foxgal , you are really mean ! I love that
So that's what it's called ! If it's out now , I can try it
Being "on trend".. Why??
- Thread starter Shelby33
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
foxgal , you are really mean ! I love that
So that's what it's called ! If it's out now , I can try it
I'm not the most fashion forward person but I thought I was getting away with itLiterally lol'd when I read this
.By the way I love your user name!
Oh for goodness sake! 
In 2025 can’t we just have the grace to accept that whatever people decide to wear is OK? Far be it from me to loose sleep over the length of some ladies pants!
Be kind!
In 2025 can’t we just have the grace to accept that whatever people decide to wear is OK? Far be it from me to loose sleep over the length of some ladies pants!
Be kind!
Agree, this thread showed up on the recent posts feed and dang I'm surprised at how mean some of these comments are! Not everyone cares about being fashionable or on trend, or can afford to update their wardrobe constantly. I see people dressed like this all the time and have never given it a second thought.Oh for goodness sake!
In 2025 can’t we just have the grace to accept that whatever people decide to wear is OK? Far be it from me to loose sleep over the length of some ladies pants!
Be kind!
I just came from a meeting with my peers, all but two of whom are over 60, and all but one of whom dressed like the image shared by @foxgal. It’s the uniform for the fashion-disinterested middle to upper middle class American woman who doesn’t live in a major urban environment. Appropriate without being fussy, and reasonably comfortable.
I don’t know where I got the quote, but someone wrote “Trends are uniforms for the young.” And while I think that may be a little harsh, how we dress reflects where we fit or aspire to fit in our community
Over the last two weeks, I’ve read Sajid’s article about “Trend Cycles getting Shorter” and the accompanying hyperlinks. And “Empresses of Seventh Avenue” by Nancy MacDonell (brilliant book, btw, focused on the development of New York fashion) And the GemFlix lecture “How to Wear It: Vintage Jewelry Style” by Christine Cheng. And someone recently recommended David Kibbe’s 2025 book, (the Power of Style) so I’m about a chapter into that.
In Cheng’s lecture, she used Mikey Madison as one example - on the press tours for “Anora”, she deliberately dressed in a very elegant vintage-inspired wardrobe to contrast with her character. She was demonstrating that she was nothing like her brash, contemporary heroine, and so her performance was due to excellent acting.
And of course, Sajid’s discussion of “starter packs”, Heidi Boys and Performative Males reminded me of the Punks and Grunge of my own misspent youth. When Vulture did an article ten years ago about “where have all the Hipsters gone,” the quote I still remember was “You either died a punk, or you lived long enough to be rockabilly.” Community members levels of responsibility and interdependence changes over time. Likewise, small groups identities are commercialized for the trend cycle, which means that as they are consumable, anti-consumption group’s members distance themselves from their former aesthetic.
“Empresses” took a chapter to talk about about Louis XIV and Empress Eugenie, and how prior to the Fall of Paris, Americans copied French styles - directly, in many cases, as Chanel, and Delong, and Scarpielli would license gowns to be copied by American garment factories - and the huge number of gowns that weren’t licensed but were copied. Two of the things that stuck with me from that book that I think are relevant. 1) French fashion as an industry was created by Jean-Baptiste Colbert (XIV’s minister of finance) to increase taxation and to both engage women in commerce (women weren’t allowed in the older guild system, but could make “casual” mantuas under the new system - and paid taxes on what they made,) 2) families would lose influence in the court of Napoleon III if a woman’s gown was considered out of mode, which leads me to the conclusion that 3) the origins of trends are fear of not belonging.
Forgive me for rambling, but I have a Lot of Thoughts.
The “Jersey knit and cropped pants” women have found clothes that align with the values of their group, and are no less stylish than the head-to-toe trendy young adult.
Trends are in some ways, anti-style, because they are submerging the individual identity into the group identity
I don’t know where I got the quote, but someone wrote “Trends are uniforms for the young.” And while I think that may be a little harsh, how we dress reflects where we fit or aspire to fit in our community
Over the last two weeks, I’ve read Sajid’s article about “Trend Cycles getting Shorter” and the accompanying hyperlinks. And “Empresses of Seventh Avenue” by Nancy MacDonell (brilliant book, btw, focused on the development of New York fashion) And the GemFlix lecture “How to Wear It: Vintage Jewelry Style” by Christine Cheng. And someone recently recommended David Kibbe’s 2025 book, (the Power of Style) so I’m about a chapter into that.
In Cheng’s lecture, she used Mikey Madison as one example - on the press tours for “Anora”, she deliberately dressed in a very elegant vintage-inspired wardrobe to contrast with her character. She was demonstrating that she was nothing like her brash, contemporary heroine, and so her performance was due to excellent acting.
And of course, Sajid’s discussion of “starter packs”, Heidi Boys and Performative Males reminded me of the Punks and Grunge of my own misspent youth. When Vulture did an article ten years ago about “where have all the Hipsters gone,” the quote I still remember was “You either died a punk, or you lived long enough to be rockabilly.” Community members levels of responsibility and interdependence changes over time. Likewise, small groups identities are commercialized for the trend cycle, which means that as they are consumable, anti-consumption group’s members distance themselves from their former aesthetic.
“Empresses” took a chapter to talk about about Louis XIV and Empress Eugenie, and how prior to the Fall of Paris, Americans copied French styles - directly, in many cases, as Chanel, and Delong, and Scarpielli would license gowns to be copied by American garment factories - and the huge number of gowns that weren’t licensed but were copied. Two of the things that stuck with me from that book that I think are relevant. 1) French fashion as an industry was created by Jean-Baptiste Colbert (XIV’s minister of finance) to increase taxation and to both engage women in commerce (women weren’t allowed in the older guild system, but could make “casual” mantuas under the new system - and paid taxes on what they made,) 2) families would lose influence in the court of Napoleon III if a woman’s gown was considered out of mode, which leads me to the conclusion that 3) the origins of trends are fear of not belonging.
Forgive me for rambling, but I have a Lot of Thoughts.
The “Jersey knit and cropped pants” women have found clothes that align with the values of their group, and are no less stylish than the head-to-toe trendy young adult.
Trends are in some ways, anti-style, because they are submerging the individual identity into the group identity
All the points you make are valid, except that the criticism of the "Jersey Knit and Cropped pants" uniform as you put it has very little to do with a comment on it as a passé trend and everything to do with it being a singularly unflattering style on anyone over a certain age except the rare specimen that maintained the measurements of a very younger self. As a uniform it maybe comfortable, but it is also unforgiving in its lack of shape and imagination. And while fashion trends are in many cases superfluous and ever more transient, style is not. One's style speaks to one's character, imagination and lust for life, and if one wears what is comfortable without thought or consideration to whether it compliments or detracts from one's appearance, it says something imo (I will leave it to you to decide what that may be).
Each to their own of course, but I for one believe that it possible to wear what is both comfortable and flattering at any age, any living environment, and at any economic level.
Trends maybe for the young, but fashion is for everyone.
This just doesn't interest some (a lot) of people. Plus, what's flattering to a 50-year old in Miami is probably a totally different vibe to a 50-year old in rural Mississippi.
While style is important to you, and probably many of us at TPF, I'd assume a huge part of everyday America couldn't care less. And heck, you have some people who put a ton of work into their style and still look
So true. I have some incredible RTW and I'd look wildly out of place wearing it to 99% of the places around me. While I'd see myself as stylish, most of the people around me would think I was doing too much. And who am I to say which one of us is right?
My CA probably gets tired of me saying... 'where am I going to wear that to?!'
So instead I spend most of my time in a t-shirt and jeans, which is just as boring as the jersey knit and cropped pants, but someone told us it's classic so it's regarded differently.
This just doesn't interest some (a lot) of people. Plus, what's flattering to a 50-year old in Miami is probably a totally different vibe to a 50-year old in rural Mississippi.
While style is important to you, and probably many of us at TPF, I'd assume a huge part of everyday America couldn't care less. And heck, you have some people who put a ton of work into their style and still look
What's flattering on a particular 50 year old has everything to do with that 50 year old's shape and personality and nothing to do with where they love. If it looks good on them Arizona, it looks good on them in Dubai.
It is true however that most of the people on this planet do not give a damn.
'Flattering' isn't a universal, single concept - it's all subjective. Clearly the women who made a whole blog about their capri pants think it's flattering enough to suggest others follow their inspiration. Lauren Bezos clearly thinks her skimpy outfits are flattering and I think she looks a mess. But, she'd fit in much better on South Beach than she would in Omaha.
IDK, to me calling something 'flattering' is basically just saying you dress how I think you should, in order to fit some standard of how people should present themselves - i.e., heavy people shouldn't wear horizontal stripes because it makes them look heavier. Maybe they don't mind looking heavy? Who am I to police how their clothes make them feel?
Oh for goodness sake!
In 2025 can’t we just have the grace to accept that whatever people decide to wear is OK? Far be it from me to loose sleep over the length of some ladies pants!
Be kind!
I'll admit I've been harsh, and apologize for taking this thread on such a divergent path with my rant. More than anything my comments were based on personal frustration re: someone who asks for my advice about how to dress in a more current and flattering style, then disregards it and goes back to the "uniform". For those who honestly don't care and are happy with their comfortable capri and tee outfit, that's awesome!
That said, @Dree55 "gets" what I'm trying to say....in that, this look absolutely "lacks shape and imagination". If one truly didn't care how they looked and was prioritizing comfort, why not just wear a muumuu or a fuzzy robe or a pyjama onesie every day? The fact that someone is choosing a brightly patterned floral tells me they like it, it gives them some inner joy, and therefore they do, in fact, care how they look. And if they care, it's too bad they aren't taking it that little step further to discover what might be a bit more fashion forward and look better on the body. But "to each their own".
But this thread was originally started by @Shelby33 to ask the question "why?" about BAG trends and there has been some interesting discussion. When I was re-reading it all from the beginning, the first thought that crossed my mind to answer that question was simply "money". It is the design houses that come up with the new styles and their marketing departments drive the desire. If trends weren't constantly evolving, brands wouldn't be making much money.
Many of us now are just getting fatigued by how rapidly the trend cycle keeps turning and realize that, in the end, a bag does need to be practical as a carrier of our stuff. And so we get off the merry-go-round!
No. Flattering means it brings out the best about your shape and character. I may not like a particular piece you are wearing, studs and patterns may not be to my taste, or the colours maybe a mess in my opinion, but have to admit that the cut fits you well and flatters your body shape and the bold colours show off your personality. It's not about personal taste it's about the architecture of the human body and the garments that adorn it. For example, low waisted jeans do not flatter short legs just as high waisted jeans do not flatter a heavy midriff. That of course is not to say they can't wear them, it's simply to say that they would look far better in a different cut.