I’ve been waffling on what kind of Halloween costume my daughter should wear this Halloween.

It’s probably the last Halloween where I can freely pick a costume for her without her input, although I have to say that outside of liking twirly skirts, she isn’t all that demanding in the clothing department.  I have a penchant for wanting her to be literary characters, so I was sort of leaning that direction.  But nothing really felt right.

People often comment on how angelic my daughter looks.  She has very big, bright blue eyes, with incredibly long lashes.

Looks can be deceiving.

Since in the past two days she has broken one of our screen doors and locked herself in the bathroom, as well as her various temper tantrums and general all-around demanding-ness, the perfect costume came to me.

A devil.

My daughter will be a devil.

Oh, the cutest devil you ever did see, but a devil nonetheless.

Hey, my husband and I need some laughs, I assure you.

I don’t like these.

And I don’t just mean the bad Photoshopping of the backgrounds.

Little girls in bikinis are a big pet peeve of mine, even before I had a daughter.  And now Liz Hurley has decided to jump on the early sexualization of young girls bandwagon with her own clothing line.  I think the purple one, with the ring on the top piece, is especially egregious.  Little girls are not women, nor should they dress exactly like them!

I just don’t get the whole little girls in bikinis thing.  If anything, we should be covering our kids’ skin as much as possible, not exposing most of it to the sun.  I don’t do a long sleeve rash guard, but both of my kids wear short-sleeved ones.

I know that Jessica Simpson also took some heat for posting photos of her infant in a bikini, which although the baby is cute as a button, I’m not totally down with it.  I read that it was supposed to be a retort on how Simpson should be in “bikini body” shape after giving birth, but still.

Fight the bikinis, girls, fight the bikinis!

I belong to more “flash sale” sites than is probably healthy, and they have more clothes by far for my toddler girl than my inching-toward-middle-school son.  I look at LOTS of dresses.

Often I will click on a particular brand just to see what they are offering, even if I know I can’t afford it.  Actually, BECAUSE I can’t afford it, I want to see what I’m missing out on by being poor.

So recently, I clicked on a prestigious French brand that is branching out into children’s wear, and read this opening line:

Do right by your little girl and clothe her in Chloé from a young age.

Erm, really?

Because I choose not to spend $180 on a denim jumper she would probably wear twice, I’m doing my daughter wrong?

Anything to make people feel morally superior for spending an inordinate amount of money on kid’s clothing, amirite?

Priorities.

Methinks people have them in the wrong place.

Thanksgiving seems like such a long time ago, does it not?

It seems that almost all of you are in it for the stuffing, with 48% of the vote.  Dessert and alcohol tied at 14% (imagine that) and turkey came in with 11%.  Which is suprising because I don’t know all that many people who are crazy about turkey.  NOBODY voted for sweet potatoes, which boggles the mind. Your house must not feature the ones my sister makes.

Today I wish to ask your opinion of this rather highly rated shirt from a popular tween store called Justice.  I want to warn you that it is made of polyester.

My daughter is tosser/turner/flipper type of sleeper.  She also has pretty much no body fat and gets extremely cold at night, but won’t sleep under covers due to the tossy/turny thing.  My solution so far has been to have her wear footed pajamas at night.  Well, that worked well until we got to size 3T, when the manufacturers apparently made the decision that they could suddenly stop placing the piece of fabric over the top of the zipper which helps to keep the zipper from digging into the neck.  So, her zipper tends to annoy her, which in turn annoys us.

Do you know that in all of the vast Amazon, I could only find ONE  2-piece long sleeve footed pajamas? ONE!  Come on now, I know that there are two year olds that are quite big for their age that could totally still be wearing footed pajamas but are ready to start potty training.  And do you know what will hamper potty training? Yup, a 1  piece footed pajama!

So clothing manufaturers, what is so hard about making a 2 piece pajama set where the pants happen to have feet?  What, I ask?

Also, when my son was about three or four, zip-off pants were everywhere.  And I loved them unconditionally.  There was nothing not to love, and they especially make sense in the climate we live in, which can be warm in the day, but darn cold at night and in the mornings.  But I was only able to buy them for about two years and then, poof! Gone!  Never to return!

Sure, I could buy them at a specialty clothing retailer like REI, but I’m not willing to pay that much.

Why do clothing manufacturers hate me so much?

Courtesy of Levi’s.

Yeah, because a sweatshirt with a fake denim jacket screened on the front of it is SO COOL!  Because everyone knows that denim in the front and sweatshirt material on the back is the new mullet!

Listen, they make ACTUAL denim everything for toddlers, so I suggest simply going that route if you are really into that type of thing.

And Jesus Christ on a stick, they want almost thirty bucks for this crap?

Just say no, ladies, just say no to the newest version of the mullet.

via

Well, unless of course you spend upwards of seventy dollars or so on your kid’s Halloween costume.  Then I guess you get to look smug.

This “dark angel” number will set you back a mere $88.00

But it’s much better than something like this:

The main costume is $98.00, but it doesn’t include the leggings, hat, or wings.  So I dare someone to put on just the dress part and have anyone recognize it as a phoenix.

The Alice costume they have is plain as can be, it’s the Queen of Hearts that gets all the love. As well it should for a hundred bucks.

If you would like your daughter to be the “Vampiress of Versailles” you will be charging $128.00 onto your credit card.

OK, I actually really like this costume.  But, if you want it to look just like it does in the picture, it will be around $160.00

Normally I’m all for unconventional costumes, but this one is a teensy bit baffling.  And for a hundred dollars, nobody should be guessing what you are.

To be fair, they do have some more reasonably priced costumes on the site, but they are considerably plainer and generic, so I should be glad that’s reflected in the price.  Right?

According to an article in the LA Times, some schools in Britain are sick and tired of the “skirt creep” that some young girls are wont to do and are solving the problem by banning skirts altogether.

As someone who was FORCED to wear skirts EVERY SINGLE DAY for all twelve of my school years (uh, not including college, natch) I applaud this decision heartily.

Skirts, as school wear, generally suck.

Nothing is more miserable than having to wear a skirt in cold, rainy weather.  And tights don’t quite cut it in the warmth department.  In fact, we were not allowed to wear tights, only socks.  I remember attempting to pull my thick wool skirt over the tops of my knees outside at lunch in order to keep my kneecaps from becoming frostbitten.  I was in Southern California, so it wasn’t actually all that cold, but try telling that to my poor, shivering kneecaps.

Also, nothing is more embarrassing than having your skirt fly up, and this can happen due to more reasons than you would think.  Bloomers are an option, as are bike shorts, but can get uncomfortable sitting in class all day long.

So, in cold weather, pants for the win!

In hot weather, culottes do the trick.  Practically impossible to roll up by the waistband (unless you like having a seam embedded in your crotch all day, and hey, maybe some people do) and equally impossible to roll up the legs.

I know, because all my friends and I tried.