New year, new me?

(hahaha, not really -- don't count on me changing too much in the beginning of my third decade of life!) 

In any case, the culmination of a day shopping was a bit less than thrilling. I did not find the things I wanted to find and have. So here is a rundown of things I would like to have, but have not been able to find thus far. Some of them are a bit bewildering as to why they're so elusive, but that's how it is, apparently. 

ONE
Glasses. To be specific, eyeglasses, not sunglasses, and I've only got a few criteria. Contacts are out of the question because I'm not a fan of poking and pinching at my eyeballs, plus, I think I'd look weird without glasses, having worn them for so long now. Onto the criteria:

• square-ish frames: (or rather, angular?) not rounded off squares, but decently angular at the corners. I've already got a round face so the frames need to counter that
• medium sized frames: (as in height) I don't want glasses the size of small saucers
• NO cat eyes: a good number of women's glasses are in this style, which I don't think looks good on me. I wonder if it'll ever catch on for men to wear genuine cat eye shaped glasses..
• NO tortoiseshell patterned frames. I hate the way tortoiseshell looks.
• fun colored frames: WHY is this so hard to find? At best, the fun colors will be on the inside of the frames so you only get a glimpse of them when the glasses are worn. Plus, the combination of angular/square and fun colored (on the outside!) is maddeningly elusive. I guess angular/square is stereotypically a more masculine thing, and then the fun colors are more of a girly/feminine thing, so... but honestly, to hell with gender stereotypes about colors and frame styles.  

At this rate, I almost should start my own glasses company and make angular, fun colored frames since there seems to be such a lack of those already on the market. I have some ideas already on what I might name some of the frame styles; one, naturally, I'd gratuitously name after myself (should I use my first name or last name for that? Both of them are fairly common; alas...), and another I would name after the person who I most associate a similar style of glasses with. That's all I have so far, but it's a start! 

 

TWO

 A messenger bag: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, they say. Backhanded compliments are the least sincere, I say. This, like everything else, I also have particular criteria for, listed as follows:

• Decent capacity, meaning it can hold all the stuff I feel like carrying around on an average school day. This usually consists of a few folders, a regular spiral notebook, a small laptop (Chromebook), a pencil case, a top-bound spiral notebook for newspaper related tasks (reporting notes), and numerous other miscellaneous items.
• SIDE POCKETS. I refuse to use any kind of bag for school if it doesn't have side pockets. Two side pockets, in particular. Maybe if the bag was otherwise perfect and only had one side pocket, I could live with it, but I'd like two nice side pockets. 
• A secure closure (that's also not too fiddly), so things don't fall out. Ideally, a partial flap since I don't really like the amount of extra fabric a full flap entails, but I'm not sure I'd necessarily be able to find one with a partial flap AND all the other features I'd like. 
• Some interior pockets/compartments for organizational purposes, and maybe an outside compartment or two (or three?) as well for convenience's sake. 
• A snazzy color. Life is too short to own things in boring, dull colors. Or at least not brown/tan/black. Gray I can live with, but an even snazzier color would be nice. Say, pastel, perhaps? Could be interesting.
• NOT leather. Too fancy and expensive for a school bag. 

Basically, if the North Face made messenger bags like they make backpacks, that'd be my dream messenger bag, pretty much. Since they don't, my search continues.    

THREE

Tolerable jeans. At the moment, I have three pairs that I like enough to wear on a regular basis (which is pretty much every time I go out of the house if the weather's too cold for bare legs) and no more. Unfortunately, at the time I got those pairs, I didn't think to get multiples pairs of them for when they started to wear out. On the bright side, the one pair that is somewhat noticeably beginning to wear out did end up lasting me at least two years, which isn't so bad. My criteria here:

• ideally, available in short/petite lengths to minimize the need for hemming/rolling up
• NOT too stretchy: many jeans these days have too much stretch in them and do not feel particularly substantial/sturdy. This is supposed to be denim, people. If I wanted to feel like I'm wearing leggings (which I don't; I hate those and refuse to wear them), I'd wear leggings. Also, overly stretchy jean fabric makes me feel like my legs are sausages and the pants are a sausage casing. 
• I guess I'm not too picky about color/wash, but it'd be nice if there were multiple options in the same cut/fit
• NOT high rise. That is just not my thing. 
• straight/skinny leg: these days, it seems that what was considered skinny five years ago is now more of a straight leg. I'm not too particular about the terminology as long as the jeans aren't overly sausage-y but also not too baggy.
• NOT too loose in the back because I'd like these things to look at least sort of flattering. At least as flattering as one can look when you dress as casually (badly? Although I've never actually had anyone tell me that I dress badly. But maybe people are just being polite) as me. In the past, I had multiple pairs of fairly ill-fitting jeans from American Eagle, which I wish I hadn't had the misfortune to wear, because they were wrong in all the ways: too stretchy, some too long, unflattering/too loose in the backside so I always had to pull them up, which was annoying

The three pairs of jeans I currently have (and treasure?) that I actually like enough to wear are the following: 

• a light/medium wash, 99% cotton, size 5S from Hollister. Fabric blends are sort of important since they affect stretchiness or lack thereof. This pair includes measurements on the label: 27 waist, 31 length. I measured my waist yesterday and it was genuinely about 27 or 28 inches. Come to think of it, I have a lighter wash version of these somewhere but I don't know where they went. So make that four pairs? I remember the particular saleslady who helped me to find/pick out these jeans was pleasantly helpful, more so than you'd expect in stores that aren't, say, Nordstrom. I always thought the pocket design on womens (or rather, girls? As it's more of a juniors store/brand) Hollister jeans was vaguely reminiscent of a seashell. 
• a darker wash A&F pair in size 2S, 80% cotton and the rest a blend of polyester and viscose, according to the label. These also have measurements on the label: 26 waist, 31 length. This pair is definitely a couple years old and I think they have redone their sizing by now to make their pants more true to size, so this size 2 pair runs a bit large and maybe fits more like an average size 4 or 6 (? probably more like a 4). The archy pocket design always struck me as distinctive but also fairly minimalist and it irks me probably more than it should that they don't put that on their jeans anymore! 
• a medium wash, boyfriend style J Brand pair in size 25 waist. These particular jeans have a name for the style -- Jake. Like Jake Gyllenhaal (or I guess Jake Tapper, but I thought of Jake Gyllenhaal first), or at least that's what they make me think of, even though I have no idea if the style was specifically named after Jake Gyllenhaal. Boyfriend style means they're a little looser than the other two pairs, but not overly baggy. Supposedly they are low rise, although they fit a bit higher (more like a mid rise?) than my other two pairs. According to the label, the fabric blend is 81% cotton and 19% lyocell, whatever that is. Whatever it is, it's not stretchy since these jeans have a pleasingly sturdy feel to them. I think these run large because a 25 waist seems like it should a bit small for me, but these fit fine. According to the J Brand size chart online, a 25 waist corresponds to a size 4 and a 35.5" hip measurement, so maybe these don't actually run small? I just don't see how a 25 waist is a size 4. Other brands' size charts have a 25 waist as a size zero. Bewildering. If I were to rename this particular style of jeans, I'd name them Isabel (instead of Jake) because they remind me of some jeans an Isabel I know wears (or at least, has worn, on an occasion or two).

As far as new jeans go, I think maybe I should try Lucky Brand and/or Levi's. I have a vague idea of which Lucky Brand cut/style might work for me, but not so much about Levi's, although it is a pretty famous brand of jeans. In any case, it would be nice to have more than only three pairs to choose from.

Anyways, there it is, a thorough rundown of some things I would like to have, yet have not been able to find versions of that meet my criteria. If you've got any suggestions for me (or old DVDs of Peter Sarsgaard movies that you don't want anymore), please send them my way. 

25200696209