Vietnam War documentaries and uniforms

Just recently I finished watching the Vietnam War documentary series that's currently on Netflix and aired on PBS last (?) year. Ten episodes and 18 hours later, here we are, presumably more educated/knowledgeable about the Vietnam War. Ever since I watched Full Metal Jacket, I thought that I should know more about the Vietnam War, which is part of the reason why I committed to watching the aforementioned documentary series.

I thought it was well-done, so I'm in agreement with what I remember reading in the reviews of it at the time of its initial premiere. It was long and extensive, but thorough. The chronological approach was sort of an interesting one, although now I think I'd like to look more into certain aspects of the war, such as the role of journalists/correspondents (naturally), among others. 

The soundtrack was pretty ace, featuring a lot of the quintessential 60s songs of the era, some of which I think I'd like to listen to more, in addition to my current music diet of a good amount of Joy Division (does that mean I'm a depressing person??). Sometime in the last few weeks, I read something about why classic rock has remained popular to this day, which was interesting although I don't completely remember what it said. 

It also reinforced my opinion that I would not want to have to fight in a war; that sort of experience seems like it would be just brutal and terrible. If a new war were to break out now, and perhaps the draft to start again, I would become an anti-war protester/modern day hippie. Maybe I'd also help some people burn their draft cards (is that still a thing? If it's not, we could just print draft card props to be burnt symbolically. As an aside, I wonder what might happen if I, a woman, attempted to register to potentially be drafted, seeing as only men are required to register, as they inform you on brochures at the post office). Speaking of which, I also liked the 60s aesthetic portrayed in the documentary's parts that covered the hippies/anti-war protestors. 

Related to this, I thought the American military uniforms seen in much of the historical footage used in the documentary were a particularly snazzy shade of green -- a sort of bluer green, not overly brown/yellow like some other military-esque greens are these days. Or maybe the shade just photographed/filmed really well on the film they used for cameras back then. The appearance of film photographs, in general, has a certain pleasing nostalgic quality to it. 

So naturally, I had to look further into this. It turns out that a) you can buy American Vietnam-era military uniform clothes on eBay, some for rather reasonable prices (and some with blood stains...). And b) there's a specific name for the color of those uniforms (OG-107, as in "olive green") which were discontinued in 1989, apparently. And somewhat related, c) there are many military surplus websites which sell... interesting products that I honestly had never really thought about before. Like Royal Mail carrier messenger-style bags or German police jackets/coats that say "POLIZEI" across the back, among others. What fun!! 

Related to this, I thought about the idea of military-inspired fashion and how a few years ago (I think, if memory serves?) the "utility jacket" was in style, and I, in fact, have one made in that style, from Forever 21. Now, a few years later, I'm actually fairly surprised at how long that coat has held up in relatively workable condition since you don't usually shop at Forever 21 for quality. For around $30 or so, what value!! I've worn that jacket into the ground, weather permitting. 

A key element of these military uniform shirts/jackets are the quadruple flapped pockets, at the chest and then around the waist. What a concept! Interestingly enough, in the past, I found a nice jacket at the thrift store, which is clearly a women's jacket, as it's a saccharine bubblegum pink. It has four pockets in the arrangement/style like on the uniforms. I barely even know what to do with all those pockets! In any case, owing to the color and the pockets, I'm going to scour eBay for a shirt or jacket that I might buy to wear for myself. It could be an interesting addition to my wardrobe. I'm somewhat worried about the fit, as the uniforms were naturally made for men, so they'll be large, but to what extent specifically, I'm not sure. Hopefully not too unflatteringly so.   

As far as other historical self-education goes, I also watched a shorter documentary series about Bobby Kennedy and his campaign for president, which culminated (or rather, ended) in his untimely assassination. That one made me wonder what it would have been like and how the world might've been different had he not gotten killed and went on to become president. Alas. We'll never know. There's an overlap between the Vietnam War era and Bobby Kennedy's campaign, which is sort of interesting how the two topics are connected. Some of the prominent issues in the 60s that Bobby Kennedy campaigned on are still relevant today, albeit perhaps in slightly different forms, and that struck me.  

Postsecret review 15

Finally, I have the time and energy to get back to this blog, and I figured I'd do a Postsecret review for this week's secrets. 

"For all these years**, I can only reach orgasm by thinking about male soccer players." 
Initially, I assumed this secret was written by a woman and so I thought it wasn't too out of the ordinary, but then I thought, what if maybe it was actually written by a man? That would make it a bit more out there...

"I'm not Christian. I'm not even religious. But, when I'm ALONE on long road trips, I love listening to Christian music. I even sing along. I have a USB full of it." 
Some of it is sort of catchy, I guess. I assume this person is referring to modern Christian music, not hymns, but some hymns are okay too. This secret also made me think of that one episode of Arrested Development where George Michael's girlfriend invites him to a Christian music bonfire: "George Michael asks his father if they have any music he can use for the Christian music bonfire that he and Ann are going to be hosting at the house. Michael suggests Christmas music, but George Michael clarifies that it's not a 'Christian music' bonfire but rather a Christian 'music bonfire,' in which they burn satanic music."

"My friends talk about Republicans as if they're subhuman. I am a Republican. They dont know that it bothers me." (with "I am a Republican" written inside an outline of the Republican elephant symbol) 
While I can somewhat understand the sentiments of these friends, it's at the very least, somewhat rude to say things like that in the presence of a Republican. But who cares about civility these days... 

"You lied about being on birth control
You thought I would never figure it out" (on a Mother's Day card) 
I wonder about the relationship between the writer of this secret and the person who apparently is now a mother, not to mention the specific circumstances of this situation... 

"I have orgasms to the thought of Jake Tapper reporting that President Trump has been impeached." 
This I can actually somewhat understand... I wonder why Jake specifically though, and not, say Wolf Blitzer, or Anderson, or Jim Acosta, et al. This secret also included a drawing of the Republican elephant symbol. 

"Now that I've won I want to keep it a secret so people don't use me for the money" (over a lottery ticket receipt) 
I wonder how much money this person won -- enough apparently that they're worried people will try to use them for the money, I guess.

"When it's time to throw away my monthly contacts I think of all the beautiful things and happy moments they've seen"
This one is just a nice little sweet happy secret. 

"I killed my neighbor's cat with the same toy they threw at me." This one seems violent and also a bit unsettling, what with the cat-killing mentioned in it... poor cat.

"since he broke up with me 9 months ago i don't sleep naked anymore" 
I like this one because there's a nice drawing of a figure and the cursive handwriting of whoever wrote it is nice. 

"I wonder if the things that remind me of you remind you of me." This one is also a nice sweet little secret. And the handwriting on this one is nice too. 

"When you don't answer my text messages, I'm afraid they found (one of the) bodies." This one is... intriguing, to say the least. I really wonder about those bodies... perhaps the implication is that they're bodies of murder victims? For the record, when people don't answer my texts, I usually just worry that they got hit by a truck/killed in a car crash... for some reason, that's just the first place my mind goes. 

That's it for the secrets, or at least the ones I thought were interesting enough to review and write up my thoughts about. 

In other news, I recently added to my slowly growing rock collection. I don't really care what exact kind of rocks they are; all that I really care about is that they're interesting looking and not too big/heavy to practically carry/collect. They have been accumulating in various corners and on various surfaces in my room.  

I have also been working my way through watching some documentary series. I already finished one about Bobby Kennedy, and now I'm onto (and halfway through with) one about the Vietnam War that aired on PBS earlier this year (or last year?) and is now on Netflix, which is where I'm watching it. For a while, I've thought the Vietnam War is something I should know more about, hence watching this documentary series in an effort to learn more about it. 

I also discovered the joy of wearing swim trunks and now I'd like to have more than just one pair to wear. Pockets!! What a concept! And fun prints/colors/patterns to boot. Maybe this time of year I could find some nice ones on sale... 

Collecting business cards and some media analysis

Popping back in here for a quick bit of media analysis, or at least what I'd like to think counts as media analysis. 

Before we get started, it's so interesting/nice when people give me their business cards, I think because of the novelty of it. I'm still young enough, I suppose, for this to hold a minuscule thrill. So I'm building a collection and I'm keeping it in a cigarette box I found at a bus stop in the past. It was in surprisingly good condition. 

I think the boxes are pretty cool the way they flip open. I wanted to think of something surprising I could store in there instead of cigarettes, to get some use out of it. So now that box is having a second life upcycled into a business card holder. They fit so nicely in there and the box is a nice turquoise Newport brand one. If I find any other nice cigarette boxes while I'm out and about, I'll be sure to collect them.

On to the media analysis. Brian Stelter, who went to high school maybe 20 minutes away, if that, has a Sunday show on CNN, where he talks about all things media. Here is a tweet I saw with a quote from one of his guests today: "Media: 'Journalism is necessary to make sure our voices are heard. As citizens, we need to use our right as voters to vote out the people who won't listen to us.' Rebecca Schneid of @EagleEyeMSD to @brianstelter on @ReliableSources (newspaper: http://eagleeye.news/  )"  [emphasis mine] 

Admittedly, I might be missing some context here, or misinterpreting things, but here are my thoughts: 
I'm guessing the guy who tweeted this is trying to address the media to pay attention to the quote? What with "Media: [...]" at the beginning of the tweet. What follows is a quote (bolded above) of a high school student's view about journalism. 

As my favorite journalism professor (maybe my favorite professor altogether to date? [what an honor! {I wonder if I'll have another professor in the future who becomes my favorite?}]) says, journalism is about telling other people's stories. Other people's. Not your own, as the journalist. The use of "our" in the quote could be interpreted as meaning that the journalist's voice is the voice to be heard, seeing as the student who said this quote writes for her school's newspaper. Or it could be interpreted as meaning that journalism provides a way for citizens' voices to be heard. While journalists can also be citizens, they shouldn't be putting their voices/opinions into what they write/otherwise produce.

The thought about journalism not being about your own (as the journalist) opinions/voice was echoed recently when I spoke to a working journalist the other week. He said that you aren't supposed to include your own opinions and/or tell people how they should feel about whatever topic it is. 

I'm not completely sure I organized or conveyed my thoughts well and clearly here, but I figured I'd at least try. Maybe if I think about it some more I'll be able to offer a clarified version of said thoughts. 

Closing thought: Media literacy feels like a full-time job these days.  

[Maybe I can be the next Brian Stelter?? Or maybe someday I'll become the editor of a larger, professional newspaper/organization... Who knows!] 

Joy Division

Muse recently released a new single, which is... underwhelming. It's too generic compared to what you might expect from Muse. If I wanted to hear music like this new song, I'd listen to other bands that are known for that sort of sound. I personally don't really like it, although it's probably a bit more radio-friendly than some of their other stuff. Alas. Perhaps the full album might be a bit better overall, but something tells me maybe I shouldn't hold my breath too much. 

In any case, I have also recently been listening to Joy Division. In the past, I only really knew Shadowplay and Love Will Tear Us Apart. Shadowplay because the Killers did a cool cover of it, and Love Will Tear Us Apart because it's probably their most famous song. Eventually I ended up listening to the album Unknown Pleasures in full, and today I listened to the album Closer in full. 

Interesting music, but admittedly quite depressing, thematically. Although I suppose that's kind of my thing, as far as music taste goes. Joy Division's music has been around for quite awhile, and I'm only really getting into it now. New Dawn Fades is a particular standout for me, along with Twenty Four Hours. 

So yeah, gonna keep listening to Joy Division in the new year. Happy belated Valentine's day, folks, and no, I have not had any success yet regarding online dating. No surprises there. I blame it on the fact that I have standards, which isn't such a bad thing, is it?  

Oh, and if I hadn't mentioned it in the past, I found out about a new (to me) song about murder, which is always fun. Another one to add to the collection. Pyscho Killer 

Adding pages to a spiral notebook

The short of it: busy me = fewer blog posts. And I certainly have been very busy since the beginning of this year's spring semester. The ordeals of editing and being completely in charge of a newspaper have not abated. 

In any case, at the beginning of this semester I realized that I was quickly nearing the end of my favorite spiral notebook. This is one of those things I'm quite particular about, in addition to my writing utensils and other accoutrements. The particulars: spiral, not composition. Never composition. Plastic cover, not paper -- durability is important. High quality/sturdy spiral wire and back cover. Even for other notebooks I might just use for more random notes (as in, not for school/class), they must be spiral bound. I just like the way the pages swing better that way. 

My go-to over the past few years has been Staples' Accel notebooks. I used to get the wide-ruled versions, but eventually I adjusted to college-ruled paper and that's what I use now. Unfortunately, I think the quality of these notebooks may have slightly declined within the last year or so.  

The cover should be an interesting color: in the past, I've had hot pink and light blue, mainly. I wish there were more options, since I like variety and would prefer not to have another notebook in the same color that I used some time in the past. Seeing as there don't seem to be more options, in the future I may have to resort to repeating a color and drawing some design on it in Sharpie and/or decorating with stickers, or something like that. Life's too short for boring notebooks. Although they do sell other brands of notebooks with more interesting cover designs, the quality is lacking. 

Since I didn't feel like getting an entirely new notebook for the second semester of a year, I decided I would just try to make the most of the one I've had so far. Whenever I happened to buy this notebook, I was quite fortunate to get one that has an actual design on the cover, as opposed to just a solid color. In the time since, I haven't seen any others like that, which baffles and consterns me, since the plain covers are sort of boring. There's also the issue of quality concerns and not wanting to repeat a cover color, which I admit is mildly ridiculous.  

For awhile, as I was quickly running out of pages, I wondered about how it might be possible to add more pages to the notebook, and eventually I thought up an idea. Buy loose leaf notebook paper and insert it into the existing notebook, attaching it via binder rings, as the notebook is hole-punched to allow putting it in the rings of a binder. By binder rings I mean the kind you can buy separately, that are kind of like keyrings except they open differently. Not the full binder with the covers and the rings attached inside to the spine.

Anyways, I finally got the notebook paper part of the equation tonight so I was able to test my idea, which seems to work. The binder rings are slightly unwieldy, but it's better (in my mind) than having to get an entirely new notebook. So now I can add additional pages as necessary, and even insert them in various positions in the notebook. It should now definitely last me until the end of the semester, and perhaps even into next year, although we'll just have to see how it's holding up and how many more additional pages could plausibly fit. Of course, I could just rip out all the existing pages and replace them entirely with a new, blank set in order to use the notebook even longer, but I'm not quite sure I want to do that.       

Some thoughts about Rachel Maddow

As examined through two interviews. 

First off: Who do I write this blog for? Primarily, seeing as very few people read it (which I don't really mind), I'd say I write it for myself. It'd be nice if I could say that I write it for more than just myself, but that's how it is. It'd be great if more people read my blog, but that's not a huge concern of mine right now.

Anyways, onto the main topic. My (partial) namesake, Rachel Maddow. I assume most people have a general idea of who she is -- an MSNBC host who's got her own show that's on at 9 pm weeknights. Naturally, it's called the Rachel Maddow Show, and not that I'm really aiming to go into broadcast journalism, but what if I end up having my own show with a similar name? An interesting idea to ponder, if you're me. 

I'm not particularly familiar with her or her show, so I had to look up how to pronounce her last name. The second syllable rhymes with show or meadow, not now. In that, she's like Anderson -- his show (or rather, the shortened name of it) also has a bit of a rhyming thing going on: AC360. I am trying to watch MSNBC a bit more for the sake of variety, so hopefully I'll catch the Rachel Maddow Show occasionally.

Not having watched Rachel Maddow enough, I can't really provide that comprehensive of a comparison of her vs. Anderson. They've both got their own shows, have had said shows for a decent amount of time, and are gay/lesbian. As far as differences go, Anderson has a fancy sounding name, and the family background to go with it, as he is an heir (but you wouldn't guess it). From my preliminary readings about Rachel Maddow, I have learned that she is not an heir and does not have a particularly fancy sounding full name. That's about the extent of the comparison I can do so far. 

The reason I started thinking about Rachel Maddow is because of Donald Trump's recent tweet about "Sloppy Steve Bannon," a new derogatory nickname. Knowing someone else (not Bannon) named Steve, I wondered what he thought (if anything) about the nickname "Sloppy Steve," since I feel like I would have some thoughts if Trump came up with a derogatory nickname for someone with the same (first) name as me. 

So, naturally, I ended up thinking about the fact that Rachel Maddow has the same first name as me and could plausibly be someone Trump might decide to come up with a derogatory nickname for. If he happens to do that in the future, it wouldn't be the first time he's gone after MSNBC personalities (ex: "Psycho Joe" Scarborough).  

Since I was thinking about Rachel Maddow and wasn't (still am not) particularly familiar with her, I decided to read a couple of interviews of her. (do you see a theme here? I'm not sure if other people share my penchant for reading interviews of various mildly-to-rather famous people to get some insight on them. But how else are you supposed to get an idea of what these people are like?)  

The first one I read was from Rolling Stone, published in spring of last year. Some key things I noticed were that she came across as very confident, sure of herself, and direct in her answers. In some ways, you could almost consider it masculine (not that women have any obligation to behave in stereotypically feminine ways). This interview happened to mention her preferred style of clothes to wear, which I wish I could get away with without feeling overly un-put-together. 

The second interview I read was from New York magazine, published in the fall of 2017: It offers a deconstruction of Maddow's style of explaining things in her show, something which would probably resonate more with me if I were more familiar with the show. It also goes into what her workday is like, her process of preparing material for her show each night. 

A very interesting part of this interview (more so the published article, rather than the actual interview as an event), to me, was where the author goes on a tangent (if you know me, you know I'm a tangential person) about a somewhat distant relative of Rachel Maddow, who happened to have written a book the interviewer had read and thought to be "brilliant." The interviewer and Rachel Maddow end up talking about this relative, and this tangent later connects to Maddow's apparent similar habit of telling tangential stories on her show, based on her trains of thought (I tried to distill this idea in my own words as well as possible, but maybe you're better off reading the relevant part of the interview).  

Some takeways/key ideas from both of them, or things that were mentioned in both: Rachel Maddow sees her job as being to explain the news.* She wants to have something worthwhile to say to her audience. 

There were a few lines/parts that were quite similar between the two of them, very similar phrasing about the same topic (one instance happened to be about personal life, privacy) -- reminiscent of when I was reading interviews of David Fahrenthold; after a few, I definitely noticed some repetitive ideas or things he mentioned showing up across multiple interviews (maybe the interviewers should've asked him different questions, therefore eliciting different answers?).

I don't really remember noticing such parallels when I read interviews of other people -- Peter Sarsgaard, for example, but maybe there are explanations for that. Maybe it's not necessarily a case of journalists (as a specific set of people) being particularly predisposed to give similar answers across multiple interviews. In any case, two examples (Fahrenthold, Maddow) might be a bit of a small sample to make broad generalizations from.  

In closing: Maybe it would serve me well to strive to be more like Rachel Maddow? But I'll have to get more familiar with her show and what she's like first.

*Somewhat similar to my notion that journalism is a means of bringing order to information, which appeals to me in the way that watching Law and Order appeals to me, because that show portrays detectives and prosecutors bringing order to things by solving the crimes and serving justice.  

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