Wednesday’s Workwear Report: Placed Floral Turtleneck
This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.
After a very warm September, it’s finally starting to feel like fall in the Northeast, so I was very excited to see this floral version from Ted Baker. I’m guilty of falling into an all-black rut once the weather gets a little chillier, but a little floral flare might help liven things up a bit.
I have a reddish midi skirt hanging in my closet that would look gorgeous with this, but I think it would also look perfect with my favorite black trousers.
The top is $135 at Nordstrom and comes in sizes XS-XL.
Two more affordable options are both at Nordstrom, from Anne Klein ($109, 0X-3X) and GibsonLook ($79, XXS-XL).
Sales of note for 9/26/25
- Nordstrom – 7400+ new markdowns! Also: 6x points on beauty.
- Ann Taylor – Extra 50% off sale, plus $20 style steals
- Banana Republic Factory – 40% off everything + extra 15% off
- Boden – Sale now up to 50% off PLUS an extra 10% off
- J.Crew – Extra 30% off sale styles, plus up to 50% off layers they love
- J.Crew Factory – 40-70% off everything + extra 20% off $125+
- Nordstrom Rack – UGG up to 40% off
- Rothy's – Up to 50% off last-chance sales
- Soma – 6 panties for $36 — readers love these no-VPL panties (and these PJs)
- Talbots – 40% off one item, plus 30% off everything else
- White House Black Market – 30% off all full-price dresses, and $50 off $200+ purchase
Good morning – checking in on our federal workers today. How will the shutdown affect you and your teams? Have you been through this before?
I still work and get paid so I have it easy. But, I’m still so disgusted.
The update to HUD’s webpage is so vile I had to sit and think if I want to continue working in the federal government.
After some back and forth, I came to my original decision I made in November 2024. I will keep doing the duty that I swore to do until I am personally ordered to do something unethical or illegal. And then I’ll meet with an attorney.
My day to day job helps people. I know that I am doing the job very well, and that if I choose to leave I will not be replaced meaning that the Americans I help suffer. I work with absolutely amazing colleagues, and if I leave their jobs get harder. If I am somehow replaced, what if I”m replaced by a sycophant who sucks at his job, delaying the aid it’s my job to deliver?
I love what I do and I worked really effing hard to get here. I’m not giving them the satisfaction of quitting.
It’s such an honor to work to make my community and my country better. It’s not an honor I or my coworkers take lightly. I spend a lot of time away from home, in less than ideal conditions, working long hours. Pressure is a privilege and I don’t take that for granted.
I will stay. And I will honor the oath I took. And I will honor my agency’s mission.
But man, do they make it hard.
In addition to continuing to do my duty, I’m doubling down on my efforts to “be the change”. I was already a vocal constituent, calling my R senators daily and I’ll continue to do that. Same with protests. I was already working to be a good community member: whether it was picking up litter or donating to the community fridge or hosting friends for dinner. And I’ll keep doing that. And, I’ll keep using my voice and my money to bring about change and or awareness in my community on very local level (buying my furloughed friends coffee) and the national and global level.
My call to action is to request that everyone who reads this does something similar: call your elected representatives, make 1 purchase local instead of from Amazon, offer to buy the homeless man outside a coffee. Do something today to make someone else’s life a little better.
Thank you for not abandoning your agency! We need principled people to remain in their posts!
Thank you for your service. I know that sounds trite, but I truly mean it. None of this is fair or right.
+1 I’m grateful there are people like you willing to stick this out. Good luck and godspeed.
+100 thank you for all that you do
Federal contractor here and extending my sympathy to all the feds. You don’t need this sh1t and neither do I.
Do these exist? Low profile, natural fiber thin or liner socks that actually stay in place without any silicone or rubber grips? Less concerned about them being visible than I am about them staying put. The grip strips or spots always make me break out in a rash so I need to avoid them.
I just got a pair of Sam Edelman Loraine loafers. While they are very comfortable, they are quite closed in and my feet sweat.
The no-show liners need to be stretchy, so I assume natural fibers generally aren’t used because even a stretchy cotton knit will lose its shape without spandex. I have had plenty of these without grippers but never seen in natural fibers.
I’m fine if there is some nylon in them, just don’t want any of those 100% polyester versions that seem to be taking over. Plastic footbags are not my thing.
Okay with nylon makes this a lot easier since it opens the door to wool (e.g. https://www.smartwool.com/en-us/wool-apparel-and-socks/everyday-socks/everyday-low-cut-no-show-socks/SW%3A001623%3A100%3AXL%3A%3A1%3A.html). The Smartwool option does have some elastane, but others may not.
These have a silicone grip spot at the heel, which sounds like a problem for OP.
Thanks for pointing that out! I have a habit of removing those but don’t know if this one would be removable or not.
In my experience, it doesn’t exist in a low enough profile for loafers. I have some Adidas and Darn Tough that work with running shoes but the vamp on loafers is too low for them.
I have the same problem and I’m ordering some insoles for sweaty feet to see if that helps (one pair that is wool, and also the Dr Scholls “go sockless” ones)
Thanks! I didn’t think to check Darn Tough. The vamp on these shoes is high enough that some of their options might work.
The problem I am trying to solve is that my feet stick to the vamp on top, so insoles are not going to help there. I hope you find some that work! I do have a pair of wool insoles that are nice and cozy, although they are thick enough that I have to size up to a wide in order to fit them in my winter boots.
I have the same loafers and I just use some foot spray powder before wearing them and it’s fine.
agreed, foot powder (or body powder, or just baby powder) in your shoes works well for this.
Body glide on your feet?
Oh no thank you, that sounds miserable.
It’s so baffling to me all these hoops that we have to jump to through just to wear shoes comfortably. I hate it.
Personally I think OP should buy shoes that are comfortable and fit. Or just wear regular socks even if it’s not a perfect aesthetic. No one is forcing anyone to wear uncomfortable shoes.
I have some from Smart Wool, but they’re pretty old and I don’t know if they still make that style.
I am having a hard time getting on board with the visible socks with loafers or other lower vamp shoes. It looks too much like how the ladies at my parents’ assisted living place wear shoes and socks. No shame to them, but I don’t want to look 80.
I second looking at Smartwool. I have a no-show option that works well with my Cole Haan loafers. And today I’m wearing Ondo socks, which are great for warm weather, but they have some kind of silicone gripper on the heel.
These may show a little, but Muji right angle sneaker socks are mostly cotton, don’t have silicone grips, and stay up (at least for me).
I believe that insoles for shoes that are sock-like exist… since those no-show socks never stay on, maybe it’s better to apply the “sock” directly to the shoe instead of your foot? I am blanking on the brand name, though.
I have hyperhidrosis so I know this struggle well :)
I got some Hue liners at Target I believe (maybe Amazon) that are a nylon mesh material on top but cotton on the sole. They work well. I can’t remember if they have grippy parts though.
Chapter 13-did you pass the background check? Really wishing you well!
My BF and I are talking about getting engaged soon. Having to think about wedding finances is stressing me out immensely. I do well (100k in a M/HCOL area), my BF does very well (about 200k) – we’ve always easily managed our discrepancy in salary.
I grew up middle class. Had everything we needed and much of what we wanted, but to get those wants there was always a trade off. Both parents worked (mom a Catholic school teacher, dad a union job). We had a nice 2kish sq ft Cape Cod (living in a SFH in my hometown means you were “wealthy”), did a week at the beach each summer. Drove old cars, but bought new clothes (from Old Navy and TJ Maxx, but not Walmart!). Went to Catholic school at a discount because my mom taught there. Played township and school sports, but not travel or club. Very typical middle class. I graduated with about 30k in student loans after financial aid and help from my parents. I have paid off those loans.
My ILs are wealthy. Their main house is over 7k square feet and they have vacation houses on Martha’s Vineyard and Vail wealthy, while sending the kids to a $ prep school and fully covering college.
My ILs are lovely people. They’re quite generous. I know from my BIL’s wedding and home purchase that they’re quite generous with contributions to both a wedding budget and a down payment. They’re also a bit out of touch and sometimes say things that I don’t love as a result, but I know they mean well.
I’m just very much dreading having the “we’re getting married and setting a budget” conversations. I don’t feel like my parents should contribute financially to my wedding – they’ve given me a ton throughout my life and I’m a 30 something with savings and a good salary. I’d be fine having a wedding that my BF and I could pay for ourselves.
I know my ILs will want the wedding to be at the club and be black tie and a very lovely, large affair that we cannot afford without their help.
I’m just as fine with a big, fancy black tie wedding where meals are $250/head as I am a more affordable wedding (which would still be nice – I don’t want a fire hall wedding reception and neither would my parents!). I’d also be fine doing a micro wedding followed by a party.
My parents can (and want to and expect to) contribute, I just don’t feel right asking them for money. But, if we take money from my ILs, we need to take money from my parents (I don’t want to mooch off of the wealthy ILs). But, if my ILs can and will contribute 100k and my parents can contribute 15k, that feels uncomfortable to me. Also, I know for my ILs, 100k is not an issue at all. I know for my parents 15k is a lot and could be put to “better use”.
I also don’t really care if there are strings attached with money from either side. As long as my loved ones are there and we have a great party I don’t care who the parents invite, if they have strong thoughts on venue or food or decor whatever.
This sounds so exhausting. Would you consider eloping and let the ritzy in laws throw a party after?
This is the answer.
Similar dynamics with my ILs and family (assuming you’re the bride and this is a western cultural dynamic). The way we approached it was that my partner and I planned the wedding we wanted and could afford (which was a 25 person wedding at an incredibly ritzy, 5 star hotel downtown). This was back in 2015 so it only cost $25k (I know that’s still a lot). But since it was so small, the fact that it was $200pp was still doable. I went to my side of the family and said, this is what we’re doing, if you want to contribute, great, if not that’s OK too. My side ended up writing me a check for all of it and the ILs paid for things like the rehearsal dinner. I think it really set the families off on a good place because my parents still paid for an absolutely PHENOMINAL wedding that was luxe and fancy and beautiful. But we got exactly what we wanted and it was wonderful.
It seems like you’re asking permission to let the in laws pay for everything and have a huge wedding. If you want to, do it. But I think it really early on established that my partner and I aren’t coin operated. They can’t just dangle money in front of us to get what they want.
I’d also speak with your parents about money being put to better use. I know my family was SO proud and happy to pay for the wedding and they’d do it again in a heartbeat.
You don’t need to take equal amounts of money from both sets of parents, you know. Perhaps let your parents buy, say, your wedding gown, veil, hair and makeup and the IL foot the bill for the party. Or your parents pay for the music and the flowers and your IL pay for the venue, food, beverage, and photography team.
What does you BF think?
Let your parents host the rehearsal dinner (which honestly is sometimes more fun than the wedding anyway!) and your ILs host (or co-host, with you and fiance) the wedding. That way your parents can still feel ownership over an element of the wedding (and can send those invites out under their names, for example). I hate these patriarchal ideas about the woman’s family having to host the wedding. Create your own normal!
This is what we did.
If your parents want to contribute to your wedding, whatever it looks like, let them. It’s a point of pride and you’re not doing them any favors by telling them they could use it on other things like necessities.
Right. It sounds like you’re letting your ego (I have a financially comfortable lifestyle, my fiance comes from money, and i’m a saver) trump letting people love you. Let your parents help, let your in-laws help, and put together a nice wedding within the parameters you want.
It sounds like you’re getting a little bit weird about the money. Don’t. It only defines your personality if you let it. What do you genuinely want? Go from there and let people contribute what they offer.
Thank you. I’m extremely, extremely independent so I feel uncomfortable asking for help in pretty much any situation (yes, I work on this in therapy).
Heck, it’s been hard for me to like let my BF carry the heavy boxes for me when we moved in together!
On getting weird about money, I would also try to keep in mind that a wedding at the club isn’t just about how nice it is or how much it costs, even if those things stand out a lot if we didn’t grow up spending money that way. For people who can easily afford it, it’s memories and community and tradition.
But the guests from both sides need to feel comfortable, so I’d focus more on how to make it an enjoyable event for everyone who attends, which I think is within reach (clubs are really good at making people feel comfortable, and it’s fun actually to be invited to a big fancy wedding, but I personally didn’t want a dress code that would make anyone have to go buy something they’ll never wear again).
I’d encourage you and your fiance to get very clear on what YOU both want. Not what you think you should do, what either set of parents expects, but what feels right for you as a couple.
My other piece of advice (and take it with a grain of salt as I have difficult parents) is that if there is something you truly care about, pay for it yourself. Money = control, and you want to be able to have the final say because you’re the one holding the purse strings. My now husband and I paid for my wedding dress, photographer, and catering as my parents refused to compromise or accept our choices. Not their money, not their decision. Did they still complain? Yep, but that was going to happen anyway.
Luckily, our parents (both sides) are kind and reasonable people – by strings attached I meant “here’s our list of family/friends we want to invite” not that “you must get married in the family church wearing grandmother’s wedding dress”.
And to me, thats totally fine and reasonable!
The list of people you must invite can be much more of a point of contention than you may think now. Ask me how I know.
Some reality, the kind of wedding tour in-laws want is 250K+, not 100K. They are also going to feel “embarrassed” about a budget event and probably won’t let that happen if they’re involved. I would have your BF talk to them, let them pay and have your parents buy your dress or something. Or elope. FWIW, my parents are your BFs and we eloped and it was the best decision ever.
I’m the anon from above with the $25k wedding. I agree. My SIL’s wedding was $250k+. My in laws were not happy about the way we went about things the whole time but since they weren’t paying they didn’t complain about it. But side by side, the photos from my wedding at the Ritz Carlton* looks just as nice as hers does. And my ILs later confessed that they ended up loving having such a small, beautiful party. They’d never ever plan something like that for their own daughter because of the social/networking aspect (so much of her guest list were in my FIL’s work sphere), but they ended up loving it.
It’s a lot of drama in the meantime though. I think it’s just a lot easier to step out of the kitchen – let the in-laws throw a society wedding and don’t get too into the details (or focus on one thing like your dress that’s actually personal to you). When everyone is involved, it’s just a lot of big feelings for the whole engagement period, and that can zap the joy. In OPs shoes, unless they’re willing to elope, I’d cede control of the day itself and enjoy some pre-wedding events, like plan a fun engagement party that’s the small wedding you would had had, a girls trip, etc.
My in laws are very wealthy, but not really “society people”.
I feel like the fancy wedding is more we have the money so why not rather than we need to impress people.
I guess it depends on your in laws. My MIL would’ve insisted on being in every vendor meeting and picking all the colors and it would’ve been much messier had I been in the middle of it and they threw the big huge wedding they wanted for their son and me. I also don’t think she would’ve let me or him “opt out” of planning. Granted, she did throw a gorgeous wedding for my SIL but it would have been tons and tons of time with my MIL regardless (even if she was on her very best behavior). Since they didn’t pay for our wedding they instead focused on what they were planning, which was the rehearsal dinner. It’s so funny, all these details are coming back to me. I know she didn’t like the place we suggested for the rehearsal dinner. It wasn’t “nice enough” so they went somewhere more expensive.
My husband and I were very uninterested in planning our wedding. My parents wanted to pay so they did all the work–picked 2 venues and let us choose, picked two dates and let us choose. They did the food/cake tasting, the flowers, photographer, and all of the hotel/invitation/guest list logistics.
Otherwise he and I took care of the dress, the bridal/groom party stuff, the transportation, and the alcohol. My mom coordinated with my MIL re everything else. The cost was roughly 25K.
I guess the question is, how much do you care about this stuff?
+1 to all of this.
First, you as a couple decide what kind of wedding would be your own dream. Is it the big ballroom with a crowd? Is it a tiny but luxe dinner party? Is it eloping?
Then consider the parents’ goals. In your ILs circle, weddings can be social currency – they might feel like they’re not participating or reciprocating or whatever if their child doesn’t have an event on a similar level as their peers’ kids. So I don’t think they would view you as mooching so much as they WANT to enable you to have that scale of an event.
I want a big wedding! I have lots of friends and close relationships with family, it’d be hard for me to get a guest list below 200 (including my BF’s list too of course). My BF would prefer smaller, but not small (100ish).
We (obviously) want it to be nice. It’s just is nice black tie at the club or cocktail attire at a different beautiful venue? Everything handled by professionals or more DIY? Standard package or upgrades?
Must haves are a good band, open bar, and some part of the day being outdoors and beautiful.
Then just let the ILs make your life easier. If your parents want to feel like they contributed, maybe they can pay specifically for your dress, or the band, etc.
If you want all of this, I think you should let your inlaws pay.
Ugh, I think there’s an elephant in the room that you’re missing: in your in-law’s social circle, that black tie wedding is the social expectation.
Stop fretting about your parents’ potential contributions or what you can contribute. To your in-laws, this is a cost of doing business (sometimes quite literally; they may invite business associates).
Of course there is a disparity in what the families can pay. Please don’t borrow trouble.
(Note that when I got married, I came from the far, far wealthier family. Yes, as the bride, it was less awkward that my father covered the entire party, but it was still much fancier than anything his family ever had. The awkward part was when his friends complained that I wasn’t holding it in a church basement.)
Eloping is definitely off the table! We both are close with our families and really want our family and friends there.
I would consider a micro wedding (parebts, siblings, bridal party) with party with everyone later, but it’s not my preference.
I don’t understand what the microwedding would solve anyway. The party would still be lavish and expensive and require lots of compromise.
just so you know, your ILs are probably talking about a 300K wedding, not 100K. My own wedding was $70K 20 years ago and was probably entry level to the type of event your ILs are picturing now.
You’re in your 30s. Say no to money from both parents.
At a certain societal level, it just does not work that way.
This.
If all the parents want to contribute, let your parents pay what they want. If you don’t feel right taking their money, plan to spend more money on them over the years (throw them an anniversary party or send them to Paris, it sounds like you’ll be able to afford it).
Based on what you said, your choices are either small wedding you can fund yourself (likely a destination so it gives ILs cover on trimming the guest list) or accepting the wedding at the club. Doing a smaller budget wedding in your area will likely be the most fraught as the club and larger guest list will be looming in the background. Best advice for managing the competing parent donations is speaking in terms of items your parents will contribute to, rather than dollars. For example, it was important to my parents to be able to buy my wedding dress. You can probably find a few more items to add up to the parental contribution.
Oh I don’t want a small wedding! Even if we pay for it ourselves, it’d be about 175 people… and that’s be with making cuts to the guest list.
The club’s ballroom seems to fit 250, so that’d be the upper limit.
does it have to be ‘the club,’ is there another fancy venue that is more neutral territory, like not a place your in-laws have such a strong connection to. also – are you and your BF from the same state? how far will your family have to travel for this wedding?
It sounds like you and BF both want a big, fun wedding, so I’m guessing you’re worrying about a problem that hasn’t happened yet and probably won’t. Once you’re officially engaged, then talk to both sets of parents, tell them you’re prepared to pay yourselves, and then see what they tell you they’d like to do. Then respect that and let them be your parents, with the caveat that whatever gets planned at the club shouldn’t be so ritzy that your side of the family won’t have fun. It sounds like you’re in love, well off, with two sets of loving and generous parents – don’t go looking for trouble!
One thing you didn’t mention: will your parents be comfortable at the ritzy expensive wedding? Could they and your other close family members afford the travel, lodgings, and attire it would require? If not, I’d personally not be willing to pursue that path even if I myself was ok with that wedding.
I was wondering that, too. My cousin comes from the same middle-class background I did. She had a small but fancy wedding in a place that was difficult to get to and very expensive for lodging and such. We went, because we love her and are close to her, but overall it was an uncomfortably expensive venture, especially for my parents. Her parents voiced that they were really uncomfortable with the nature of the wedding, but ultimately knew it was the couple’s decision.
Let your in laws pay for the big wedding. Your boyfriend can approach them and say “On our own OP and I can afford a restaurant wedding with 50 guests (or whatever your budget allows). We’re fine with this, but if you were hoping for something bigger we would need you to cover the difference.”
If your parents want to contribute ask them to cover something specific within their budget- your dress, a morning-after brunch, or hair and makeup. Don’t worry about a “fair” split between your parents. I don’t know anyone who still assumes the bride’s family funds the whole thing. In my circle it’s based on how much each set of parents are willing and able to contribute. Sometimes it’s 50-50, sometimes the wealthier set of parents volunteers to host it, sometimes the parents expect the couple pays for it themselves. There’s no wrong answer if the parents are on board with the plan.
yea i agree with this. i come from a circle where the ones getting married generally do not pay for their own weddings. in my case, my in-laws gave my parents a check for $30,000 and then my mom, my fiance and I did all of the planning (rehearsal dinner, wedding itself, brunch the next day, etc.). we tried to include my mother in law (she came dress shopping with me, we invited her to look at the venues, but she just wanted to base her decision off of the website, which was annoying), for my sister’s wedding, her in-laws wanted to pay for 50%, which initially my parents thought was great, but then it was a ‘too many cooks’ situation. my-inlaws could’ve contributed more, but thought it was the bride’s family’s responsibility, which personally i think is preposterous in this day and age. i get where it came from historically, but now that women also go to college, get graduate degrees, etc.
my other piece of advice – have as short of an engagement as possible. almost every wedding i’ve ever heard of involves some drama, hurt feelings, etc. despite best intentions and the longer the engagement, the more time for drama
As a very recent MOB here, if your inlaws pay for something, please carve out some planning just for you and your parents, especially your mom. We paid for our daughter’s wedding, but her MIL has a strong, somewhat manipulative personality, and I would have been so, so disappointed if she had shopped for wedding dresses with us. She wanted to; she actually invited herself. And I will be forever grateful that my daughter told her no. It is your parents’ wedding, too, no matter what everyone else says, and they need to be more than just another set of guests. My daughter picked out almost everything on her own (I just Venmo’d people), but I was with her when she picked her dress, we visited venues and the florist together, she ran major decisions by me, I was with her and her bridesmaids all day while they had hair and make-up, and I got a speech at the wedding. It was a good level of involvement while still letting her get what she wanted.
Not to be a concern tr0ll, but I just can’t believe the hype around sunscreen sometimes–I’m pretty convinced that it does more harm than good, though I’ll wear it for a full day at the beach, the same way I’ll drink water from a disposable plastic water bottle instead of being severely dehydrated. What are everyone’s thoughts on this:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62qdje2ll4o
Sunscreen that does not provide the protection that it claims does more harm than good.
Sunscreen in general is not harmful and that is conspiracy theory nonsense.
This.
Some sunscreen doesn’t provide the stated protection, which is an issue.
Sunscreen as a concept does a lot more good than harm and is essential for the prevention of skin cancer.
Fwiw this is why I switched to European sunscreen from American. They have newer filters that are more effective and are more rigorously tested to make sure they have the stated protection. Also of note that they can’t sell anything above SPF 60 in Europe, so take claims from American sunscreens of being SPF 70+ with a big grain of salt.
at my recent skin check, the derm said anything above SPF 30 is a bit questionable. I also asked about the reapply every two hours-rule. She said that matters for days at the beach or hiking, where you expect high exposure, sweating and rubbing off the product. If I’m sitting at my desk all day, applying sunscreen in the morning is fine.
Yeah I’m VERY pale and freckled and I would never reapply every two hours if I’m indoors most of the day. On high UV index days I’ll apply it again before going out in the afternoon (solar noon during daylight saving time is 2 pm where I live, so 3 pm school pickup is pretty much mid-day in terms of sun intensity) but I don’t do it more than twice a day unless I’m planning to spend significant time outside. And in the winter I don’t even worry about reapplying at all.
I suffered second degree burns over 30% of my body when a teenager after using a sunscreen that did not provide the SPF it claimed. It has since been pulled from the shelves. Sunscreen is not a scam, let yourself be smarter than the fear-mongers.
+1 – just because one medication causes side effects or isn’t effective doesn’t mean all medications are bad. I don’t see why people can’t make the same logical conclusion about sunscreen. One formula might not work well but that doesn’t mean all sunscreen is a scam.
Feel free to google images of long haul truckers who never wore sunscreen so you can see exactly what it does to your skin long term.
+2 I don’t get how you jump from misleading SPF values to the whole concept of sunscreen being harmful. It’s a case for better consumer protection and possibly industry regulation.
+3
I only use it when I’m outside for the day, like at a pool. I do t do daily use and never have and my skin is just fine.
+1.
well I’m vain, so I’m an avid sunscreen wearer. Best way to stave off wrinkles and discoloration!
Lawd. Zinc oxide works. And if minerals aren’t your thing, there are other types of sunscreens that work IF you actually use them and re-apply as needed. Sun exposure = really wrecked skin decades early than needed. I get that maybe you won’t get cancer people count on being lucky. But you can also count on wrinkled leathery skin that ages you significantly. My vanity speaks loudly and I listen to it. I also don’t want cancer, so I do what actually keeps me looking good and being healthy. It’s really not rocket science.
What hype are you referring to? It is a fact that it prevents sunburns, skin cancer, wrinkles, age spots, etc. No hype about that. I think you know that too, since you wear it when you’re in the sun all day. In the linked news story, the harm being done is because those sunscreens are defective, not that sunscreen as a product is bad. So for a sunscreen that works as labeled, what exactly is the harm?
I’m not aware of good evidence that it’s lowered skin cancer rates as much as we hoped, but it definitely helps prevent visible signs of aging like wrinkles and discoloration, and the assumption is that it can only help with skin cancer.
Ineffective sunscreens that prevent sunburn while still allowing damage probably actually raise cancer risk, and were on the market for quite a while without warnings, then with warnings that they weren’t broad spectrum. So that’s a confounder that is hard to deal with. People also don’t realize that it’s supposed to be one layer among others, so it’s possible that people ended up getting more sun net from not seeking shade or wearing hats and protective clothing. Sunscreen isn’t 100% protection so if you spend vastly more time in the sun because of it, you’re protected compared to if you hadn’t worn it, but not if you’d skipped the day at the beach altogether.
FDA has now admitted that a lot of sunscreen ingredients do absorb systemically (after years of reassurances from manufacturers that they stay in the dermal layer), and that the FDA does not really know whether that’s harmful or not. Sunblock stays on the skin, so there’s no concern about systemic absorption there… except there are questions about nanoparticles in some sunblocks.
FDA are ridiculous though, since their outdated requirement that sun protection be tested on animals has prevented a lot of manufacturers from attempting to sell in the US market at all, since other countries don’t allow products that were tested on animals as part of animal cruelty legislation! So the USA has the oldest and worst sun protection products and is a bad market because the FDA won’t back down on animal testing.
If FDA wants to be a stickler, then I’d like to see a product that went through the same safety and efficacy trials as a pharmaceutical drug, and that comes with a prescribing information sheet. Because we do put a lot of faith in these products.
There are groups that test sunscreens each year.
My parents have both undergone painful surgeries that left them with facial scarring. They weren’t lying on the beach every day, they had a normal amount of sun exposure but grew up in the age of SPF 5. I assure you they don’t think sunscreen does more harm than good.
On a vain note, I started wearing daily sunscreen in my early twenties. Over a decade later I have no fine lines or signs of sun damage. My peers all have wrinkles or are obsessed with botox.
Same. My dad is a farmer. SPF was not a thing he did. Several melanoma scares and painful surgeries later, and you better believe I’m militant about sunscreen when I’m going to be outdoors for any length of time.
If you want to age like milk, then go for it. As for me, I wear it everyday and my skin is flawless. Good luck!
+1
At a recent girlfriends trip I was shocked by how old some of my friends are looking. It was a sunny day so I was applying sunscreen religiously and consequently found out that none of them use it.
Anyone read Should the Autism Spectrum be Split Apart in the NYT this morning? There have been some discussions on this subject here in the last year or so. For my part, I believe it should.
As a parent of two severely disabled autistic adults, this shook me. That’s all I can say.
Are you able/willing to share more? I’m not the OP, but I’m trying to be a good listener to better understand the dynamics around the discussion from people with first hand knowledge of it.
No NYT subscription here, but I have a kid. Decades ago or if we lived in a smaller town, she would have been quirky. Now, she has a label that will keep her out of all of the good private schools where she might have universally positive things like smaller class sizes, less chaotic classrooms, and trained teachers hired to teach classes before the school year has started. In her under-resourced school, it’s chaos: classes are large and unruly, many classes don’t have teachers (just subs while they look for a teacher, often in key things like math and science), etc. All because autistic kids are all thought to be like severely affected kids (who often have co-morbidities driving behavior) who will impede the learning of others. Many don’t want her to learn how to drive, even though half the kids we know are on strong ADHD meds or are busy texting while driving. We ought to serve everyone on the spectrum (while recognizing that it’s all a spectrum and each kid is actually unique and deserves to be treated that way).
Comorbidities are a big deal. I think there’s stigma to acknowledging things like fetal alcohol exposure, the impact of infectious disease (how many people want to even think about how a COVID infection while pregnant raises risk of developmental disorder?), and TBI.
I’ve seen neurology textbooks distinguish autism from autism secondary to a genetic condition. Elsewhere I’ve seen it insisted that autism is never secondary to a genetic condition, and that always represents misdiagnosis. We need consensus on how to talk about this. I’m not sure if the issue is that supports are available for “autism” but not for obscure developmental disorders, or what the issue is.
I think people generally underestimate how hard it is to treat epilepsy and how bad it can be (also how hard it can be to get care for it from specialists and insurance).
I’m still upset that it’s even possible that a subset of kids diagnosed with autism had an autoimmune CNS folate deficiency this whole time, but no one bothered to test because of the circular reasoning that things seldom tested for are rare. But I know that childhood onset pernicious anemia often plays out the same way (no one even tests for it, or they run a serum cobalamin lab that is known to be too insensitive to rule out deficiency in anyone, and also known to be less reliable in people with autism).
Can you post the gist of it for those of us who can’t read it? Autism and Asperger’s used to separate and IMO that was helpfully descriptive to people. If I say I have a kid with autism, they don’t know if it’s more like Train autism or wear a helmet because kid bangs head on the floor autism (and assume it’s only those options, never expecting the autistic kid to be a girl even).
There is a growing split in the autism community over whether profound autism should be considered distinct from “level 1” autism (which is dramatically less severe and in many ways doesn’t resemble the severe autism experience at all). People with level 1 autism used to be considered “quirky” and “unusual” and can go to Harvard and work as doctors (they are quoted in the article). People with profound autism may never speak, toilet independently, or live without 24/7 care. The parents of kids fitting that description seem to be leading the charge for recognition and services that acknowledge how disabling it is.
This is something that’s been bothering me in come backs about rising rates of autism. People keep saying it’s all from greater recognition, diagnosing girls and women, and not a real rise. But the data shows a rise in profound autism that is presumably not something that would have just been overlooked in the past. How are people just imagining that more people need 24/7 care?
People also saying that it’s all genetic. Well even identical twins are not always both autistic. But yes since we know that the risk factors are genetic, if the same family was level 1 for generations and now the grandkids are profoundly disabled, that is a change.
Maybe people need to shift focus from “who is autistic at all” to “what is so seriously harming autistic people right now that so many autistic people are living in distress and struggling this much.”
This is really not a good historical moment to agree with Dr. Asperger’s on this!
Is everyone going to leave vague suggestive comments today?
Asperger was a Nazi and I am perfectly happy to find another name for the condition that currently bears his, but it does not change the fact that it is not the same thing as being profoundly autistic.
Agree. PLEASE BE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. For the rest of us not fully caught up on the topic. Please.
Dr. Asperger’s drew the distinction between autism and Asperger’s syndrome in order to distinguish who would and would not be spared euthanasia based on how much of a drain on society they were vs. how much they could nevertheless still contribute.
Medicine still treats autistic patients very badly, and the status quo is that patients who cannot advocate for themselves may have serious comorbid disabilities and medical conditions going undiagnosed and untreated even if they’re seeing specialist providers. People who have gotten better support for their needs have been trying to advocate for those who haven’t to get the medical testing they deserve, the accommodations that can help, and medical treatment to alleviate the intense distress so many people are in, but way too many people in medicine feel that it’s all a lost cause and the real hope lies in prenatal testing.
Right now the situation is that for those who have, more will be given, and for those who do not have, even the little they have will be taken away from them. I would like to see the people who are suffering most severely gaining access to the same level of support as people who had the capacity to fight for care.
But won’t you think of how hard this is on the #autismmoms?
With the caveat that I am not the parent of an autistic child, I am very good friends with a woman whose son is profoundly autistic. And if one more person says something to the effect of “autism is a difference, not a disability“ she is going to lose her mind.
Her son is minimally, verbal, often violent, and will never be self supporting or able to live on his own. He is absolutely and profoundly disabled. Putting him in the same category as Elon Musk or Bill Gates is extraordinarily unfair to everyone involved. I am not suggesting that both groups do not require support in areas like education, but they are not the same.
+1. They really aren’t the same thing. I say this as the parent of a neurodiverse child. What we are dealing with is harder than “normal” but it’s not even close to what other parents are experiencing with severe autism.
You realize it’s not about the parents though right? Its about the actually disabled person.
I’m speaking in terms of advocacy.
Yes, I strongly believe it should. A person who will require life long care is far different than someone who will live a mainstream life and just has some quirks. It really seems like any quirky personality trait suddenly makes people autistic. We don’t need to pathologize everything! One woman I know diagnosed herself as autistic simply because she doesn’t like her food to touch. This would infuriate me if my own child were severely autistic .
This isn’t how conditions work or how science advances though. Conditions like Charcot Marie Tooth can show extreme variability of severity even in the same family with the same mutation (just one example of many). Trivializing the manifestation of the condition in the family members who can walk doesn’t help the family members who are severely disabled; instead there’s an opportunity to study what factors allow for the better outcomes.
Yeah my point is that quirky people should just straight up not be considered autistic. Not that they’re mildly autistic or whatever.
Okay. This general line of reasoning (exclude the people with less severe manifestations) would set science back if it were applied to other conditions. But I think you’re imagining that something is happening that is not really happening, and that people who are “just quirky” are ever diagnosed by anyone other than themselves. The real diagnostic criteria, I promise you, don’t boil down to quirkiness. You do not know how many supports successful actually autistic people are getting. And you don’t know what their abilities and what their meltdowns have looked like over the course of their life.
Hmm that’s a good point. Using Down Syndrome as an example that many people are familiar with, there is a huge spectrum of disability within that condition. (And with mosaicism and you can have some people who are seemingly very mildly affected and don’t even have the common visual characteristics.) And yet they all have DS, which can be scientifically identified and proven.
Gift link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/health/autism-spectrum-neurodiversity-kennedy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.qE8.gQNu.B6euQmXJNjEA&smid=url-share
Does anyone have experience dealing with a competitive and jealous sister? I don’t play those games, honestly I’m not even sure what she jealous of, but there’s a lot of passive aggressive comments and general mean girl behavior from her. I try to keep low contact with her, but she’s complaining to family about it and they’re pushing me to be more gracious with her. She only acts this way with me. There’s no middle ground here that I’m missing, right?
When someone writes a post that includes a lot of negative labeling of someone else’s behavior but absolutely no specific examples of it, I assume that the OP is as much, if not more, of the problem than whoever they’re complaining about.
The problem with details is that this board jumps all over them, making incorrect assumptions, and then it becomes a rabbit hole.
Okay, well, I’m solving that problem by making the assumption that OP is the problem here based on how whiny and non-specific this post is! Reads like something a 15 year old would write.
When someone writes an anonymous post that is short and pithy, I assume that it’s because they know their lives better than we do and do not feel comfortable with specifics that could identify them.
Your family needs to get their noses OUT of this situation.
“Mom, Dad: I am an adult and I am in charge of who I have relationships with and under what terms. I do not want to have the kind of relationship with Emily that you want us to have. Respectfully, drop it.”
I swear some of you have never actually talked to another human in real life.
I honestly can’t tell from anything you’ve said why you’re trying to keep low contact. If you don’t play these games, what’s the big deal? It doesn’t seem like low contact is helping. Or is there more than little comments and mean girl stuff?
I see the comments about how details can derail the conversation, but it’s really hard to give good advice without. I notice in myself lots of feelings of competition and jealousy, and yes they can manifest as passive aggression (but I also keep a lot to myself). From my POV, my sister is favored by my parents and they regard her with a lot more sympathy than they do me / my kids / my choices. We are generally a close and loving family, and I do consider my mom and sisters to be among my best friends, but human relationships are complicated and among sisters there can be a lot of baggage, even in the best cases.
It’s rare for problems to be completely one-sided and takes a lot of self-awareness and humility to look at your role in the relationship, too.
Does anyone have the Inez brand Cleo model shoe? They are stalking me on social, but rightfully so. I need a strap because I have a really narrow heel that won’t stay in shoes. But the shoes can’t otherwise be narrow, which rules out a lot of European brands and others that run narrow generally. If not this model, how are Inez shoes generally? Currently living in the flat Madewell mary janes, which are great for an off-the-rack more casual shoe. But for replacing aging block heel pumps, I need something.
Does anyone have experience with a competitive and jealous sister? I don’t play those games (honestly not even sure what she’s jealous about) but she is tough to be around with her passive aggressive comments and general mean girl behavior. We’ve had conversations about this in the past she admits she’s jealous and has been since we were kids. I keep low contact but lately she’s complaining to family about it and they’re pushing me to be more gracious with her. She only acts this way around me and is very pleasant to everyone else. Is there a middle ground here I’m missing?
This is very much my sister, and I’m working on dealing with her in therapy. I try to remember that we both have successful, functioning lives, that her jealousy comes from her own (fully unnecessary) unhappiness and poor self esteem, and that much of the dynamic has its roots in our narcissistic father’s history of triangulation. The middle ground is learning to let it roll off your back, spend the time together that you enjoy, and avoid time together that you don’t.
Fashion help – what color shoes and shirt would you wear with the Reiss Gabi suit in Berry?
Oooh beautiful suit! For lighter look– white shirt and tan shoes; for darker– black top and shoes.
It also would look lovely with grey snakeskin shoes.
shirt: cream, grey, black, navy.. if you’re into prints any number of lovely fall colors would work.
Shoes: black (leather or suede) probably. i had grey suede booties that i might have worn with it.
Agree on the shirt; for shoes I think black would work but cognac, gray or leopard would also be beautiful.
At least on my monitor, that’s a really dark burgundy shade, which is pretty neutral. You could go a lot of different directions.
– black shoes and a patterned blouse with black and white or ivory and possibly a contrasting color like gold or chartreuse
– leopard shoes or blouse, but probably not both at once
– oxblood shoes would coordinate with the suit, so your top could be anything that works for you: pale neutral, pattern, olive, some shades of pink, navy, grey
– shoes in a range of browns from tan all the way to chocolate with an ivory top
I just started wearing a heart rate monitor that attaches to my skin with strong adhesives and the attachment areas are so itchy that I don’t know how I can do this for the next 14 days. I know lots of women here have tried continuous glucose monitors and other similar health things. My heart monitor was prescribed by my pcp because of a potential irregular heartbeat. I have been miserable for the last 2 days and just want to rip it off. Any tips from anyone who has been there done that.
It’s possible you’re allergic to the adhesive. I would reach out to your doctor ASAP and ask for another way to attach the monitor.
I am having the same problem, and the directions that came with the monitor says they have patches for sensitive skin. I am calling today.
If it’s the Bodyguardian Mini, the sensitive patches SUCK. The whole design does actually.
No, mine is the Zio.
Are you also using a Zio monitor? I think that the prepping steps may have contributed to the issue because I can see that the area around there is also red and a little bumpy from the exfoliation step. I have sensitive skin and also have mild eczema.
I’m really sensitive to adhesives, so I can tell you it’s not likely to improve on its own. And the formulations which help – cortisone cream or ointment – will loosen the adhesive. Second asking your doctor for a patch for sensitive skin.
My husband was so grateful when the one he was wearing fell off early. He eventually had one surgically implanted, but I can’t remeber exactly why. No advice but commiseration!
I have very sensitive skin and had to attach the holter monitor sensors with ‘Hypafix Gentle Touch’ medical tape. Everything else left welts or broken skin.
My doc was able to get enough info from my holter monitor in 3 days. 14 seems excessive.
My sensitive skin is howling after attaching a bunch of monitors for a sleep study, and I’ve found Bag Balm helpful. You can get it on amazon, and it’s also terrific for any dry and irritated skin, feet, cuticles, etc.
Did you ask your doctor or pharmacist for anything you can do for it? (e.g. take an Allegra?)
My skin was angry the whole time the Zio patch was on, but it wasn’t unendurable for me, but I wonder if that was because of other meds I was taking already.
I see a lot of women using a LV Neverfull (large size) as a purse. Ditto the Goyard Louis (similar shape to the Neverfull). I got a bag that size and . . . am not seeing it as a purse at all on me. It seems like either what you’d take to a PTA meeting for projects or maybe a small overnight bag.
For a novice accessorizer, what are the boundaries of large purses vs “shoppers” (I think they are called now) vs an overnight bag? I seem to be fumbling the ball on this.
Not all bags look the same on every person. A good reason to try them on and see how they look and feel on your own shoulder and for what you need to carry.
A shopper is great to be lightweight for having a days’ worth of essentials on-hand (water bottle, emergency kit, maybe some makeup or a brush, sunglasses, folded up reusable shopping bags, and similar) but will be too big if you tend to travel light.
oh and one reason the LV and Goyard bags may read smaller on other women than your bag is the slouchy coated canvas. A bag that is literally the same dimensions, but made of heavier leather or sturdier canvas, will read bulkier.
Just a petty vent this morning. We live in a quaint historic district full of beautiful old houses, mature trees, shady lawns – it’s like a postcard. The historic guidelines are specifically no guidelines – “everyone’s a grown-up and can take care of their own property.”
That works great until the King and Queen of Trashlandia buy the house across from you. There are half-completed “projects” all over the yard – plywood, lumber, piles of stuff; not one but two dead lawnmowers where they stopped in the lawn; no trespassing signs all over (who’d want to?); plastic tarps strung up on laundry line extending off the house to conceal whatever’s going on behind (tacky as he11, but better than looking at their mess, I suppose); and seasonal decorations for that extra festive touch. New this morning: a car up on blocks. Because of course.
I will continue to kill them with kindness and aim to have the prettiest house on the street to balance them out…and do my best to ignore their house the 10 times a day I let the dogs out facing their house 🤦🏻♀️
I’m sorry. That might be me. I just can’t right now. Maybe its the crush of grief + eldercare + two cancer scares + kid with learner’s permit + FT work? Maybe I just need a counselor. I loved your neighborhood when I moved here with the best of intentions. But at least I don’t have a clothesline up in the front yard yet because I’m trying to save the planet. God loves all of us, even me.
Same. We don’t mean to be this way but get overwhelmed with ideas and half completed projects. We are, however, aiming to get rid of two junked cars within the next few weeks. Just not sure how to dispose of them (they haven’t run in years, are covered in mold, and mice have lived in them (and it shows) for years. Not sure Kars for Kids would even want them. It’s frankly just been easier to ignore then deal in logistics.
We donated a car to make a wish foundation. It was gross and moldy in the trunk and they did not care. They pick up non-running vehicles also – they just come over and take it and sell it for parts I think and send you a receipt. Just making a suggestion in case it’s helpful.
This is very helpful. A lot of feeling overwhelmed is the feeling that there’s just nowhere for the cars to go and they just get worse over the years. We just bought full body coverings and masks to empty them out and removed the plates. Once they’re empty we’ll start making some calls. It’s a rural historic area, so mice can’t ever be avoided.
My parents (rural midwest) donated their old car and it was apparently super easy – same day or next-day pickup, totally free.
As much as people lament historic districts as a legal concept I love that everyone has to behave or face consequences. No painting houses black or other old house crimes.
Come at me, but noted historic districts should have tight laws against this kind of thing. My aunt lives in a small house built in 1755 in a town in New England and has to appeal to the historic commission for any changes on the outside that face the street. She supports it fully and so do I.
I mean, people live there and have for decades or centuries. People don’t just get to decide new rules apply because someone wants picturesque.
+1. Thank goodness for our historic district commission. There are 3 new mcmansions but they look so much less bad than the ones in the other parts of our town!
Sorry you have to look at people who don’t have their lives together as much as you do.
Yeah, everybody hates an HOA, but I love them after living next to neighbors like this.
HOAs are really fantastic for people who don’t get enough power struggles and petty drama at work each week.
Historical district or no, a lot of that would violate my local zoning laws. You can’t have non-operable cars parked in front of your home, for example (and that might also extend to lawn mowers), or signs (other than temporary political signs), and having all of the building materials out with no building permit would get you a visit from code enforcement all by itself. In other words, are you sure you don’t have recourse?
I had some tan suede booties that I wore all the time, to the point of wearing them out. I need new ones, and would like a less-casual model (while realizing that this is a casual shoe; prior model was too Yellowstone sometimes). Something Aquitalia would be in budget, but I am lost in the possibilities there (but open to suggestions there and elsewhere).
Are there any wavy hair routines/methods that are compatible with frequent washing? I have a very oily scalp and do very sweaty workouts like 5x/week. I need to wash my hair or I look like a greaseball. I have to use clarifying shampoo a few times a week. But I also really want to lean in to the waves that I’ve developed in my early 40s. My hair used to be stick straight and when it dries these days it has a little body but the waves that are present with wet hair are gone. Any product suggestions?
I’m in the same boat and I’ve settled on using just curl cream every time I wash my hair. And I use clarifying shampoo but not every time.
Which one are you using and do you like it?
Maybe one of the newer ‘air dry’ or texture creams? I’ve heard good things about both Roz and JVN but there were so many more than I expected when I popped into a Sephora this weekend.
I have wavy hair and have tried a bunch of the air-dry creams. They all seem to have the same problem: they make my hair into STRINGS and don’t accentuate the waves at all. IDK how to fix this. Maybe it’s because I don’t have much hair to begin with? How do I clump the waves into bigger clumps without looking bald?
I use mousse (L’oreal volume boost) and mostly air dry my hair. It does need to be brushed out a bit when it dries or it looks crunchy. Whether or not the wave stays depends a lot on humidity though. My stylist dries it with a diffuser; I am just impatient. You could also try using a sea salt spray. The John Masters organic one is literally just salt, water, and lavender oil – so, very expensive saltwater. But it works well.