My mother bought me the World’s Ugliest T-shirt, and my guess is that it came from these people. It was:
White
With two big roses (guess where they were positioned)
Which were then emphasized by being outlined with sequins thereby guaranteeing that you couldn’t just throw the thing into the wash (although how it would get dirty in the first place I have no idea)
The really odd thing is that I presented this, as a Horrid Example, to a young woman one of my sons was dating, and she said, “Hey, that’s kinda cute.”
So I gave it to her.
She must have had good taste 'cause she was dating my son, so I can’t explain it. They broke up soon after so I never had to see that awful shirt again.
Doesn’t matter if you’re 5’ or 6’, anything 16+ is plus size. (I can sympathize, I’m 6’1 and a size 16/18 depending on the brand or style and lately the styles that used to fit are too small, even though I’m losing weight).
Those clothes look like the ones my Nana would buy me when I was a kid. I despised them.
You have 16W which is plus sized and then you have 16 misses. W sizes are cut fuller around the hips and such. Typically misses go up to a 18. I wear anything from a 12 to an 18 misses. I can also wear around a 14W (usually). One good thing about being a 12 on up is you can (usually) go back and forth between plus size and misses.
Exactly. This shit is degrading.
It’s also over-priced. Look at the JC Penney’s website, and you can find a LOT of nicer stuff in the plus section and pay less for it as well.
Cutesy should not be worn outside of pajamas. Cutesy pjs are okay because they’re supposed to be warm and baggy and comfortable.
The women in the Ladies Auxiliary at my firehouse wear stuff like this - sparkly sweatshirts, themed to the season. They all must have at least a dozen, one for every time and holiday of the year. We just had our Easter Bunny breakfast and they were all decked out in their sparkly bunny sweatshirts. I was amazed that there were no two alike.
Personally, I think they’re hideous. I wouldn’t be caught dead in one.
There are plus size 14/16/18 - followed by a W. 14W, 16W, etc (I have also seen 12W - mainly at Talbots). There are “misses” 14/16/18 (and occasionally 20), which are not considered plus-size & are usually not as fully cut as the "W"s.
Wilhelmina & Ford modeling agencies’ plus size division starts at size 10. MISSES size 10. :rolleyes:
Not exactly. Plus sizes are womens sizes - 12/14/16/18/ and up - with a W after the number, indicating a fuller cut. Misses sizes generally run to an 18 (sometimes a 20) and are not as fully cut.
Well that’s just WRONG. Shame on them. I see larger but by no means heavy women in ads these days for Lane Bryant, Playtex, and I just think again, shame on them.
Way to perpetuate the “body consciousness” of young girls. You’re fat if you’re a 10?
I don’t think a modelling agency’s recruitment policies are really relevant to any young girl who does not actually apply to be a model. They have to play to their customers; the clothing industry. The clothing industry generally hires size 6 models. If you send them a size 12 model, you won’t get the business.
It’s common knowledge, I think, that what looks good in front of the camera simply is not the same as what looks good to the naked eye. A woman who in person would seem too skinny looks good in photos, while a size 12 who looks insanely hot in person looks too heavy in photos. Princess Diana, who in photos looked great, looked way too skinny to me in person (though her face was prettier than I’d thought, for whatever reason.) Kate Winslet, who has been criticized for her weight at times and certainly does look heavy in some shots, is a goddess in person.
I don’t exactly know why that is - probably something to do with the difference between two dimensional images and three dimensional objects - but it’s true.
I’m sorry, but I fail to see much difference between the tacky Quacker t-shirts and the tacky Kate Spade purses, except for the socio-economic class of the idiots who buy such tasteless crap.
Eh, just like the Quacker Factory can only hope to approach the tackiness of Fingerhut and Lily Vernon, Kate Spade is a mere blip on the radar for tasteless purses. If you want *really * tacky handbags, you head for Dooney & Bourke.
Sorry for the hijack, but D&B has baffled and angered me for years now. What posesses people to spend hundreds of dollars on these atrocities?
See? I’m sorry to upset y’all, but dammit, share my pain!!! That site is full of almost equally ugly bags, most of which seem aimed at the pre-teen market. Many of them appear to have been made my pre-schoolers with glitter glue.
I think the one I linked to *is * the worst, though… even at $365.00, that’s a lot of ugly for the money.
