What’re your thoughts on reverse Kibbe typing? I find myself extremely drawn to natural, especially SN, clothing - not necessarily because I think it looks the best on me, but because it feels the most me - but if I were to go off the quiz/general knowledge about Kibbe, I wouldn’t type myself as natural.
(self-)perception VS feeling VS kibbe type
that’s the idea of essence and the conflict of it: the one you would pick for yourself versus the one that the world perceives, versus the one that suits you best up close. so you have three (!) or more ways of having a type.
kibbe is an entirely external way of analyzing the body — personal idea of character and personal comfort only came when the concept entered the 2010s, trying to make it more casual and individual, easier for daily life, quicker to style, making it truer to you.
but it’s opposite to what the system is all about. which is tailoring an image identity based on your body’s geometry as seen and assigned from the outside which is the reality. it’s rather disconnected from the person and depends on the onlooker. which is why it was intended for women only bc sexism, but i insist men gotta be looked at.
people who dress with what feels like them while at the same time expressing their kibbe type, very rare. you’d have to be lil nas x (flamboyant gamine) who has the lifestyle, attitude, guts, money, consistency, and fashion sense to nail it. he’s a lucky one, his type perfectly overlaps with his personal ideals and his concepts. it is the same as how he views himself and how he says he feels like.
where you can make tweaks and make it more practical is creating your own genre within your category which i often talk about. but reverse typing will only give you the essence in your mind’s eye or a thought-up appearance in the mirror. which i theorize is your sort of imagined or dream body: which might be very different from the actual kibbe type. kibbegory might not always be what feels like you since self-perception is by default warped. and hell, even typing others clearly is hard when imagination comes in.
example: yoongi often dresses like a classic type in public. elegant, clean, very minimal. while he’s actually, from the outside, a gamine who can handle extravagant, extreme fashion. meanwhile, what ‘feels’ like yoongi is a natural type: cozy, pragmatic, and mature character, who does some sports but likes to be busy and homely. so how he perceives himself is very understated, moderately tall, and balanced (C), while in reality his body couldn’t be any more petite, unconventional and contradictory (G), but the feeling of yoongi is much more grounded and relaxed (N). it compares quite interestingly:
he looks good in all three renditions. the only difference is, he stands out the most when he dresses according to his objective visual type. he looks the most fully expressed regardless of how it differs from his personality and gusto. when yoongi wears classic and natural, it’s subjective to him, which is what you experienced as well being drawn to soft natural clothing as personal taste.
moral of the story, as you say kibbe is only there to find out how you shine basically. it usually won’t find you clothes that are your pre-determined personal ideal and style. the gap between taste and how one sees themselves to how they actually come across is too large for kibbe to cover all three approaches. you might feel like or be drawn to fashion that opposes your lines entirely since it’s a subjective pick.
the only types that don’t fall into that trap are the most extreme ones. like flamboyant natural, their sheer height and muscularity will always force them into their kibbe category. they wouldn’t be able to find other clothes. and since their body is extreme, they often feel this way, and since they stand out, they get treated this way, and they perceive themselves like that essence. so you get more congruency. but most people, yes, have three types.
1 note · View note
So, about Christianity and cultural appropriation. (CN: this is going to get weird. As in, graphic and detailed disrespect of a very serious religious ritual.)
I think this is another thing where people do oversimplify things, and that "if you're raised in a predominantly Christian culture, it's impossible to culturally appropriate Christianity."
Because, here, let's say I got a group of friends together. And said, hey, you know what would be fun? We should do a Catholic communion!" And I grab some graham crackers and some Mike's Hard Lemonade (because, close enough, right?) and fake my way through something that might conceivably be mistaken for Latin and...
I mean, if that's not cultural appropriation, what is it?
(And I said Catholic, but I think this could be modified for a Protestant-style communion if you're thinking "well, not all forms of Christianity are the same, there's some places where Catholics are a pretty small minority..." true but probably not actually relevant here, Catholicism's just easy to go after because things are so standardized.)
So, I was thinking about this because there was some discussion on my dash a while back about whether the Montero (Call Me By Your Name) music video might be "appropriation". And...I'm not entirely willing to say it definitely isn't, like it might not be but also...I think of appropriation as being basically a form of disrespect, like that's the main thing that's wrong with it, that it's disrespectful, and... Montero is incredibly disrespectful and I'm fine with that. First, on a personal level I don't really object to people being disrespectful as fuck about Christianity for no reason, but also there is a specific very good reason that Montero is disrespectful in the way that it is disrespectful. It's sending a message about how Christianity treats LGBTQ+ people, and it's largely for LGBTQ+ people, and it's a way of saying, "yeah, you've been told certain things, but fuck them, actually you're OK."
It's ultimately a big fuck-you to Christianity as a way of supporting and affirming queerness. Because quite large swaths of Christianity put an awful lot of time and effort into putting down LGBTQ+ people, into demonizing us, forcing us to stay closeted, sending us to conversion camps, actively organizing to take away our rights. (Especially, at the moment, trans teenagers' rights.) It's a thing.
And, that music video, I can't get enough of it. There's persecution, sure, but there's also so much joy there, so much exuberance, so much celebration of sexuality...
This is fundamentally a story (or, it can be seen that way) of a Hero who has to Defeat a Great Evil to Win His Heart's Desire and unfortunately in this story, the homophobic side of Christianity is that Great Evil. (And it's a dark story -- the win involves some sacrifice.) So yes, by definition that does involve some disrespect there. By definition, that involves some role reversal, putting Christianity into the bad-guy role, because that's what Christianity is being for a lot of LGBTQ+ people.