Reply
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 7,368
Registered: ‎03-30-2014

Oh my!  This is eye opening!

 

Have we found a topic as good as to dye or go grey?

 

 

Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,276
Registered: ‎04-04-2020

No matter one's opinion on this topic, seems to me what you wear exposes another's first impression.  No pun intended. Cat Wink

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,453
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

@snipsnapsnur 

 

I'm okay being labeled a prude.

 

If someone wants to dress like a "roving hostess"  .... they are free to do so.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 


@snipsnapsnur wrote:

Zowie!!!  What a bunch of prudes!


 

Regular Contributor
Posts: 155
Registered: ‎03-24-2018

I stopped caring about the dress code, it's the personal grooming that has me turned off.I don't wtch QVC very much anymore, but do watch brands that I actually like.I caught a show with SK and she was modeling sandles and her feet were in SERIOUS need of a pedicure. To make it worse the camera kept showing her feet instead of the model. As always I changed the channel. Just watch on line, it's a lot less stressful.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,453
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

 

@DasMEM2 

 

I can't watch shoe shows at all.  Not a fan of bare feet.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


@DasMEM2 wrote:

I stopped caring about the dress code, it's the personal grooming that has me turned off.I don't wtch QVC very much anymore, but do watch brands that I actually like.I caught a show with SK and she was modeling sandles and her feet were in SERIOUS need of a pedicure. To make it worse the camera kept showing her feet instead of the model. As always I changed the channel. Just watch on line, it's a lot less stressful.


 

Honored Contributor
Posts: 12,854
Registered: ‎11-16-2014

@San Antonio Gal wrote:

@ajsidney12 wrote:

@kaydee50  As a self respecting, independent, educated working mom and wife I am glad it is not 1953! Surely you cannot be serious. A woman could not buy a car or house without "a man", because you could not have a stupid checking account without "a man". Let's get with it.  I am not wearing a house dress, a going to town dress, church dress, dinner dress, gloves, stockings and heels. Women can wear what they want, Thank God.  Why don't people complain about what men wear, hummm?  

 

Go to the modern workplace, maybe not the large corporate Fortune 500 America but in general business dress reflects our everyday life.  So if people do not like what is worn on air, don't watch and don't buy.


@ajsidney12  - I was not aware that a female could not purchase a car or open a checking account without a man in the 50's!  Omg -  I had no idea!  


In New York that was not the case @San Antonio Gal . My husband's aunt was a banker and never married. She had many accounts and bought her own home and cars back in the 50's. My mom brought me with her weekly to deposit $$$ in her accounts teaching me that a woman should always have her own money. My grandmother from Dublin, Ireland was the same. And I learned very young that if there is a will there is a way..🌸

QVC Customer Care
Posts: 1,973
Registered: ‎06-14-2015

This post has been removed by QVC because it is inappropriate

Respected Contributor
Posts: 4,283
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

I remember all the angst from my parents and other adults during the 60's.

 

They were sure the collapse of the country was imminent with my generation and the way we dressed, acted and cared about the planet and social issues.

 

Evidently, not much has changed.

"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are." BF
Trusted Contributor
Posts: 1,852
Registered: ‎06-08-2021

@lgfan wrote:
Why would anyone want to go back to the fifties. Women wore corsets, garter belts and bras that looked like concealed weapons. It is time to move on and dress comfortably. There has to be a happy medium between wearing out of date clothes and looking like you just rolled out of bed.

******************************************

 

 I'll see you the Fifties and raise you the Forties!  Personally, I would love to go back to that era.

 

 I don't think women have it better today.

 

 Back then, they wore girdles - now, they endure medical procedures like liposuction that costs $$$ and are potentially dangerous.

 

 Give me a girdle any day.

 

  Some wore padded bras back then - now, they have silicone or saline bags implanted in their chests, leading to serious health issues in many cases.

 

  Look at all the plastic surgery women endure today, in a quest to look better or younger.

 

 At least the ladies back then were natural beauties vs. the BBL and inflated lips. JMO

 

 

Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,697
Registered: ‎05-30-2010

BoopOMatic: In the 1950s, women felt tremendous societal pressure to focus their aspirations on a wedding ring.The "M.R.S." Degree.

 

This was also the era of the "happy homemaker." For young mothers in the 1950s, domesticity was idealized in the media, and women were encouraged to stay at home if the family could afford it. Women who chose to work when they didn't need the paycheck were often considered selfish, putting themselves before the needs of their family.

Women in the 1950s were not allowed to make contracts or wills, could not buy or sell property, had little control of their earnings in most situations, and were discouraged from acting politically, such as hold office, even though they could vote. Women's rights were minimal. Couldn't have their own credit card or bank account.

 

Decades of Childbearing
But even for happy homemakers, pressures were mounting. In a departure from previous generations, it was no longer acceptable for a wife to shut her husband out of the bedroom. Starting in the 1950s sex was viewed as a key component of a healthy and loving marriage. Without an effective female-controlled contraceptive, young wives faced three decades of childbearing before they reached menopause.

 

Looking back to the 1950's, no thank u.