Denim dress

Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context. This is NOT about transvestism or crossdressing.
skirtyscot
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3137
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:44 pm
Location: West Kilbride, Ayrshire, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by skirtyscot »

I'm curious, John. How can long trousers, a garment which you presumably wore most of the time for most of your life, remind you of a divorce?
Keep on skirting,

Alastair

User avatar
Kilted_John
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1210
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:07 am
Location: Duvall, WA, USA
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by Kilted_John »

Alastair,

It was a bad time for our family, so... I won't go through everything in detail, since it's not really pertinent to the topic at hand, though.
Skirted since 2/2002, kilted 8/2002-8/2011, and dressed since 9/2013...
flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/245gt-turbo

skirtyscot
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3137
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:44 pm
Location: West Kilbride, Ayrshire, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by skirtyscot »

Fair enough. But if it put you off trousers, it wasn't all bad!
Keep on skirting,

Alastair

nzfreestyler
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 12:21 am

Re: Denim dress

Post by nzfreestyler »

I have this chambray fabric style imitation cross-over dress. Great casual summer dress with a waist tie.
Light weight and floaty. Poor pic sorry - its an old pic.

Image

cheers
NZF

User avatar
new2skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:33 pm

Re: Denim dress

Post by new2skirts »

nzfreestyler wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:34 am
I have this chambray fabric style imitation cross-over dress. Great casual summer dress with a waist tie.
Light weight and floaty. Poor pic sorry - its an old pic.

Image

cheers
NZF
Looks 🔥🔥🔥 ideal for hot summers :wink:
The Artist Formerly Known As Kilty :mrgreen:

nzfreestyler
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 12:21 am

Re: Denim dress

Post by nzfreestyler »

hey a quick on line shopping image search fins some lovely denim dresses very quickly...
check these simple styles out!

Image

Image



cheers
NZF

User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Denim dress

Post by Jim »

nzfreestyler wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 11:53 pm
hey a quick on line shopping image search fins some lovely denim dresses very quickly...
check these simple styles out!
Those only look like they'd work on people whose waist is much smaller than their hips or chest.

nzfreestyler
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 12:21 am

Re: Denim dress

Post by nzfreestyler »

Jim wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:59 am
hose only look like they'd work on people whose waist is much smaller than their hips or chest.
I do agree the second one is fitted - the first is an a line and quite loose... the second yes you do need a narrower waist. but I really think the biker jacket style lapels and the zip going on a diaganol across the front is a neat option allowing for it to be worn various ways!

NZF

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 10926
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by crfriend »

Both are actually quite fitted, and leave little room for error in sizing. Such is the way of the modern world where women are expected to look like teenage guys,

Of course the above comment, whilst heart-felt in opposition to the butching-up of the gals goes, benefits guys because stuff is now being manufactured (although not marketed to) that actually fits men. (Of course, most of the gals have simply given up and the guys aren't allowed to "think outside the box".)

I'll betray a bit of my old-school character here, but I will be very happy when the bare-feet/bare-legs look goes away with the next swing of the pendulum. Whether I'll be around for that is anybody's guess. Bare feet and legs look fine on children. Once one gets to about 14, the charm wears thin, and age doesn't help matters all that much after that.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

nzfreestyler
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 12:21 am

Re: Denim dress

Post by nzfreestyler »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:28 am
Both are actually quite fitted, and leave little room for error in sizing. Such is the way of the modern world where women are expected to look like teenage guys,
Thats just the way with most stuff from the womens side of the aisle. Tops are just as bad - even shoes have to be a precise fit unlike mens shoes where you can get away with imperfect fitting.
crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:28 am
I'll betray a bit of my old-school character here, but I will be very happy when the bare-feet/bare-legs look goes away with the next swing of the pendulum.
Do you prefer the hosiery look on the leg? It is very hot in warmer weather though? Even sheers are really hot in summer months. Or are you referring to bare feet into shoes - or the modern shoe trends with see through PVC components.

NZF

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 10926
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by crfriend »

nzfreestyler wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:15 am
Do you prefer the hosiery look on the leg? It is very hot in warmer weather though? Even sheers are really hot in summer months. Or are you referring to bare feet into shoes - or the modern shoe trends with see through PVC components.
All of the above, actually. I understand the argument about summer. I also understand that I am very much alone in this regard, but I just find that one simply doesn't look "finished" or polished with bare legs. This is fine for the sort of hyper-casual style that's popular these days (aka "not giving a fig about what you look like") but highly inappropriate for any sort of dressy situation.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Denim dress

Post by Jim »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:28 am
I will be very happy when the bare-feet/bare-legs look goes away with the next swing of the pendulum. Whether I'll be around for that is anybody's guess. Bare feet and legs look fine on children. Once one gets to about 14, the charm wears thin, and age doesn't help matters all that much after that.
My opinion is the opposite. Being a Christian nudist, and believing that God's creation of the human body is "very good" (Genesis 1:31), the closer one gets to nudity, the better--except for inappropriate eroticism.

User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2711
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: Denim dress

Post by Fred in Skirts »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:03 pm
I understand the argument about summer. I also understand that I am very much alone in this regard, but I just find that one simply doesn't look "finished" or polished with bare legs. This is fine for the sort of hyper-casual style that's popular these days (aka "not giving a fig about what you look like") but highly inappropriate for any sort of dressy situation.
Carl if you like the covered legs and feet. I know you like long dresses etc. Watch "The Murdock Mysteries" if it is available in your area. It is set in the late 1800's and in Canada. Aside from the fancy long dresses and skirts the programs are pretty good as well.

:D
Fred :kiltdance:

"The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle."


"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 10926
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Denim dress

Post by crfriend »

Jim wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:19 pm
crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 1:28 am
I will be very happy when the bare-feet/bare-legs look goes away with the next swing of the pendulum.
My opinion is the opposite. Being a Christian nudist, and believing that God's creation of the human body is "very good" (Genesis 1:31), the closer one gets to nudity, the better--except for inappropriate eroticism.
I accept that, and we merely have slightly divergent views based on venue. There is exquisite beauty in the human form; however, much of that is, in my opinion, better left to "more intimate" settings than letting it all hang out in public.

In reflecting on my comment about the "hyper-casual" nature of what passes for modern "society" I became aware of a subtext to that which has likely been driving me for a few years now, and that's an active rebellion against what modern "society" has become -- and as that gelled in my mind I realised that what I'm seeking is a "Nouvelle Belle Epoch", a New Beautiful Age: an age where decency, civility, beauty, grace, and dignity reign. This is, of course, in direct opposition to what our current entirely vulgar, base. and boorish time represents. We're forty years into the the regime of the neo-conservative (read, "reactionary"), and we've got close to two human generations who have never experienced anything else save for the banality. We've had nothing but boorishness, narcissism, self-aggrandisement, and outright greed and avarice since then. From the hard-nosed thuggishness of the Thatcher regime in the UK to the equally-as-base Reagan regime in the US, we've had way too much idiocy.

So, yes, I'm after something entirely grandiose -- an utter repudiation of baseness and banality -- and, in keeping with the meme of "Be the change you want to see in the world" have been trying, almost imperceptibly, to live that mantra. It's a losing battle, I know, but at least I'm going to go down fighting. We can -- and need to -- do better than where we are today. We owe it to ourselves, not just as lone individuals but as human beings. We can do better.

To Fred, yes, much of my aesthetic derives from the late Victorian and early Edwardian times, and I am also sensitive to the social stratification that was in force at the time. However, at least they managed to keep the overt banality at a low key, quite unlike what we're experiencing today. Also, in spite of my personal tastes for elegant and long, I am known for occasionally "going short" and thereby jarring many around me. I am very fortunate that at almost 60 I am capable of even doing so in a cogent manner. (Actually, my short looks attract more positive attention than my more staid long ones.)

So, thus go forth into the world, and with intent, determination, and resolve commit random acts of beauty, civility, grace, and dignity. You will be instantly and ineffably alone, save for those who are on the same mission. "Just sayin'." But there is something entirely satisfying about it.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

Dust
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: Denim dress

Post by Dust »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:38 pm

In reflecting on my comment about the "hyper-casual" nature of what passes for modern "society" I became aware of a subtext to that which has likely been driving me for a few years now, and that's an active rebellion against what modern "society" has become -- and as that gelled in my mind I realised that what I'm seeking is a "Nouvelle Belle Epoch", a New Beautiful Age: an age where decency, civility, beauty, grace, and dignity reign. This is, of course, in direct opposition to what our current entirely vulgar, base. and boorish time represents.
I would love to see more beauty moving forward. I've heard things referencing back to writings from centuries ago of the need to have more (and more appreciation of) goodness, truth, and beauty. While I appreciate practical, utilitarian solutions, we need to have beauty as well, and the two should not be seen as mutually exclusive.
crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:38 pm
We're forty years into the the regime of the neo-conservative (read, "reactionary"), and we've got close to two human generations who have never experienced anything else save for the banality.
If forty years is your timeframe, I'm in those two generations you're talking about. My initial thought was "conservative!? What the heck is he talking about?!" but then I realized that compared to the 60's and 70's that I've only heard about but never lived you might have a point in some respects. Still, a lot of very liberal changes happened in the 90's and on to today, whatever you may think of it.
crfriend wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:38 pm
So, yes, I'm after something entirely grandiose -- an utter repudiation of baseness and banality -- and, in keeping with the meme of "Be the change you want to see in the world" have been trying, almost imperceptibly, to live that mantra. It's a losing battle, I know, but at least I'm going to go down fighting. We can -- and need to -- do better than where we are today. We owe it to ourselves, not just as lone individuals but as human beings. We can do better.

To Fred, yes, much of my aesthetic derives from the late Victorian and early Edwardian times, and I am also sensitive to the social stratification that was in force at the time. However, at least they managed to keep the overt banality at a low key, quite unlike what we're experiencing today. Also, in spite of my personal tastes for elegant and long, I am known for occasionally "going short" and thereby jarring many around me. I am very fortunate that at almost 60 I am capable of even doing so in a cogent manner. (Actually, my short looks attract more positive attention than my more staid long ones.)

So, thus go forth into the world, and with intent, determination, and resolve commit random acts of beauty, civility, grace, and dignity. You will be instantly and ineffably alone, save for those who are on the same mission. "Just sayin'." But there is something entirely satisfying about it.
I know quite a few rather conservative types who are onboard for restoring some formality to dress, as well as general dignity and decorum to society. Unfortunately, they tend to look to the 1950’s (or at least the glamorized TV version of it) for their inspiration for menswear. They might also draw in some inspiration from as far back as the 1920's, but that's about it, clothing wise.

I'm definitely in agreement with the "be there change you want to see" concept, although my style is different from yours. In fact, I tend to see using past eras for anything but a touch of inspiration (or something to learn from the mistakes of) as reactionary, just on a larger time scale.

Every era had it's issues, and longing for days gone by that one didn't actually experience in a sort of artificial nostalgia just strikes me as stupid and lazy at best, and asking for a repeat of the worst of those times due to ignorance. This is more a general comment than anything you (or anyone else here) are particularly guilty of...

Post Reply