March 24, 2017

Saks Fifth Avenue — once a purveyor of sophisticated clothing for women — shows faux-schoolgirl clothes on a model who's much too small for the clothes, so that she looks even tinier than a schoolgirl.

Seen in the sidebar to my blog just now:



Look how oversized everything is, including the very long belt that hangs down to her knees. The girl is sad and stumbling. She looks as though she can barely walk and hardly knows what to think about anything. Her lack of any capacity is symbolized by the absence of visible hands. They're somewhere inside those overlong sleeves.

How can this be how women are now invited to see ourselves? Feeble, vulnerable children.

This makes me want to show you a photo I snapped the other day at the hair salon:

Celebrity feminists in their filmy lingerie

I didn't go out of my way to put those 3 magazines together. That was what was arrayed in front of me: Jennifer Lawrence, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Emma Stone, all posing in thin lingerie. Stone, in particular, looks naked. These are the same movie stars who lecture us about feminism.

108 comments:

rcocean said...

I thought part of feminism was being able to "let it all hang out" if you wanted to.

tcrosse said...

Rag and Bone almost says it all. They left out Hank of Hair.

madAsHell said...

Sak Fifth Avenue

The new Occupy Wall Street slogan? Black Lives Matter, we barely knew you!!

traditionalguy said...

Old Madison Avenue teaching: Sex sells. Actually, seeing that is still true is sort of comforting. Vive La Difference is alive and well in the new Genderless Land.

traditionalguy said...

Isn't that the old Heroin Look. But it is becoming all the rage in New England.

rhhardin said...

It's what will the audience read. There are ads in there.

Feminism is for the NYT audience.

rhhardin said...

Women are, mostly, a bundle of needs, by the way.

Chuck said...

I always like the pictures of Hollywood stars who scold the nation about gun laws, posing with semi-auto pistols aimed at some off-screen person. And always with a menacing, determined expression on their faces. Because, like, they are tough guys who are on the side of justice. Rough justice. That they can enforce, but you should not ever attempt.


Ignorance is Bliss said...

traditionalguy said...

Isn't that the old Heroin Look.

It looks more like the new that thing you slipped into my drink has kicked in, I'm ready to be date raped look.

rhhardin said...

Feminist at the hair salon.

Would be a good cartoon caption.

exiledonmainstreet said...

That weird slouch is how girls who were taller than average in high school used to try to hide their height before they realized that being tall is a good thing.

So much for "stand up straight, hold your head up and be proud!"

BDNYC said...

Sort of like the Fearless Girl statue in downtown NYC ... adult feminists are creaming themselves about a statue of a small girl standing in front of the charging bull statue. So defiant! She's leaning in! She's also stupid or plain suicidal, and also symbolically trying to get in the way of capitalism.

'TreHammer said...

...yeah, baby!...

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"These are the same movie stars who lecture us about feminism."

I've got decent guns and a so-called six pack. I like being being photographed looking hot.

Presumably, according to Althouse, feminist gals shouldn't want to be photographed looking hot.

Her mind is aging. But, that's not, directly, the aging that results in her reoccurring theme re lashing out at young/hot gals.

We all know the one word conclusion that POTUS would use re describing Althouse re this.



Carry on.

mockturtle said...

Hypocrisy, thy name is [leftist] Woman.

YoungHegelian said...

These are the same movie stars who lecture us about feminism.

It's hard enough to get consistency out of scientists & philosophers. You expect it out of movie stars?

All this SJW stuff is just part of their schtick, the lefty equivalent of a WWII actress reminding us all to buy war bonds as we leave the theater.

It's only a problem when you forget that the simulacrum is a simulacrum.

Ken B said...

I had a prof who dressed like that first one, 30 years ago. I called it designer floppy.

madAsHell said...

I'm going to write a book.....I think I'll call it..... "Feminism, and the Cognitive Dissonance of Areola Brown".

Coconuss Network said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Achilles said...

I always liked women's business attire. Probably mostly how the clothes were more of the framing emphasizing the qualities I found attractive.

The uniform thing works for women too.

The clothes in the fashion industry are developed by men who are like most artists. A little off.

Fernandinande said...

These are the same movie stars who lecture us about feminism.

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and caldron bubble.
Cool it with a baboon's blood,
Then the charm is firm and good.

Coconuss Network said...

I just read today about marketing and talking with customers more about what they could lose by not having the product or service, which btw seems to work better for sales vs. what they would gain. So if we feminists would not have the opportunity to see these photos of favorite stars, and their décolleté, do we lose track of our femininity in our life process?

dda6ga dda6ga said...

and Al say they could all use a decent meal...perhaps more than one...

Dust Bunny Queen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

Maybe Meadhouse should move to Lynchburg.

Presumably Liberty U has a beauty parlor degree program w/ a student operated beauty parlor.

There Althouse would be able to get done up w/o exposure to such media, incl the NYT.

Plus imagine the lovely banter. It'd be like her threads where everybody huffs and puffs about the libs!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Feminist are so hypocritical

"How dare you objectify me by my sex and sexuality"
"Look at my tits!"
"I have an all powerful magical vagina, bow down to my lady parts"
"Don't call me a slut"
"Watch our slut walk protest and slutty clothes...and see my tits"
"Hey....my eyes are up here"
Meanwhile..."Check out my tits!!! And doesn't my new ass (ala Kardashian)look great?"

No wonder men have decided to just opt out.

Robin Eatmon said...


From Nordstrom's Website:
Since its 2002 debut in New York, rag & bone has distinguished itself by combining directional, modern design with the British heritage of founders Marcus Wainwright and David Neville. Today, rag & bone has become synonymous with innately wearable clothing that melds classic tailoring with an edgy yet understated New York aesthetic.
The line features a bunch of torn up jeans for Spring...not exactly Ivanka's style.

Big Mike said...

I thought you'd come around to Camille Paglia's point of view sooner or later. What kept you?

Steven Wilson said...

...where all ladders start,
in the foul rag and bone shop of the heart."

W. B. Yeats "The Circus Animals Desertion"

3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...

"No wonder men have decided to just opt out."

Right, it's even worse when gals have me touch there tits and twats.

Thanks for your concern.


Bob said...

Needs a loooong jacket.

rehajm said...

Meh. 'Boyfriend' sweater is a staple. The floppy skirt and belt just continues a theme.

Sack Fifth Avenue.

CJ said...

I personally think the "oversized" look has the exact effect intended: Disinterested and rich.

That's a pretty desired look, isn't it? I've got it and I don't care.

rcocean said...

The cover pictures certainly are airbrushed. How old is Paltrow in real life? 50?

CJ said...

@DBQ - Well said and funny.

Darrell said...

The only thing wrong about Jennifer Lawrence, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Emma Stone is that they've been sucking from the font of Socialism. Like the charming story Keira Knightley tells about when her 18-month-old child said the F word when they announced Donald Trump had been elected President.

johns said...

I read Thorstein Veblen when I was about 23. I loved his description of how women signaled that they did not do manual work--by having long shiny fingernails, high heels, etc. They distinguished themselves from the working class in an unmistakable way. Women also signal that they do not perform any useful function by wearing totally impractical clothing. In "It's My Turn", Michael Douglas is playing foosball with Jill Clayburgh, and she is getting her clothing entangled in the game. Douglas says "why do you wear such dumb clothes?"
So what message are the women on these mag covers trying to send? It certainly conveys weakness and vulnerability, but why that is so attractive to women is beyond me.

William said...

The "very long belt that hangs down to her knees" is an allusion to Donald Trump's tie that hangs below his belt. It's a phallic symbol. When women sport phallic symbols, they are empowered. When men do so, they are insecure.......I'm supportive of women's wish to wear lingerie on magazine covers. For movie stars, lingerie is like a pin stripe suit for corporate execs. These women are the heads of multi-million dollar businesses (i.e. their stardom), and they dress for success.......The current Jennifer Lawrence movie, Passengers, is ok. She runs around a lot in a tight t-shirt.

Etienne said...

At my age I have very little interest in "style" for the sake of style.

It's a tough business. Just try and sell 300,000 magazines a month. It's not for the faint. You have to look at this stuff in the eyes of an 18 year old girl.

My daughter, who is 25 now, has grown out of the need to follow the latest styles, or the latest artsy fartsy stuff. Her biggest interest lately has been ear rings. She likes the little toys, so right now she is wearing little tiny sun glasses ear rings. I actually find this cute and stylish. Not so the Japanese schoolgirl look.

So I guess from age 30 on, we just don't have the capability to understand this crap.

Live and let live...

damikesc said...

Presumably, according to Althouse, feminist gals shouldn't want to be photographed looking hot.

They seem perturbed that OTHER women want to look hot. They are hypocritical, no? If the male gaze is "problematic", dressing in a way to attract it should be no better.

JohnAnnArbor said...

tcrosse: "Rag and Bone almost says it all."

Yeah, she's all bones, and dressed in oversized rags, like a death-camp inmate.

damikesc said...

And what cruel person convinced Gwyneth Paltrow she was sexy? That was a mean joke. Up there with the vicious person who convinced Sarah Jessica Parker she was hot.

Donald Douglas said...

Althouse, it's "Saks." You're a language maven, so I'm surprised.

AprilApple said...

Preppy Les Mis

n.n said...

She appears reckless, which matches the chauvinist theme: no consequences. Don't strive. Accept... lower expectations. Perhaps a dissonant view promoted by progressive confusion in an amoral society.

Ann Althouse said...

"Old Madison Avenue teaching: Sex sells. "

Re the Saks ad then, pedophilia.

She's made to look like a schoolgirl, then further diminished.

Re the 3 movie stars: a woman, at least. At her most blandly pliable, in the case of Stone.

The question on the Bazaar cover is: What's sexy today?

I'm reading the answer as: weak, unformed, useless women.

Just about the opposite of feminism.

And I wonder what men, if any, are implied? Rapists or weaklings? Not anyone worth having. And I am saying that as someone who remembers how I felt at all different ages, for those of you inclined to take the cheapest shots at me.

TWW said...

Mrs. Meade: You reached the finish line but couldn't pull the trigger. The advertisement is a form of pornography. It's pornographic because it presents women as a cliché, an inaccurate stereotype. It presumes to say, "this is who I am or to whom I aspire, not to men but to other women.

Henry said...

In her defense, Emma Stone is just dressing down for the Climate Crisis.

Yancey Ward said...

Steve Wilson beat me to it. Raving sluts at the till.

Yancey Ward said...

Bob wrote:

"Needs a loooong jacket"

And a white Chrysler Lebaron?

robother said...

Its still cold season in NYC. Those extra long sleeves cover up the hands and double as nose-wipes, which can be turned back into cuffs. Plus, my mother would approve of a young woman buying clothes with "room to grow." A return to practicality in fashion should be praised, not buried.

PB said...

Michael J Fox sleeves from Back to the Future II

exiledonmainstreet said...

It certainly conveys weakness and vulnerability, but why that is so attractive to women is beyond me.

3/24/17, 11:34 AM

It's not attractive to me, but if you are a pussy hat wearer who wants the government to pay for your contraceptives, abortions and checkups and blames all your problems on white male privilege, then looking like a victim is attractive, I guess. And Thorstein Veblen would recognize that that is definitely a look only privileged women, women who actually feel pretty secure in their own little bubbles, can pull off. A blue collar or inner city woman knows that looking weak is asking for trouble.

mockturtle said...

And women will flock to Saks to buy this crap but don't want to pay for their mammograms.

mockturtle said...

As an early teenager I used to pore through Vogue--this was back in the early 60' and I think my mother subscribed--drooling over the sleek sophistication of models who looked like Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast at Tiffany's and think that was how I wanted to look when I 'grew up'. Instead, after a brief flirtation with the British 'mod' look, I turned hippie and wore jeans and an old army fatigue jacket much of the time. And, aside from the bad ideology, those were some of the happiest days of my life.

Static Ping said...

The schoolgirl look is a turn on for a lot of men. This was the sort of things girls were wearing when the men hit puberty so it has a definite sexual vibe to it. It does help that the girls were either trying to look good, or they were wearing a school uniform and school uniforms tend to be aesthetically pleasing.

The Rag & Bone picture looks like a 10-year-old trying on her older sister's clothes. I'm not sure what their expected target audience is supposed to be. It certainly isn't me.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said...That was what was arrayed in front of me: Jennifer Lawrence, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Emma Stone, all posing in thin lingerie. Stone, in particular, looks naked. These are the same movie stars who lecture us about feminism.

Oh dear, that's high-level slutshaming, Professor A. I am glad you've retired, otherwise the protests would be deafening.

Geez, think of the terrible rhymes and chants they'd come up with!

Today I saw the clip of people protesting Murray at Columbia, with "Charles Murray you can't hide / we charge you with genocide!" which is stunningly stupid--which race of people did Murray kill, again?

Just off the top of my head you've got louse, mouse, grouse, spouse, slaughterhouse...it could have been rough.

Static Ping said...

Looking at the other comments, the target audience for the Rag & Bone girl is someone who feels like a victim. If you haven't heard, playing the victim is popular these days.

Virgil Hilts said...

That look reminds me of Vashti Bunyan and the Train Song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AGD78mWcss

Bob Loblaw said...

How can this be how women are now invited to see ourselves? Feeble, vulnerable children.

You're invited to see yourself as wealthy enough to dress in a way that precludes any sort of labor. This is as much about class as it is about sex.

The outfit itself is ugly, but then again I never find the expensive brands attractive. It seems like making sure everyone knows how much money you spent is more important than how it actually looks. Women's fashion is the ultimate expression of planned obsolescence - whether you wear it or not you're going to be getting rid of it in three months. The bad posture takes an ugly outfit and makes it a bit worse.

Of the three magazines, only Rolling Stone is going to have very many male readers . I'm not sure if the point of the other two is to provoke arousal in women or more "buy this magazine and you'll look like me".

Sacto Dave said...

It's kind of sad to see intelligent? highly ambitious women reduced to not much more than high class strippers. Jennifer Lawrence and Emma Stone, particularly, are wonderful actresses yet in magazines and red carpet affairs they're expected to show T&A. Sad! as President Trump would say.

Rag and Bone - it fits.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Static Ping said...The Rag & Bone picture looks like a 10-year-old trying on her older sister's clothes. I'm not sure what their expected target audience is supposed to be. It certainly isn't me.

In fairness, though, how many runway "looks" are actually themselves all that attractive? I mean for all the complaining the Project Runway judges used to to about this or that looking to "costumey" it seems to me that very little of what we (general audience non-fashion people) see of designer looks is pretty far removed from actual, wearable clothing...and lots of those outfits are pretty unattractive.

I mean, I agree the Saks look is bad, unattractive, and not pleasing even just as art. I guess I'd say that to my male eye that's also true of a lot of runway outfits/designer clothes.

Ann Althouse said...She looks as though she can barely walk and hardly knows what to think about anything.

Sure, but lots of designer looks are paired with ridiculous shoes in which normal women can "barely walk."
Example the first

Example Part 2: The Wobble Strikes Back

I agree that the Saks outfit is impractical and unappealing, but I don't that that's all that rare with designer clothing (what I see of it, anyway).
I agree that the magazine covers you featured show pretty bland, boring style/looks for the women featured, but on the other hand someone like Emma Stone is attractive enough that she can probably get by with a look like that (assuming it's sexy enough).
I'm a bit jealous of your freedom and ability to link those things to a critique of modern feminism/people who call themselves feminists--if I tried that I'd be chased through the streets and whipped.

Laslo Spatula said...

The 'Schoolgirl Outfit' enables the Older Male to know that he is not molesting a girl, but rather EDUCATING her.

The clothing indicates she is in School: abstracted through Society, she is in School to become a Woman. As such, there are some lessons Young Girls cannot learn in that School without the Proper Instruction of an Older Man: she is ASKING to be Taught.

The oversized nature of the clothing indicates the disparity of the Girl from the Woman she will become: thus, it becomes a visual request for Guidance. Older Men can provide this Guidance. Oh yes: he can teach her that it is what is UNDER the clothing that matters, but that it is OK to leave the skirt on, anyway, because that's Hot.

This also applies to CATHOLIC Schoolgirl Outfits: even more so, because the Presence of Catholic Guilt is very sexy, and after sex you can do ten 'Hail Mary's' together, naked.

I am Laslo.

Fernandinande said...

"schoolgirl.tiff is a jpg file with an incorrect extension."

"Jennifer Lawrence, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Emma Stone"

I couldn't/wouldn't recognize any of them and my thought at the pic of the three magazines was "three standard actress/model-types on magazine covers".

"Double, double toil and trouble"
THREE, get it? 3! III!

Martin said...

There is something very weird going on among certain groups of elite or wannabe-elite women--aggressive misandry and subtle lesbian overtones in speech and politicized opinions, accompanied by the kind of sexualized innocence and helplessness Ann points to and epitomized by the popularity of 50 Shades of Grey, and especially intolerance toward Western values they claim to care about, while supporting and excusing barbaric anti-female practices if they can be in any way associated with Islam (I'm thinking female genital mutilation and honor killings, but there's plenty other, less violent, things).

The whole thing is very strange and I do not pretend to understand why, but these traits are indisputable, and the internal contradictions suggest this does not end well.

AlbertAnonymous said...

DBQ is right on here.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, sums up current social media/culture nicely.....

"Look at me! Look at me! But don't judge me..... Bigot!"

AprilApple said...

Mockturtle @ 12:12

You nailed it. Progressive women can afford all sorts of things, but they cannot fathom paying for their own health care. They can fund a vacation or some fancy new clothes - but they cannot find any money for something self-reliant.

hombre said...

Don't I remember feminism going to eliminate the perception of women as sex objects?

Perhaps that was to be accomplished through the feminization of men. Speaking as one of the old dogs who hasn't been feminized and who is familiar with the public presentation of the leftmost two of these three women, I don't see their appeal other than as sex objects.

As for the model in schoolgirl attire, perhaps that reflects the age group that appeals to feminized men.

raf said...

Etienne: the Japanese schoolgirl look.

So, just a different style of porn look

Kirk Parker said...

This post needs a Fen's Law tag.

Crazy Jane said...

It's odd that Madonna's brazen sexuality gave way to slut walks (taking control, and don't you dare judge me!) and then to fighting the patriarchy and assertions of rape culture on campuses where, now, being expected to read Ovid's Metamorphoses can be triggering and give a young woman the vapors. Dangerous stuff, that reading.

Freud asked the essential question: What do women want? So far, nobody has come up with a coherent answer.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"epitomized by the popularity of 50 Shades of Grey, and especially intolerance toward Western values they claim to care about, while supporting and excusing barbaric anti-female practices if they can be in any way associated with Islam (I'm thinking female genital mutilation and honor killings, but there's plenty other, less violent, things)."

Indeed, I've started to wonder if some of these women don't secretly long to be shoved in a burka and ordered about and beaten by Muslim husbands, who, as nasty as they might be, are preferable to their effete wishy washy feminist husbands and boyfriends. It's like the more they demand subservience from Western men, the greater the contempt they hold for such men.

I dunno. It's as much of a mystery to me as it is to you guys.

Matt said...

Who says feminism can't be about being sexy? Do you expect feminists to only be the way Rush Limbaugh describes them? The point of feminism isn't telling people not to adhere to sexual stereotypes or play into the patriarchal structure. Feminism is about telling women that they shouldn’t feel obligated to follow certain paths or adhere to what might be deemed anti-feminist.

damikesc said...

It's kind of sad to see intelligent? highly ambitious women reduced to not much more than high class strippers. Jennifer Lawrence and Emma Stone, particularly, are wonderful actresses yet in magazines and red carpet affairs they're expected to show T&A. Sad! as President Trump would say.

Hollywood actresses who are feminists are endlessly hilarious. Watching actresses who are upset that their tits aren't enough to get them jobs (Heather Graham, for example) bemoan the misogyny of Hollywood is a hoot.

Young actresses in Hollywood get roles not due to any special talent but simply because they're hot. When the looks fade, so do their roles.

You nailed it. Progressive women can afford all sorts of things, but they cannot fathom paying for their own health care. They can fund a vacation or some fancy new clothes - but they cannot find any money for something self-reliant.

Vacations won't pay for themselves.

My wife finds modern feminism insulting in almost every possible way to women. They lower women to being solely vaginas and boobs to appease trannies. They assume women are thoroughly incapable of any off-color jokes in a way that'd make Victorians blush. They assume that women who don't think as they do are idiots.

Most of the women I know in their 30's or lower loathe feminism.

damikesc said...

Who says feminism can't be about being sexy? Do you expect feminists to only be the way Rush Limbaugh describes them?

The "male gaze" is "demeaning" to women. Feminists are hardly fond of beauty. Even less fond of sex.

Feminism is about telling women that they shouldn’t feel obligated to follow certain paths or adhere to what might be deemed anti-feminist.

Except they get quite upset when women don't follow their prescribed paths.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"Young actresses in Hollywood get roles not due to any special talent but simply because they're hot."

I imagine the casting couches are still operative, as well.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Feminism is about telling women that they shouldn’t feel obligated to follow certain paths or adhere to what might be deemed anti-feminist"

Oh sure. That's why feminists embraced Sarah Palin and are so proud of Kelly Anne Conway's achievements.

When you are a conservative woman, you find out very quickly that feminists don't consider you a "real woman."

AprilApple said...

Real women don't vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hari said...

"I love the Saks Fifth Avenue. I have been shopping it for 50 years. I'm begging it to go straight."

Krumhorn said...

I've never seen feminism as anything other than a quest for power. When reduced to the basics, virtually every moral crusade today, whether it's Black Lives Matter, campus rape, gender issues, or hate crimes, is about power and nothing more. There is no point in looking for consistency in feminist theory and the conduct of the loudest proponents unless examined in the context of power.

Female sexuality is very powerful. Not only does it affect the behavior of others, it rakes in the dough. Pounding the table about equal treatment of women has the power to raise their pay when you are Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone and Paltrow. Similarly, campus rape issues loudly and repeatedly proclaimed, force men to ask permission, back off, bow to unacceptable risks, yield up the patriarchy, give up white privilege....in a word...submit.

None of this has any internal virtue, but it does change the power dynamics. ultimately, that's the objective.

- Krumhorn

Bob Loblaw said...

Feminism is about telling women that they shouldn’t feel obligated to follow certain paths or adhere to what might be deemed anti-feminist.

It's also about telling women who aren't sufficiently feminist they had better damn well toe the line. And wasn't there just an op-ed in the Guardian that said women should be required to work as soon as their children are in school? Bunch of lovely people.

johns said...

Matt said:
Feminism is about telling women that they shouldn’t feel obligated to follow certain paths or adhere to what might be deemed anti-feminist.

Holy crap, Matt. Did you fall asleep sometime in the 1980s? You shouldn't comment on internet blogs until you have been awake long enough to see what feminism has become.

Darrell said...

Feminism was the womens' auxiliary of the Left, nothing more. Destroying from within so that the Left could take control of the Capitalist West.

Freeman Hunt said...

Rag and Bone price points are aimed at upper middle class shoppers. Looks like the look is aspirational, the goal is to appear as though one need not do anything, like one has people for that, and that one is well-placed enough that appearance doesn't matter or can even be poorly done on purpose.

Freeman Hunt said...

It's actually a pretty interesting example brand. You can a good idea of the available clothes and prices here. What makes it interesting is that at those prices, the clothes are not as flattering or interesting as you would expect, almost as if the message is supposed to be, "I have enough money to waste money on purposely mediocre clothes."

mockturtle said...

Indeed, I've started to wonder if some of these women don't secretly long to be shoved in a burka and ordered about and beaten by Muslim husbands, who, as nasty as they might be, are preferable to their effete wishy washy feminist husbands and boyfriends. It's like the more they demand subservience from Western men, the greater the contempt they hold for such men.

I wonder that, too, Exiled. Maybe they fantasize about being abducted by some sheik, like in old silent Rudolf Valentino movies.

khesanh0802 said...

I often think that fashion designers and sellers hate women. Otherwise why would they make them look ugly and like fools?

Krumhorn said...

By the way, once again, Laslo hit it out into the bay.

a visual request for Guidance

Priceless!

- Krumhorn

Peter said...

The model looks like an older version of the flies-in-the-eyes girls one sees on charity solicitations.

Are we supposed to feel bad for her? If so, is the sales pitch that if you look like this then people will bad and will then want to do things for you so they can feel good again?

What's the pitch?

Todd said...

Robin Eatmon said...

From Nordstrom's Website:
Since its 2002 debut in New York, rag & bone has distinguished itself by combining directional, modern design with the British heritage of founders Marcus Wainwright and David Neville. Today, rag & bone has become synonymous with innately wearable clothing that melds classic tailoring with an edgy yet understated New York aesthetic.
The line features a bunch of torn up jeans for Spring...not exactly Ivanka's style.

3/24/17, 11:22 AM


Holy crap! I thought the "rag & bone" tag on the photo was a spoof! "rag" for what the model was wearing and "bone" cause she was just skin and... It is a real "brand"? WOW, just wow.

mockturtle said...

khesan muses: I often think that fashion designers and sellers hate women. Otherwise why would they make them look ugly and like fools?

They probably chuckle to themselves over a bottle of Dom Pérignon about what monstrosities they will get women to fall for this season.

Bob Loblaw said...

It's actually a pretty interesting example brand. You can a good idea of the available clothes and prices here.

$200 for torn cut-offs? Maybe we have too much money as a people.

David53 said...

Heh, I googled images "skip williamson agnew fart" and Althouse's hair salon photo of magazines was on the second row.

William said...

I was hoping that this thread would turn into an in depth discussion of Jennifer Lawrence's feminism. In her current movie, Passengers, she does not save the world. Instead, she helps her boyfriend save the world. She's brave and heroic, but her boyfriend does most of the heavy lifting, Is this a step back from the feminism of her more dominant role in Hunger Games? Beyond this, some of the outfits she wore in this movie were more seductive than anything she wore in the Hunger Games......I think if you want to see the direction in which feminism is headed, you should watch Jennifer Lawrence movies and pay attention to the outfits that she wears.

Ann Althouse said...

"Althouse, it's "Saks." You're a language maven, so I'm surprised."

Sorry. Just didn't see the typo. Thanks for pointing it out, but it's not surprising.

David said...

The appeal of young women is their robust good health. That girl looks sick unto death. Help her, Obi-wan, you are her only hope. Or a couple of weeks consuming milkshakes and cheeseburgers.

readering said...

Saks is signaling to shoppers, don't worry our clothes will fit you since they're too big for the waifish model.

Bill Peschel said...

Todd wrote: Holy crap! I thought the "rag & bone" tag on the photo was a spoof! "rag" for what the model was wearing and "bone" cause she was just skin and... It is a real "brand"? WOW, just wow.

I thought the same thing the first time I was "Derilique" from Zoolander hit the Fifth Avenue runways.

And every couple of years after that.

I pity young feminists. Their politics tell them they should act one way, their hormones another. They're not supposed to dress to attract men, thereby denying themselves the means by which they fulfill their evolutionary function. Feminism promises sex with no consequences, until they learn the failure rate of birth control and condoms. Celebrities demonstrate they can delay motherhood until their 40s, forgetting that they may not conceive by that time (and the celebs either have surrogates or use IVF).

By the time they learn, it's too late.


No wonder they're so irrational and hateful.

Oso Negro said...

More Althouse Agonistes. Not only is the New York Times a rag, but feminism is a big put on.

buwaya said...

This is not a safe subject for any man, comments on ladies fashion, but, taking my life in my hands -

Perhaps oversize clothes are a way to create a feeling of being thin?

walter said...

Free the nipple!

Steven Davis said...

Lazlo gets some run, but certainly not in the direction or distance I would expect. I'm always impressed.

Rae said...

She looks like she's resigned herself to seeing penis in the girls bathroom.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

These days most of the lectures on feminism I get are here at Althouse. Jennifer Lawrence is wearing a dress not lingerie on that Vanity Fair cover. While she's the highest paid actress in Hollywood these days, Melissa McCarthy is second. No Melissa McCarthy covers at the hair salon?

CWJ said...

You don't have daughters. I have 8. Perhaps surprisingly I can talk to them not just about this look, but what any of them have in mind if they adopted it.

Fred Drinkwater said...

Your daughters need a role model? Forget those dames on the magazines. How about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_K._Lee

Probably the classiest & sharpest-minded person I ever had the pleasure to meet.

Fred Drinkwater said...

Or another of my perennial favorites, Senior Research Engineer on the SR-71 Blackbird
https://www.facebook.com/maryfshafer

Gahrie said...

When are chokers coming back..I miss chokers.

Oh..and thigh high leather boots too...