Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

fashion and glamour for the anorak about town

Moderator: let it ride

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:39 pm

Ok. As much as I adore and enjoy clothes, accessories, make-up and beauty things, and reading about it... there are a lot of people who take it way too seriously. In my opinion, if it's not fun, where's the point? This was my main reason for quitting Vogue. Reading it, not working at it, haha! I thought it was just way too stupid and silly and do I really want to spend my time reading a debate article on Pencil Skirts vs. Ice Skating Skirts (aka flippy short skirts)? No. I do not.

Anyway. A ridiculous article about - you couldn't make it up - the horror of armpits. ARMPITS! I found it on Jezebel

From Jezebel:
Anyway, it's one thing to try and combat perspiration. It's quite another to search for the perfect pit. Dodie Kazanjian penned a piece for August's Vogue titled "Up In Arms," and the subhead says it all: "With all the body parts we've grown to obsess over as we age, should armpits, too, be on the list?" In a word, Vogue says: Yes.

"I first noticed it one hot day in August 1999 on my way to a luncheon party on Long Island. As I studied a map in the car, my eye caught an unsightly bulge of skin peeping out from under my sleeveless blouse, where my left arm joined my chest. That's sort of unattractive, I thought. Over the years, I've obsessed about one part of my body after another — my fat thighs, my nasolabial folds, my elbows — but I guess I wasn't ready for the armpit… I kept noticing the errant bulges, though, and watching them morph, as I passed 50, into flaps of loose skin."

And so, because Ms. Kazanjian is obsessed with her pits, she tries to convince us that other people are, too. She visits famous dermatologist Dr. Patricia Wexler, who indulges her. "Women come to me about this problem all the time," Dr. Wexler says. "They're not called armpits, they're called gludgeons, those fatty things that hang over a strapless gown." Wexler used Thermage (radio-frequency therapy) on her own gludgeons, and recommends it for Kazanjian. Ever the consummate reporter, Kazanjian gets a second opinion from Dr. Haideh Hirmand, who has her head screwed on right. "When you first called me about this," Dr. Hirmand says, "I thought, are you serious?" Hirman goes on to say Kazanjian could have plastic surgery on her folds, but: "Honestly? It's not worth it."

Determined to get someone to share her armpit horror, Kazanjian meets with designer Vera Wang at her Park Avenue duplex, where she gets the mother of all pull quotes:

"Yeah," Vera Wang agrees. "we all know exactly what you're talking about. The armpit is nasty, nasty. Even young girls can have this problem."

Thanks, Vogue. You took a perfectly natural occurrence — skin that connects arms to bodies — and turned it into something "nasty" that even youngsters should worry about. Ladies, we'd better forget our health, our weight, our noses, our thighs, our cleavage and whatever else we think we're supposed to be worried about: Armpit hate is the new hot shit.
INSANE!
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
Gordon
Posts: 5340
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:33 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/GreenGordon
Location: King's Landing
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by Gordon » Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:30 pm

or body dismorphic?
Toot toot.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:39 pm

Yes, but that's the point! The editors should have said "Ah see, this is an obsession that is not very healthy and a body hang-up of your own making, and shouldn't be written about in a "yes it is weird, let's get armpit surgery!" kind of way" instead of "HUZZAH! Armpits are the new thighs!"

I mean, I know a lot of the magazines (and beauty industry in terms of creams and things) are built on people having low confidence and looking for quick fixes to feel or look better, but still. Usually it's not so aggressive on actual body parts.
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
cuppie
Posts: 877
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:12 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/cuppie
Location: Ostrava

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by cuppie » Sat Aug 02, 2008 12:31 am

I love a good armpit. You know, I invented 'glamorak' and I've never gotten any credit for it. Not that I'm fishing for any, no no. The work is enough in itself.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:34 am

Aw, I had no idea! It works nicely.

Oh by the way, this is not like a Go Fug Yourself mocking thread or anything, it's just to go "Are you crazy?" to bizarre people in fashion rather than anyone's outfits or anything.
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
stolenwine
Posts: 2071
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:27 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/stolenwine/
Location: giddy london
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by stolenwine » Sat Aug 02, 2008 11:01 pm

oh god, that is so so so horrible. it's just like when i first read about that surgery where they reshape your er...bits.

i know this is really really lame of me, but the first thing i did after reading this was go and look in the mirror at the "ugly" arm-undearm skin. but then i kind of mentally slapped myself for being so silly.
tell me how good it is / to wake from a bad dream / and have someone there and I will tell you / how butterfly wings stay dry in the rain
--
stolen wine social

User avatar
Miss 9
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:03 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by Miss 9 » Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:58 pm

I am just now watching (for like the 5th time) that MTV "True Life" about compulsive shoppers. I am cursed (gifted?) with such an extreme sense of guilt, it takes me months and months to work up the courage to purchase even a much-desired necessity, so I really, really do not understand these girls who spend hundrededs and thousands of dollars on crap for no reason. Now, some people I think probably do need help, but these girls on MTV? Lazy with absolutely no self-control. And never learned the concept of 'consequences.'

And they don't even look good! They're still wearing Uggs! The clothes they're buying instead of like, electricity make them look so, so gross. And that's what I can't get behind. Grossness for no reason.
Q: I know you are, but what am I?
A: A garbage man.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:32 pm

Haha yeah, "money" style is often like, a trucker cap and a "Jesus is my homeboy" t-shirt. It's like HELLO it's not 2003 and you're not Ashton Kutcher!

While I'm not the best with money, and tend to buy stuff without thinking a lot of the time (for genuinely wanting it though!) I don't think I'd ever accidentally like, have to live on the street (but in cute outfits) or something. I'm not quite that bad.

I've never seen that show though, it isn't shown here it seems! A shame, it would have been quite fascinating I'm sure. And I'd feel kind of guilty about shopping, and then not guilty again because at least I don't shop like that.
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
lynsosaurus
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/
Location: Auld Reekie
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by lynsosaurus » Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:53 pm

i guess it's not strictly in the spirit of the thread, but it made me go "WTF?" and i just do not get this aspect of fashion at ALL. from an article at jezebel.
Designer Jean-Paul Gaultier is one of the highlights of Paris Fashion Week: Love him or loathe him, he always gives the fashion folk something to talk about. But, following last night's Fall 2008 presentation, many in attendance had little to say: Gaultier's audience, in fact, was rendered speechless by his gratuitous, almost pornographic use of fur. Fur appeared in nearly every look sent down the runway, and frequently, the heads and tails of the mammals themselves were still attached to the pelts. "I cannot recall the last time I saw so much fur on a runway," wrote the Washington Post's Robin Givhan on her blog this morning. "I couldn't decide if leaving the head on a stole is a form of brutal honesty or just plain creepy. In all truth, I generally like fur as long as it doesn't come from endangered species. But this was fur overload." Said the Telegraph's Hilary Alexander: "[H]eaps of fox-skins dangled from heads and waists and bags, croc-skins were turned into jackets and mink into scarves. At times, there was so much fur on the catwalk it seemed Gaultier was throwing down a deliberate challenge to PETA."

Jen Melocco of Australia's Daily Telegraph points out that, although Gaultier used furs produced from fur farms, he also used faux fur and pelts reworked from old coats, along with "leather and suede printed to look like fur was also used along genuine and fake fox-heads." But Christina Brinkley of the Wall Street Journal seemed downright traumatized by the animals on parade:

With Catherine Deneuve looking shocked in the front row, enfant terrible designer Jean-Paul Gaultier got our attention with fur. Not sanitized mink and fox coats. He gave us visceral fur: a fox coat with two fox heads swinging back and forth on the model's back — noses, eyes, teeth and all... the only thing missing from his show was a live fox prancing down the runway....[The show's] closer: recorded laughter — a huge wicked madman's laugh that followed the models off the runway.

Whether he meant to use fur as a "fuck you" to PETA — Gaultier's Paris boutique, after all, was one of those targeted by PETA's Ingrid Newkirk, as seen in the HBO documentary I Am An Animal — or as "brutal honesty", we do know one thing: The process of how fur gets made is never pretty. A gallery of selected looks, including captions with what we imagine to be Ingrid Newkirk's response to each, below.

User avatar
Sootyzilla
Posts: 1096
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:31 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/sootyzilla
Location: lounging about at the edge of the dancefloor

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by Sootyzilla » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:02 am

Heaven forbid la-di-da fashion critics should be made to face up to where fur comes from.
As wrong as it was to do,
Those eyes were made to look into.

User avatar
lynsosaurus
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/
Location: Auld Reekie
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by lynsosaurus » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:04 am

Sootyzilla wrote:Heaven forbid la-di-da fashion critics should be made to face up to where fur comes from.
aye, but surely there are better ways to do that than sticking the corpses of animals on models.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:09 am

I don't believe they're all la-di-da, but WTF! I've never been a particular fan of Gaultier but still. Fur pisses me off so much, just as leather products do! I hate when people are like "Mmmmmmmmmmm my new expensive leather purse smells so goooooooooood!", it's like YOU ARE SMELLING SOMEONE'S SKIN!! IT IS NOT MEANT TO BE ON A FUCKING BAG!

I like Stella McCartney for not using animal products at all in her clothing, accessories and cosmetics range. I respect that. But I could never start drooling over designer bags or anything like that, they are always mega leather land.

I hate the idea that fur = decadence/glamour/sophistication.

Faux fur I don't really mind but the idea that it might make someone see it on town, go "Oh that's a nice fur jacket" and want real fur puts me off.
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
lynsosaurus
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/
Location: Auld Reekie
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by lynsosaurus » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:13 am

what light wrote:
I hate the idea that fur = decadence/glamour/sophistication.
exactly! after the actual, you know, CRUELTY aspect, that's what bothers me the most. i feel the same about the whole diamonds thing, too. but i guess if we were to start on the ethics of fashion we'd never stop, right?

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:36 am

No, that's true... but I think it's because fur is so blatantly the result of DEATH that is the actual product, that I can't see how you can make it glamorous in any way. Brrrr.

Ok, this was what it was for? It's horrible (just from a design perspective). As much as I like clothes, I don't understand like 99% of the fashion industry. WHAT? This was worth all the suffering of those poor animals?
All of this played out as Michael Jackson's "Thriller" mingled on the loudspeakers along with the sound of lambs baaing.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
lynsosaurus
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/
Location: Auld Reekie
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by lynsosaurus » Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:47 am

IT DOESN´T EVEN LOOK GOOD! gaultier has his head so far up his own ass it is quite unbelievable. that shit wasn´t cool when it was done before and it's even less cool this time around. and i doubt gaultier did it with any intention of showing where fur comes from and making people aware of it; he did it because he thinks being "shocking" is a substitute for, y'know, actually designing some good shit.

i don't know anything about fashion, mind you, so perhaps i am totally wrong and he's all cutting edge and that.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:01 am

No no, i've stopped caring about the fashion collections as I realised: a) it's pointless as I'm not going to buy anything and b) IT IS POINTLESS. It won't help me to go shop in the high street by going "Ah yes, that is a trend from designer x and z" in any way.

I think Jean Paul Gaultier last was relevant when he did Madonna tour outfits in 1994 or whatever year it was. That shit pointy bra. I remember saying to my sister and her friend (who were 15, I was 8) "For one million kronor, I would wear that!" to show how horrible I thought it was but that I would be willing to see beyond it for one million kronor. Lovely.

Amanda did a funny collage for our blog of the worst collections this year (we've both gone a bit anti it all, some designers do nice, wearable things but it really is just wanky a lot of the time! Translated, for your reading pleasure:
Image

#3: Clicking through Balmain's collection was rather confusing. On one hand, some nice floaty dresses, on the other hand, short, tight trousers in animal print paired with sequin details and fringed shoes? Con-fu-sion! A lot of "rock" and lightning bolts and definitely high ewwww factor. This dress captures all those elements in one. Sequins, zebra print and lightning bolts. Class-ey!

#2: I do not care that Charlize Theron wore this crap for some red carpet event. So many overly sharp lines in a dress! And a slit. Nej, I'd rather do power dressing in a whole other way. NO. There is just not more to say than that.

#1: Congratulations to MJ who got the non-flattering victory! That coat presonifies jazzy old bingo lady and that some people have actually praised that slid down head band fills me with unease. It looks like a slid down sausage. In this case a BABY BLUE slid down sausage. Dare to say no!
Followed by:
Image
Hahaha the first thought in my head as I saw this MJ look for the first time was: "The only person who would wear this and carry it with confidence would be Dorothy from Golden Girls" and look how nice she is looking in it. Here with a black version of the still horrendous head band.
(Sorry, maybe this is just funny to me and Amanda? It made me laugh so much! I'll have to find my equivalents, I think)
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
Miss 9
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:03 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by Miss 9 » Tue Aug 05, 2008 4:58 am

I eat meat and wear leather and have no real opinion on fur because I never see it, but stoles and whatnot with the faces attachted just seem so '50s to me, like something Lucy Ricardo would wear to pull off a fancy caper. And it's not even a good '50s thing like hats, it's a shit '50s thing like racism.

I should clarify about that shopping programme, these girls weren't splurging every now and then: they were not paying bills and getting shit reposessed and begging mommy and daddy and boyfriend for money so they could buy wigs and True Religion jeans they would never wear.
Q: I know you are, but what am I?
A: A garbage man.

User avatar
let it ride
Posts: 2651
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by let it ride » Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:29 am

Yeah, I assumed it was one of those psycho shows where you just sit and point and go "Ohmygod what a freak!" and feel normal yourself!

I kind of want to see it now though.
clear eyes full hearts can't lose

User avatar
Gordon
Posts: 5340
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:33 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/GreenGordon
Location: King's Landing
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by Gordon » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:45 am

Has anyone ever made an evening dress out of a whole fish? That I would (almost) like to see.
Toot toot.

User avatar
lynsosaurus
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm
Last.fm: http://www.last.fm/user/
Location: Auld Reekie
Contact:

Re: Glamorak says: Oh no you DIDN'T!

Post by lynsosaurus » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:47 am

Gordon wrote:Has anyone ever made an evening dress out of a whole fish? That I would (almost) like to see.
it would have to be a REALLY big fish. or a very small person.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest