Found this 1920’s shoe yesterday, thought of avintagehoarder's blog!
W October 2007
Photographer: Steven Klein
Thunder happens because my soul is changing
Let’s talk nude lingerie.
Very often, when people ask me for a “nude” lingerie recommendation, they mean beige (or similarly light skintones). Again and again, in lingerie collections I see every season, it’s taken for granted that “nude” equals light, and some lingerie retailers have even gone so far as to insist that this one shade of nude is suitable for all skin colors! I had one memorable experience in Nordstrom a few months ago where a bra sellers insisted I needed a nude bra…and then offered me a beige one. When I said, “I don’t think that’s a nude for my skintone,” she looked shocked…as though she’d never even considered the possibility that women with different complexions would require different shades of nude. And this wasn’t the only time that’s happened.
The reason this is important is because centering one skintone as “normal” or “natural” automatically displaces women with darker skintones and others them as unusual or abnormal (trust me when I say women of color are not rare). In the worst instances, as in the case with Wacoal, women with dark skin are implied to be “unnatural.” It’s a steady, constant reminder (one of many) that lingerie companies just aren’t thinking about women of color. A name like “naturally nude” belongs in the same historical trash heap the crayon color “flesh” does. It’s archaic, outdated, and, to be perfectly honest, ignorant. The entire idea behind “nude” lingerie is that it should fade into your skin and be perfectly invisible. Yet when only one shade is ever defined as nude, you have to ask, “Which skintone are lingerie designers thinking of?” The answer is obvious. Not mine.