tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post915912507834279333..comments2024-03-14T16:03:32.434-04:00Comments on Gertie's New Blog for Better Sewing: Vintage Sewing and Body ImageGertiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04314542159287533507noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-7727876829224005682010-05-22T00:35:39.765-04:002010-05-22T00:35:39.765-04:00Im 5"1' and about 90 lbs. 31-25-31. i thi...Im 5"1' and about 90 lbs. 31-25-31. i think im too fat and have breasts too small and in grade twelve home ec made my first vintage dress with a waist the circumference of my head, 22 inches. some ppl tell me i am so lucky to be thin. But body image is clearly all in the point of view, which ties nicely into what position your body is in, or how the illustration is drawn, everyone looks a lot thinner if they do that sidey-twisty thing. models are posed, real life is not. i felt like i had accomplished thinness in that dress. it was concrete. the dress was proof. we cannot all accept that bodies are fluid even second to second, we constantly search for a clear cut answer... like a dress size.<br /><br />it bothers me that i don't exercise because i'm still a zero.... that is my reason for allowing laziness. concern is placed much more on looks rather than health because looks are evolutionary and social "signifiers" to good health. we are trying to go form the outside in, rather than the inside out.Meaghanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664025595375001549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-6547259748885222562010-03-27T16:31:28.354-04:002010-03-27T16:31:28.354-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-3617838502214808802010-03-17T18:12:36.564-04:002010-03-17T18:12:36.564-04:00Hi Gertie, I like your body image posts, so keep &...Hi Gertie, I like your body image posts, so keep 'em coming. The ensuing discussion is always fascinating, and no matter who we are and what we look like, body image always matters. <br />That said, my vintage sewing is still very early stages, but I find that when I buy vintage pieces (especially home made pieces), that I am amazed at the fit. I am lucky to be pretty "hourglass"y (which a strong shoulder line, and a high hip line, which means my wide part is quite high), and I can fit into 24" waists (OK, with a little help) so vintage cuts can fit me, but they are sometimes a little ridiculous. Also, I think we are on average about 2-3 inches taller than prior generations, and that makes a difference as well. <br />I wonder about availability. My mother-in-law sewed a lot of her own clothes, but she was never a junior miss, even when she was under 18. Maybe no one really fit into those existing standards and had to learn to make adjustments. That was probably as important as learning to cut and mark the fabric? I talk to her and my aunt-in-law who did costume design about this sometimes and they said that adjustments were really important, as was a great girdle. I am glad that we don't HAVE to wear restrictive foundation garments anymore, but looking at those illustrations are kind of crazy sometimes. Like who could stand on those legs? <br />Great topic, as usual.Radhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01946279879863336523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-44606434364998804372010-03-17T03:43:23.388-04:002010-03-17T03:43:23.388-04:00Hi Gerti,
I think Susannah may be on the right wa...Hi Gerti, <br />I think Susannah may be on the right way ... I find her argument compelling: those amounts of little sizes are left overs, while the general sizes are much more popular and therefor used. <br />For example: I usually search for my vintage pattern in german old magazines and - like Hana said before - the average patterns are way to big for me (a bust 32"). I tend to look for young girls fashion and sometimes a pattern for 14-16 year old girls fits me in those magazines ... then I feel really tiny :)Zuzsahttp://zuzsastyle.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-59760657039841896782010-03-15T11:05:11.021-04:002010-03-15T11:05:11.021-04:00I got a bunch of old German sewing magazines (30s-...I got a bunch of old German sewing magazines (30s-40s) into my hands some time ago.<br />What I discovered is the opposite of your problem - many of the lovely patterns are for approximately 100 cm bust! My bust is 90 cm (that's 36 inches, right?). There's, for example, a knitted blouse/sweater on the front page of one of them, and that one is 100 cm, and they proudly claim it on the frontpage... And the model looks very model-ly and everything.<br />I wonder, was it a German thing, or does it have to do with the time, or does it have to do with the type of magazines? Either way, those patterns are too big for me!Hanahttp://marmota-b.blog.cznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-36028331273727098902010-03-15T00:07:37.925-04:002010-03-15T00:07:37.925-04:00better late than never to the comment party on thi...better late than never to the comment party on this one. But I would say that for me personally, I spend about equal amount of time mauling a modern size 14 pattern into my body shape as I do those 1940's size 20s. I lived in Japan for 4 years where most clothing came in size "female" which generally ranges depending on brand from about 32-36 inch bust and 25-28 waist which is similar to those vintage patterns so I kind of view that as the "norm" mentally.<br /><br />In regards to larger vintage patterns, the size 18s and 20s are out there you just have to search and gather from all the many vintage pattern sites on the internet (and I have at minimum 30 bookmarked) and be up on it weekly as they do come in frequently and then zoom right out as we scavengers snatch them up quick too ;)bucktickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03323318736088089231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-18127077955992694202010-03-14T18:06:35.545-04:002010-03-14T18:06:35.545-04:00i have to be honest & say, i don't really ...i have to be honest & say, i don't really feel any body negativity with vintage patterns. all the ones i have are my gramma's. they come complete with her alterations. at 5'3" she was a petite so they're all folded & the recommended lines. also, she had wide hips so she'd cut the next size up. everything was worn with a padded bra & girdle. <br />that being said, every pic of her is fab. she didn't expect to naturally fit into the pattern. she never felt bad about it bc everyone she knew did the same thing. <br />thus, when i make something from the past, i know i'll need my girdle & padded bra too. and i have to admit, i always feel very cute cute & saucy in them. <br />numbers just help you make something that fits you perfectly. they're not good or bad!Elizabeth Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00928033549597177234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-14462774098451228462010-03-14T12:12:51.005-04:002010-03-14T12:12:51.005-04:00Yeah, I know what you mean! One recent project, t...Yeah, I know what you mean! One recent project, this 50s "pannier-effect" skirt- thought it would be simple afternoon project, ha! Turned into a fiddly, frustrating come-back-to project over the last month, threw out all proportion & construction from the original except the tucks in front- it's like it was drafted for a different species entirely. Which is pretty much par for my trying to sew anything 50s, so I should know better by now! Hard not to feel disheartened (word I'm looking for may be "mutant"), but once the fit starts to come together, there's nothing quite like it in terms of making you feel like a total bombshell after all- maybe it's the memory of how it looked last several fittings, maybe knowing you figured it out, but hard to not absolutely glow [gloat?] and swagger once you finally get there.<br /><br />Over the last year I have learned to be a little more honest with myself in buying vintage patterns, covering the empty space alongside the hourglasses pictured, to better visualize, am I really truly going to love these proportions still if the silhouette is straight up & down? Since my body just doesn't nip in at the waist/out at the hips in a very visible way, sewing vintage without carefully choosing the pattern can really magnify those feelings of being "wrong", instead of just individual. <br /><br />Mostly I love to sew early 40s, but I've found myself recently more and more drawn to some 30s patterns, maybe partially influenced by the comparative lack of pronounced hourglass in the styles/illustrations (or partial hourglass effects created by all manner of wackadoo sleeves which I am totally into at the moment, LOL)- I feel like I can better visualize how the finished garment will look on me, makes me feel slightly more confident that the design's style lines will hold up on my body. The too-many-heads proportion still applies in the sketches, but at least they don't show massively begirdled midsections for me to try to think through-- styles aren't necessarily premised on an intricate architecture of shapewear to achieve the look. (If you didn't see the brilliant Susannah's "Hypoxia Blue" post last week: http://cargocultcraft.com/2010/03/02/the-new-look-now-in-hypoxia-blue/ ) <br /><br />Now, if I could only find some way to fall in love with a dropped waist, and could really get on board with 20s day-frock fashion, I would really be in business-- an aesthetic designed to flatter my actual proportions instead of camouflaging them-- how late I am to that party! Funny how we just went through that whole low-rise thing, but dresses didn't much come into it so much as separates. Admittedly, the low-rise era was truly magic for me in terms of getting off-the-rack [women's] jeans to fit for the first time ever, but I'm still happy to see the back of that trend. One of the greatest pleasures about sewing my own at the moment is getting high-waisted things that fit! Maybe I'll save the dropped-waist, bobbed-hair thing for my Mrs Exeter years.Hillaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01324854929065302634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-44731295782880864702010-03-13T17:09:27.088-05:002010-03-13T17:09:27.088-05:00I guess you just have to think of it like if you w...I guess you just have to think of it like if you were buying a dress from a store, chances are you would require some alteration here and there, Its the same with patterns it's pretty unlikely that you will fit perfectly. I agree that the issue with larger size patterns probably due to fact women were much smaller back then, my nanna was 4"9 with size 4(Australian feet)and an australian size 6, I'm 5"7 size 8 feet and an australian 8! and i take after the small side of the family lol. The waist measurements on vintage patterns is always my bone on contention, i am roughly the same size through bust and hips but waist is always several inches bigger, then i remember they had to wear those dreadfully uncomfortable girdles back then and happily add a few inches to the waist and think myself lucky!! lolrubyslippers_86https://www.blogger.com/profile/18357170072138624681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-58456690033939844362010-03-13T09:11:32.955-05:002010-03-13T09:11:32.955-05:00I read in a book about vintage knitting that the m...I read in a book about vintage knitting that the majority of waists got thicker (their words not mine) during WW2 war because rationing meant that the new diet incorporated a lot of potatoes. Interesting. Maybe this accounts for the push towards accentuating the waist with big skirts and such.Katenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-58958275750098293302010-03-12T23:14:10.723-05:002010-03-12T23:14:10.723-05:00Anonymous,
Yes, I'm a size 0, but I am also un...Anonymous,<br />Yes, I'm a size 0, but I am also under 5' tall. I could put on 20 lbs and be clinically overweight and still be a size 4 -evidence that clothing size is not an indicator of health.<br /><br />I never stated that a certain size or weight is an ideal standard. I simply stated that from a health care/disease prevention perspective, we need to be wary of becoming overweight to a point where we increase our risk of disease.<br /><br />The Metropolitan Life Insurance height weight tables were not drawn from thin air - they were based on normative values from data sets that were collected during the 1940s and 50s, and the weights listed are based on mortality rates. The data sets have been updated several times since their inception and do reflect "modern" weights.<br /><br />The medical field does not really rely on those charts, nor do we rely solely on BMI as an indicator of being overweight. BMI is notoriously inaccurate in athletic populations because it fails to consider muscle mass. BMI is accurate in recreationally active or inactive populations. For the average person, BMI is a very effective tool and a quick and easy way to assess weight status as it relates to health.<br /><br />Regarding the sedentary lifestyle - yes, it is a factor, but 30 minutes a day of activity is barely scratching the surface of what is needed. Even at ACSM we are looking at revising the recommended daily activity levels because the current guidelines are not enough to make serious improvements in areas of health such as reducing risk factors.<br /><br />As for referring to me as a "health expert" - I am an exercise physiologist with a MS in the field of Exercise Science, and I can assure you that any recommendations we make regarding reducing disease risk are based on hard data from scientific studies. We keep current on the research and implement it in our practices. I won't go into it here but I can assure you that calories in DOES equal calories out in terms of weight gain and loss and we know how and why people gain and lose weight. It's not rocket science, it's basic mammalian metabolism. If you want to know more give me your address and I'll send you my lecture notes and text book from some of my classes. Also regarding Dr. Brownell - Dr. Brownell is a psychologist, not a physiologist. Considering his research group is focused on things like advertising and public health policy's impacts on obesity, I would say he has found a number of causes for obesity, and interestingly none of them are related to the so called 'mysteries of metabolism' of which you speak. I am sorry if you do not respect my profession, but the reality is Americans are getting increasingly unhealthy, and we're trying to help them.Kerryhttp://kerry-litka.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-86927322675049030862010-03-12T17:44:50.420-05:002010-03-12T17:44:50.420-05:00I have a slightly different perspective on this be...I have a slightly different perspective on this because I grew up in the late '50s-early '60s in a house full of larger women. My mother and older sisters all sewed, and we had a lot of those now-vintage patterns around. I can attest to the fact these patterns in large sizes (18-20) got used to death. No one in our family has a figure remotely like the nipped-in-waist illustrations. But I remember my mother especially making a lot of those styles, and she made them fit her figure and looked nice in them. (She was in her mid-30s during the 1950s and was in the midst of having five children, so my earliest memories of her were probably when she was pregnant!) She did wear girdles sometimes, but as I recall they were just to firm up her middle rather than to change her basic shape.<br /><br />I think that was a much less media-obsessed time. People weren't staring at pictures of starving fashion models and celebrities 24/7 on TV and the 'net. Sure, women felt like they were "too fat," and went on diets, but most people, like my mother, just altered the patterns to fit and got on with life.Harrietnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-44865438489596645052010-03-12T15:45:28.784-05:002010-03-12T15:45:28.784-05:00Sorry I should just clarify, when I say the health...Sorry I should just clarify, when I say the healthiest 'you' can be, I am not meaning you Gertie, I mean you, as in us the masses out there in the world.Brumbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04971989256577832523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-28020094641798211272010-03-12T15:25:48.439-05:002010-03-12T15:25:48.439-05:00I love that as a writer Gertie you can produce top...I love that as a writer Gertie you can produce topics that evoke so much passion from us readers, and naturally body image is always going to be a controversial one.<br /><br />Personally I think Kerry has some really valid points, there are factors beyond our control such as hormone levels in foods etc,and certainly that food is so readily available now has to be a contributing factor but one other obvious one is our lifestyle.<br /><br />We are blessed enough to have so many tools that our grandmothers, and great grandmothers did not have that make our life easier, but also reduce out energy output.<br /><br />Think about our own hobby, Granny had to pedal to get her sewing machine to work, she burned calories as she sat there sewing. Us, we tilt our foot and voila!<br /><br />Granny had biceps of steel from manually washing clothes, wringing them out and walking them out to the clothes line, and she had 8 children to wash for. Us, we pop them in a machine, press a button and come back an hour later to move then 25inches to the dryer, we have 2.5 children to wash for.<br /><br />But, as we get further along in our progression of technology we are not doubt going to have options that require less and less effort from us, will OUR grandchildren look at today's patterns and be having the same discussions? Which I think is where we do need to be conscious of our growing sizes, and not be afraid to stand up and say this is not healthiest that you can be, how can we make you healthier. Now please note I am saying healthier NOT skinner, because I do not think the two are mutually exclusive, I have a friend who is teeny tiny in stature, but she could not run even once around the block, so therefore I do not consider her a healthy person.<br /><br />I also think that it is a little 'pot calling the kettle black' those of you who are saying Kerry could not understand as she is naturally skinny, would her points be more valid is she were morbidly obese due to thyroid issues? Both conditions are out of the persons control.<br /><br />I think the key is that we should be striving to be a healthy and happy, if that means you are a size 2 or 20 is somewhat irrelevant, so long as you are physically able to live your life as fully as you would like at the size you are at.Brumbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04971989256577832523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-70405573601561673962010-03-12T15:14:51.023-05:002010-03-12T15:14:51.023-05:00Can I just tell you about my mum who was in her mi...Can I just tell you about my mum who was in her mid twenties in the late 1950s and sewed all her own clothes. She is slim and always has been, " never more than a (vintage)size 12" she has always told me. Well when I was in my early twenties and about the same size I borrowed one of her patterns from the early 60s to make a sheath style dress. It didn't fit! When I told her she said Oh I always used to add a little to the pattern! She was so concerned about keeping to her size that she wouldn't buy a pattern bigger than a 12. Perhaps that's why there are so many of the smaller patterns around, women like my mum refused to be any other size.Jennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06659929017085133209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-62225810478000315682010-03-12T14:54:07.874-05:002010-03-12T14:54:07.874-05:00I have actually found that vintage patterns fit my...I have actually found that vintage patterns fit my body better than new ones. Apart from the waist issues raised by two children, I am petite and SHORT. I think many patterns of the past were geared towards short women with small bone structure and this is great for me! You are right though, I need some sort of waist nipper for the earlier dresses!PetalRosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-85449339981607844862010-03-12T14:49:45.034-05:002010-03-12T14:49:45.034-05:00No problem at all, spottedroo, I really do appreci...No problem at all, spottedroo, I really do appreciate your feedback. And we are of one mind on skinny jeans! I'll have a lot to say on fitting of vintage patterns once I finish the background dress. Need to make a SECOND muslin first though!Gertiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04314542159287533507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-8891980559524708362010-03-12T14:40:52.269-05:002010-03-12T14:40:52.269-05:00Gertie,
Fair point. I know lots of people have h...Gertie,<br /><br />Fair point. I know lots of people have had the experience of visiting a fitting room or making up a pattern and feeling bad about themselves because of it (me too, certainly). Sometimes I wonder though if dwelling on those feelings does a bit more harm then good? (I could be very wrong). One of your posts I really enjoyed was seeing how you adapted a vintage pattern for a more modern silhouette (lowering the bust point, etc.) I'd love to see more posts about how to adapt different patterns to different body types. While I know that there are some styles that will never work for me (you could not pay me to sew myself skinny jeans, for instance), I wonder if some of us shy away from certain styles because we don't know how to make them work for us. One thing I love about Carolyn's blog, for instance, is seeing how she makes a lot of great styles work for her. And one of the fun parts about sewing for me has been to find new shapes that work for me, even though I didn't think they would. Any patterns or tricks you have come across that make you feel *great* about yourself? Again, just my thoughts and I don't know how other women feel. Sorry for the eye-rolling comment. I really do appreciate your blog.spottedroohttp://www.spottedroo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-77418712274223478542010-03-12T14:37:05.879-05:002010-03-12T14:37:05.879-05:00Gertie, I love your posts about body image. I don&...Gertie, I love your posts about body image. I don't care if you do them every day! They speak to me equally powerfully each time.<br /><br />I think it's worth pointing out that Adele Margolis, whose books you know well and were published in the 60s, speaks frequently about fit issues and body types ("The Complete Book of Tailoring" and "Dressmaking for Beginners" spring to mind immediately). Even then, she emphasizes that nobody is a perfect 12 or 14, which is why she wrote a 400-page book about fitting.<br /><br />Her advice, which I take as gospel, is to measure yourself accurately and learn how to adjust patterns to fit. She instructs you to get to a place where you know your body so intimately that you immediately make the necessary adjustments--1/2" off the shoulder, added to the waist, etc.<br /><br />We all have body image issues, but I think learning how to provide yourself with a good fit is the first step to moving past them.<br /><br />...not to say that I have managed to do anything of the sort quite yet :)Monethttp://www.madebymonet.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-55845488375199874222010-03-12T14:22:10.609-05:002010-03-12T14:22:10.609-05:00I find a ridiculous amount of ease in the bust of ...I find a ridiculous amount of ease in the bust of patterns from the mid 1940s - mid 1960s. Is this caused by the different undergarments? They fit in the shoulders, so I would assume so. So usually I would have to remove fabric from the bust, but add to the waist and hips. I'm not experienced enough yet with fitting to understand how to remove and add in those areas smoothly, but I'm trying to get better. I'm also learning to ignore the pattern illustrations to an extent - they never properly show blousiness in the bodice for example. The first vintage pattern I tried made me feel upset about myself, but I'm realizing that people are all different shapes, and what's important is learning to fit myself!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-10837176164301585292010-03-12T14:16:29.073-05:002010-03-12T14:16:29.073-05:00spottedroo, point taken, but I don't just writ...spottedroo, point taken, but I don't just write these posts for/about myself. A lot of what I write doesn't come just from personal experience but from empathy I have for other women's experiences. The point is to generate a discussion that takes into account diverse points of view, not to harp on about my own issues or make you roll your eyes. I do appreciate your feedback though as I try to make the content here very balanced.Gertiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04314542159287533507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-24835819204550536612010-03-12T14:08:06.523-05:002010-03-12T14:08:06.523-05:00Gertie, I hope you will not take this comment the ...Gertie, I hope you will not take this comment the wrong way. I love your blog and generally think the relationship between sewing and body image is interesting. Sometimes though I feel that I have read one too many body image posts and I want to role my eyes. Let's review some fact shall we?<br /><br />1) You are a beautiful woman.<br />2) You have a great sense of style<br />3) You have the sewing chops to create garments that suit you stylistically and physically. Lucky you!<br />4) All patterns require a lot of adjustments to achieve a great fit. This is not because pattern companies are evil but because all women are shaped differently. I am never ever going to be able to buy a pair of pairs off the rack that fit, or a pants pattern that can be sewn up without tweaking. Again that's not because the fashion industry is out to get me but because (I have learned) my pelvis tilts forward more than the average woman. Thanks to sewing (and with a lot of muslins) I can now make pants that fit. Yay me!<br /><br />You don't have to feel bad about your body! No pattern can make you feel bad, nor any drawing, nor any advertisement. If you decide that your body is beautiful it *will be* beautiful. And everyone will be able to see that.spottedroohttp://www.spottedroo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-48866613575864859112010-03-12T14:04:34.456-05:002010-03-12T14:04:34.456-05:00I definitely know what you mean! I have a small bu...I definitely know what you mean! I have a small bust but a larger waist and hips according to the size standards on patterns, and it can be disheartening to hear the pattern tell you,"You're too small here, but too big here." In other words, it can feel like you're not perfect enough. However, we should realize that these standards are humanly impossible, that even a supermodel would not fit it (too skinny in all the wrong places)! I think the thing is to take control; the pattern is the oddball, thin and large in the wrong places, and you need to change it (not it needs to change you). There are moments when I could cry because my almost finished sewing project doesn't fit :(Melhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17328888453758928942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-25903256797121589642010-03-12T13:41:24.615-05:002010-03-12T13:41:24.615-05:00I find 1950s patterns fit me better than today'...I find 1950s patterns fit me better than today's patterns. I wear a 36 bust, sometimes a 38, and I find that my seamstress can usually sew those up with few alternations. That said, as a pattern seller, the most plentiful vintage patterns seem to be in bust 30-32. Bust 30s sit on my site and rarely sell. I've gotten to the point that I almost never even buy them. Frustrating.<br />I do find the illustrations on old patterns more realistic for my body type than the skinny minis on today's envelopes.denise@thebluegardenia.comhttp://thebluegardenia.typepad.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-28759351462720480452010-03-12T13:29:57.841-05:002010-03-12T13:29:57.841-05:00OK, kerry, I just read your whole entire post one ...OK, kerry, I just read your whole entire post one more time and it did not piss me off as much on the 2nd go round. sorry if I was rude.<br /><br />You did post right after I did, though, so it made me feel like you were criticizing my daughter. <br /><br />That's stepping into dangerous territory.a little sewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18086285440873869055noreply@blogger.com