Page 1 of 4
Would you wear this dress?
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:10 pm
by 01/01/08
I saw this in the JCPenny circular this morning.
http://www.jcpenny.com/jcp/X6.aspx?Dept ... =&CmCatId=
Tell me what you think.
john
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 4:22 pm
by Sasquatch
I like the cut of that dress. The right man could pull off that look. It is one of the more masculine cuts I have seen. I might try a shirt dress if I could find a similar style in ankle-length and certain solid colors, like tan or drab green or dark brown. White with stripes may not work too well on a man my size.
sasq
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 4:59 pm
by RichardA
I wouldn't wear that, it's at a point of crossing over, sorry
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:14 pm
by Sarongman
Nope, sorry, I definitely concur with RichardA on that one. It is just over the borderline. You have to grant, however, that I am, though a skirt wearer, a fairly conservative dresser. Another man may carry it off with aplomb.
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:27 am
by sapphire
It is a basic shirtdress, but I need to add some caveats.
The picture does not show if there are bust darts. Those are guaranteed doom for a man.
The proportions of shoulder to waist are different for men and women. In commercial pattern making the shoulder to waist dimension for "average" heights is scaled for a woman 5 feet 6 inches tall with a b cup bra size. Most men are taller than 5 ft 6 in.. and are a aaaaa- bra size
I do not recommend this dress for a man.
However, with a good man's shirt pattern and some careful measuring and pattern adjustment and a different fabric choice, this look could work for a man.
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:03 am
by RichardA
I wouldn't wear that, it's at a point of crossing over, sorry
A rethink would you wear a denim shirt and skirt together

the only thing that would break it up would be a leather belt....dress maybe, maybe not

Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:03 pm
by Pythos
nope. Not for me.
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:55 pm
by r1g0r
nope, thanks.
my problems with the dress...
i don't like light colors or patterns (i would wear some patterns, but i am picky)
sleeves too short. i almost always wear long sleeves.
skirt too short for my usual wear.
too femininely shaped, as sapphire pointed out. i just ain't got the hourglass figure necessary for that design.
pockets. i need pockets.
now, i do on occasion wear a dress. they are either long sleeved, or sleeveless and i wear a shirt under. they are also knee-length or longer.
if the dress is what you want to wear, then more power to ya. not every garment is for every person.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:52 am
by Colin
Not my style either.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:16 am
by cessna152towser
Nor me. Has to be either a kilt, worn with a sporran or a skirt with pockets, always worn with a belt. I experimented once with a camo print T-shirt along with a camo print box pleat skirt and the look just wasn't for me. Even one of my friends who usually compliments my choice in kilts and skirts said it looked ridiculous.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:47 pm
by crfriend
cessna152towser wrote:Even one of my friends who usually compliments my choice in kilts and skirts said it looked ridiculous.
You got away with only a comment of, "Ridiculous"? You're lucky -- the last time I tried on a dress, more as a proof-of-concept than anything else, I got told by my dear wife: "You look like a gorilla in a dress." Ouch.
The sad thing is that the garment was delightfully comfortable and fit reasonably well. I'd make some basic changes to the design, e.g. at the collar area (the one I tried on had a scoop neck -- not the most flattering on males) and the fabric (this one was light blue with seashells on it; I'd go for a darker solid or subtle vertical pinstripe). Sometimes one just can't win...
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:50 pm
by sapphire
IMO, the dress did not fit well. The waist was in entirely the wrong place, the scoop neck was unflattering. The shoulders were actually too narrow and looked clumsy. The skirt was flared, but didn't meet the proportions of Carl's body. The print was feminine and clashed with Carl's body hair.
THe fabric was yummy and most comfortable. In a solid or subdued print the "idea" of that dress could be adapted to Carl's frame and look good.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:55 pm
by sapphire
Cessna,
The look may not be to your taste, but it really isn't that bad. It might work for a man with different tastes.
Is the source of your dislike for this look the head to toe pattern? Most men have been conditioned to wear one color/pattern on top and a different one on the bottom.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:10 pm
by crfriend
sapphire wrote:IMO, the dress did not fit well. The waist was in entirely the wrong place, the scoop neck was unflattering. The shoulders were actually too narrow and looked clumsy. The skirt was flared, but didn't meet the proportions of Carl's body. The print was feminine and clashed with Carl's body hair.
Well, I guess that shows the extent of my sartorial smarts....

Back to the easy stuff.
dress
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:23 pm
by JRMILLER
The basic problem with most dresses and frankly most skirts is that they tend to look femme. My personal taste is to look like a guy regardless of what I wear. Thus, what we are sorely needing are dresses and skirts that are made to fit a guy and, well, guy-like in appearance. With the fashion industry completely tuned out and with most of us on the consumption end instead of the creative end, it makes it difficult to specify what we would like and there aren't too many examples in the current culture.
I recently watched Ben Hur and the Roman commander wore a tunic which for all purposes was a dress. He wore some sort of leather over the lower half and metal armor over the top, but the underside was clearly dress-like. It looked very masculine and I liked it.
At this point in our culture, about the best we can do is to go back into Western European history, find out where men's fashion left off and pick it up from there.