Current mood:

Flippant

My Clothes are For Everyone - except YOU.
From a mouse on Wank Report.

High-end fashion blogger, Susie Bubble, tries on an unfortunate creation by Pamela Hogg and posts the photographic results to her blog.

The designer's PR is not amused and demands the pictures be taken down for reasons that change with each discussion.

Defense of the designer ensues. Nasty defense!

http://pipeline.refinery29.com/daily_links/gaga_at_opening_ceremony_paul.php

"Susie Bobble isn't ugly but she's not pretty either. She's an average looking girl who loves above average looking clothes and therein lies the problem.

Message to Ms. Bobble: Make your own clothes from patterns and leave Pam and other talented designer pieces for the more suitable, pretty and slighter girls or women."

Susie pulls down the photos but is hurt and it's not from pulling off the tightest Spandex this side of the Power Rangers.

The imbroglio becomes the talk of the town.

Meow with a side of wank.

ETA: Deena of "Fat Girls Like Nice Clothes Too" has her own hilarious response.

	velvet_mace 2009-06-04 09:48 pm UTC (link)
	Wait. People actually buy those things? I don't think I'll ever understand fashion. Is looking like bad cosplay the goal? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	judyhazeleyes 2009-06-04 10:18 pm UTC (link)
	I've always wondered why the models need to look dead (not just the weight, y'all, the creepy make-up and everything else as well). Apparently, seeing clothes on dead people is supposed to make me think "OMG, I would look SO FANTASTIC in that!!" (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	velvet_mace 2009-06-04 10:39 pm UTC (link)
	I always figured the models were trying to copy the look of the outfit on a coat hanger. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	sarracenia 2009-06-05 12:31 am UTC (link)
	Considering most clothes designers seem to start by sketching their clothes two-dimensionally and absolutely hate the thought of having to make it 3D by accommodating things like boobs and asses, you're probably right! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	_goblin_ 2009-06-05 12:15 am UTC (link)
	Yeah, it's like vapid has become passe; now you have to look soulless. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	adevyish 2009-06-05 09:21 am UTC (link)
	See also, Twilight. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sharps 2009-06-06 12:17 am UTC (link)
	I dunno. The models in the last issue of Glamour I read just looked goofy, possibly a little slow up there. Whatever they are, they aren't what I call pretty. What happened to sweet little smiles? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	khym_chanur 2009-06-05 01:58 am UTC (link)
	Pfft, you're just a plebe. Her customers have the souls of true artistes. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	velvet_mace 2009-06-05 03:43 am UTC (link)
	True true. I have the soul of a hack. I think I'll spend my money on dull things like food and my mortgage and leave these very nuanced bits of eye-gougingly ugly haute couture to those who actually care. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	dragonfangirl 2009-06-06 07:18 pm UTC (link)
	Fashion has always been like this. Anyone can buy and wear clothes that look nice. It takes a special segment of the rich and stupid to go through that and out the other side into hideously ugly. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	velvet_mace 2009-06-06 07:35 pm UTC (link)
	Well what else do they have left to spend their money on? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	dragonfangirl 2009-06-06 08:22 pm UTC (link)
	Exactly. The whole point of fashion is not to resemble anything that sane people might wear so that there's no accidental confusion -- if you see someone wearing something like this you know they must have money coming out of their ass, because who else could waste it on shit like this? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	veleda_k 2009-06-06 09:48 pm UTC (link)
	That... actually explains a lot. I have spent way too much time pondering why designers make clothes that no sane person would ever wear. (Reply to this)(Parent)