Accessorization is challenging. I know it is. And adding yet another consideration to the outfit-construction pile might make you want to say, “Forget it. I shall wear the same stud earrings until they become one with my lobes, refuse to swap out my necklace, and ignore the existence of belts and scarves.” But I’m hoping this particular discussion will be more intuitively helpful than irritatingly overwhelming.
So we’ve talked about belting, and the practice of determining which belt width will work for your height, figure, and torso length. (Links below.) But accessory scale goes beyond belts, and understanding it will help your outfit accents work harmoniously with your overall look.
Originally posted 2013-11-04 06:36:52.
This post has been brewing in the deep, dark recesses of my brain for ages. I’d like to say all that brewing means it’s now fully fermented, but that is yet to be seen. Nevertheless, I wanted to open a discussion about consumer expectations and market reality because I hear many of the same complaints and questions from readers, clients, friends, and family. And I’m betting many of you do, too, and have opinions and insights to share! Here are the main concerns I hear voiced:
- It frustrates me that many of the stores I love don’t make or stock my sizes.
- The stuff is gorgeous, but it’s just too expensive.
- So many clothing companies use shady labor and production practices.
- I want to support my local economy, but it can be so hard to find items that are made in my home country, state, or city.
- I love how cheap this is, but it falls apart after a few wears.
All valid complaints aligned with certain needs, wants, values, and expectations. And yet the current fashion marketplace cannot deliver on all of them. Not with current economic conditions, not for all of us, not all the time, and especially not if you want more than one of those concerns to be addressed simultaneously. I’ve put together the Venn Diagram that floats through my mind when I hear folks registering these concerns in multiples. I’m using my own knowledge and research to back this up, but will also set you up with some links to helpful resources at the end of this post. Now let’s dig in.
Originally posted 2013-11-01 06:14:23.
I talk a lot about traditional figure flattery. In no small part because that’s what you folks tell me interests you, and because the questions you have are typically very specific and include topics not covered by style books and magazines. I find it fascinating to learn about the challenges you face in dressing your personal best, and love to explore options with you.
I’m also fascinated by the F*ck Flattering movement which was more or less sparked by a tee shirt designed by Gisela Ramirez, and have read with interest the responses to this conscious rebellion against fashion rules and dressing norms. In common use, “flattering” means something that “makes your body appear tall, thin, balanced, and hourglass-shaped.” It also implies limiting jiggle, covering cellulite, wrinkles, and scars, keeping a large bust in check, and lots of control-related mandates. Traditional ideas of figure flattery are rooted in a very narrow beauty ideal, tied to the male gaze and heteronormativity, and extremely exclusionary. Looking past the obvious sizeism, consider that some petite women will never appear tall and some thin women will never appear hourglassy. “Flattering,” in common use, tries to force a marvelously diverse population of women into a very specific idealized shape.
Originally posted 2013-07-22 06:02:00.