Sunday, February 28, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
band of skulls
thank you again coachella, for helping me discover these guys.
i just learned via wikipedia that they had a song on the new moon soundtrack which sort of disgusts me but oh well. not sure how i feel about their lyrics yet, they are lacking a little on some songs, but they more than make up for it with their catchy ass riffs.
i just learned via wikipedia that they had a song on the new moon soundtrack which sort of disgusts me but oh well. not sure how i feel about their lyrics yet, they are lacking a little on some songs, but they more than make up for it with their catchy ass riffs.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
leggings, tights and pants: the distinctions.
pants: i think we all know what pants are.
leggings: stretchy material in a pants-esque shape. may be cotton, shiny, lame, black, pink, etc. NOT sheer. generally do not have pockets or a zippy crotch plus button. except for the sometimes questionable jean leggings.
tights: sheer. can sometimes be of a thicker sweatery material, but still less substantial than leggings.
i am of the thinking that leggings can be worn sans pants, shorts or skirt on top, as long as the shirt worn mostly covers the crotchular region. while leggings will not expose said region, there is always the danger of camel toe. CONSTANT VIGILANCE IS REQUIRED.
tights, on the other hand, SHOULD NEVER BE WORN SANS PANTS, SHORTS OR SKIRT. seriously. they are not designed to cover your lady bits, even if they are of a less sheer knit.
i honestly cant believe that some people need to be told this, but i swear during the first week of school this year i saw a girl walking around wearing ONLY BLACK TIGHTS with a shirt that did not come close to covering her crotchular region. now i know youre probably thinking, come on blair, they were probably just questionable leggings. no. they were not. they were most definitely tights and i know because i stared at this girl for a full five minutes. i could not look away i was so fascinated/horrified.
anyways, apparently the Apparel does not agree with me that leggings can stand on their own. oh well. theyve started including warning labels in their leggings.
image here.
on a semi related note: went out downtown for a friend's birthday last night, and did not realized until this morning that my outfit was entirely american apparel aside from my shoes. im sort of proud and sort of disgusted with myself.
leggings: stretchy material in a pants-esque shape. may be cotton, shiny, lame, black, pink, etc. NOT sheer. generally do not have pockets or a zippy crotch plus button. except for the sometimes questionable jean leggings.
tights: sheer. can sometimes be of a thicker sweatery material, but still less substantial than leggings.
i am of the thinking that leggings can be worn sans pants, shorts or skirt on top, as long as the shirt worn mostly covers the crotchular region. while leggings will not expose said region, there is always the danger of camel toe. CONSTANT VIGILANCE IS REQUIRED.
tights, on the other hand, SHOULD NEVER BE WORN SANS PANTS, SHORTS OR SKIRT. seriously. they are not designed to cover your lady bits, even if they are of a less sheer knit.
i honestly cant believe that some people need to be told this, but i swear during the first week of school this year i saw a girl walking around wearing ONLY BLACK TIGHTS with a shirt that did not come close to covering her crotchular region. now i know youre probably thinking, come on blair, they were probably just questionable leggings. no. they were not. they were most definitely tights and i know because i stared at this girl for a full five minutes. i could not look away i was so fascinated/horrified.
anyways, apparently the Apparel does not agree with me that leggings can stand on their own. oh well. theyve started including warning labels in their leggings.
image here.
on a semi related note: went out downtown for a friend's birthday last night, and did not realized until this morning that my outfit was entirely american apparel aside from my shoes. im sort of proud and sort of disgusted with myself.
die antwoord
im not really sure what to make of these guys, which also seems to be what everyone else on the intertubes is thinking. die antwoord is afrikaans for the answer. not that that makes anything clearer. its ravey-minimal-electro-hip hop-ridiculousness. in early 90s outfits.
and of course pitchfork wrote about them.
and of course pitchfork wrote about them.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
arabic
wow. remind me not to bring my arabic homework with me when i fly. a middle eastern studies major from pomona college was detained by the TSA because he had arabic flashcards with him while he was going through security.
article here
article here
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
i really hate titling every post
so i hate to admit it, but i kind of like this song. i know, i know. its vampire weekend. ill hand in my hipster card first thing tomorrow.
tarantino
ever since a friend in high school sat me down and made me watch pulp fiction, i have been a tarantino fan. this interview with him from the vancouver sun is really interesting. lots of things i didnt know about him.
also anyone who hasnt seen death proof, DO SO ASAP. its extremely underrated.
click here to read the interview!
also anyone who hasnt seen death proof, DO SO ASAP. its extremely underrated.
click here to read the interview!
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
beeker does kansas
so word on the street is that jason segel is writing the new muppets movie. WHAT?? i love the muppets! i love jason segel! i just peed!
watch this, its a muppet and its funny.
watch this, its a muppet and its funny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
