I’ll just be over here with you on this side of that generation-gap line, Drew. Miss Lawrence’s outfit is tasteful and accents her beauty. Further, it’s a picture that she can look at later in life and not ask, “What was I thinking?!”
Miss Browning’s picture is… the opposite of all of that.
I’m off to the store to see if they’ve restocked eye-bleach.
She has a jacket studded with Rollo candies (spikes would be dangerous, see, and the designer is going for wussy dangerous), control-top panty hose on the outside of her outfit and a 70s velour-looking top with circles to emphasize the boobs she doesn’t have. And there’s an ugly ring on her right hands that sticks out two inches. I think the term for this look is craptacular.
I’ve thought that part of the problem with women’s fashion is that so many men are in it that, how can I put it, aren’t interested in dating a female model. On some level, they find the curvy female form icky and it’s hard to make designs that work for women of varying curviness in varying places. Designing for stick women with figures of a 17-year-old boy is far easier.
A few times I’ve seen articles in the British paper ‘Daily Mail’ about women of either the average size or the one smaller going to the high-fashion stores and being told at every one (usually with a sneer) there isn’t a single outfit in the store that would fit them and they can’t order one, either.
So much easier being a guy.
Stormbird nailed it, its about class and queer fashonistas should stick to dressing their boyfriends, Mary Quant pushe the censor hard but her gear had class but then she was a curvy woman. Proof is the “hot” clothes and trend is for size zero but how many skinny page 3 girls are their (UK Sun page 3, look it up!)
Next entry: an expert on the usa speaks on crime,poverty and awful system of justice
Previous entry: eye candy