Well, there is that. Like I said, the blue dress does express confidence to me without going too far into the extreme of being either frumpy or fussy. It’s what I perceive as the happy middle of the spectrum, and that would be something I’d find attractive in a woman.
Both of the articles look busy to me because of the patterns.
I’m female & I like the shape & style of the dress, but I hate polka dots. I love the shape of the jacket but not the plaid pattern & colors. Too much competition. If I had to look at it for any length of time I’d get dizzy. I also get migraines from too much intense light & clashing colors/patterns.
I have no idea what you (the OP) look like but, even in the photo and not on a human female, the dress looks nice to me. Simple, feminine, nice shape with the belt and I’ll be another to use the word “flirty”. Not overtly sexual or anything, just a pleasant feminine looking dress. I personally like the polka dots as they give it a slight “retro” look in my opinion which ties in well with its more traditional shape.
The jacket really does strike me as the sort of thing women pick out and like although it doesn’t inspire much in men. I could easily see my sister or mother being into that jacket. I don’t have any real complaints about it, it just does nothing for me. Frankly, and this might be the plaid speaking, but it reminds me more of equestrian gear. Which might work with a white blouse and some tight tan pants but there’s only so many places where the “fox hunt” look is appropriate.
I think a dress like that which looks like a shirt is going to be attractive because it makes me think you’re just wearing a shirt, even if it is longer than a normal shirt.
But, I agree, sundresses usually look rather good to me as a guy. But I actually like the androgynous look, and think long hair is usually a shapeless mess.
Good call. Best to err on the side of caution.
For the OP, how close is the dress to what you usually wear? Could the women be mentioning the suit only because it is different and a change of pace?
My usual business attire is either pants-or-skirt, blouse, jacket-or-sweater. For the most part I am a short skirt/long jacket kind of dresser, and the pants in question are skinny or at least straight. I do have a couple of shorter jackets.
So the dress in question I generally wore without a jacket or sweater because I didn’t really have anything that looked right. The best thing on top of that dress would have been a jacket as white of the dots but that would have been too much white for me. On the extremely rare occasion when I did wear a jacket with it, it was a fuchsia linen jacket. There were a couple of other things that I wore without a jacket or sweater or any other additional covering that I did not get similar compliments on, but most usually I had the extra layer on, and in that case I didn’t.
So, for those asking, the suit was more in line with what I mostly wore, except it was louder. The dress was the kind of thing I wore much less often, except that I wore that particular dress a lot because (a) I liked it (b) I never ever had to iron it © it traveled really well and (d) it just seemed to fit a lot of occasions. And then of course (e) I got lots of compliments!
The picture I found of a suit jacket really does not do justice to the one I had; mine was much uglier. It could have worked if it had ONLY been the jacket that was plaid, but so were the pants and so was the skirt, and it being an a-line skirt, the plaids were not matched! On the whole a crappy outfit. If Herb Tarlick (of WKRP) was a woman, he’d have worn it!
The jacket looks like the kind of thing that it took me about 30 years to train Mom out of trying to stuff me in. I always got the impression that she wasn’t trying to look for stuff I’d be ok with, but for “stuff she thought she’d like if she happened to be my age” or, rather, “stuff she liked when she was my age”. Which always happens to be 27 years before I turn that age, you know?
The dress looks like the kind of dress Dad would try to stick her into when she still had a figure to show off. The jacket is as anti-figure as it comes: unless it’s perfectly tailored it’s going to have spots that never look quite right, and even if it is tailored perfectly, that pattern breaks the silhouette.
The dress has a low waist: the jacket has a high waist. FWIW (and I’m a bloke), I’ve never liked anything with a high waist.
Also, that’s a square-shoulder jacket. To me, square sholders say pocket-napoleon, or someone who uses his rank instead of his brains. Women may admire the power-jacket look, but to me, if you’ve got to use your clothing to get people to do what they’re told, it’s an admission of defeat.
The kind of clothes that I like women to wear are all about their legs.
Specifically, I love dresses and skirts and stockings (certain kinds of stockings make womens’ legs extremely attractive).
Also, I love when they wear high heels. Not necessarily extremely high heels or spikey heels. But, just so long as they accentuate a woman’s legs, they make me very happy.
That is just about it. I love the kind of clothing and accessories that accentuate a woman’s legs, knees and ankles. I’m sure that diff men appreciate diff aspects of a woman’s body. I just happen to have always apprecated her legs, knees and ankles. I think they are just the sexiest parts of a woman’s body.
Different men are bound to prefer different body parts. I’m sure I don’t need to say that a great many men find a woman’s breasts to be the single most beautiful part of her body. But breasts have never done a thing for me. I have always found men to hoot and holler at the sight of a woman’s large breasts to be real strange animals. I have never understood why they feel that way. But, to each their own, I suppose.
AFAIC, a woman’s eyes are the gateway to her soul and very few body parts are as beautiful as pretty blue or green eyes (they are my very favorite). For me, pretty eyes are closely followed by pretty legs. Again, it’s strictly a personal opinion. But since you asked, I am happy to tell you just how I feel about it.
There might be something to that. The dress is very attractive while saying, “I’m Rosie the Riveter out on the town.” A 1940s look. The jacket, OTOH…
No, it’s the cut speaking. That plaid is nasty. Otherwise, it’s a nice riding jacket.
Not pants. Jodhpurs. I sorta grew up in horse country, and that look is only appropriate at horse shows, and only if you’re competing. I think it’s because jodhpurs give everybody a bedunkadunk.
Reminds me of one of my favorite moments in Something To Talk About. Gena Rowlands and Robery Duvall are on the outs but she catches sight of him as he is getting ready to compete in the horse show – and goes all weak-kneed. 
Grace: Oh, my God.
Aunt Rae: It’s just a man on a horse, baby, just a man on a horse.
I thought jodhpurs had the baggy side pockets and things but Google Images returns both skin-tight and baggy-sided results so I learned something new.
That’s what I thought, too; that jodhpurs were flared and the tight equivalent were breeches. Wikipedia disagrees. It says that riding breeches are shorter (mid-calf, and worn with higher boots), jodhpurs are longer (ankle-length, and worn with jodhpur boots), and that either can be flared around the thigh (but modern stretchy materials make this less necessary than it used to be). Learn something new every day around here.
And that can look damn good on some women, but you probably do need to be around horses to make it work.