Page 3 of 10
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:50 pm
by rick401r
I bought my first dress the other day. It was from Victoria's Secret and it looks like a black tank top only it comes down to just above my knees. Very comfortable in this hot weather.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 4:05 pm
by JRMILLER
My goal in skirting is to continue to look like a guy and incorporate skirts that work for a guy. Hence, kilts, sarongs and a few well chosen skirts. I would not wear heels or hose with any of these because I think it takes me too far into feminine territory to be believable simply as a guy who wants to use skirts in his wardrobe.
A dress covers a lot more real estate and as a result, I would have to try even harder to make that look believable. Jack is our poster boy for that category, his outfits are believable, but often at the expense of interesting. The Romans managed to pull the dress look off with a long tunic, often belted at the waist.
Given that this website is about guys wearing skirts in the context of "men's fashion", I would rethink these outfits and certainly loose the panty hose and heels... Probably choose a different overall form for the dress, anything that enhances the bosom just doesn't work in this context...
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:56 am
by Jack Williams
Dresses are the final frontier. To get a believable real bloke's dress is the goal. The ones I have now are really girls' ones converted.
I'm getting a tailoress friend to construct me a few. With side pockets. In denim. In more than one colour.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:51 am
by Jack Williams
Blue of course, black, brown methinks, green? Dunno. RED?? Now that would certainly be something. "His RED dress"!
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:05 pm
by straightfairy
Jack Williams wrote:Dresses are the final frontier. To get a believable real bloke's dress is the goal. The ones I have now are really girls' ones converted.
I would have thought the easiest way would be to buy a robe/dress already designed for men in countries where that is the national dress, as it were.
The only dress my parents know about is an African djellaba I bought in a market and got my mum to shorten for me. It's a simple poly/cotton item with no frills etc at all.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:43 am
by Jack Williams
Those male dress-like garments of traditional style in hot countries are always loose and robe like, whereas I prefer something more fitting, so I tailor them in from usual "relaxed fit" as supplied, other than the light denim ones which are perfect as is. The ones I choose are straight top, (no "tit tucks"!) like t-dresses, shirt dresses etc.
They have been very successful I think, and certainly accepted hereabouts as not at all incongruous on a male.
I think when it comes to the tailormade new denim ones mentioned above, ordinary denim blue, deep blue and one in black denim will be the chioce there. Maybe other colours another time perhaps, but I think it is good to have a few choices from word go so can alternate them on the street.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:54 am
by Kirbstone
Do they make hats like the one in your avatar in Denim? I reckon that'd go well with all those denim dresses and shirts.
It had better have some sort of shark repellant built into it, too!
Tom K.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:17 pm
by Jack Williams
Probably not, they are actually poly-cotton (50-50).
Most of my stuff is in fact cotton or other knit. Perhaps a knitted beany...
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:14 pm
by Jack Williams
Dresses were flying today!
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:38 am
by Sarongman
Onya Jack! Actually, if one delves into history, dresses were the last surviving male unbifurcated item, only dying out fully after the troops came back from the "Great war" of 1914 - 1918 with a totally different mindset than they went away with. England, continental Europe and the east, into Russia, the working man's garb was a loose fitting dress called a smock dress. Count Leo Tolstoy's peasant dress hangs from the top of his wardrobe in the museum devoted to him, and it bears little, if any, difference to the English style. Here is a picture from the turn of the 20th century. Maybe not Haute Couture, but serviceable!
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:58 am
by Jack Williams
I have been experimenting with dresses. Here is my latest effort:
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2012 12:18 pm
by crfriend
That one works. Personally, I'd be tempted to add a belt but it works well as is.
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:13 am
by Sinned
Was in Egypt for two weeks September/October and whilst there I bought a gallibaya with the outer kaftan as a set. The gallibaya is really just a long cotton shirt open at the throat and the kaftan is a full length garment like a coat with long wide sleeves open in front. There really isn't much difference between the gallibaya and a long ( to the ankle ) shirt dress but wearing this has my wife's approval. At least around the house but she couldn't have any objections outside the house surely. The material is quite thin so I would have to be careful what underwear I wore with it ( most definitely white ). Not really discussed this with her. I intend to take patterns from these and make some more, initially in purple ( my wife's favourite colour ) and black then other block colours as I like wearing colours such as yellow, red and bright blue. Brown I can get away with but green is not really to my taste and pink I would wear in the right garment and occasion. To experiment with patterened cottons would be far into the future but possible for say, geometric patterns. Materials - thin cotton for warm weather and thicker materials for winter. Hmmm, food for thought and could be the way to go for me dress-wise.
The lines certainly are getting blurred for me and familial/societal attitudes most illogical.
Sinned

Re: Dresses!
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:39 am
by couyalair
Sinned wrote:The material is quite thin so I would have to be careful what underwear I wore with it ( most definitely white ).
Strange to me that you should prefer -- so definitely -- white underwear. White shows through thin material more than any other shade. Perhaps your aim is to be certain that everyone can see you are not naked underneath, I don't know.
For me, underwear is something that should not be seen (whatever today's sagging youths think!) including through outer clothing. Most of my underwear is black which means it is not noticeable either through my clothes or directly when my knees are raised for whatever reason (falling on my backside, for example!)
Martin
Re: Dresses!
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:47 am
by Sarongman
Sinned wrote: Most of my underwear is black which means it is not noticeable either through my clothes or directly when my knees are raised for whatever reason (falling on my backside, for example!)
Martin
Well theorised and I fully concur with the idea.------ It seems there are two threads called simply "Dresses" and I wonder if it would be tidier if they were merged.
I must take some pictures of my four (soon to be augmented by another four) but will get S.W.M.B.O. to take them as my self portrait attempts are off putting to say the least!