Yesterday, an unexpected controversy was stirred up by a post about tights. Yes, tights. Write about sex ed, no problem. Write about legwear, prepare for vitriol.
In the post, I made a comment about how, in my opinion (and isn’t that why you read here, for my opinion?), there were “no exceptions” to the two-out-of-three rule. Some commenters chided me for being so stringent and so dictatorial. But, in my view, wearing a mishmash of colors on your lower half is not a good look for most women. And, even if you are the rare flower who can make colored tights look good when paired with different color separates, it’s not appropriate work attire in a professional work environment like Capitol Hill.
So, what I meant was, that there were “no exceptions” in a professional office setting–because this is, at it’s heart a professional fashion blog about work environments that tilt conservative. But it became clear after my second or third “clarification” in the comments, that I hadn’t made this point very well because I had assumed that the professional part would go unsaid. Clearly, I was wrong.
On occasion, when I realize that I haven’t made my point in the way that I wanted, I’ll go back and alter the post. I’ve done it a dozen times.
Maybe a reader is genuinely offended by something I said (I made an unfortunate crack about Dr. Mengele once, and a reader was right to criticize me), so I change it. Maybe I assumed that something went without saying when, in fact, it needed to be spelled out. Or sometimes, the debate in the comments just changes my mind about something, and instead of forcing future readers to read dozens of comments, I alter the post to reflect my new opinion.
Whatever the reason, I sometimes change posts after the fact. It’s rare, but it happens. After all, I am the editor/sole writer/creative director/Grand Poobah here at CHS, and it’s my right.
So to the commenter and the emailer who accused me of abandoning my argument and insinuated that I engaged in a cover up to spare my easily bruised ego the pain of hearing my long cherished beliefs about tights challenged as heresy: This is a blog about shoes and purses, not the Pentagon Papers. I don’t know where Hoffa’s body is buried or what is on the missing 18 minutes of the Nixon tapes or the identity of the second shooter on the grassy knoll. There is no cover up here.
I like to be understood, and when it became obvious that I hadn’t made my point in the way that I had intended, I changed the post to make it more clear. If you have a problem with that, feel free to read elsewhere. This is a fashion blog, not the paper of record.