Ugly outfits are not all alike
Here are two very ugly outfits that don’t resemble each other at all.
One is not exactly a dress; it’s what I think is called a jumpsuit, meaning an all-in-one pants outfit that makes it very hard to use the ladies room and looks good on almost no one and yet periodically returns to the fashion world. This one combines the jumpsuit esthetic with the current trend for peekaboo breasts held up by something more physician-enhanced than the designs of Mother Nature.
This one is quite the opposite. First, there’s the color, a yellow that almost no one can wear successfully with the possible exception of redheads. The dress is an attempt at ballgown formality crossed with modern ironic casualness, and it succeeds on neither level, giving the viewer the impression that the wearer has either put on a dress too big for her or has failed to fasten some important element of the garment.
The jumpsuit reminds me somewhat of Rudi Gernreich’s monokini, which those of you of a certain age may remember:
Think of something in your life that took 1/60th of a second to do. Now, imagine having to spend the rest of your life talking about it. I think it’s a beautiful photograph but, oh, am I tired of talking about it.”
But I guess that she liked the notoriety at the time:
1964, I remember it well. Fifty years ago.
The expression on the face of the first model suggests to me that she is very angry at whoever forced her to wear that contraption.
If I called my husbands attention to these outfits, excluding the yellow number he d say.
“What’s wrong with that ?”
Yes, the first model really looks like she is thinking “Some way, some how I am going to get you for this, you tasteless bastard…”
The monokini picture: fashion commentary and a blow against Islamic censorship, all in one!
I approve.
The monokini picture: I’ll show ’em all a thing or two!
If your ego demands that you go partially naked, might as well be honest, and fashionable about it. That first picture is one of the most remarkably tasteless attempts at fashion I have seen in a while. It makes a rather simple, moderately pretty woman, and misrepresents every moderately attractive feature she has. Then again, who knows how many of her features were carved into her, or otherwise created. Perhaps it fits. Bleh.
Dear me.
1964 was *51* years ago. Just thought you might want the reminder 😉
It’s kind of sad; both of those first two women are quite beautiful; so, why did they choose to distracts from their good looks and make such ugly statements?
The third woman, both a beautiful woman and a great photo! But, yea, I could she why she is tired of talking about it. Fifty years ago it might have gotten her in trouble in some parts of the country and cause a “scandal” in other parts; today it might just produce a yawn. (Except in the Islamic world where it would get her stoned)
In 1964, I was a sailor. I am still a sailor. My only negative thought is that no. 1 and 3 don’t take joy in sharing their beauty with us. (Sigh) maybe I am a little jealous….nobody ever particularly wanted to see me naked.
The yellow dress is stunning if properly accessorized. It should be worn with tassels and a curtain rod.
I remember the Gernreich business. Even though I was a little girl at the time, I remember thinking “well of COURSE he’s going to get into the papers, doing THAT.”
What else did he do besides show off women’s breasts? Can’t recall.
Funny, when I saw the color of the first dress (and before I read neo-neocon’s full commentary), I thought to myself, “Self, what’s wrong with that color? The Lovely Mrs. Firefly would look great in that color.” Then I read the rest. My wife is a redhead.
But yes, aside from the color, the dress is absurd, but nowhere near as absurd as the first one. It seems like some designers hate women.
The rumour is that a lot of fashion designers are homosexuals and they dislike breeders. So anything that makes them less likely to breed is a fashion statement.
The third picture shows a really well-shaped woman who would NEVER be a model today – too “fat”.
Fake boobs have truly distorted the understanding of the female body. If a woman diets too strenuously, she will lose her secondary characteristics. However, today, models diet until they look like a pre-teen boy, then have a surgeon slap on the fake boobs, and – voila! – today’s model – the Boy with Boobs.
But, NO-O-O-O, the gay designers, dressers, and other fashion hangers-on, they don’t want a teen-age boy!
Right.
Women, those with sufficient resources, have been trying to dress well for thousands of years. It would be silly to think there is anything yet undone which would improve on the efforts of…thousands of years.
The upper-class Roman gowns, for example, are classic and can show as much or as little–that’s what imaginations are for–as the wearer desires.
What’s left is outrage to epater les bourgeois and get some ink. And, due to the regression to the mean (classic themes) of clothing which normal women require, the New Thing can only be outrageous and ugly. All the good-looking stuff has been (sniff) done.
#1 is not flattering, and clearly the one wearing it doesn’t flatter it.
#2: Nolanimrod says it well.
#3: Ah yes, I remember it well.
The first outfit looks too small for the model and the second looks too big. The third one looks like somebody cut off the top of a one piece suit.
Neo, have you seen the 72nd Golden Globe red carpet dresses? My absolute favorite, just overall, was Jessica Chastain.
did you see Dunhams dress? i am amazed neo did not put that on the wacko dress list…
feminism… bring out your inner female wacko while trying to act out the worst qualities of men…
if it werent for feminism T&A would not be so prevalent
neither would camel toes, women dressing like barbarella/peter pan/rum bottle pirates…
First, there’s the color, a yellow that almost no one can wear successfully with the possible exception of redheads
looks like someone is peeling back a bannana to see the bruised contents…
too bad i am not gay, i would have a career being a biatch commenting on fashion… heh
Glad you paid the photographers (like me) for using their shots… right? nope… just steal them like everyone else does… (you can see my stuff all over, but no money comes to me!!!!)
Artfldgr,
Neo’s use of these images falls clearly within several Fair Use exceptions of US and international copyright law. Your accusation of theft lacks such protection, and is libel. Apologize. Now.
I will immediately seize your rss feed as I can’t to find your email subscription hyperlink or newsletter
service. Do you’ve any? Kindly allow me recognize in order that I may
subscribe. Thanks.