Sexist
Men’s couture seems to be every bit sexier than that of the ladies’. Maybe because of the lack of variations for a man’s outfit that innately draws in greater attention to detail (and design).
Walk into a designer store and one is bound to notice how the men’s range is usually much more deserving of the label (and the price) than the ladies’ are.
A short stint as backstage dresser on the runway made me realized how trashy Hugo ladies’ clothes are. And yet the Hugo suit remains as one of the symbolic must haves for the young upstart. (Never mind the fact that the label is under the same corporation that markets your toothpaste and shampoos.)
When RAOUL came into the market, I was little jealous. The classic stripes, the Egyptian silk, the finely tailored shirts. It set a new benchmark for well-designed mainstream office wear (for men).
When RAOUL-WOMEN was launched, and I was enraged. It was nothing more than a branding leverage for the ladies.
And now I hate to note that Pedro is the “brother equivalent” of Charles & Keith. (How can??) Because those laced-up-pointed-Elvis shoes are undeniably way more sexy than the towering heels on my rack.
If I were a man, I’d be splurging way more than I already am.
Damn.
Fashion wise, i still tink its better to be a woman,couture also, in that respect…. u know you agree with me..
Comment by butterfly — August 9, 2007 @ 4:59 am
Well, that’s because no matter what, couture or not (clothes or not), ladies are (almost) always sexier than men.
Comment by Tutee Ng — August 11, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
Amen for “almost”
Comment by butterfly — August 11, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
always.
Comment by Tutee Ng — August 11, 2007 @ 4:32 pm