URB Menswear

[renesm1]

Has anyone seen this retailer? Prices still expensive but at least heading the right way towards reasonable!!!

http://urb-clothing.com/product/long-mendress

[RichardA]

spot the difference oh yeah it's cheaper and the guy is in the expensive one

[skirtyscot]

Ah Richard, you old cynic. The mandress is only ten times the price of the ladies' one. That's hardly anything at all!

[MoonDrake]

spot the difference oh yeah it's cheaper and the guy is in the expensive one

The dress and the gal looks better anyways.

[BobM]

Others might disagree, but so many so-called designers choose models that convey only personal attitude and do nothing whatever to promote what they are modeling. The lead link in this thread is a case in point.

[MoonDrake]

Others might disagree, but so many so-called designers choose models that convey only personal attitude and do nothing whatever to promote what they are modeling. The lead link in this thread is a case in point.

Defenantly a zero energy "man dress", a weak pathetic attempt. A feedsack and a confused young boy does not do anything for one such as myself or for men in mugs in general from my point of view.

[Sarongman]

While agreeing with MoonDrake, I'll also call foul on polyester. $110.00 for plastic that looks like something seen in a discount catalogue is just highway robbery,

[Stu]

It's clearly expensive because the supplier wishes to make the label seem high fashion and so exclusive. It can not be exclusive if it's priced at just a few quid/bucks. That's not really the issue, though. What is significant is that this is yet one further example of the dam being breached. If garments like this are seen among the trend-setters, then other suppliers won't want to miss out on the act so they will offer them too and, inevitably, the downmarket suppliers will jump on the bandwagon.

I am irritated at it being called a "mendress". It is what it is and that is a dress. If they are going to have the cajones to produce a dress for men, then call it that. We don't call female trousers "womanpants", do we?

Stu

[GerdG]

We don't call female trousers "womanpants", do we?
Stu

Stu, we don't - any longer. Because when women started wearing trousers, and I'm old enough to remember, they at least in DK were called "damebukser" - ladies' trousers.
Not until they had reached a wider distribution and acceptance "we" stopped calling them "ladies'"
So to me it makes some sense calling dresses for men, men's dresses.

[Stu]

Gerd - thanks - I didn't know. That must have been before I learned to speak Danish, which was in the mid 90s. In the UK, ladies' trousers were often referred to as "slacks", but they are rarely called that nowadays.

I do find it irritating when they insist on either finding a neologism like "manbag", "meggings", "manscara" or "mandress" for an item which already has a perfectly good name, or when they refer to what is obviously a skirt as a "kilt". It is cowardly to create these items, market them to men, and then try to deny what they actually are even though it is blindingly obvious.

Stu

[Milfmog]

It is cowardly to create these items, market them to men, and then try to deny what they actually are even though it is blindingly obvious.

You're not wrong, Stu. However most men appear too cowardly to try a skirt or stand out from the crowd in any other way that can't be presented as Macho; so maybe the marketing types are right to choose a cowardly name.

Have fun,


Ian.

[GerdG]

Gerd - thanks - I didn't know. That must have been before I learned to speak Danish, which was in the mid 90s. In the UK, ladies' trousers were often referred to as "slacks", but they are rarely called that nowadays.

It was back in the 70'es I think. By the way, we too had slacks. But it was primarily used by shop assistants and women who had some knowledge of English - by far not so many as today - and liked to let surroundings know.

[Grok]

If an imported garment is a traditional MUG, perhaps the traditional name will suffice? For example, use the term "sarong" rather than "surf kilt."

[crfriend]

I am wholeheartedly in agreement with Stu that all renaming things does is look cowardly and cause confusion. So, a kilt is a kilt, a sarong is a sarong (not a "surf kilt"!) and a skirt, blast it, is just a "skirt".

[Grok]

Another example-it would be reasonable to refer to a caftan as a "caftan," rather than as a "dress." If importing a traditional MUG, it would not be unreasonable to also import the traditional name.