PortaPocket Notebook

Living in this day and age, one cannot deny the success and influence of one of the most powerful and (financially) successful entrepreneurs of our time, Sara Blakely. The creator of SPANX has been lauded by Oprah, praised by the (then) First Lady, and given millions of women around the world a reason to feel more comfortable in their own skin. All of these are good things.  And yet... 

The irony is...if you really think about it... one main premise of SPANX is that it's built around the mindset that women should look a certain way to be attractive and acknowledged. While I have no problem if people want to wear these shapers if they choose to and if it makes them feel better about themselves, great! ...but should people feel any less worthy if they choose not to? 

Empowering women (and men) is good. But should we be perpetuating the skewed societal view that women are objects and how they look is of utmost importance? It's not Sara's fault that our society values physical beauty over intangible qualities, but must we keep buying into the notion that that is our best asset?  

How about you?
What do you think? 

Photo Credit:  Compfight.com (SPANX) 

I'm sure you've heard the controversy at the Sochi Olympics...the US speedskating team's lackluster performance is surprising, so many involved are scratching their heads and questioning why they are winning no medals. The team has been wearing some specially designed "Mach 39" suits from Under Armour, which in concert with defense contractor Lockheed Martin, had created the "fastest speed skating suits in production," specifically for these 2014 Winter Games. But now these suits have come under fire and have been blamed for posssibly adding unnecessary wind drag while the athletes are racing.  So it must be this equipment's shortcomings, right? Well... not so fast...

In a recent race, US women speed skaters in the 1000 meters had covered up the questionable vent on the suit's backside with fabric in order to eliminate the potential wind drag issue, yet ended up with a similar result as when the suits hadn't been adjusted.  It seems that the variable has been eliminated. So what could it be then?

When things don't go our way it is easy to point the finger at external forces and lay blame elsewhere, but never on one's own shoulders. Under Armour has been making high quality sporting gear for over a decade and I personally own and enjoy wearing many of their items. And while no, I'm certainly no elite athlete, and my use of their gear never means my achievements in life are dictated by a fraction of a split second, I've never had a problem with the quality of their garments and feel they are simply getting a bum rap here.

While it's true UA pants never have enough functional pockets (especially for women) and they can't comfortably and effectively fit a cell phone while you work out (which is the exact same problem that ANY sportswear maker's pants have!), I think Under Armour is a good brand. And a decent company. And it's not their fault. Let's not make them the scapegoat.