BYU Idaho bans skinny jeans.

[HauteCoug]

HUH? I have been in the process of gathering a major war chest.

I have no idea how to respond to this!

[Commando]

Apparently we're not allowed to be unkind to a large woman, but being unkind to a thin woman is perfectly okay.

Being unkind to anyone isn't ok, but I think most Americans agree that thin girls are hawt, so pointing out their thinness isn't a slam (or an unkindness) usually, "boyish" figure or no...

[HauteCoug]

Being unkind to anyone isn't ok, but I think most Americans agree that thin girls are hawt, so pointing out their thinness isn't a slam (or an unkindness) usually, "boyish" figure or no...

hawtness, fo sho.

Really though, last year I had a serious problem gaining weight. It was like this wah wah wah, poor me, I can't gain weight... but I couldn't, and it was getting worse and worse and I looked sick and there wasn't anything I could do. The talk I heard behind my back was very hurtful, talking about my supposed eating disorder and how they all wished they could save me. My doctor was scared for me because we couldn't figure out how I could have the same eating habits I'd always had, and I couldn't find a way to be at a healthy weight. I wore a lot of leggings at that point because they were ALL that fit.

So I do take it very personally when individuals claim that I'm being unkind to heavier gals. Not at all. The fact remains that clothing fit determines the modesty of a garment, and placing a larger girl in something that is too tight is absolutely immodest.

[Northwestcoug]

*UPDATE*

Apparently the whole skinny jeans fiasco was an ugly misunderstanding caused by some douchebag zealous testing center mullah.

https://www.facebook.com/BYUID/posts/334491879898320

That was quick! Yay!
Of course, there will always be plenty more mullahs waiting to determine how tight clothes are..

[HauteCoug]

And yes, her handle was her choice but endowed upon her from another. I'm sure she'd be happy to change her handle to something less offensive, such as "flatchestedcoug" or "needsaboobjobcoug", per her own indication here.

Or perhaps, "notitsbutgreatasscoug"

[Green Monstah]

Wuap, Hottie is a big girl and can take care of herself. I didn't read her post the way you did, but I understand that it could have been interpreted the way you did.

Her point was this: a large woman in skinny jeans can end up showing a lot more skin than she does. You don't know her; you don't know how she dresses. She is a temple-goer and dresses stylistically, but modestly. That was her point. It wasn't meant to offend anyone with some extra cush'n for the pushin'

And yes, her handle was her choice but endowed upon her from another. I'm sure she'd be happy to change her handle to something less offensive, such as "flatchestedcoug" or "needsaboobjobcoug", per her own indication here.

How abouts "Mybrothertalkedaboutmyboobsizeonaninternetforumco ug"???

[HauteCoug]

ok, now that's a bit much.

I go the distance to show how modest you and this is the response??!!

Oh man, it could get ugly.

haha joke haha funny hahahaha.

really though.

muy chistoso no?

[HauteCoug]

p.s. Viking - our matching pictures are grand. get thee hence from brasilia pronto!

[Moliere]

*UPDATE*

Apparently the whole skinny jeans fiasco was an ugly misunderstanding caused by some douchebag zealous testing center mullah.

https://www.facebook.com/BYUID/posts/334491879898320

The power of communication today is amazing. This whole thing broke what, 2 days ago by a little student run newspaper called The Student Review. Now it is making the rounds on Facebook, Twitter, and UK online newspapers. This obviously has forced BYU-I to backtrack. Power to the people!

[wuapinmon]

I'm sorry, modesty does change from body type to body type, even within the same piece of clothing. I'm flat chested, meaning a V-neck is going to be modest on me, whereas for some other women who have a "normal" chest size it probably wouldn't be as modest because you'd have cleavage hanging out everywhere.

Don't try and make me seem villainous for pointing out the obvious: modesty absolutely depends upon fit, and fit depends upon size. Period.

I'm not out to belittle curvy women. Not in the slightest. But it's infuriating that items of clothing that are perfectly fine and modest for my admittedly boyish figure are banned when women who are bursting out of their "approved" garment (ps in the fashion industry, we refer to everything as a garment) are just fine. So yeah, you better believe I'm going to stick up for the skinny girl. Why don't we turn this into a debate on how body image is so effed up. Apparently we're not allowed to be unkind to a large woman, but being unkind to a thin woman is perfectly okay.

Nu-uh.

By the way, my moniker is entirely tongue-in-cheek, and given by Clueless.

Spare us the faux outrage that having access to all clothes made on earth due to your size is some kind of terrible burden to shoulder (or off the shoulder if it's cerulean). I bet all the money in your brother's accounts that you would much rather be skinny than "large" if you could only choose between the two, especially given your use of "we in the fashion industry." I'm reminded of a certain scene wherein Meryl Streep tells Anne Hathaway (doesn't she though?) that size six is the new 14.

But look, I'm not the enemy, I just point out prejudices in language; that's what we in the linguistics industry call them. Just as you rise to the occasion to defend thin women against perceived attacks on their fashion choices due to (im)modesty, I will call out anyone who makes cracks against the girls who make my rockin' world go 'round.

Wuap, Hottie is a big girl and can take care of herself.

I see what you did there.

Her point was this: a large woman in skinny jeans can end up showing a lot more skin than she does. You don't know her; you don't know how she dresses. She is a temple-goer and dresses stylistically, but modestly. That was her point. It wasn't meant to offend anyone with some extra cush'n for the pushin'

I know what she meant, but authorial intention is meaningless before reader reception. I was also sort of testing what mettle she's made from.

And yes, her handle was her choice but endowed upon her from another. I'm sure she'd be happy to change her handle to something less offensive, such as "flatchestedcoug" or "needsaboobjobcoug", per her own indication here.

Perhaps "waifishcoug,"

HUH? I have been in the process of gathering a major war chest.

Or perhaps, "notitsbutgreatasscoug"

Wow, way to keep us guessing. This is like Joseph Smith's bar and cigars. (and wives)

[HauteCoug]

Spare us the faux outrage that having access to all clothes made on earth due to your size is some kind of terrible burden to shoulder (or off the shoulder if it's cerulean). I bet all the money in your brother's accounts that you would much rather be skinny than "large" if you could only choose between the two, especially given your use of "we in the fashion industry." I'm reminded of a certain scene wherein Meryl Streep tells Anne Hathaway (doesn't she though?) that size six is the new 14.

But look, I'm not the enemy, I just point out prejudices in language; that's what we in the linguistics industry call them. Just as you rise to the occasion to defend thin women against perceived attacks on their fashion choices due to (im)modesty, I will call out anyone who makes cracks against the girls who make my rockin' world go 'round.


I know what she meant, but authorial intention is meaningless before reader reception. I was also sort of testing what mettle she's made from.



Perhaps "waifishcoug,"


Wow, way to keep us guessing. This is like Joseph Smith's bar and cigars. (and wives)

Oy vey. I was NOT making a crack at larger women. I was making the very clear point that there are a lot of women in this world who wear clothing that is WAY too small for them, making it extremely immodest. By the way, thin girls are included in this. There are women who enjoy certain trends, and who suit those trends, and who are told they are not allowed to enjoy those trends that work on them because of those women who do not suit those trends (the worst display of parallelism ever). That's all I'm saying. Did I ever say that I'm better than someone because I'm thin, or that curvy women aren't attractive? Of course not.

Beauty is beauty, regardless of size.

Do not turn this into a debate of how hard curvy women have it. Every woman has to deal with the constant back and forth from multiple sources, telling them what is wrong with them. I may not know what it's like to not be able to wear clothing made for thin people, but I can tell you that there are a lot of things I can't wear because I do not possess curves.

This is so silly.

By the way, author intent vs reader intent is for a different thread, and I'd gladly debate you on that one if you'd like.

Finally, I'm not a waif (my body corrected the strange weight loss of 2010), and yes I was joking about the new moniker. Joke. JOKE.

[The_Tick]

Spare us the faux outrage that having access to all clothes made on earth due to your size is some kind of terrible burden to shoulder (or off the shoulder if it's cerulean). I bet all the money in your brother's accounts that you would much rather be skinny than "large" if you could only choose between the two, especially given your use of "we in the fashion industry." I'm reminded of a certain scene wherein Meryl Streep tells Anne Hathaway (doesn't she though?) that size six is the new 14.

But look, I'm not the enemy, I just point out prejudices in language; that's what we in the linguistics industry call them. Just as you rise to the occasion to defend thin women against perceived attacks on their fashion choices due to (im)modesty, I will call out anyone who makes cracks against the girls who make my rockin' world go 'round.



I see what you did there.



I know what she meant, but authorial intention is meaningless before reader reception. I was also sort of testing what mettle she's made from.



Perhaps "waifishcoug,"







Wow, way to keep us guessing. This is like Joseph Smith's bar and cigars. (and wives)

Um...so would I. So that doesn't make any sense. It would make life much much easier for me.

[HauteCoug]

To cap this all off, I will admit when I'm wrong (see thread about daily universe), but I will also stand by things when I believe I'm right. And I stand by everything I've said in this thread (even the playful joking about my own body). I deal with women of all different shapes every single day, and my job is to make sure they leave confident in what we have styled them in, regardless of what the scale says. To insinuate that I am being unkind in expressing what I myself have seen in the language used against me is hypocritical, particularly when I never made any sort of attack against curvy women who understand how to dress for their body type.

namaste.

[Pheidippides]

Um...so would I. So that doesn't make any sense. It would make life much much easier for me.

Yeah, I'm not getting it either. Also, hottie-or-nottie coug's original point - that modest isn't one size fits all and what is modest for the think isn't for the not-so-thin - seems to be pretty innocuous. Especially if you replace the word "modest" with "advisable". Lost in this discussion any argument about thinness or thickness of skin and whether there is a correlation with thinness or thickness of build.

Btw, I saw a demotivational poster today that showed a very modestly dressed woman and had the caption "Modesty: Because it's easier to dress our women like shapeless adolescents than to teach our men to behave themselves."

[Art Vandelay]

I miss Babs. She would own this thread.