Dreaming of Tropical Vacations

Pictured products from J. Crew. The beach tunic, which I purchased recently on additional 40% off, is here. I can't personally vouch for J. Crew bikinis because they don't carry ones in my bra size, but mine is also navy with polka-dots.

New York City continued its snowy, slushy, and bitterly cold winter last week, but I've consoled myself by starting to plan my trip to Asia, which will take place in August after I take my licensing exams. I'll have almost two months free before starting my full-time job, and I'm spending half of that abroad before I come back to look for an apartment and prepare to enter the working world. It won't be as spendy as my last vacation because I've learned to better manage my finances. At the same time, I do balance the budgeting against how it will probably be my last opportunity to take a major trip for quite some time. 

I'm far from the first person to have learned a few lessons about the possible applicability of minimalism to one's closet during international travel. When I went to Europe last summer, I packed a US-sized carryon (which I belatedly learned might be larger than an international-sized carryon) quite lightly, with a good amount of room to spare, and found that I'd actually brought too much. I kept cycling back to half of the items I packed: a quarter were unsuitable because I underestimated the heat, and I just didn't feel like wearing the rest. It is premature to start planning my packing list for my next trip, but I did learn a few lessons last summer about how to pack for hot-weather vacations. 

Some of these tips might be commonsense, but I was a fairly experienced traveler (having spent several long stints in very hot, very humid  East Asian summers) before my trip last year and some of these were a surprise to me. Another recent post on the topic from another blog can be found here. 

Packing Tips for Travel in Hot and Humid Climates (in rough order of importance):

• You need fewer clothes than you think. I haven't quite figured out a perfect formula for how much to bring, but if I had realized how many times I could comfortably re-wear the breezier, swim cover-up type pieces, I would have packed less. 
• Bring enough sunscreen. I'm always slightly shocked at how marked-up sunscreen can be in resort-y destinations. Also, if you have a preference for higher SPFs, those can be more difficult to find in some parts of the world. For instance, products with SPFs of 8 were rather common in Europe and the highest SPFs were generally in the 30s. (It might not be scientifically necessary, but I personally prefer SPFs in the 50s. I'm also very particular about facial sunscreen.) 
• Avoid polyester. I learned this the hard way when even skimpy polyester dresses and tank tops proved to be highly uncomfortable. Pack mainly natural fibers like cotton and silk if possible. I also find that viscose and modal seem fine in very hot weather. 
• Avoid clothing made with too much material and be careful of linings (even cotton ones). I have a lovely heavily pleated and pin-tucked J. Crew skirt made entirely of light cotton fabric. However, I found it to be too heavy last summer despite the lining also being made of cotton. Maybe this is obvious, but sometimes lighter clothes are better.
• Light summer-weight cotton sweaters and shawls might, however, still be useful. Some vacation destinations might involve sightseeing at temples that require covering up the shoulders. Urban destinations (Hong Kong especially) might involve long periods spent in heavily air-conditioned interiors.
• Will you need a beach towel? In Europe and a past trip to Puerto Rico, where I stayed in a cheap hostel, packing a beach towel would have been extremely helpful, as they were heavily marked up. In Southeast Asia, many moderately priced hotels in beach areas happily provide beach towels. 

On Quality

via Pinterest

Many people have discussed the trend of the declining quality of clothing. I even personally know it to be true: J. Crew is a frequently-cited example, and that's consistent with my experience, where things that I bought five years ago are still going strong while new silk tops and sweaters at the store are of noticeably worse quality. 

Yet I've never found that clothes, even those from the most fast fashion of retailers (like Forever 21) are particularly low quality. I can probably count on one hand the number of items that I have discarded solely because low quality led to them getting prematurely destroyed by normal washing or wear and tear: There was a pencil skirt from Banana Republic that, in hindsight, felt lower-quality than their usual at the time of purchase (like an outlet item that they accidentally put on the racks at a "normal" store, if that happens). Then there was a pair of red skinny jeans from Forever 21 that stretched out dramatically on the first wash. Furthermore, I've only ever had one item actually shrink in the wash: a J. Crew wool cardigan that would have been fine if I hand-washed it instead. Considering that I've been shopping for almost a decade (and primarily at the likes of Target and Forever 21), it isn't too bad. It certainly isn't enough evidence to substantiate an epidemic of profoundly noticeable declining quality.

Outside of those examples, I've found that those fast fashion clothes all seem to be of fine enough quality. Things that I wear very frequently (sometimes more than once a week throughout most seasons of the year) generally last for nearly three years at least. Things that I wear less frequently seem to last almost indefinitely: I get rid of them because I get tired of the styles, not because of signs of wear.  Maybe it helps that I machine wash all my clothes with cold water and line-dry most items? Beyond that, isn't it natural that clothes start showing their wear with a few years of semi-frequent use? 

I guess what I'm getting at is that I really don't know what the "quality" of earlier days actually looks like. I agree that true quality, whether of materials or construction, likely requires higher retail prices, as explained in books like Deluxe and Overdressed. Yet, if most fast fashion survives three, four, even five plus years of wear without showing dramatic damage, on what basis is that kind of "quality"meaningfully different from more elevated types? I imagine that the average fashion-conscious consumer could conceivably get tired of an item long before it wears out. Essentially, I'm wondering if the concept of truly timeless "quality" I read about and sometimes aspire to might be a bit of an elusive concept. (It is also not easily accessible without significant disposable income.)

Make no mistake, I still feel considerable responsibility to cut down on my consumption of fast fashion, though I also talk often about the budget constraints that could get in the way. Additionally, in the contemporary retail environment where expensive brands also try to cut costs, price is certainly no guarantor of quality (the comments on both posts I linked earlier include many examples). It can be frustrating to be a consumer that values quality and more ethical production because even when one is willing and able to pay, it seems to be very difficult to identify truly high-quality brands and collect information about how items are produced. 

In closing, I have a few questions that might present some food for thought: How long do you expect your clothes to last? How often do you throw away clothes because of quality issues? How old are the items you throw away? Have you noticed problems with declining quality at the retailers that you frequently go to? 

Wear to Work: Expressing Identity

This post about workplace dress is partially inspired by posts from Out of the Bag, Blue Collar Red Lipstick, and on The Cut.

I rambled quite a bit about how I approach dressing for work in my comment on Out of the Bag's post. In sum: I make what I consider visibly different-from-average fashion choices at work (I dress more colorfully and in slightly more casual silhouettes) and I do so to express something about myself (that my personality is a little more good-humored and less stern than possible stereotypes about my field might suggest). That set of choices could possibly conflict with other aspects of my personality at work, namely with how I take work extremely seriously and want to be judged solely on the merits of my work.

All those considerations need to be taken in context of how I am actually fairly certain that it is entirely unnecessary to expend that much thought on how I dress, at least at this particular office. Because my office has a fairly permissive business casual dress code, I am entirely free to indulge in my desire to dress in "casual business casual," often with bring colors and/or loud prints except on days where there is an important meeting. Although I pulled out the business casual sooner than any other intern, I was never, by any stretch of the imagination, the most colorfully or the most casually dressed woman at the workplace. Because I still lean towards fairly conventional cuts and silhouettes, I will never be the most fashionable woman at work either.  

Carrie Mathison from Homeland also dresses very professionally, though in a much less deliberate and feminine way than Claire Underwood from House of Cards. Carrie's style is probably consistent with The Cut's characterization of Samantha Power's wardrobe: dresses professionally and appropriately, but not in a way that suggests being "way too busy to give a crap."

Despite any possible thoughts I might have on the obstacles to equality for women at work in general and in my industry in particular, I am fully confident that, at my large company, no women is ever held back or at all negatively affected by what she chooses to wear to work. No person, male or female, ever commented on any woman's manner of dress in a negative way. Women sometimes chat amongst themselves to compliment this or that item of clothing (a no strings attached, no underlying implications compliment) or to express a wish to buy something similar.

If left completely to my own devices and entirely without other people's opinions to consider, I would probably dress like Emma Pillsbury from Glee.

That we don't have to worry about what we wear to work probably makes us quite lucky. Women in the public eye get arguably sexist scrutiny about their clothes all the time. There are industries that exert stronger pressure on women employees than men when it comes to what is and isn't an acceptable manner of dress. While that particular article argues that women in tech are becoming more free to dress fashionably, friends in the tech industry comment that if they were to adopt my "pencil skirts and ruffled printed tops" wardrobe in their office, they could well be seen as one of the "girls in marketing" rather than as serious computer scientist types.

Although I hope that few women in contemporary times could attribute any career setbacks or other problems to what they wore at work, dressing for the office is something that naturally causes some anxiety. Even if career problems don't arise directly from what one wears, it is very normal to feel some pressure to conform or to dress a certain way.

Friends in my field who work at smaller, male-dominated offices also report feeling more scrutinized. I can only speculate on why that would be the case, but the office must be more difficult to navigate when most co-workers are men. In some instances, it feels like a more cautious course would be to dress more formally, in jackets and suits, and to stick to more conventional colors like gray and navy. That style of dress might have some parallels to Claire Underwood's wardrobe in House of Cards, which the costume designer describes as being "about looking good but not standing out." 

Review: Selling Clothes on Thredup

I sent more items to Thredup than I did to Twice. With all of these items, the bag was only half full.

Edited 3/11 - I didn't realize that they charge a 2% fee to cash out to Paypal until today.

Edited 3/25 - You can see the payout for my second bag here. I am a little less pleased with the payout here, though it is, of course, understandable because I sent lower-value and fewer items. The only thing they rejected was a pair of like-new shoes from Nordstrom that might, admittedly, not be on their approved brands list. This time around, Thredup was also much faster, and processed my bag in about a week.

Edited 5/19 - It looks like Thredup is changing their payout structure, which will likely result in lower payouts for sellers.

Edit 2016 - Twice is now defunct, so the comparison between them and Thredup is no longer useful. I've also found over time, with more recent Thredup bags, that they are pickier now (which is understandable, given all the items that they're sent) and payouts do indeed tend to be lower.

Thredup finally got back to me with their offer late last week, which means that I can actually compare my Thredup and Twice experiences with fuller knowledge of both. There are definite pros and cons selling on either site. My post on the Twice selling experience can be found here. I can't say for sure that I would strongly prefer one resale place over the other, but because Thredup accepts more types of items and brands overall, I am much more likely to try Thredup again in the near future. 

$54.58, with a 2% fee if you choose Paypal rather than store credit. You can check out my bag here.

I was initially very concerned that Thredup would have extremely strict quality guidelines (both from their stated policy and anecdotes from some classmates) that would result in many of my items being rejected. I was pleasantly surprised, however, by how many things they took. Everything I sent was in very good, like new, or new condition, but given my experience with Twice, I expected at least a bit of arbitrariness to the quality control process. Thredup rejected an Ann Taylor pencil skirt (worn more often than the other items), the faux-fur H&M scarf/collar (kind of dated), and a polka dot Forever 21 top (kind of old). 

The things I liked about Thredup:

• The accept more brands. I have many H&M items that I never got around to wearing and it feels like a pity to just donate everything when there might be a little bit of resale value left. Twice doesn't accept H&M or Forever 21.
• They accept more accessories. Twice accepts handbags (and shoes), but not scarves or belts. 
• Their quality control might well be less arbitrary than Twice. This is surprising because it is the opposite from what one expects when reading their respective policies. I was shocked by some of the items Twice rejected, while I can see where Thredup is coming from with each of their rejections. 
• Anecdotally, though I can't verify this personally because I sent more expensive items to Twice than Thredup, payouts might also be a little higher on Thredup. 

The things I liked less about Thredup: 

• They're so much slower. I understand that Thredup is the much bigger website and that it handles a much wider selection. However, I initiated the process with Twice almost a week after I initiated the process with Thredup. It might take another 10 days before my Paypal payout goes through, while I got my payout from Twice last week.
• Relatedly, Paypal is the only option for a money payout on Thredup, which adds to the processing time. 
• They charge a 2% fee to cash out to Paypal.