...for a rather slow sunday afternoon. It may be deeply troubling to some, spark innovation in others, if you feel that you are ill prepared to handle a question of this magnatude then I must ask you to make like a tree, and get out, how ever if it is something that you can handle please read on. ...
...
...
...
...
...
We have all seen it (or well if you haven't then start looking) the pants (outerware here folks get that mind out of the gutter (I suppose it may just be my mind that is in the gutter, but i digress)) that many women are sporting these days that have words of various sorts, on the bottom of the clothing. I think this is an odd thing, words on one's ass? Is this an explosion of desire to have people look at one's butt? (I know that I nearly always at least make an attempt to read what is written). The results of much exparmentation have yeilded that is is probally not so, due mostly to the glares, laughs, etc that I have recieved during this proccess. (This could be that I am not the type of specimen these women were hoping to attract). Thought, further questions, and comments (hopefuly from the women themselves, although proxys will be accepted as well)
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
If you have writing on your ass, you are not allowed to glare at people who look at your ass.
That's MY opinion, anyway.
And I don't wear writing on my bum.
Posted by dawnmaria (Member # 4142) on :
I think this trend is stupid. What I find most disturbing about it is when I see young girls wearing these shorts. What parent in their right mind wants people looking at their young girls ass!?! I do not understand it. In my area the girls athletic teams have their names on the back of their shorts. I would like to know who thought this up so I can ask what they were thinking! Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
You know what's even worse? I saw a young girl (my guess is about elementary school age) wearing a shirt with a playboy bunny on it... to church. What kind of parents allow that? What kind of priests?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Agreed. It's right up there with "slinky" clothes for 4 year olds.
Not on any child of mine, thankyewverymuch. No matter how much the price is marked down (because other parents weren't that stupid either? thank God!), not even if they were free!
[Edit: I was responding to dawnmaria, but it works as a response to Julie too! Eeek!]
[ December 07, 2003, 04:45 PM: Message edited by: rivka ]
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
Holy cow, the things that pre-teens (and older, but that's a slightly different rant) wear make me very sad. I worked at an outdoor ed place until a week or two ago, and the girls from grade seven (and younger) would be wearing these tiny tight shirts and pants... And makeup! Now, it's cool, experiment, I did it too (not much, admittedly, which is probably why I can't apply eye shadow to save my life), but when you know you are going on a hike, at night, and you are not going to be allowed to bring your flashlight, why do you need to put on your makeup?? You know that noone will be able to see you even if they tried, and yet we've got enough makeup for a clown convention! *sigh* And if you need to wear your $200 jogging suit on the nature hike, don't complain to me if it gets wet because you fall in a puddle. It's CAMP, for pity's sake, not the Hilton.
Ummm... Sorry, Hatrack... That didn't start out as the incoherent rant it became... I'm still not entirely recovered from camp...
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
I have the same problem at my camp. If you know you're going to be there a week and there's rain in the forecast, then why don't you bring waterproof shoes? And extra dry socks?
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
I supposed I shouldn't have gotten those pants with "Sexy" stitched into it, then.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
They know where to advertise, I guess. Location, location, location.
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
Nah, you don't need 'em, T.
I do think this is an idiotic trend, and I refuse to have anything written on my ass. Mostly I refuse to have anything written anywhere, but sometimes a souvinier tshirt or something is ok.
Ni!
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Personally, I can't wait to hang out with hot Nathan. Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
I, for one, feel that this is a perfectly valid form of self-expression. I know that whenever I consider purchasing a pair of pants, I always ask myself, "What is my ass saying with these pants?" I want my ass to be bold and confident. Cool, hip (no pun intended), and sophisticated. Phat. And I find that the right word or phrase can really spice up what would otherwise be a mute, boring ass. When people look at my ass, they're going to say, "That's an ass that like to party. That's an ass that I would want to be friends with."
Or if I'm going on a job interview, I'll wear my pants with the words "qualified and dependable" on the ass, so that when I turn around to leave the interviewer's office, he or she will know that I'm a winner.
Or if I'm ever living in a crowded city with a high-crime rate, I can wear my "don't hurt me" pants.
And, by the way, Julie
quote:What kind of priests?
You're kidding, right?
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I wonder what mine is saying...
Hobbes Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
What is almost as bad as the writing on the butt is the pawprints. ::shudder::
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
Pawprints: "My ass loves animals" or "Animals love my ass"
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
...this could be very bad.
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
Instead of a hatrack t-shirt, we need to have hatrack ass jeans.
Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
*Goes off to write "I love Jehovoid" on pants*
Posted by Happy Camper (Member # 5076) on :
I really find the trend very disturbing. I was in the local park one day a month or so ago, and I saw a girl, couldn't have been more than 9, with shorts on that read "hottie". Aside from the main problem, here's another one, from my standpoint. Words written anywhere tend to draw the eye, and here I am, in the park, a 24 year old guy, by himself, looking at a little girls butt. Only briefly, mind you, but still. Is there any way to avoid looking like a sicko in a situation like that? The only real reason I think about this at all is because a lone guy can easily make some very wrong impressions, just based on the fact that he is alone, so you have to be very concious of how your actions may be (mis)interpreted. Especially in a high density, family area. But maybe it's just me, as I care about the perception people have of me, to some extent. I don't really care if they happen to think I'm a nice, cool guy or not, but I'd rather not have mothers and their children avoid me because they think I'm a sick pervert, if you get what I'm saying.
Err, that seemed to diverge from the ranting about stupid fasion trends, didn't it?
-HC
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Stop looking at my ass, lalo. I see you.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
How could you see me? Does Foobonic tell you about how I made you my desktop, or what?
And yeah, way to go, refer to me after I delete my post out of fear it might hurt Meph's feelings.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
And you don't hurt my feelings by never calling me back?
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
Call you back? You called me at all? Crap, did my phone number get out on the Internet, now? I don't want deez hos tyin up mah thug line!
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
--I--
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
A friend of mine told me that he once saw a girl wearing a shirt that said "Stop staring at my breasts" right across the front.
Posted by Mephistopheles (Member # 3250) on :
You won't offend me, regardless of what you were going to say, it is all taken with a grain of salt anyway since your state did elect Arnold governer.
----
I think that words on the ass of pants are just further proof that people, women in particular will (no offense, you buy more stuff), buy anything that is marketed. Another case of this are the shirts and other apparel that have the playboy bunny on them.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
--I--
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
Thought Meph was joking when he said women buy more stuff. *laughs* Disagree.
And T_Smith, you woulda saved a lot of money if you had just spray-painted the words on your tights.
Posted by Mephistopheles (Member # 3250) on :
The disagreement with my post seems to be that, two of the women here at hatcrack seem to think that we men purchase more stuff. Perhaps I am inncorrect, however the good in question is clothing, which, while nearly everyone I have met owns more clothing than I, most of the women that I know well enough to have some clue as to volume of clothes that they own, they all have far more than any of my male friend of whom I have simalar knowlage. The clothes certainly were not involved in amorous relationship in they closet (horizontal stripes + vertical stripee = plaid), leaving the only logical result as they bought these clothes.
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
I'm a dude, dude.
Actually, in my experience, my GUY friends buy more clothes than my female friends. It depends on the kind of person they are, not their gender. However, I'm sorry if I came off as rude, since my "disagreed" doesn't leave a lot for you to know HOW I disagreed.
[ December 08, 2003, 01:40 AM: Message edited by: Zotto! ]
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
The bigger problem is that since I hate being out of the loop, I have to check every female butt and chest just in case something's written there. And you know how they always tell you to read the fine print? Well....
Posted by Zotto! (Member # 4689) on :
The moose is the best. Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I just want to chime in and say that I too hate this trend. I devloped the habit of reading anything I saw (that goes for signs and announcments and just about everything else). So I of course just naturally read stuff on people shirts and pants and then suddenly realize where on their shirts and/ pants and feel really guilty.
Hobbes Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Man, I'm not even gonna to run my ass-tattoo idea by you guys.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
If I had a hot booticus I'd totally wear writing on my pants. Fortunately for the sake of moral superiority, my buttocks is the last thing I want to draw attention to.
Good thing writing on shirts is still acceptable.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Okay, so I really didn't have an ass-tattoo idea before...but now I think a derby and a plus sign on my left cheek would make for a great rebus.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Am I allowed to be schocked in this thread, or should I have just expected it based on the starting topic and who posted in it?
Just in case:
Hobbes Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Ralphie: Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
I don't usually buy stuff with company logos on it, but if GAP made those booty shorts, I'd buy some.
"GAP, huh?"
"Actually, it's more of a crevice."
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
The only words that will ever appear on my derrier are "Levis" or "Lee" or I guess "Calvin Klein" because they were the jeans for $20 at Sam's Club that fit me, even though I'm not a big name brand person.
When I was on the swim team though, there were a lot of club logos printed on the butt. When you are face down swimming like you are with 3 out of the 4 strokes, it really isn't obvious what team you are on. One of our club competition suits had this little shark icon on the right butt cheek at about the same location you would expect a tatoo of the same. At least that is where it hit the girls. Logos on guys Speedos in the front end up in er, interesting, spots. There just isn't enough surface area on guys speedos to put a logo anywhere modest.
AJ
Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
I think the worst are these shirts with two hands, one on each breast, and it's written "don't touch". A lot of girls wore it here a few years ago, and I found that quite disturbing. It's maybe because of girls like that YOU are not being trusted when you say peole tried to touch your breasts or ass without permission... EDIT because my grammar is awful
[ December 08, 2003, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: Anna ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Oh my, out of morbid curiosity I went to the Speedo USA webstite to see what the latest designs were.
Guys cover your eyes because these were designed especially for you. I need to ask my brothers how they are being worn. If you wear them under your outer speedos or if that is actually all you wear!
AJ
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
How can guys swim fast when they keep having to stop and pull that thing out of their butt?
Posted by ludosti (Member # 1772) on :
Supposedly, that's the appeal - since it's meant to get all crammed up in there, there's no need to stop and pull it out.... Posted by Brinestone (Member # 5755) on :
I think we Jatraqueros should get booty shorts that say "Hatcrack."
[ December 08, 2003, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Brinestone ]
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Now I know what to get you for Christmas. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I don't like clothing that dates itself. Timeless classics -- now there's something I can get into. Brands come and go, but a nice set of dreadlocks, that's the ticket. Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Appropriate things stitched across pants bottom:
1) This end down. 2) Stuff inside may be smaller than it appears. 3) If you can read this you are too close 4) Gas Alarm. If blue, all clear. If green, it was the dog. 5) Help, I'm being held captive in a back pocket. 6) No Trespassing. Violators will be shot. 7) Do not fold, spindle, or mutilate unless empty. 8) Do not open til X-Mas. 9) Warning: Contents may be hazardous to your health. 10) How is my walking, Please report unsafe speeds and bad behavior. Call 1-800-Walking.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:10) How is my walking, Please report unsafe speeds and bad behavior. Call 1-800-Walking.
*laugh* This I love.
Posted by Wussy Actor (Member # 5937) on :
one more: Abandon hope all ye who enter here.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I'd put Jim Carrey as Fletcher Reid saying "IT WAS ME!".
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
I first noticed this kind of pants on Gilmore Girls (yes, I know it's not very manly of me to watch such a girlish show) when Lauren Graham was wearing a pair of pants with "Juicy" written on the butt. It certainly *looked* juicy! Of course, the beautiful people make anything look good...
I think pants like that invite flirtation, because when you say something aloud about them, the woman can go "Oh, so you were looking at my ass, huh?" which then leads to compliments of said ass (which may have been the only reason for wearing the pants) and opens up a dialog that may lead to dating...I think it's fine for single, of age women with attractive asses...the problem arises when these fashions get abused! We need more fashion police!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:(which may have been the only reason for wearing the pants)
May?
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:I first noticed this kind of pants on Gilmore Girls (yes, I know it's not very manly of me to watch such a girlish show) when Lauren Graham was wearing a pair of pants with "Juicy" written on the butt.
JNSB, those are Juicy Couture pants. That label is largely responsible for the words-on-the-butt trend and for the jogging-suits-as-every-day-clothes trend. Luckily, both are on their way out, along with the bare midriff.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*pouts* I liked the bare midriff trend, but I used to be in shape and not mind showing it off either. Now I keep it covered so as to not scare or blind anyone.
AJ
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
My wife noticed a lot of people staring at her chest one day. She started to get upset.
Then she remembered the top she was wearing had a lot of small mirrors on it, about quarter size.
People were attracted to the shiny mirrors, and couldn't help look at them. This was more attention than she hoped for when she was given the top by her Grandmother.
Words on the rear must do the same, though the wearer doesn't notice them as often.
and back to the list>
12) These are not backup lights. 13) Help! I can't breath back here. 14) Pants by DuPont Paints 15) What you looking at perve. 16) My other backside is JLo. 17) WWJD (What would Jordache Do?) 18) Slow Down, Curves Ahead. 19) STOP! 20) Your Advertising Here.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:Luckily, both are on their way out, along with the bare midriff.
If SoCal is any indication, I'd say you're wrong. Juliette and I were at the fancy mall this weekend (South Coast Plaza, if anyone cares) doing some Christmas shopping, and both the jogging suits with writing on the butt and bare midriffs were everywhere.
We were actually having a conversation about this on Saturday. Over the past 10 years, trends in women's clothing across all ages have become more and more overtly sexual. When I started high school, the hippy look was popular (this may have just been my hippy-saturated area, though), which meant that there were a lot of loose, blousy shirts, long skirts, and Birkenstocks. Then came the whole grunge thing, and girls were wearing baggy jeans, baggy t-shirts, and flannel overshirts, just like the guys. Do the changing trends indicate something about the nature of our society?
Pretty much everywhere I go, I see girls and women with bare midriffs, low necklines, low-rise jeans (and I mean low), or writing on the butt. Or all of the above. And this is regardless of the weather. Now, admittedly, it never really gets all that cold in Orange County, but when it's 50 degrees out, I like to put on a sweatshirt and long pants.
It seems to me that an increasing number of girls and women define their self-worth solely through their sex appeal, and if this is the case, it's surely worrisome. My question is, is what I see mostly just due to the dominance of image in the Southern California lifestyle, or is this a really widespread thing?
My own experience tends to indicate more the former. I was home for Thanksgiving last weekend and stopped in at the mall. What you notice about style is that, while many of the young women and girls do still dress this way, I saw very few women over 40 who did, and none over 60. The young people I can write off as just wanting to be cool, like all young people do, but when I see a woman old enough to be my grandmother walking through the mall with two sets of cleavage being prominently displayed, I have to wonder about her self-image.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:If SoCal is any indication, I'd say you're wrong. Juliette and I were at the fancy mall this weekend (South Coast Plaza, if anyone cares) doing some Christmas shopping, and both the jogging suits with writing on the butt and bare midriffs were everywhere.
Yes, but they won't be for long. Check out what the trend-setters are wearing and I guarantee that it is not a jogging suit with writing on the butt that shows the midriff. Mall rats are always at least 6 months behind the fashion world. Designers are getting sick of the casual look and the new spring fashions are reflecting that.
It's actually been a long time coming - consider how well last year's Marc Jacobs tweeds did and how Carolina Herrera's profile and influence have exploded. Even for this fall, designers invoked Balenciaga and Coco Chanel.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Well, seeing as my familiarity with fashion trends is quite limited, I must bow to your superior knowledge. However, I highly doubt that fashion will be moving toward the conservative in the near future.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Additionally, I'm quite surprised by your statement that "mall rats are always at least 6 months behind the fashion world." It's been my experience, anyway, that the high end malls in Southern California tend to have the highest concentration of fashion-conscious people of anywhere I go (which could just mean I don't get out much). Plus, I've never heard the term "mall rat" applied to anyone older than a teenager, and it doesn't really fit with my mental image of a "mall rat" to be shopping at malls that include stores like Armani, Burberry, Christian Dior, and Chanel.
Could this be a difference in culture between SoCal and Virginia, or is it just that I'm oblivious (as usual)?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Well I know for a fact that Oklahoma fashions are about two years behind Southern CA fashions.
Also Southern CA will almost always show more skin than the rest of the country except for possibly florida.
AJ
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
And in CA I have seen grunge and midriff fashions sucessfully combined as well. I don't know if grunge will ever completely leave the CA scene, though I haven't been there for a while.
AJ
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
It certainly seems to have left Orange County.
Unless you're talking about the recent skater/punk fashion trend, which I've always seen as separate from the Seattle/alternative/grunge rock fashion trend.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I just figured as long as there are surfers there will always be a certain amount of grunge present. But I could be totally wrong too. Orange County is a bit more upscale than where I grew up too. And like I said I haven't been there in 3 years and I wasn't horribly fashion conscious when I was there.
aJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The malls by definition are a little behind the cutting edge.
Of all people, my dad (my dad!) commented on and applauded the more modest, less slutty clothing trends he saw while in Southern California.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:The malls by definition are a little behind the cutting edge.
Why is that?
And I must admit that your dad's comment is surprising. What, do the girls just run around naked in his town?
Can I come visit?
.
.
.
.
.
Probably best that Juliette doesn't come here that often.
.
.
.
.
.
Except that she's the one who told me about this thread! Oh no!
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:If SoCal is any indication, I'd say you're wrong.
That's the thing - while Southern California is undisputably the entertainment capital of the world, it is not even in the top 5 for fashion. The fashion capital is New York, followed by Paris and Milan. (I've had arguments about whether the fashion capital is NYC or Paris and I stick with NYC, but I admit that a good case can be made for Paris).
quote:I highly doubt that fashion will be moving toward the conservative in the near future.
Don't be so sure. Look at the late 60s and early 70s. My mother was a Ford model then and there are tons of pictures of her in tiny Pucci bikinis and miniskirts with platform boots. Fashion is cyclical, but the length of the cycles are hard to predict. It used to be roughly a 30-year cycle, but some 80s fashions are coming back about a decade too early.
quote: I've never heard the term "mall rat" applied to anyone older than a teenager, and it doesn't really fit with my mental image of a "mall rat" to be shopping at malls that include stores like Armani, Burberry, Christian Dior, and Chanel.
Could this be a difference in culture between SoCal and Virginia, or is it just that I'm oblivious (as usual)?
First, let's not include Virginia in any discussion about fashion. The people here in Richmond are farther behind than the people in Dacula, Georgia and that's saying something. They wear baseball caps to go out here. At night! To clubs! I always completely ignore what people here are wearing.
And it's not that you're oblivious, it's that I have altered my usage of the term mall rat. To me, a mall rat is someone who is a slave to trends and still has no style. For example, all those people running around with the Louis Vuitton Murakami multicolored bags are mall rats. People with style (and lots of money) have Hermes Kelly bags. The difference is that the Murakami people won't be seen dead with those bags next year and the Kelly people will have theirs until the day they die.
I should think of a new term, but I'm not very good at that sort of thing.
Also, let me say that people with innate style will have it no matter what, even if they never have a Kelly bag or Chanel ballet flats. Having style is not about what you carry, but how you carry it.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
My Mother-In-Law lives outside Dacula Georgia!!!!
I'd feel insulted, but you are quite right in your description.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
NO WAY! That's where I grew up. I bet I know her. Does she live in Lawrenceville or Winder?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:What, do the girls just run around naked in his town?
No, but one of his favorite mini-rant topics (in that sweet, dadly-opinion manner) is about the teenage couples he sees where the guy is wearing clothing three sizes too big and the girl looks like her clothes were painted on and they ran out of paint before they were done. Apparently, if you take the average of the two, you'll have a decent outfit for both. The last time I was talking to him, he was expressing pleasure that he no longer had to look away to avoid counting the fat rolls and reading the name of the underwear designer on the girls he saw.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Mrs. M, she lives in Auburn (just past Winder).
I did thankgiving shopping at the grocery store in Winder.
She's been there for about 15 years I would guess.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:Don't be so sure. Look at the late 60s and early 70s. My mother was a Ford model then and there are tons of pictures of her in tiny Pucci bikinis and miniskirts with platform boots. Fashion is cyclical, but the length of the cycles are hard to predict. It used to be roughly a 30-year cycle, but some 80s fashions are coming back about a decade too early.
My opinion about the near-future direction of fashion trends is based on what I see on TV and in Entertainment Weekly. Perhaps not the best sources for making such a prediction, but aren't celebrities usually the ones setting trends?
quote:For example, all those people running around with the Louis Vuitton Murakami multicolored bags are mall rats. People with style (and lots of money) have Hermes Kelly bags. The difference is that the Murakami people won't be seen dead with those bags next year and the Kelly people will have theirs until the day they die.
I should think of a new term, but I'm not very good at that sort of thing.
Also, let me say that people with innate style will have it no matter what, even if they never have a Kelly bag or Chanel ballet flats. Having style is not about what you carry, but how you carry it.
I won't disagree with you on style, but are style and fashion necessarily the same thing? And does this invalidate my observations about trends over the past decade? I mean, that's the thing about trends, right? That they involve lots of people? Most people, even? It's easy enough to say that all the girls and women I see with their butts hanging out have no style, but does that address whether or not there is an underlying social issue?
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
quote: Agreed. It's right up there with "slinky" clothes for 4 year olds
I'm right with you there Rivka. I cannot stand little kids in clothes that sexualise them. There is no reason why a four year old needs high heeled knee high patent leather boots, or midriff tops, or itsy bikinis. It is now possible to buy padded bras for 6 year olds - very very wrong.
When I have a daughter, she's not gonna be out of overalls until she's at least 15.
Posted by jexx (Member # 3450) on :
Padded bras for six year olds!?!?!
*dies*
I recently went to Wal-Mart to buy pants. That is where I buy my pants. I am not a person who cares about fashion, obviously. Usually I get my pants from friends who lose weight. They love to give me their pants! I love to get their pants! My friends have good taste and go to stores other than Wal-Mart.
So anyway, I went to buy some pants, and I bought some, even tried them on (I hate shopping for clothes so very very much). I thought they fit fine, but I must have had a different shirt on from usual. They said 'mid-rise' pants. Sounded good. Apparently 'mid-rise' pants do NOT show your buttcrack. That is good. They do, however, go way lower in the front than I am used to. I still wear them, with looong shirts, but I always feel a 'draft' on my belly. I am a size twenty in pants! I do not need or want jeans that expose my belly! No one else wants that either! Yucko!
Posted by Wussy Actor (Member # 5937) on :
I think we’re overlooking a valuable educational tool here. I know that when I was in high school, I would have been much more excited about reading The Brothers Karamozov if it had been written on some girl’s bottom. And furthermore, I would be much more motivated about my writing now if I got to write on some girl’s hindquarters.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
What about being small? Stores tend to assume that if you are slim, you want to have pants that sit a few inches above where your legs end! This is simply not the case!
I do not like silly clothes, especially on children. I know a child who wants to be a rock star. She's six years old, and when I was talking about her Barbie's shoes and saying stuff like. "Look at these shoes!" and "Doesn't she hurt her poor ankles when she walks?" this poor girl said that when she's a rock star, she will have to wear shoes like that. And I mean high, high, high-heels.
I asked if she wanted to be taller. She replied, quite seriously, "no, I don't want to be taller, but I'll be prettier with shoes like that."
I could not help but cry at the state this poor girl has got herself into.
I still dress badly. With no taste, I mean, because I simply do not notice what I can wear, and what I cannot. Ooops. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Wussy Actor
I'm sure Shakespeare would approve of your idea.
AJ
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:My opinion about the near-future direction of fashion trends is based on what I see on TV and in Entertainment Weekly. Perhaps not the best sources for making such a prediction, but aren't celebrities usually the ones setting trends?
No, with a few notable exceptions. Designers set the trends and they use celebrities to market them. Think of them as high-profile mannequins. For example, the reason Sharon Stone was such a fashion icon in the early to mid-90s is that she had a working relationship with Vera Wang. Vera Wang got to increase her exposure and Sharon Stone got a reputation for being stylish. Of course, Sharon Stone has since destroyed most of her credibility, but that's how it goes.
One of the most notable exceptions of celebrity trendsetters (in that she actually is one) is Gwenyth Paltrow. She has an innate sense of style, a vast knowledge of fashion, a body like a hanger, and an excellent sense of what works for her. Remember the just-below-the-knee length denim skirts? Those became popular because she hates to show her knees. She wore a vintage one and was photographed in it and the next month they were everywhere.
Television and Entertainment Weekly are not the best places to follow fashion. I recommend Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, and W.
quote:I won't disagree with you on style
I love it when people don't disagree with me.
quote:are style and fashion necessarily the same thing? And does this invalidate my observations about trends over the past decade? I mean, that's the thing about trends, right? That they involve lots of people? Most people, even? It's easy enough to say that all the girls and women I see with their butts hanging out have no style, but does that address whether or not there is an underlying social issue?
Yes and no. Fashion is dialectic. Society influences fashion trends and fashion trends influence society. I think that women have always derived much (if not all) of their self-esteem from their attractiveness. What changes is what society finds attractive. The pin-up girls of the 40s and 50s would be considered fat by today's standards, but they were the height of sexiness in their day. More recently, the glamazon supermodels of the late 80s and early 90s were replaced by the waifs of the late 90s, who were in turn replaced by the athletic models, who were in turn replaced by actresses of various sizes (well, various degrees of thinness). In the past few years, a significant amount of trends have reflected an overt sexuality, which I personally find vulgar. This reflects the fashion world's acknowledgement of the general attitude of their target market towards sexuality. That attitude is influenced by any number of things, which are always changing.
Edit: Hanger!
[ December 09, 2003, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: Mrs.M ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I can't tell you much about Vogue or what's hot with New York designers these days, but I can definitely verify that trends oscillate towards and away from overt sexuality. Just look at Shakespeare and how bawdy his stuff was in the 1500s, then I can't think of any good examples from the 1600s, but there was Tom Jones, published around 1740 which was VERY bawdy, then the Victorians were quite prudish, then we have 20th c. lit which was all over the map. It goes back and forth, in writing, at least. So it makes sense that in fashion it must do the same.
[ December 08, 2003, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:She has an innate sense of style, a vast knowledge of fashion, a body like a hangar, and an excellent sense of what works for her.
Her body can house aircraft? Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
D'oh!
If only I could think of some clever comment tying my stupid mistake to her pregnancy.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:No, with a few notable exceptions. Designers set the trends and they use celebrities to market them. Think of them as high-profile mannequins. For example, the reason Sharon Stone was such a fashion icon in the early to mid-90s is that she had a working relationship with Vera Wang. Vera Wang got to increase her exposure and Sharon Stone got a reputation for being stylish. Of course, Sharon Stone has since destroyed most of her credibility, but that's how it goes.
One of the most notable exceptions of celebrity trendsetters (in that she actually is one) is Gwenyth Paltrow. She has an innate sense of style, a vast knowledge of fashion, a body like a hanger, and an excellent sense of what works for her. Remember the just-below-the-knee length denim skirts? Those became popular because she hates to show her knees. She wore a vintage one and was photographed in it and the next month they were everywhere.
Television and Entertainment Weekly are not the best places to follow fashion. I recommend Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, and W.
Are we talking about high fashion or about trends? Walking down the street, I don't often see people wearing Vera Wang or Versace or whatever. I sort of doubt you'd see that all too often no matter where you were. In general, I don't see high correlation between what I see on a normal day and what I see at a club, or a fancy party, or on the red carpet on TV. Is high fashion particularly relevant to a broad discussion of society? That is, it's always seemed to me that high fashion is not typically designed to be accessible to everyone, and so, in that way, it must be somewhat marginal as an indicator of social values.
The sense I'm getting from what you're saying is that current trends in clothing are not really all that big a deal, because they'll be out in a couple of years anyway. This begs the question: does fashion follow social trends, or do social values follow fashion? Which is an indicator of which?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:Remember the just-below-the-knee length denim skirts?
Remember?
*looks down at her just-below-the-knee dark denim skirt*
Oh dear.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
While I always learn a lot from Mrs. M, I know she would cringe at what I wear to work. Jeans and polo shirts, with an occasional baggy sweater for variety or warmth. Almost never bother with makup either.
AJ
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Also at what point do you discard a pair of jeans? Is wearing it with one hole in the knee acceptable as long as the hole is small? Or do they get relegated to painting status as soon as a hole develops?
I have another pair of jeans that is still basically wearable (no holes) but the zipper is worn out, so I've tied a piece of string to it and loop it around the button so it won't slide down.
These are the fashion conundrums of my existence
AJ
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
Can't you have the "Joe Elliot" (from Def Leppard) look with the super faded, holier-than- just-about-anything-else jeans as long as there's lots of cool white threads stretched across them or hanging from the edges of the holes? If not, I'm gonna have to get rid of my summer pants. (but they were cool in the 80s!! *whine*)
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
saxon, elements from the runways filter down, not the specific items. The items may be avant-garde, but the elements are recyclable.
For example, there is a current lingering trend of stripes in women's clothing. Last year it was fresh (in Wisconsin), now it is established. Next year it will be old hat. But this was preceded by a runway trend toward stripes and acrylics back in 1999.
quote:A range of greens dominates the Vegetarian range. Sage, seaweed, bamboo, palm and fennel are brightened with pink and red. There are a lot of tonal stripes, patterns and mottled effects.
What filters down can be recognizable to the trained eye. Last summer pinky-peach mixed with beige was working its way down from runway trends, as well as a more feminine silhouette. I predict Wisconsin will be full of girly frou-frou pink&tan references this summer. We'll see. My money is on larger print florals, with the smaller prints now regarded as "dowdy."
I'm also expecting the A-line and bell-shaped silhoutte of the late 60's, a'la Down with Love, to make a strong appearance. This, with the detail of gloves, has been presaged for ages on the runways.
[ December 09, 2003, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
PS: But of course, I defer to Mrs. M. She -- very obviously -- knows her stuff.
I've been working on a timeless style for me. My goal is to prepare for the possibility that I will accidentally enter a time warp wormhole-thingie, and I'd hate to stick out like a sore thumb.
In such cases, blending in could be the key to survival. I'm feeling pretty secure in my lightweight black cashmere turtleneck and soft lightweight wool off-white slim skirt. However, it's starting to reek.
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)