Before we go any further we should point out that Sarah is wearing a $8.98 dress from her Bitten line:
SJP seems to think there's a revolution happening among the fashionistas. As she explained to the New York Times:
“What has changed,” Ms. Parker said, “is that now people have bragging rights about what they paid. I admired a woman’s pair of pants at a party recently and she said, ‘Fourteen dollars! H & M!’ It really is, among the people I know, part of what they do now.”
That's all well and good, but our bullshit detector forces us to point out that she paired her little discount dress (just before publishing this we realized we spelled it "discunt" and for a second considered leaving it as is) with...
A $695 pair of Valentino Peep-Toe Bow Pumps.
Total cost for the outfit: $703.98, making her point about fashion for the masses just a teensy bit hypocritical, yes?
As for the dress, it's poorly tailored and looks awful on her.
[Photos: Tony Cenicola/The New York Times - WireImage]
126 comments:
At least she has enough faith in he Bitten line to at least wear it.
i didn't think it looked that bad. Love the blue color for Spring as well.
$8.98, for real?
For what the dress is, it's cute enough, nice print, etc. But as much as I like that the idea that shoes and bags no longer have to match (each other or the garments they're worn with), I just don't get those red shoes with that dress. Or, for that matter, brown shoes with a gray suit.
Politically she is a smart cookie. People want to buy these dresses for the summer and that kind of money is tempting. I predict a huge number of these this summer on teenagers and women who should know better.
On SJP, the midriff looks horrible, but on whom would it look good with that print? The design is bound to bunch and sag on anyone but a mannequin or 18-year-old because alas, we are made of flesh and blood. The print just exacerbates the problem.
The accessories are very poor choices. That necklace is just ugly and who on earth told her those shoes were the right thing to wear with this?
SJP, love ya lots but this outfit is OUT.
More about that:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/
lifestyle/2008-05/05/content_6661571.htm
If that dress is $8.98 I can't help but think about those poor kids somewhere in Asia... Or South America.
She looks vaguely pregnant. Is she pregnant?
On the surface, she looks cute and age appropriate. The dress will sell well to women who don't wear dresses very often, but need one for an occasion, or teenage girls who have neither the budget nor the attention span for better clothes. They want cheap and trendy and that's what Bitten is. H&M is doing quite well with that market, why not someone else? Once you start picking the dress apart though, you can see the construction is a bit wonky and the print is not the most flattering. I do have to agree with ferny, at least she wears her own line of clothes. That's more than most of the celeb "designers" do. I say she's in. Compared to some of the stuff she shows up in this looks good.
An updo might have helped polish the look.
But then again, there's so much about apparently current trends that I just don't get. Mismatched shoes -- what's so wrong about matching one little color in the clothes up above? Mismatched accessories -- what's the point of reference for the clunky silver in that dress?
I know that a certain amount of insouciance screams "au current" but what ever happened to just plain old looking good?
It's Monday, forgive my foul humor.
I don't get the red shoes with the outfit either.
herdgirl72
Well, it may not be 'star quality,' but I know plenty of girls and women who would happily wear that dress, especially for the price.
Her shoes made the outfit, though. I covet them so!
boy, it seems there is some kind of SJP hate going on lately, right?
I haven't seen the dress at the store to judge the quality, but it looks nice and for the price of one trip to Starbucks, I would say it's a pretty cool choice.
and what is wrong about pairing something affordable, with something more luxurious? I don't understand the criticism here. She says fashion doesn't have to be a luxury, but is she supposed to avoid any clothing or accessories over $10 then?
How hard is it to match the print so it at least flows across the pattern? It's so broken up that you can't help but notice the construction and how the body makes the print break even more. I think Uli should have been consulted on this project. Hell, if SJP was smart she'd just create a Runway brain trust and be the 'muse'...all the good will I have for her because of SITC is slowly draining away every time I see another one of her 'designs'. Carrie, come back!
She looks to be a little too short waisted for that dress, but I think it's cute enough. I'm ambivalent about the red satin peep toe pumps with that dress, but it doesn't bother me as much as Broderick's brown shoes (look at the size of those puppies!) with the shiny grey suit.
I'm sorry to say I disagree with the analysis that her expensive shoes belie her fashion for the masses crusade. There are plenty of us regular folk who pair up bargain fashion with $$ accessories that we know we can wear for a while. It makes more sense to spend money on quality shoes, purses, jackets etc. that will last a good long while and go with several outfits than to shell out beaucoup dollars for some dress or top that will last maybe two seasons at most.
It must be obvious I shop at the mall too much - I think the $9 dress is cute and hate the $700 shoes. (I like the one matching accessory, though - he looks great there.)
Oy - How did I not notice MB's shoes ... Of the two offenses, I think hers is the less egregious
Telling us about the "discunt" typo is pretty much the same as leaving it as it is. What makes you think _your_ sexism don't stink?
MEOW BITCHES!
Discount or Discu...
LMFAO
Oy, now that it's been brought up... What WAS Matthew thinking? Altogether, that ensemble is quite heinous.
What is it with ladies who wear sandals with their toes hanging over the front? Can't they bring themselves to wear their real sizes? Or use an insert that'll kept their toesies where they belong? Nothing worse that seeing toes hanging off the front of sandals. Ugh.
What about Matthew Broderick's suit? It doesn't fit him well either, and it's rather shiny.
It's a cute dress for what it is -- a beach cover-up or casual summer outing dress. Otherwise, it looks like she got her money's worth. And had she worn shoes at the same price point, y'all would undoubtedly be talking about how crappy they looked. The point she's making is that what with the recession and everything, even people who have money to spend on Valentino shoes need to conserve somewhere, and a serviceable look for $8.98 is a useful part of that repertoire.
I do love how the rich economize. I plan to try it sometime.
As much as I love you, TLo, I think you're being a wee bit harsh on Ms. SJP. When I saw that dress, my first thought was Oscar de la Renta Spring 08 collection; the color and print just reminds me of the safari-theme he had going on. I don't think it looks terrible on her at all. Plus, I think the spirit of the Bitten message still carries through even if she's wearing $600 shoes. You can buy equally stylish shoes for a fraction of the price, and ladies shouldn't expect her to hold their hands through a Macy's and tell them exactly what shoes to buy. Her look is meant to inspire, not dictate, a woman's style and I applaud her efforts.
Who are we kidding here? Wear a Wallmart dress for a premiere and I'll believe your BS about saving the world, curing AIDS in a $9 dress.
You're wearing a dress that is part of YOUR collection. Need I say more?
blessed_divette..... I totally agree with you, I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling the same.
Who are we kidding here? Wear a Wallmart dress for a premiere and I'll believe your BS about saving the world, curing AIDS in a $9 dress.
How would a Wal*Mart dress send a 'saving the world' message, pray tell?
I have to tell you I think her Bitten line is a godsend for many people. My high school and college age daughters absolutely love it. They can find fashionable clothes and not spend an arm and a leg. They bought some before school last year, and the clothing is still in one piece. We have an outing planned to buy more Bitten clothes in the near future.
"ugly-kitties said...
Who are we kidding here? Wear a Wallmart dress for a premiere and I'll believe your BS about saving the world, curing AIDS in a $9 dress.
How would a Wal*Mart dress send a 'saving the world' message, pray tell?"
You totally missed my point, but that's OK. It figures.
Wow, I REALY wish you hadn't pointed out that this was a dress from her Bitten line...it would have been highly amusing to see what the reaction would have been to it if people thought it was an expensive designer dress!
mcbrunnhilde
The dress is what it is: a $9 dress. It's nice enough and it's got a certain charm. Never in a zillion years would I think that dress should sell for more than $19.99.
The shoes are another story. I think they are lovely. I'm not surprised to read they were $695. However, wearing them with that particular $9 dress does nothing for either item.
You totally missed my point, but that's OK. It figures.
Well, you could have easily elaborated, but you chose the "snappy but unhelpful" route instead. Wal*Mart is one of the last symbols I'd use for world salvation/peace.
Either way, it's good that she has faith in her line, and I already know people who are excited about Bitten's prices, because they can't afford much else.
For the money, it's a cute dress. I wouldn't wear $800 satin pumps with it , though, maybe my fake Steve Madden espadrille's I got at Target.You could slay everyone at a backyard bbq where everyone else is wearing was wearing cargo capri's.
I don't know who she's trying to kid about "everyone" buying cheap clothes. Honey, if you got the money go ahead and spend it, we don't care. And wearing clothes that were manufactured in sweatshops when you can afford not to isn't exactly something to be bragging about, is it?
"ugly-kitties said...
You totally missed my point, but that's OK. It figures.
Well, you could have easily elaborated, but you chose the "snappy but unhelpful" route instead. Wal*Mart is one of the last symbols I'd use for world salvation/peace.
Either way, it's good that she has faith in her line, and I already know people who are excited about Bitten's prices, because they can't afford much else."
It's easy to talk about dressing for less when you're wearing a dress from your collection.
When I mentioned Wallmart I didn't mean wear something specifically from Wallmart, I meant wear an H&M dress, a Target dress or any low-end store outfit and then I'll believe your speech about being able to look good wearing inexpensive items blah blah blah.
The message here is BUY MY DRESS. Period.
I'm going to get that dress
to wear in my pottery studio
this summer. No a/c - ovens
on - too old for shorts -
might pass on the $$$shoes tho -
Not to mention, as the article says...
"The most basic dresses at J. Crew start at $58. At American Apparel, they start at $26; at Old Navy, $19.50; and at Forever 21, some styles cost $15.80. The least expensive dress on the Wal-Mart Web site is $14.92."
God knows where and how these dresses are beig produced.
I thought it looked great on her!
She needs a good tailor. I thought the dress was cute, but definitely would never be mistaken for Oscar de la Renta. Personally I love the shoes, but I really dislike them with that dress.
The shoes are way too evening for the beach-y dress, and the dress is too casual for a premiere. As far as the mix and match/cheap with luxe aesthetic, that's certainly nothing new -- she's just not doing it well.
Sorry, that anonymous post above was mine - hit publish too soon!
Okay so the wholesale cost of this dress is around $4.50 then and so I can't imagine how cheap the fabric must be, but STILL that leaves maybe $1-2 at most that has gone into the labor of producing this dress.
Something is horribly not right about this, and I don't know how she can even stand behind it.
This is part of what's killing our economy in the long run. Support small designers. Not cheap throwaway crap.
This article, from China Daily (linked above), says,
"[Steve and Barry] claim they keep prices low by opening in struggling shopping centres where they can negotiate cheaper rents and by manufacturing in countries such as China, India and Madagascar.
But they say they do not use sweatshops."
I wonder how they know they don't use sweatshops if they're manufacturing in China, India, and Madagascar.
Does anybody know these stores? I'd never heard about them before this.
Steve and Berry's is a great place to buy college wear - you can get sweatshirts for about half the price that you would pay in a college book store. They also handle other types of clothes - like the Bitten line. Some basketball player, whose name escapes me, has produced a reasonable line of basketball shoes that also sells at S&B's.
As for the sweatshop issue: http://runway.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/sjp-follow-up-labor-and-costs/
For $8.98, it's practically disposable!! Wear it once to a luau or backyard pool party as a cover-up and then use it to make a pillow or some place mats!!
Love the shoes, hate them with the dress, hate her toes hanging over the end.
------StkrShock
jessine said...
Something is horribly not right about this, and I don't know how she can even stand behind it.
That was pretty much what I thought when I read the dress retails for $10. Ten dollars? If nothing else, there are a few yards of fabric needed to construct that dress. Someone somewhere is paying the price for such an inexpensive piece of clothing.
I say this knowing that SJP/Bitten are hardly the only offenders, but just the ones we're discussing right now.
Aside from the price, I thought the dress is attractive and looked nice on her.
so, for definition (as brooklyn bomber states) if something is made in China, India or Madagascar has to come from a sweatshop?
then there are a lot of places with some explaining to do: just on top of my head: Banana Republic, Laura Bennett Design and many that escape me right now....
last week's article from the NYT talking about Steve and Barry's and other stores explained how they keep their prices low.
again, I haven't seen these clothes yet (except in photos) so I cannot say much about the quality. but for example, an H&M tank top that I bought for $5 is practically identical to the $15 from Banana..... so it is possible to get decent stuff for cheap....
anyway, interesting how the in and out of today brought up all these economical issues (and class issues also.... I smell a lot of snobism towards a $9 dress).
At least she looks better than the hubby. Looks like he has on dad's suit or something. Jacket is too tight in the chest, sleeves and pants are too long. Shoes don't work. And he looks miserable!
joanie, thanks for posting the link with more explanation about Steve & Barry's. I liked what a commenter on that board had to say:
So Steve & Barry’s is like the Trader Joe’s of fashion? Cool.
I can get behind that sort of business plan -- I do loves me some Trader Joe's.
Goodness. it looks every bit like an $8.98 dress.
I pretty much can't stand SJP, but I love her clothing line for two reasons: It's a celeb fashion line that comes in a realistic range of sizes that people who aren't a size two can wear, and it's ridiculously affordable. In fact, everything at Steve & Barry's is affordable (but you really earn those savings dealing with the staff and the clutter of the store - at least the one here in Santa Monica).
I like the dress, its cute for a sundress. The choice of shoes and jewelry are a bit of a mystery to me, but she looks like she'd having fun.
Also - after having read more of the comments, I will add that I have quite a few pieces from the Bitten line, and they've all held up as well as anything else in my wardrobe. I have to believe after KathieLeegate, celebrities would be a little more discriminating about how their clothing lines are produced. Just because they're made in China doesn't mean a ten year-old that gets paid six cents a day made it. Half the things in most peoples' closets are probably made in China.
Too harsh this time, TLo. SJP wore an $8.98 dress, and she looks like a hundred bucks.
The color is good for her. The print is quite a bit much, like a muted tropical print; quite casual. She is out for a "happy and carefree" tone, so ... mission accomplished. You may hope 24/7 Fabulosity from any starlet, but you should not expect it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this blog was supposed to witty and snarky bitchy, not mean. I don't think TLo have really crossed the line yet, but I used to come here and read funny and insightful commentary on fashion and reality TV. Lately, all I've seen is vitriol against fat people, "Middle Americans", West Coasters, and now people who watch their budget. It's disgusting. For people who claim to be enlightened, you come across as very sadly narrow-minded individuals.
Not only is it hypocritical, but the shoes look terrible with the dress! Bright red satin shoes with a blue/black/white print cotton(?) dress? Doesn't the woman own a mirror?
Hate the dress. Love the shoes ($$$ has absolutely nothing to do with it). I don't think the shoes were really the best choice for this particular dress, but it appears SJP is most likely making a political statement as opposed to a fashion statement.
SJP seems to spend an awful lot of time and energy on convincing the public of how truly humble, down-to-earth and real both she and Matthew really are. It's tiresome smacks of insincerity.
- edina -
"Anonymous said...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this blog was supposed to witty and snarky bitchy, not mean. I don't think TLo have really crossed the line yet, but I used to come here and read funny and insightful commentary on fashion and reality TV. Lately, all I've seen is vitriol against fat people, "Middle Americans", West Coasters, and now people who watch their budget. It's disgusting. For people who claim to be enlightened, you come across as very sadly narrow-minded individuals."
Well, you know where to go then. As a matter of fact I think that's where you came from.
I think the dress looks like it's $8.98. Chip, chip, chip, in a chip way, no?
I actually like the dress, and I love the shoes, but I do not like them together at all. Both the style and the color of the shoe are all wrong for the dress.
In my humble opinion.
And I'd like a pat on the back for staying out of the Wal-Mart/sweatshop discussion this time. Thank you.
I actually really like the dress. I don't think you can criticize a $8.98 dress the same way you criticize designer runway dresses.
I hate it. I hate the print, I hate the fit, and I hate the fabric. While the "fashion for all" philosophy might sound good, I think it speaks to our throwaway society and the mindless consumption of garbage without any thought.
I'd rather spend $200 on something more tailored, classic, and of quality and wear it for a few years than a crap-throwaway tube for one night despite how little it costs. In fact, my clothes-buying habits have transitioned away from this "one or two wears" kind of shopping to less purchase of hight quality. And I just can't get past the sweatshop factor on clothes that cheap. Gawd I sound like a total stick-in-the-mud, but there it is.
Lately, all I've seen is vitriol against fat people, "Middle Americans", West Coasters, and now people who watch their budget. It's disgusting. For people who claim to be enlightened, you come across as very sadly narrow-minded individuals.
Criticizing a poorly made dress isn't the same thing as criticizing people who watch their budget. I'd like to see some examples of where and when fat people, west coasters and middle Americans were criticized.
Also, where exactly did anyone "claim" to be "enlightened?"
Dress - cute and fun in an evening barbecue sort of way.
Shoes - Somewhere in Oz, a now mature Dorothy is looking for her Big Girl ruby slippers. Ironically, nothing says "cheap shoes" like the toes hanging over the edge look. For that kind of money, there should be some internal engineering that keeps the foot from sliding down thus allowing the toes to escape. (Duct tape, perhaps?)
Re: SJP's comment on bragging about how little garments cost, this very morning, I had that conversation with two cohorts who were also wearing blue jackets. I commented that mine was dyed with real indigo. One friend responded that she got hers at a thrift shop, immediately trumping my dye job. As a confirmed thrift and consignment shopper, who buys the occasional signature piece from local designers, I have to say it's good to have our turn in the sun. I can afford a designer piece here and there since much of what I wear was pre-selected by someone in an upscale neighborhood who maybe wore it one time.
I thought SJP's dress was kind of cute myself. However, Matthew B.'s suit looks poorly fitted and doesn't go well with those boots. Methinks he needs to hire some gays.
I bought those exact same shoes on sale at Macy's for thirty bucks.
jelodi said...
... I think it speaks to our throwaway society and the mindless consumption of garbage without any thought.
... In fact, my clothes-buying habits have transitioned away from this "one or two wears" kind of shopping to less purchase of hight quality. And I just can't get past the sweatshop factor on clothes that cheap.
Feel free to join me in the anti-over consumption corner. I actually started shopping in thrift and consignment stores in part because it seemed to me that clothing purchased there did not directly reward sweat shop production practices. I hate to shop, so that takes care of the over consumption as well.
Hey, Dorothy got away with the blue and white dress with the red shoes didn't she? Perhaps this is SJP's updated shout out to Oz??
Still, the waist line was cut too high on her or she didn't have the proper foundation garment on.
I'll give her snaps for wearing her own line. Too bad her own line looks so much like a Chinese knock-off.
And those shoes are
(a) ugly,
(b) garish (see 'ugly' above), and
(c) completely wrong for that dress.
LOL HILARIOUS.
Let me repeat what I think I saw in the comments section - these are not throw away clothes. My daughters have been wearing things from this line for a year now.
Matthew's more in than SJP is.
Honestly for her to talk her boo-hoo talk about how she walks the walk not in those shoes honey, is pretty hypocritical.
But I sense some pre-Sex In The City, Movie, snark. Getting the tongues (or fingers) ready to hate the movie, perchance?
The shoes that MB is wearing look like well-worn comfortable pair. He probably thought, "Hell, if she can wear that $10 dress to an event, I can get away with my favorite shoes."
Jelodi said:
I'd rather spend $200 on something more tailored, classic, and of quality and wear it for a few years than a crap-throwaway tube for one night despite how little it costs. In fact, my clothes-buying habits have transitioned away from this "one or two wears" kind of shopping to less purchase of hight quality. And I just can't get past the sweatshop factor on clothes that cheap. Gawd I sound like a total stick-in-the-mud, but there it is.
More power to you if you can afford, and choose to shop for higher quality, classic clothing-go for it.
The truth of the matter is that SJP's clothing line is aimed at an audience that wants some attractive, and attractively priced clothing-and, as others have remarked, is available in a larger size range. I don't think Bitten's target audience is looking for clothes that are going to last forever.
One thing that bugs me about the dress is that with its ginormous print (way, WAY out of scale on tiny SJP anyhow), the sweatshop workers who made it were not instructed to match the print at the waist seam. So it looks out of kilter.
SJP is definately 'In'.
...And so is her hubby.
---GothamTomato
Hey props to SJP. She is funny, charming, a great guest judge on PR and like it or not, a fashion icon. (See Tim Gunn's Guide to Style).
Dress? Not bad...not fab, but really, not bad. We all can't hit it out of the ball park every time...and really if my BF and I looked as cute as SJP and MB...I'd dress however I pleased (well, I do anyway...)
You guys are HARSH. Seriously.
Those shoes are so beyond fierce.
I think the dress would look better if it were shorter..and a different color.
Yes, she's a good mother, a loyal sister, a great neighbor, a wonderful friend, a devoted wife BUT THE DRESS LOOKS AWFUL ON HER.
Whatever on the $9 dress. I think it's cute to be frugal.
However, Sarah, if you wish to rock $600 designer shoes (and we expect that of you, since you are Sarah f-ing Jessica Parker), for crissakes, get yourself a pedicure! A little polish on the piggies would have been nice.
Also, you have gangly ex-dancer feet. You should seriously question whether peeptoes are a good idea.
lots of women do and have done exactly what SJP has done with this outfit. mix it up. it looks lovely on her.
OK, I read the post, I read the comments and NOBODY is saying that
a) you shouldn't mix and match (expensive + inexpensive items)
b) you shouldn't buy inexpensive clothes
c) a dress shouldn't cost $9
MOST PEOPLE are saying that no matter how much that dress costs, it looks cheap, poorly made and poorly fitted, and I agree with that.
I also think that it is a little bit hypocritical of her to think that because she wore her cheap line ONE DAY on the red carpet that erases the other 364 days where she wears nothing but the most expensive gowns and shoes.
I come from a Latin America country and I know how and where those dresses are produced. It ain't cheap for them.
why so much hating on SJP?
Ironically, I like the dress and hate the shoes.
"personette said...
why so much hating on SJP?"
We're criticizing her dress, and/or her shoes and/or her statement. How can that be classified as hatred? On what planet??
Just one thing. Discunt? Really misogynistic, and pretty crude. My homeroom full of teenage boys are better.
On the $9 dress? For what it is, it's fine, and someone who doesn't want to spend $50 on a sundress they're just going to wear out is probably perfectly happy buying it.
Only the terminally humorless would consider a frigging TYPO to be misogynistic. Get a goddamn grip.
I could forgive her for this if she didn't have a Sex & the City movie coming out. If she were truly done with that, she could wear this stuff and tout all her principles till she's blue in the waist.
But this is not a good way to pull people into the theaters if they are expecting the usual Carrie Bradshaw offbeat glamour, and over-the-top NY glitz. She's an exec producer, she shouldn't have to be told this by a lazy blog queen like me.
Still love her though!
I like Mathew's shoes.
-- desertwind
uncle vanya said...
... till she's blue in the waist.
Hee-hee-hee!!
Thank you for that!
kurasan said...
Just one thing. Discunt? Really misogynistic, and pretty crude.
No it isn't. Embrace the word. It's really quite liberating. Discunt! DISSSSCUNNNTTT!!!
It's not a typo if you write about it and make a joke about it. And being liberated by it means embracing it and using it about yourself, not about someone else.
Think of me as on the side of the dress, the shoes, SJP, affordable clothing, and splurging on a pair of red shoes.
The dress is actually cute...
I have checked out the line at Steve and Barry's and the quality will make you cry.
But for 8.98, what can you expect..
And I actually appreciate that the chickie throws us a bone and her line goes up to a 22 but the sizing is pretty unreliable and there are NEVER any of the big sizes ( over a 12) available at the store but I guess it's the thought that counts...
Love,
Milla
Oh, almost forgot: I have never seen a shiny suit in my life that looked good on a man, let alone a short, stocky man. Stop listening to your wife Matthew, and stick with classic and understated.
Anonymous...
Fat people are CONSTANTLY at the receiving end of negative comments from everyone all the time outside of the size-positive fatosphere and size acceptance blog.
Fat is the new black and fat is the new gay.
Every time someone says: "OMG!! That makes so and so look fat!" or " it looks like so and so has gained weight" like it's a negative thing or when someone speaks of thin people in the same tone the Nazis reserved for the pure Aryans amongst them, people are offending and hurting and discriminating against fat people.
And PLEASE don't bring up the " but it's not healthy" argument.
My health and that of other fat people is not a matter of moral judgement or reason for contempt.
If I had cancer and choose not to get chemo because it affected my quality of life would I be looked down on? NO.So, if I choose to NOT loose weight ( not that I can or that anything works towards that end. I was a cerified aerobics instructor and an anorexic and I was still fat), it is no one's business but my own and not a reason for contempt, derision or ostracism.
Fat people and particularly when the discussion turns to fashion and around the fashion industry is the equivalent of Jim Crow laws, apartheid and homophobia.
Fat discrimination is the last acceptable bastion of biggotry.
"Anonymous said...
Think of me as on the side of the dress, the shoes, SJP, affordable clothing, and splurging on a pair of red shoes."
You mean in your discunt outfit?
I bet you look discuntful!
I hate the dress, love the shoes. Wasn't that what the post was about?
Take your personal issues somewhere else, ladies. It's getting old.
P.S ^^^^^^^^ See what I mean?
It's fine as a summer dress but not very appropriate for the red carpet IMHO. I would never pay that much for those shoes, they're ugly.
"FashionFanatic said...
The message here is BUY MY DRESS. Period."
YUP!
If SJP is sooooo concerned about women being able to afford fashion why doesn't she donate her share in the Bitten deal to a great charity?
" Brooklyn Bomber said...
More about that:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/
lifestyle/2008-05/05/content_6661571.htm"
Very interesting, Brooklyn Bomber. Thank you for the link.
The dress is pulling at all the wrong places. I'd say OUT.
anonymous at 9:34pm:
how do you know she doesn't give her share of sales to charity???? and anyway, giving women the chance to buy nice clothes for more affordable prices, isn't it a charity in itself?
and about the pairing light blue with red, she did it again, although the opposite (red dress and light blue shoes) in a photo spread for NY Magazine, I think it looked awesome....
"Fat discrimination is the last acceptable bastion of biggotry (sic)."
Okay, this? Not true. Ask gay people. Ask Muslims. Ask a large number of other groups. Yes, fat discrimination exists, but it's certainly not the only tolerated form of discrimination in society.
Also, I kinda like the dress.
I can sort of understand why she feels that way, though. There's a lot of otherwise enlightened people out there who rail vehemently against sexual/racial/religious discrimination but still actively encourage and propagate fat stereotypes. So if you mostly keep company with otherwise intelligent people and watch otherwise intelligent media, you may end up feeling like you've been singled out.
I have no problem with the expensive shoes/inexpensive dress, but I agree that she's trying too hard to make it a a statement. Women have done this forever. Usually the reverse.
Adore the shoes and I'm not usually a peep-toe kind of gal. The dress is ok if you don't look at it closely. The hem isn't straight and that looks chip.
A little matchy-matchy with Matt's blue shirt and the shiny suit with brown shoes has to go.
"milla said: Fat is the new black and fat is the new gay.
Every time someone says: "OMG!! That makes so and so look fat!" or " it looks like so and so has gained weight" like it's a negative thing or when someone speaks of thin people in the same tone the Nazis reserved for the pure Aryans amongst them, people are offending and hurting and discriminating against fat people."
Oh give me a fucking break!
Anyone who has ever REALLY been discriminated against would never say anything like that. A person's ethnicity or sexual preference is what they are; how they were born. A person's fat is what they do; the choices they make. There is a huge difference.
And attempting to make a bizarro comparision between the so-called (ie;non-existant) 'fat discrimination' and the very real bigotry faced by Blacks, Jews, Gays, or other people of color - and even bringing the Nazi's into it, is not just stupid; it is downright ignorant, (beyond ignorant actually) and a slap in the face to all those who have faced (and been bloodied and killed by) REAL bigotry.
It also reeks of a kind-of warped desperation to be a part of the current victim culture: The designation 'victim' is too highly prized, likely because those who want it think it absolves them of responsibility for where they are in their lives.
I have had weight issues my entire life, but I'm also a part of a minority group, and I know the difference betwen the two. I'm also smart enough, and honest enough with myself, to understand and admit that every pound of fat on my body came from choices I made (to eat junk or not, to excercise or not). If someone 'discriminates' (oh please) against me because I'm a few pounds overweight, that is their right to respond how they wish to the choices I've made. If someone denies me my basic rights because of my ethnicity, that's a different story. There is no comparison.
--GothamTomato
Gotham Tomato, fat is not always a choice. Do your research on the causes of obesity before you run off at the mouth (or fingers). And make sure the research isn't sponsored by Slimfast.
"Discunt" is not funny, and I'd like to think I have a pretty good sense of humor. I've been enjoying this blog for quite some time, but I did not enjoy this entry at all. Felt like Tom & Lorenzo had suddenly morphed into a pair of bitter 13 year old boys, and it was surprising.
As for SJP? Dress is meh by itself, but the over-the-top shoes make the outfit laughably bad. It's a gorgeous color on her, though.
Discrimination, riscrimination. The more important thing is the fact that SJP's shoes look like something the bridesmaids would wear at a hooker's wedding. A very expensive hooker, but a hooker nonetheless.
What the fuck? Are people really upset over "discunt"? I could see being upset if TLo called someone a cunt, but all they did was mention a funny typo. Lighten up.
Wow Gothamtomato! I kinda love you! BTW, isn't SJP kinda known for pairing stuff that ordinary (as opposed to fashion) people wouldn't think of pairing and everybody thinking or pretending like they're thinking that it is awesome? I've definitely seen her look worse...speaking from a ordinary person's perspective, of course.
"Anonymous said...
What the fuck? Are people really upset over "discunt"? I could see being upset if TLo called someone a cunt, but all they did was mention a funny typo. Lighten up."
These people shouldn't be here, they should be reading a "only positive comments" type of blog.
And fat IS A CHOICE. You can do something about it, therefore IT IS A CHOICE. You can't do anything about BEING GAY, JEWISH OR BLACK.
GothamTomato: I completely agree with you. Even if there are times that fat isn't a choice--genetic or otherwise--comparing that kind of discrimination (if one can call it that) to the kind of vicimization and utter cruelty that other minority groups have faced is, as you said, downright ignorant and a complete slap in the face. I have had comments made to me about my size, but they have been utter peanuts compared to the comments that have been hurled my way because of my ethnicity. There is absolutely no comparison.
And T.Lo is still fabulous. Their comments are not misogynistic. They are funny, and they are witty, and they are unapologetic about their critiques, which I love. I don't always agree with them, but I love them all the same. They make me smile. :)
I cannot believe we're actually getting into a "my discriminatory experience is worse than your discriminatory experience" pissing contest. Can we please stop chasing this boorish rabbit and go back to snarking on SJP?
"fauvistfly said...
And T.Lo is still fabulous. Their comments are not misogynistic. They are funny, and they are witty, and they are unapologetic about their critiques, which I love. I don't always agree with them, but I love them all the same. They make me smile. :)"
Exactly. They have written hundreds of posts, if you happen to dislike one of them, that's fine, but do not judge them or their blog based on one single post or joke that perhaps based on your standards wasn't that funny or offensive.
One of the things that I appreciate about this blog, unlike other blogs, is that "discussion and strong opinions are encouraged."
Re: Discunt, T Lo did not call SJP a discunt, they called the dress discunt . I can assure you the dress did not get it's feelings hurt. It was far more painful to have its side seam merrowed in a single operation, by an operator who did not pull the bias properly and had already put in a 60 hr week.
Why can't someone judge Tom and Lorenzo when the whole blog is devoted to judging? Why should they be exempt?
I've loved this blog for a long time, but I, too, would say that it's become meaner and nastier lately, maybe because it's offPRseason and there isn't as much to say. It's less fun than it used to be. Remember when it's job was to love Laura Bennett? I miss that.
Oops -- got my its-es and it's-es all wrong. Feel free to judge.
Milla,
When there's an Auschwitz for overweight people, I'll agree w/ you. When overweight people are forcibly rounded up to be slaves or denied marriage licenses, I'll agree w/ you.
There are metabolic, neurological & genetic factors to obesity that scientists are just discovering so to say it's solely a choice cannot be scientifically substantiated.
Granted, inflicting the pain of negative judgment based on external appearance is cruel & unfair. We as Humans must use our internal strength get beyond such primitive assessments (of anyone we aesthetically don't approve of) in the most important matters of job fitness, intellectual and/or emotional worth, et al.
But to put weight consideration in the same category as other groups who have experienced systemic discrimination throughout generations is a bit unrealistic.
As a fellow San Diegan I tip my hat to you, your embracing the freedom to be oneself regardless of size is laudable & inspirational. But by the same token I ask you to think about the scope of your complaint.
SJP's dress?
It's OK. I do question its appropriateness for the event.
Fat people and particularly when the discussion turns to fashion and around the fashion industry is the equivalent of Jim Crow laws, apartheid and homophobia.
When was the last time someone was denied their basic rights because they were fat? When was the last time someone was beaten to death or lynched because they're fat? Lady, that was probably the most offensive goddamn piece of shit reasoning I've ever read.
"Anonymous said...
Why can't someone judge Tom and Lorenzo when the whole blog is devoted to judging? Why should they be exempt?
I've loved this blog for a long time, but I, too, would say that it's become meaner and nastier lately, maybe because it's offPRseason and there isn't as much to say. It's less fun than it used to be. Remember when it's job was to love Laura Bennett? I miss that."
Judge BUT BE REASONABLE and...
a) put a "face" on your judgment. It's easy to be anonymous and judge.
b) come back here when they're "funny" again
And their "job" was to love Laura? hahahahahaha
Please, at least they're posting something on a daily basis. It's easy to click once and judge; try spend hours coming up with ideas and pictures for posts.
As I always say, unless your computer is programmed to come here, you have no obligation to do so.
It is amazing how people feel so "entitled". You don't pay a dime to come here.
Feel free to delete my rant, boys.
"You can't do anything about BEING GAY, JEWISH OR BLACK."
Hmm, I wonder what Anne Heche, Woody Allen and Michael Jackson would have to say about that.
When did this blog (comments) become so bitter and ignorant? To argue that people choose to be fat ignores genetics, social-economics and nutritional education.
BTW: I think I read a definition on urban dictionary that a cunt was anybody who was a bitch 95% of the time. In that case, Im pretty sure were all cunts here (and I mean that non-gender specifically).
I just get very tired of people trying to dictate to others what they can and can't be offended by. I once had someone argue to me, with a completely straight face, that racism doesn't exist any more (because there are no longer lynch mobs, you see), and so black people should just calm down and stop getting pissy about every little thing.
If you haven't had that person's life, how do you know what that person has suffered? Even if their suffering may not be the worst, in the greater scheme of things, it's still important to them. Try to give people the benefit of the doubt sometimes, step back and see where they're coming from.
Thanks for being so reasonable, tekhou, and also so kind.
My kittykat, Mittens...just shat out a big one that looks better than that dress...and her face.
Jelodi said:
"I'd rather spend $200 on something more tailored, classic, and of quality and wear it for a few years than a crap-throwaway tube for one night despite how little it costs."
It's nice for you that you have $200 to spend on a dress. A hell of a lot of people do not, classic or not. They will buy the $10 dress and they will wear it until it falls apart. This might be a lot sooner than your $200 dress, but how often will you really wear it?
Just be aware that you're showing your social class very clearly. And if you have the money, you should definitely spend it as you see fit. But having a clothing line that's fashionable that poor people can afford is a completely different world from the one you're living in. Try not to judge it by the same standards.
If she wants to sell her line it's only right that she models it from time to time. Wonder why she didn't design Louboutin-lookalikes in her line so those of us who want gorgeous shoes that will kill our feet can have 'em?
I do wish she'd had a colorful pedi, though.......
Post a Comment