Just when you thought you had seen it all . . . (Warning: Not for the fainthearted)

[Superfluous]

Maison Martin Margiela 1999

 

[Otter]

Ahhh, "Jacket, Deconstructed", part of the Satchi collection ?

 

[GHT]

It looks like an "after" shot of a cartoon that's been run over by a road roller. The appearance of this is not nearly so bad but the vandalism in the name of art is. Take a razor and make slash marks in all the jackets panels, do it so that there's some geometric uniformity to the damage, call it distressed, like this one,and set an asking price of $1348:98.

 

[Monitor]

Vaguely resembles a cafe racer. Would buy for a high price.

 

[ton312]

All new "full action back". Gentle tug on sleeves and it becomes a vest. Turn your head, collar falls off and you have a belt.
Form fled from function.

 

[Monitor]

Is that... the elastic band, holding the shoulder gussets together?

 

[navetsea]

based on the snap position, it is a women jacket, and probably the wide elastic is worn over breast, so I won't complain

 

[Stand By]

Lordy!!! And on the madness goes.
I just flew out to Utah and had a look-see in the in-flight magazine and I came across an article on the proliferation of "gender-neutral" clothing lines - it's getting big (apparently). In all honesty, I had to read it twice to try and digest it - it was the stuff of parallel world nonsense. But the mass clothing lines are really buying into it.
I kept the magazine for everyone here and I'll try and find a source for it and post a link - otherwise I'll take the time and write it out. It really needs to be read to be believed. And like me, perhaps twice!
It's no wonder I drink.

 

[MisterCairo]

The Fonz meets Edward Scissorhands...

 

[Stand By]

You know how it was in the old Warner Bros. cartoons when an anvil would appear in the sky and drop on someone?
It looks like that happened to it.

 

[Edward]

Lordy!!! And on the madness goes.
I just flew out to Utah and had a look-see in the in-flight magazine and I came across an article on the proliferation of "gender-neutral" clothing lines - it's getting big (apparently). In all honesty, I had to read it twice to try and digest it - it was the stuff of parallel world nonsense. But the mass clothing lines are really buying into it.
I kept the magazine for everyone here and I'll try and find a source for it and post a link - otherwise I'll take the time and write it out. It really needs to be read to be believed. And like me, perhaps twice!
It's no wonder I drink.

Within certain confines, the gender neutral thing makes good economic sense. When you're dealing with "proper" tailoring, you obviously have to treat the male and female forms separately; equally so if you're going for a 'vintage repro' vibe. With so much modern stuff, though, there's no difference. Tracksuits, sweatpants, sweatshirts... things that fit the same whatever, why notg just stack 'em high and let folks buy whiever colours they want? Most of the colours traditionally, and arbitrarily labelled "male" also appeal to women, meanwhile a lot of what folks think of now as "girl colours" have often in histroy been worn by men (pink was a popular colour for males in both the late Victorian period and the 1980s, for instance). Cheaper, more efficient, easier to market.... stacks up. Not going to appeal to me for most things owing to my own tastes in clothing, but I can't honestly imagine not buying a sweatshirt, say, because it was in a 'gender neutral' seciton rather than a 'men's' rail. For as long as the loungewear revolution is the norm, it's a no-brainer.

 

[Stand By]

Within certain confines, the gender neutral thing makes good economic sense. When you're dealing with "proper" tailoring, you obviously have to treat the male and female forms separately; equally so if you're going for a 'vintage repro' vibe. With so much modern stuff, though, there's no difference. Tracksuits, sweatpants, sweatshirts... things that fit the same whatever, why notg just stack 'em high and let folks buy whiever colours they want? Most of the colours traditionally, and arbitrarily labelled "male" also appeal to women, meanwhile a lot of what folks think of now as "girl colours" have often in histroy been worn by men (pink was a popular colour for males in both the late Victorian period and the 1980s, for instance). Cheaper, more efficient, easier to market.... stacks up. Not going to appeal to me for most things owing to my own tastes in clothing, but I can't honestly imagine not buying a sweatshirt, say, because it was in a 'gender neutral' seciton rather than a 'men's' rail. For as long as the loungewear revolution is the norm, it's a no-brainer.

I'm sorry Edward. I've read your reply twice and I still don't understand you.
(I'm laughing - couldn't resist! You know I like you!).

But seriously. Seriously?
Genderfluid is what they call it. Get a load of this from the article - just a snippet:
"Vogue, never one to miss out on a trend, is gushing about how "athletic midriff baring tops" speak "to the ambisexual vibe reverberating in menswear" while pop-culture journal Dazed & Confused is so consumed by all the "pussy-bow blouses, shrunken knits and peekaboo lace" hitting menswear shelves that it suggested that industry fashion weeks should simply go coed. Reveling in the erosion of conventional boundaries, Kanye [West] himself has appeared onstage rocking a black leather Givenchy skirt, which oddly makes him look more macho than Russell Crowe in Gladiator".

Here's another:

"Joining these more rarefied brands are trendy upstarts such as New York-based 1.61, whose slogan is "Utilitarian. Uniform. Unisex." The company makes natty casual-wear outfits, including plain shirts and matching drawstring pants, with a marketing strategy that seems to be pegged to the idea that men and women are equally inclined to shell out a thousand bucks for an outfit you'd wear while reading the Sunday paper".

The rest is no better. I had to take it off the plane to share it. Why should I feel Dazed and Confused alone?

 

[Edward]

Yip. That's the thing... if there's no real difference to speak of between versions, why not just stick it in a pile in the middle and let 'em get on with it? The goth kids have been hip to this for years. I mean... how much gender variation can there be in "draw string pants"? Strip away the marketing speak, and you've got a very simple retail model.

 

[Stand By]

It's marketing and The Next Big Thing. That much I get, Edward!
But that's all.

 

[tropicalbob]

Yip. That's the thing... if there's no real difference to speak of between versions, why not just stick it in a pile in the middle and let 'em get on with it? The goth kids have been hip to this for years. I mean... how much gender variation can there be in "draw string pants"? Strip away the marketing speak, and you've got a very simple retail model.

I'm envisioning a future in which polyesther mu-mu's will be de rigueur. Who wants to be first? C'mon, Edward. "Mucho macho!" as we say here in the steamy tropics.

 

[Stand By]

Meanwhile on another thread, Cuchulain is complaining that his new Aero FQHH jacket is too stiff. Is the modern solution actually "Peekaboo lace" ?

 

[Edward]

I'm envisioning a future in which polyesther mu-mu's will be de rigueur. Who wants to be first? C'mon, Edward. "Mucho macho!" as we say here in the steamy tropics.

Polyester?? Noooo! Otherwise, I'd quite happily wear a mandress.

 

[Edward]

Meanwhile on another thread, Cuchulain is complaining that his new Aero FQHH jacket is too stiff. Is the modern solution actually "Peekaboo lace" ?

Well, everyone has their preferences. It is notable that everyone I've ever heard complain about FQHH being "too heavy" has, I think, been based in the warmer parts of the world, so perhaps that's to do with it. Intersting how even in a world where we such a fixed range of historical fashion interests, though, that fashion still comes and goes - one piece back, multiple piece backs, heavy hide, ight hide, cow, goat, steer, horse.... Vive la difference, I say!

 

[GHT]

I'd quite happily wear a mandress.

Would you like me to ask the missus to run one up for you?

 

[Superfluous]

^ Is that Bruce/Caitlyn?