Stylist in a dress

News from High Street, for the Fashionistas among us! Couture only here please; if you can buy it off the rack, try another forum.

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Jack Williams » Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:34 am

Interesting. Gays in this part of the world go for the "lumberjack" look! What can you do? Just be yourself I guess.
User avatar
Jack Williams
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2116
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby crfriend » Mon Aug 01, 2011 11:17 am

MSpookshow wrote:Carl, I usually find your posts very well thought out and enlightening, but I've got to disagree with you on this one. Who exactly gets to decide who does and does not look like a "horrific idiot"? Obviously, the answer is that it's entirely subjective, but in that case why should anyone limit themselves based on other's opinions at all?

Your assertion that the ultimate arbiter is the viewer and that it is all highly subjective is spot on, and we are actually in agreement on that. What I might label as idiotic might actually appeal to somebody else rather delightfully, for instance, the current fashion of "droopy drawers" (jeans worn on the lower part of the buttocks).

I suspect that part of the "problem" (as I view it) with the look is that it's outrageously over the top. I understand that is sometimes necessary in the world of "high fashion", but would the look work in an everyday setting? Would you wear such an ensemble to a job interview? To work? Even just out and about on the street? I take a look at the outfit, try to imagine myself in it, and just start laughing. Laughter is not what, I suspect, the average bloke wants people doing at him -- with him is one thing, but at is something altogether different.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10152
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby MSpookshow » Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:23 pm

crfriend wrote:I suspect that part of the "problem" (as I view it) with the look is that it's outrageously over the top. I understand that is sometimes necessary in the world of "high fashion", but would the look work in an everyday setting? Would you wear such an ensemble to a job interview? To work? Even just out and about on the street? I take a look at the outfit, try to imagine myself in it, and just start laughing. Laughter is not what, I suspect, the average bloke wants people doing at him -- with him is one thing, but at is something altogether different.


I'll agree it's not the type of attire you would usually see at the grocery store, but everyday attire is also a bit subjective. For example, I'm a makeup artist by trade, so this type of fashion isn't too far out in my line of work, honestly. Actually, I did in fact wear tights and heels to my last job interview, albeit with a sophisticated pair of slacks. The looks I post on my Flickr account (and by extension, here) are all looks that I do wear out and about in everyday life on the street, so again YMMV. Any strange looks or laughter I may receive is cancelled out by the fact that my high heels nearly always cost more than that person's entire outfit. :lol:
User avatar
MSpookshow
Active Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby crfriend » Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:53 pm

MSpookshow wrote:I'll agree it's not the type of attire you would usually see at the grocery store, but everyday attire is also a bit subjective.

That's quite correct, but for the most part the context I run in is vastly more the grocery store, gas-station, and hardware store world, and such an outfit would look so out of context that it could well be viewed as ridiculous. Your context of makeup artist is quite a bit different than mine, and I could well expect that the latitude you can work with is broader than what the "average Joe" dares or might even be able to easily comprehend.

My basic point is that what we're doing is stretching boundaries already, and that in so doing it's possible to "go overboard" to the point where a look simply cannot work within the local context (my "believeability maxim"). By stretching the boundary too far we risk alienating those around us which, I feel, does everybody a dis-service.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10152
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Stu » Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:11 pm

There is a very wide grey area between, on the one hand, men like me who wants to see the decline of the specific taboo about men wearing unbifurcated garments, and out-and-out crossdressers who want to emulate women. Nevertheless, the whole motivation of the two ends of the spectrum couldn't be more different.

A man who wishes to remove the unnecessary restriction on men wearing unbifurcated garments is wanting to redefine masculine fashions to some extent. He is effectively saying that certain types of skirt, for example, should be perceived as masculine, or on the masculine end of unisex, when worn by a man, as part of an overall masculine look. However, a man who crossdresses wants to use his fashion choices to identify as female or feminine, and so is effectively reinforcing the make/female binary. These two positions are irreconcilable.

I am not in any way condemning men who want to wear flouncy dresses, or pink lipstick, etc for whatever reason, but I can not feel solidarity with them because their struggle is not my struggle. My understanding of the purpose of this site, and its forerunner, Tom's Cafe, was to extend fashion choices for men to include unbifurcated garments, but within a strictly masculine context. For those men who has a desire to go further than this, then I think they need to be clear in their own minds where their true motivation lies. If they wish to be perceived either as female, or androgynous, then that is, IMO, an entirely legitimate, but essentially different, agenda.

Stu
Stu
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby nicothoe » Mon Aug 01, 2011 6:40 pm

My understanding of the purpose of this site, and its forerunner, Tom's Cafe, was to extend fashion choices for men to include unbifurcated garments, but within a strictly masculine context.


In the eyes of many men, any skirted garment (kilts included) is going to be considered non-masculine. These men will label us all as feminine.

Next you have the men who will gladly wear a kilt, perhaps a sarong, but not enter the realm of skirts. Kilts are masculine, skirts are not.

Then there are those guys who will wear some skirts, but not others. The will decide that some skirts are feminine while others masculine.

Finally, you have people like me who put on many variety of skirts. Are they masculine or feminine? As far as I am concerned, they're all masculine. I define my own masculinity. I dress to be me, no one else. For the record, I am an openly polyamorous, which means I can, and do, have multiple relationships. I have not found skirts to be a hindrance to my dating; in fact, quite the opposite is true. Yay for skirts, is what I say.
Be Bold. Be Skirted.
User avatar
nicothoe
Distinguished Member
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:27 am
Location: Montgomery, IL

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby SkirtedViking » Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:59 pm

MSpookshow wrote:This seems as good a time as any to say this. I think this forum is far too obsessed with keeping things "masculine". Freestyle fashion is all about breaking preconceived gender stereotypes on style. Consistently calling men who wear more than just a boring denim skirt crossdressers is not exactly promoting fashion freedom. The blurb at the top of this site seems to indicate a more open-minded spirit than I regularly see from posters here. It just seems that anything even a little adventurous is shunned or otherwise mocked a bit too quickly, and I think ultimately that's harmful to fashion freedom as a whole.

Carl, I usually find your posts very well thought out and enlightening, but I've got to disagree with you on this one. Who exactly gets to decide who does and does not look like a "horrific idiot"? Obviously, the answer is that it's entirely subjective, but in that case why should anyone limit themselves based on other's opinions at all?

Anyways, I think the man in the picture looks great. Sure it's not for the faint of heart, but that's what makes it stylish in the first place. Does he look masculine in a lumberjack sort of way? Certainly not, but I hardly think that's down to the outfit. Let's be real, this boy would look delicate in even the most outrageously stereotypical masculine attire. So once we strip out the unnecessary gender labels and ask if the outfit as a whole looks good and works on his frame, I think the answer is a solid yes. Then again, when I think of fashion I don't see denim skirts and crocs, so your mileage may vary. :P


Could not have said it better myself!
There is nothing worse than double standard!
SkirtedViking
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:08 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Jack Williams » Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:34 am

I couldn't agree more. That is a knockout look. Pity I'm not his age. That's the problem. Much more conservative then, but I did experiment much in the "hippie" era. I do look to my age group, and thus (I hope!) don't look too bizaare.
User avatar
Jack Williams
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2116
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby STEVIE » Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:01 pm

For a start, what has the cost of a pair of shoes, heeled , or otherwise to do with anything.
There is no such thing as a gender exclusive garment, no buts. However, there is such a thing as being plain stupid. We have to live in the real world. I remember a time in a pub, in Aberdeen and not an especially refined one. A guy alone, shoulder length dark hair, feminine slacks and gold chains in abundance. He was at home in his environment, accepted, a local, accepted. Me, if I had presented in a skirt, I probably would be typing this post with a straw.
We push boundaries, each in our own way, boring denim or stunning expensive, that's life.
Do not judge.
Steve.
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1797
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Davy » Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:56 pm

Kirbstone wrote:That's overt CDing. Far too obviously femme. Those white details are quite clearly meant to fit over and emphasise boobs.The black shiny tights, shoes and hair adornment say it all, too. I'm surprised 'he' doesn't have a designer handbag to go with it.

Looking again....'he' DOES have a handbag!!

Tom K.
I agree this appears to be CD for the reasons Tom cites. However, don't knock the handbag! I have found a handbag to be essential when wearing a dress or skirt as you need some place to store keys and wallet where you won't lose them. (Although I agree a small plain one would work just fine.)
Davy
Active Member
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:28 pm

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby azhiker » Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:38 pm

regardless if you are wearing a skirt, dress, shorts, slacks...... You should always carry a purse as I have back problems causes by sitting on my wallet for all those years. And I believe that hanging a cell phone off of your hip is not good for the body either. So I carry a purse for those reasons.
azhiker
Active Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 2:00 pm
Location: Texas, United States

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Kirbstone » Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:05 pm

Bags, no. I'm a pockets person. They have to be big enough to get my large hands into, too. Has anybody noticed that models (female) show hip or slash pockets in garments by slipping just their fingers in, leaving the thumb out? This means, of course that the pockets are far too small for anything and are just tokens for perhaps at most a hanky.
...and talking of shoulder bags....Girls have a notch just inboard of the outer end of their shoulders, just right for hanging a strap off. My trapezius muscle slopes all the way to the end from my neck and nothing will stay on unless it's worn crosswise from the other shoulder, and I'll never do that.

I've had several monotubes tailor made, each with pockets big enough for my spades.

Tom K.
Carpe Diem......Seize the Day !
User avatar
Kirbstone
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3910
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby crfriend » Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:17 pm

Kirbstone wrote:Girls have a notch just inboard of the outer end of their shoulders, just right for hanging a strap off. My trapezius muscle slopes all the way to the end from my neck and nothing will stay on unless it's worn crosswise from the other shoulder, and I'll never do that.

One word: "epaulets". They're not just ornamental, they were originally put there for a reason -- which, of course, has conveniently been forgotten.

As far as wearing a bag crosswise, if you've got a couple of thou worth of camera gear in the bag, one will almost certainly carry it crosswise. And, crosswise frequently enhances access to things if one needs them quickly. Too, a crosswise carry is easier to conceal under a (closed) jacket.

I know bags aren't for everybody, but they can be really handy things sometimes.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10152
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Kirbstone » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:01 am

I forgot about cameras, Carl. You're right. Normally (like when sailing) I carry a little Cannon compact digital in my pocket, but I do possess a serious SLR thingy which I deploy for special occasions, and its bag for lenses &c. is carried crosswise.
Tom.
Carpe Diem......Seize the Day !
User avatar
Kirbstone
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3910
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Stylist in a dress

Postby Davy » Fri Sep 23, 2011 12:11 am

I always carry my purse crosswise over the shoulder to insure it doesn't fall off. It also seems much more secure that way, and I'll bet its much harder to pick than a pocket as well. If you are worried about the bag messing up your overall look, a small one is not likely to do that. Of all the times anyone has commented (both positively and negatively) about me wearing a skirt or dress, no one has ever mentioned the purse, so my guess is that it just doesn't get noticed all that often.
Davy
Active Member
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:28 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Couture

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest