Turn on thread page Beta

Crimes against style that you've committed... watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Confess your worst offenses against style in this thread.
    I just remembered, back in primary school, everyone was supposed to be either a 'townie' or a 'mosher', and I was wondering what the big deal was. So on a non-uniform day, I went in with my trousers tucked into white socks like a complete townie. I don't think anyone noticed, and I just went around feeling awkward all day.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Oh, I'm sorry.... I didn't realise that style was set in stone?

    Saying that, I have done the socks and sandals thing before. :getmecoat:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I was a proud sporter of the 10-year-old-kid-who's-just-discovered-gel's spiked-up-at-the-front-hair. Quite a while ago now, but I've got a feeling it'll be coming back soon.
    Also, I was amongst the majority at that age who would wear football t-shirts constantly.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Grey stretch-skinny jeans. Quickly learnt to MAN UP.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Oh, I'm sorry.... I didn't realise that style was set in stone?

    Saying that, I have done the socks and sandals thing before. :getmecoat:
    There are some boundaries that are pretty objective, especially if you're a man- men's style is a lot more rules-based and static than women's.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmanoj)
    There are some boundaries that are pretty objective, especially if you're a man- men's style is a lot more rules-based and static than women's.
    I'm not aware of this. Explain.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I've been a hippy and a goth (didn't even like the music, just the clothes). :facepalm: Thankfully both before I was 14.

    Edit: I used go round my estate in a tracksuit when I was younger too. I've done everything awful in fashion.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I wear the same slippersas my dad if that counts.

    Bright yellow short swim shorts, but like them.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Well, some of the clothes my mother used to dress me up in when I was a kid are *not* good. But that wasn't me committing them, so that doesn't count.

    As for myself... I had the emo look for about 6 months. Looking back now, I can believe how ridiculous I must've looked. High-top converse, long stripy socks, tartan skirt, black top, dark make-up and a hell of a lot of wrist accessories. I still have the tartan skirt though - but it looks nice when it's not paired with the rest of the ensemble lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There have been numerous times when I've left the house and 10 minutes down the road realised I should have put something better matching on but didn't have time to go back. Like unthinkingly throwing on black shoes with pale jeans, that kind of thing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    I'm not aware of this. Explain.
    Well, men's style is about fitting into a spectrum or framework with rules that evolve very slowly over time. For example, you could wear a suit cut in a 1930s pattern today and simply look well-dressed or dandyish, not necessarily "vintage" - because today's highest end suits aren't that different from those of the '30s, especially the "drape cut". Minor changes to the spectrum occur straightforwardly enough with the introduction of variations on existing items - for example, it became acceptable to wear a belt with your suit trousers in the '40s, although some men like the Duke of Windsor had been doing it for years beforehand. Major changes generally occur at the extremities, for example by the late '30s, the frock-coat was considered so old-fashioned and stilted that they stopped wearing them even at court. At the other end, over the course of the '50s and '60s, it eventually became stylish (rather than merely fashionable) to wear a t-shirt and jeans.

    My point is that, although style certainly evolves, some things are always just going to look stupid, and will never fit into the classic spectrum or even come near it (eg tucking your trousers into your socks).
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    :eek: T-shirts of the bands I used to listen to.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Hrm well when I was younger I used to dress in leggings and cartoon t-shirts... When I say leggings I mean flowery leggings. Yeah. I blame my mother, she dressed me and I didn't know any better!

    I also had this white blouse and flowery skirt that made me look like a granny..

    OH and tortoiseshell rimmed glasses.

    I was TEH SEX when I was younger. Yep.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Haha, I remember when I was about 12 I used to have one of those neon pink zip up "Punkyfish" tops that had about a zillion zips. This was paired with some horrific baggy jeans from Tammy Girl, plastic beaded bracelets and a handwoven multi-coloured bag from the local "ethnic" shop. Oh dear god. Luckily when I started year 9 I threw it all away and started to get some style!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Until I hit 17 I dressed like a chav. Slicked back hair, trackies and proper fat.

    Explains why I didn't lose my virginity until I was 18 LOL!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Primary School:
    - Dark blue "Cyprus" t-shirt which I was absolutely certain went with everything.

    - Very tight neon lycra t-shirts with cartoon girls on them surrounded by glitter and silly messages.

    Secondary School:
    - Unfortunate goth phase, which involved proper tight-lacing corsets, lots of stripy thigh-high socks with fishnets underneath and endless low-cut black things. Too much black eyeshadow as eyeliner, very very very red lipstick and (unfortunately simultaneously) black and purple braces. A generally bad two years.

    - Relatively acceptable 40s pinup phase, which would have been entirely acceptable if my necklines had been a few inches higher or if I hadn't been 15 at the time. The clothes were all absurdly tight though, I didn't know it was possible to make a pencil skirt look indecent!

    At least I know better now .
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmanoj)
    Well, men's style is about fitting into a spectrum or framework with rules that evolve very slowly over time. For example, you could wear a suit cut in a 1930s pattern today and simply look well-dressed or dandyish, not necessarily "vintage" - because today's highest end suits aren't that different from those of the '30s, especially the "drape cut". Minor changes to the spectrum occur straightforwardly enough with the introduction of variations on existing items - for example, it became acceptable to wear a belt with your suit trousers in the '40s, although some men like the Duke of Windsor had been doing it for years beforehand. Major changes generally occur at the extremities, for example by the late '30s, the frock-coat was considered so old-fashioned and stilted that they stopped wearing them even at court. At the other end, over the course of the '50s and '60s, it eventually became stylish (rather than merely fashionable) to wear a t-shirt and jeans.

    My point is that, although style certainly evolves, some things are always just going to look stupid, and will never fit into the classic spectrum or even come near it (eg tucking your trousers into your socks).
    I guess you have to differentiate between what is 'stylish' according to what the world' fashion houses dictate and 'fashionable' according to what the majority wear. When I was at London Fashion Week a couple of months ago, I remember noting that a male model from Burberry, I believe, did indeed have his trousers tucked into his socks. As ridiculous as that may have looked, I guess it's an indicator that fashion designers are trying to introduce that look into contemporary fashion. However, I take your point that it will probably never fit into the "classic spectrum" of what the average man wears, but if your definition of "stylish" is "what the leading fashion designers are producing," then things get a little more complicated.

    As with your point about men: yes, it's true there is a more limited range of items for men to wear than woman. As a result, though, I think that makes it easier for men to get it right. Because women have such a large range of different 'styles' at their disposal and and an equally narrow base when it comes to what is "accepted," it makes it harder for us to not commit a crime against style, according to the perceptions of the rest of society. I guess it's difficult for men and women to compare their experiences though, seeing as no one (barring transvestites/transsexuals!) has an experience of both male and female fashion.

    Blimey, I never knew style could get so complicated. :eek:

    (Original post by MsAnnThropic)
    Primary School:
    - Dark blue "Cyprus" t-shirt which I was absolutely certain went with everything.

    - Very tight neon lycra t-shirts with cartoon girls on them surrounded by glitter and silly messages.
    I'm not really sure this kind of thing can be called a crime against style. It would seem that most children wear this kind of thing.

    (Original post by MsAnnThropic)
    Secondary School:
    - Unfortunate goth phase, which involved proper tight-lacing corsets, lots of stripy thigh-high socks with fishnets underneath and endless low-cut black things. Too much black eyeshadow as eyeliner, very very very red lipstick and (unfortunately simultaneously) black and purple braces. A generally bad two years.
    I went through this stage too. Although, I have to admit, I still have one of the dresses I bought and I still think it's beautiful. It looked a little like this, just without the handkerchief bit at the bottom:



    (Original post by MsAnnThropic)
    - Relatively acceptable 40s pinup phase, which would have been entirely acceptable if my necklines had been a few inches higher or if I hadn't been 15 at the time. The clothes were all absurdly tight though, I didn't know it was possible to make a pencil skirt look indecent!
    Until you mentioned the indecent pencil skirts etc, I was about to object to this point! The pin up look is great if you get it right.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    My whole 'emo' phase from the age of 12 to 16... everything I wore was so unflattering! To be honest though, I've still got the same attitude towards fashion etc, I've just learnt that you don't need to look like, well, everyone else, to be INDIVIDUAL. >____>
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    knee length flared jeans with knee length stripey socks. OH DEAR
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    I guess you have to differentiate between what is 'stylish' according to what the world' fashion houses dictate and 'fashionable' according to what the majority wear. When I was at London Fashion Week a couple of months ago, I remember noting that a male model from Burberry, I believe, did indeed have his trousers tucked into his socks. As ridiculous as that may have looked, I guess it's an indicator that fashion designers are trying to introduce that look into contemporary fashion. However, I take your point that it will probably never fit into the "classic spectrum" of what the average man wears, but if your definition of "stylish" is "what the leading fashion designers are producing," then things get a little more complicated.

    As with your point about men: yes, it's true there is a more limited range of items for men to wear than woman. As a result, though, I think that makes it easier for men to get it right. Because women have such a large range of different 'styles' at their disposal and and an equally narrow base when it comes to what is "accepted," it makes it harder for us to not commit a crime against style, according to the perceptions of the rest of society. I guess it's difficult for men and women to compare their experiences though, seeing as no one (barring transvestites/transsexuals!) has an experience of both male and female fashion.

    Blimey, I never knew style could get so complicated. :eek:



    I'm not really sure this kind of thing can be called a crime against style. It would seem that most children wear this kind of thing.

    I think your definitions are the wrong way round. Fashions change quickly. Style changes slowly.

    The fashion industry throws lots of ideas out, and some of them catch the imagination of the general populace and become "fashionable". (Some fashions originate in other segments of popular culture of course) Some fashions are good, some are bad. The bad ones get quietly discarded and laughed at 10 years later on "I heart the 80s" shows, the good ones get amalgamated into this theoretical concept of "style".

    No one person defines what is or is not "stylish"; it is a constantly updating concept, and everyone will generally have their own interpretation upon which bits of the entire they wear. An analogy would be to compare individual styles to a form of parole, chosen from the superset of style or langue.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.