around them; and
c) their iPod is not only the best mp3 player out there, it’s the greatest piece of technology ever invented.

There’s nothing wrong with buying an iPod if you’re willing to shell out extra cash just because something is shiny and has a scrolling wheel. All I ask is that you don’t walk around smugly congratulating yourself for being an iPod owner, and please, please don’t try to brainwash me into joining the cult of the i.

American Exhibiton v. 2.0

I am obsessed with my digital camera. I seriously doubt that I am the only person in the class who feels that way, let alone the only person in America. Seemingly everywhere I go, people are whipping out their tiny, pocket-sized cameras and snapping dozens of photos. Digital cameras seem to simply be one more incarnation of America’s obsession with tech gadgets.

Then again, Americans have been fostering an obsession with cameras since back in the 1840s when the daguerreotype was invented. By the early 1900s, Brownie Cameras, with their modest price of $1, were in the hands of quite a few Americans. Maybe the narcissistic urge to preserve your image isn’t a new one at all, but it’s definitely a concept that we seem to have perfected in this country. A combination of emerging technology and record levels of self-absorption among today’s generation of young adults (the so-called “Me” generation) is taking this exhibitionist phenomenon to new levels.

The instant gratification afforded by digital technology is a major part of this. In just a few hours, you can take hundreds of photos of yourself, upload them to a computer, delete any unflattering pictures, and upload them to the internet. The ease of this process has afforded Americans a major opportunity to create their own online celebrity. Photo-sharing and social networking websites such as Flikr, Facebook, and MySpace, have allowed Americans to happily put their entire lives on display. It was an exciting day when Facebook added photo-sharing capabilities, because now you could display entire albums of silliness and debauchery in addition to a carefully chosen profile picture. Of course, there would be no point to this if there was no comment feature allowing instant feedback from Facebook friends and the internet at large.

And that’s really the main reason for putting up photos – wanting attention. I am by no means putting people down for this, because I am certainly guilty of it myself. Of course, there are times it crosses a line – when you post thousands of photos of yourself in under a month, or when you spend hours sitting alone in your room, taking MySpace-angled photos of yourself in the mirror, and then act shocked when 40-year-old men comment on your swimsuit poses and try to add you as an online friend.

Photography is a great activity to share with friends and family. However, a lot of Americans aren’t taking photos for the sake of art, or even to preserve memories. They are doing it because they can, and because they love looking at themselves in their tiny LCD screen. Camera manufacturers know this and are raking in the dough. Other corporations know this as well, and you can be sure they will be Googling you to see how many drunken party pictures they find before extending you that job offer. As long as you know that your professor, boss, and future mother-in-law are likely to see any photos you take, click away!


My friend Caitlin and I spent last night taking silly pictures of ourselves at Arundel Mills. Then a mall cop made us put the camera away, because shots of the inside of the mall are no longer allowed due to the threat of terrorism.

American Exhibiton

I am obsessed with my digital camera. I seriously doubt that I am the only person in the class who feels that way, let alone the only person in America. Seemingly everywhere I go, people are pulling their cameras out of bags and pockets and purses to snap photos, show off their handiwork to others, or even record secret videos of their friends acting stupid in public (there is no doubt that a trip to YouTube is in these videos’ future…). Digital cameras seem to simply be one more incarnation of America’s obsession with tech gadgets.

Then again, Americans have been fostering an obsession with cameras since back in the 1840s when the daguerreotype was invented. By the early 1900s, Brownie Cameras, with their modest price of $1, were in the hands of quite a few Americans. It’s not like taking silly pictures of yourself is a new phenomenon, either. Both of my grandmothers have quite a few funny shots of themselves with their friends when they were teenagers and young women.

So maybe the narcissistic urge to preserve your image isn’t a new one at all, but it’s definitely a concept that we seem to have perfected in this country. Digital technology has afforded us even more opportunity to do so than ever. Instant gratification is certainly a major part of this (and Americans love the word “instant”). It’s so much more enjoyable to take hundreds of pictures of yourself over the course of a few days when you can see each individual picture as soon as it is done, rather than waiting to fill up a whole roll of film and then waiting even longer for the photos to be processed.

Other technologies contribute to these urges as well. Practically unlimited storage space allows you to take as many pictures as you want. There is no need to stop and think about the value of a shot before snapping away – you can always go back and cull through the results later. The delete button is important too; digital camera users (especially girls) frequently become trapped in the endless loop of taking a picture, looking at said picture, deciding said picture makes one look too ugly, fat, stupid, short, tall, slutty, hobo-like, or fill-in-the-blank-here, and quickly pressing delete before anyone can see the results.

Of course, when you are going to post your photos all over the internet, you want to put your best impression forward. Photo-sharing sites such as Flikr, and to an even larger extent, social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace, have allowed Americans to happily put their entire lives on display. It was an exciting day when Facebook added photo-sharing capabilities, because now one could display entire albums of silliness and debauchery in addition to a carefully chosen profile picture. Of course, there would be no point to this if there was no comment feature allowing instant feedback from Facebook friends and the internet at large.

And that’s really the main reason for putting up photos – wanting attention. I am by no means putting people down for this, because I am certainly guilty of it myself. Of course, there are times it crosses a line – when you post over 1000 photos of yourself in under a month, or when you spend hours sitting alone in your room, taking MySpace-angled photos of yourself in the mirror (yes, I know people who have done both).

Photography is a great activity to share with friends and family. However, digital cameras have allowed Americans to become a little too obsessed with it. A lot of Americans aren’t taking photos for the sake of art, or even to preserve memories. They are doing it because they can, and because they love looking at themselves in their tiny LCD screen. Camera manufacturers know this and are raking in the dough. Other corporations know this as well, and you can be sure they will be Googling you to see how many drunken party pictures they find before extending you that job offer. As long as you know that your professor, boss, and future mother-in-law are likely to see any photos you take, click away!



My friend Caitlin and I spent last night taking silly pictures of ourselves at Arundel Mills. Then a mall cop made us put the camera away, because shots of the inside of the mall are no longer allowed due to the threat of terrorism.

AMST 344 Introduction

I'm Jen Matthews and I am a senior American Studies major. I am also majoring in English and minoring in history. I am interested in either entering the publishing field or pursuing a graduate degree in material culture or museum studies. When I'm not in class, I work at the Registrar's Office on campus. I also enjoy nerdy hobbies such as reading, attempting to learn foreign languages, and drinking coffee while discussing literature. I also like photography (I'm obsessed with my digital camera!), watching tv, and riding roller coasters. I'm a huge figure skating fan, and I love driving with my windows down and singing along with the radio.

I'm addicted to Facebook.

I look like this (except I don't usually come to class with my roommate's hand draped over my shoulder):