The Rolled Cuff: Potential Fashion Panacea?

Perhaps the rolled cuff trend hinges on a longing for the days when a woman showing her ankle was both erotic and scandalous. I do subscribe to the argument that the spans of leg between the lower calf and beginning of the ankle bone still holds some sort lingering aesthetic charm. (Not that "showing a little ankle" can really attract droves of men these days... but historically speaking it's a validated attempt!)

Regardless, the strategic nonchalant pant roll has a multitude of life benefits. And by life benefits I do mean important, earth shattering, and otherwise absolutely necessary for happiness. I cannot TELL you how many times I've salvaged an otherwise ill-fitting pant by rolling up the ankles and creating the illusion that all is well and good.

A slightly rolled pant (if executed correctly!! mustn't be too perfect or too precise!) can provide the following benefits:

1) Trick observers into thinking that your shoe matches the rest of the outfit. I call this the "buffer zone phenomenon." Think of those 2 inches of ankle as a visual field which combats the necessity for continuity between pant and shoe. Glory be!

2) Make your outfit appear as if it is more styled and contemporary than it actually is. The rolled pant indicates a mediated action upon dressing. It says: A minute or so of extra time was spent in thought about the aesthetic balance of the outfit. In other words, this person cares a little. NOT SO MUCH AS TO SEEM HIGH MAINTENANCE. But enough.

3) Create more substance on the bottom of the pant leg in order to detract from an ill fitting thigh-of-pant. This is particularly useful when trying to get away with wearing A RELAXED FIT TAPERED TROUSER SITUATION. A relaxed fit pant with a large leg opening, however, cannot be rolled without one appearing as if one just came from some sort of waterlogged terrain. There are some pants that truly cannot be saved.

4) Allow an otherwise casual pant to be paired with a heel. Again, this falls under the category of the buffer zone phenomenon. A truly priceless naturally occurring event!

But in all seriousness... Some winter picks

A return to a more subdued menswear look. Warm browns and utility-based brands translated to novelty accessories. Yes!

The Ambiguous White Sneaker: Part Deux

Because judging from recent sightings, this really does merit more discussion.

It has recently come to my attention (not to quote the Chloe Sevigny youtube spoofs) that there are several components differentiating an inoffensive white shoe from a dreadfully ambiguous white sneaker. Think Converse vs. any of the above footly delinquents. I'm speaking mostly about males here, as almost all modern day females have thankfully steered clear of this particular offense.

For newer readers: Please refer to my first white sneaker post for an introduction to the terrors of said ambiguity. Essentially, I concluded with the following:

A large white lumbering object on the foot is a sure fire buzz kill/swag kill/game kill.

And yes, I do speak from experience as an innocent bystander caught off guard by a STEALTH ambiguous white sneaker quietly tucked under the pants of a potential suitor. As I've said before, good thing I've got eyes like a hawk for things like this!

Anyway, onwards to new realizations about the issue at hand.

The following are the primary attributes of an ambiguous white sneaker:

1. That chunk-nasty sole: Really, any casual shoe with a noticeably tall/springy looking sole makes the wearer look slightly bewildered or out of place. Think: child, senior citizen, tourist aesthetic. Not particularly a smooth shoe. Not particularly a wise shoe. Platform soled shoes for men really haven't been acceptable since the 70s. And even then, the platforms were not of the rubbery/athletic variety. On top of all of this, recall that anything in white looks doubly large. So white + chunk + foot = spongey lumbering mess. Now that's a foul equation if I ever saw one.

2. A criss-cross velco strap: Though not on every ambiguous white shoe, this attribute denotes one specific subclass of the larger group: the stereotypical "Euro" sneaker. Let us recall the reason for velcro to be a shoe in the first place: the inability to tie one's laces. Thus, velcro straps poking out of a pant rarely appear adult and never appear streamlined. The sound of velcro is equivalent to the sound of your swag frantically scrambling away from yo misguided self.

3. Skewed toe-width to arch-width to heel-width ratio: (See 3rd picture from the top above.) Hourglass figures are ideal for female bodies, and not for much else in this world. So riddle me this: why in the Sam Hill would a straight male want to artificially create a feminine silhouette with his footwear? There is something incredibly offputting about a heavy, wide heel tapering into a feminine arch. And looorddd when a wide toe is thrown into the mix, all aesthetic hell breaks loose down there. Eek!


What to conclude from all of this? As I've said before, and I'll say once more: Males, exalt the slender soled canvas shoe!

Our dear old friend, the "CZ" Stud

One of my fabulous scouts has alerted me to a most unfortunate issue. An issue that I naively believed to be buried in the early 2000's. An issue that appears much more resistant to the purifying nature of cyclical fashionbiotics than I had hoped.

Now this isssssh(u) needs to be handled with a delicate hand, as it centers around a most delicate topic of taste in jewlz.

So let's get "real" here: nothing screams questionability like a massive cubic zirconia square-cut stud pulling down on ones earlobe.

Number one: We all know that a rock that size cannot exist outside of the Tower of London. Why must absurd exaggeration be the choice here? Particularly where diamond size is concerned, there is a steeply sloped bell-curve of believability. Something a little more subtle could in fact be perceived as legitimate. Oh the perils of catching the Diamondique bug!

Number two: We can hear your earlobe wailing and gnashing it's metaphoric teeth from here. For goodness sake, free the poor lobe from it's bedazzled torment!

Now, I must confess to owning a pair of cz's back in the day. This was approximately during the same time period when I deemed it appropriate to be wearing Air Force Ones. We must all forgive ourselves for stylistic transgressions of yesteryear. The important point here is that in 2010 there are many wonderful options for ear ornaments besides cubic zirconia - or real diamonds for that matter.

A few thoughts on Halloween Costumes

Being that the parasitic "Spirit of Halloween" seasonal franchise is in full throttle, it is probably about that time again to consider the thought process behind poor choices in Halloween costumes.

I'm pretty sure ALL of us have a few mis-steps in our past. See: freshman year "Strawberry Shortcake" costume, childhood "Hershey Kiss" costume that unfortunately appeared more like the garb of a racial extremist sect than a chocolately treat... (the list continues).

Thankfully, every Halloween is a new opportunity to make up for the errors of the past. So what exactly DOES qualify as a good costume?

1) Culturally irrelevant figure, clutch style. Think: Linda Hogan. This allows the wearer to dress in absurd, over the top "trendy" clothing of poor taste. On no other day of the year could this be at all a positive. A perfect excuse to venture into some sort of hot mess of a trashy retailer and not wear a ski mask.

2) Odd consumer packaged good. Think: box of Wet Naps. Sartorial accuracy gets bonus points here. Mixed media, paper products, and bizarre household materials are all up for grabs. This is the only opportunity to relive "anything but clothes" themes, post college.

3) Washed up musician. Think: Ja Rule. Study obscure music videos from the early 2000s. Learn outdated dance movies. Embrace unfortunate temporary hairstyles.

4) Faux social "concept." Think: Wangsta. Simultaneously embody all cliches of the character type at once. Deliciously obnoxious.

Happy Halloween!

Swag Alert: The Power of the Slim Cut Suit

Inspired by my recent viewing of The Social Network (Holla Eduardo and yo fine fine self), I find it to be an appropriate time to articulate my theories on the slim cut suit.

At times erroneously dismissed as "European" by members of the mainstream male population, the silhouette of a slim cut suit more than makes up for in swag what it lacks in fabric volume. Now, I'm not talking skin tight. And I am most certainly not talking about pompous quaffing and flashy expensive hooplah. We shall leave that to the fools who believe that arrogance in dress is at all relevant or attractive.

Let us now return to the issue at hand: the inherent swag of a wonderfully understated slim cut blazer and pant. It is inspiring to see that while women have been dressing to fit their bodies for years (with only a few trip ups along the way--> see: hoop skirts, mom jeans, etc.), now straight men are finally realizing that it is okay wear clothing that accepts a live human form underneath. Fancy that!

I'd venture to say the male torso is somewhat of an ellipsoid. A freely moving ellipsoid with appendages that function to feed, dress, and groom the male. Whatever the case, this torso is not a rectangle, so why cloth it in conventional "generous" suiting that is shaped as such? Seems a little deceptive if you ask me. And we mustn't be deceptive now.

This all understood, I do realize that the slim cut suit may be frightening to newbies. Here are my points of advice on proper execution:

1. Start with a darker, non-patterned suit. All sorts of bad things can happen when an unruly plaid or paisley is introduced to the situation. When one is more comfortable, one can venture into slim stripes in lightweight, casual textiles.

2. For more casual environments, a strategic unbuttoning of TWO topmost buttons on the shirt underneath is permitted. No more or you will, without fail, be perceived as a damn fool.
While I'm at it, it goes without saying that a shirt must be worn underneath. Eek. The folly of some lost lambs!

3. Tightness quotient: purchase a pant that follows the lines of the backside and legs, NOT one that grips them for dear life. Alternately, there should also be no excess fabric saggage chilling on the back of the upper thigh region of the suit pant. The pant (and the blazer similarly) should NOT be able to comfortably house a Christmas ham or woodland creature.

4. Shoe choice is crucial here. Let's walk away from the clunky. And away from the square toe as well. Let us don a nice slim oxford. Let us give thanks.


Follow these and swag will follow shortly thereafter. Predictable little bugger.

Commuter Fashion: Sneakers, Boxy Suits, and all sorts of Blasphemy

We’ve all seen it. Perhaps some of us have even done it. I myself may proudly say I have trekked to and from work in platform heels most days this summer, with the occasional change to metallic flats when necessity demanded. Never, ever, did I don a sneaker with any of my work outfits. Not even on casual Fridays when we are allowed to wear jeans to work. This may be extreme behavior, but I’m a walking illustration of an important point, damnit!

I understand the restrictions associated with having foot problems. Due to an unfortunate spill freshman year of college, I myself have remnants of an untreated fractured foot as well as a history of several stress fractures since that time. Never stopped meeeeeEe from donning respectable shoes during the work week.

My long-winded point here is that ambiguous white running sneakers with business suits is a MOST dreadful and unnecessary assault on the eyes of unsuspecting fellow commuters. [See related: my previous post entitled “The Ambiguous White Sneaker.”]

With the exception of the very aged, there is WITHOUT DOUBT some sort of shoe entity besides that of the athletic variety that is functional and comfortable enough to carry your body a few blocks to the subway. Face it, unless your commute to work on the island of Manhattan involves,

a) Cardio acrobatics (and I say cardio here because normal acrobatics can be performed barefoot or in a deliciously soft-soled shoe)

b) Hurdling objects taller than 3 feet above ground level

Or

c) Darting around defensive linemen

it is probably better to preserve your dignity than to don a clunky “sneak” (and I’m not being affectionate here) with that pencil skirt/tapered slack/etc. etc. Especially now that brands such as Cole Hann are making business appropriate footwear with comfort technology.

And if you ABSOLUTELY insist to wear some sort of non-boot lace up thang, let me remind you of an old standby and a wonderful footly gem: the Converse shoe. At least with this strategic selection, you’d clearly be saying,

Yes, I am copping out and wearing a non-matching shoe for my work commute, but it is a cool canvas shoe. A culturally relevant canvas shoe. A canvas shoe that does not automatically decrease my attractiveness level to passerby. A canvas shoe that does not assault the integrity of the rest of my outfit.

Oof!