case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-09-29 08:17 pm

[ SECRET POST #3557 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3557 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 11 secrets from Secret Submission Post #508.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 12:51 am (UTC)(link)
I'll be honest, I think crop tops are tacky as hell, unless they're over something else. They seem to be on the way out, though, which makes me happy.

I'm noticing an uptick in overalls, too. I just can't shake the feeling that they only belong on farmers/plumbers/electricians/other trade job folks, so seeing "cute" versions throws me way the hell off.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 12:52 am (UTC)(link)
crop tops over another shirt sounds tackier than crop tops on their own tbh

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 12:56 am (UTC)(link)
Still tacky, just not as bad. And obviously a tight one would look stupid, I mean that sorta-80s loose-crop over a tank top or something. Not great, but a hell of a lot better in my book.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 08:00 am (UTC)(link)
I mean, that just sounds like an 80s work out video. I would prefer feeing someone's stomach

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 08:01 am (UTC)(link)
(*seeing)
philstar22: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-09-30 12:53 am (UTC)(link)
I agree about crop tops. And I don't think the waist is even the part of skin most people would want to show? I mean, even thin people I don't think want to emphasize the waist? IDK.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-09-30 01:32 am (UTC)(link)
I thought that was THE thing to emphasize if you were thin

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 07:27 am (UTC)(link)
Are you kidding? Of course people with thin waists want to show/emphasize them!

I'm a skinny girl with a waist that is - relative to my size - quite broad and flabby, and holy crap, if I had a trim, tiny little 24" waist like some young women, I'd be in crop tops from June to September.
philstar22: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-09-30 07:34 am (UTC)(link)
Really? Hmmm. Okay. I just didn't think people thought of the waist as a particularly attractive body part regardless of size. I always thought people were more likely to want to emphasize things like legs and cleavage and hips or butts.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 08:14 am (UTC)(link)
I always thought people were more likely to want to emphasize things like legs and cleavage and hips or butts

I'm not sure if emphasizing hips is much of a thing. Most women tend to want to minimize those, I think. You're definitely right about people emphasizing cleavage and butts, of course. And then I think I would put waist in with legs, as sort of "cool" "casual" areas of the body to show off. I pair those two because, unlike cleavage and butt, waist and legs are not inherently viewed as sexually provocative parts to show off. They keep things casual while still ultimately accomplishing the same purpose.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-09-30 02:26 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't think most women specifically try to emphasize hips, though part of the reason to emphasize a small waist is to outline the hourlass figure, which includes hips.

And the line between hips and butt is a bit blurry anyway at least when it comes to body shape.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 12:55 am (UTC)(link)
That'd be classist even if overalls didn't look great.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 12:59 am (UTC)(link)
this

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 01:01 am (UTC)(link)
Almost everyone in my family works trade jobs and agrees with me, but enjoy ur baseless assumptions about me!
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-09-30 01:33 am (UTC)(link)
they're talking about an association with certain trades and overalls, not looking down on the trade. they're usually workman's clothes, and not made to look cute because they're designed for practicality. It's not classist at all to say that.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 01:52 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you ♥ That's exactly what I was trying to say.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 02:13 am (UTC)(link)
I can see the point that you're making here, and apparently that's what OP meant, but I hope you can see why I read it the way that I did.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 03:28 am (UTC)(link)
Not really. OP made a clear distinction between proper overalls worn by people in trade for practical reasons vs. "cute" ones that aren't mean to be practical items of clothing. Not at all classist, in other words. Seems to me you were looking for a reason to be offended, though I can't imagine why.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 07:29 am (UTC)(link)
NA

+1
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-09-30 02:24 pm (UTC)(link)
I could see it if OP had spoken disparagingly at all of trade jobs or even implicitly looked down on them, but they really didn't. Can you explain why you read it that way?

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 03:33 pm (UTC)(link)
I didn't read it as being about practical versus impractical. I read "cute" not as focusing on the impracticality, but as being about... people who are trying to be fashionable and look cute, I guess? So the way that I read it was that OP thought it was weird that people who were trying to be fashionable were wearing things that "only belong on farmers/plumbers/etc". That there was somehow a gap where, like, those things should never be considered fashionable precisely because they "only belong" on tradespeople - not because they're practical for tradespeople, but because there's some sort of class-based appropriateness. Yeah.

TBH, really, a lot of the reason that I interpreted it that way comes down to that specific phrase - "they only belong on". Makes it sound like some kind of natural law.
diet_poison: (Default)

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

[personal profile] diet_poison 2016-09-30 03:38 pm (UTC)(link)
I see where you're coming from now, but I think you're being really pedantic with that phrase and assigning it a lot of intent that I didn't read into it at all.

Re: Fashion Trends you Don't Get

(Anonymous) 2016-09-30 04:23 pm (UTC)(link)
Well, like I said, my interpretation was clearly wrong. But that was my reaction.