The Latest In Stupid Supposed Trends: Man-Repeller Clothing
I mean, a lot of women wear it, and have for years, but I'm guessing most don't really know any better and the rest have some sort of unresolved issues (perhaps just being a consumer of college feminism). Irina Aleksander writes for The New York Times:
LEANDRA MEDINE, a fashion blogger who lives with her parents on the Upper East Side, was thumbing through the hangers in her bedroom closet on a recent Monday morning, pulling out the sort of items that she calls "sartorial contraceptives": a blouse with erect shoulder pads from Zara; a floral, curtainlike blazer by Zimmermann; high-waisted lime green trousers by Opening Ceremony; drop-crotch utility pants; an ostrich-feather miniskirt; a cape.Since April, Ms. Medine, 21, has been publishing photos of herself wearing these pieces on her blog, the Man Repeller, as well as shots of similarly challenging recent runway looks: fashions that, though promoted by designers and adored by women, most likely confuse -- or worse, repulse -- the average straight man. These include turbans, harem pants, jewelry that looks like a torture instrument, jumpsuits, ponchos, furry garments resembling large unidentified animals, boyfriend jeans, clogs and formal sweatpants.
Glossy magazines have taken notice. Lucky has asked Ms. Medine to guest-blog. Harper's Bazaar assigned Ms. Medine a feature in its December issue titled, "Can You Be in Fashion and Still Get a Man?" And women in New York who have become fans of her blog have begun using it as a verb, as in, "I am totally man-repelling today."
"I'm really happy that people understand that man-repelling is a good thing," Ms. Medine said, seated on a velvet blue sofa in her parents' living room.
I guess it's the only way she can get attention -- to proclaim the glory of not getting any male attention.
via Kate Coe
Amy would this be the new trend called the Bag Lady Look??All you need now is shopping bags full of old rags and empty pastic bags find the over powering Urine smell.My new designer Perfume Essences Of Bag Lady on sale at Higher end retail stores Now!
RexRedbone at December 19, 2010 8:53 AM
How is that different than 'ugly clothes'? You can make unappetizing food and call it a 'diet aid,' but I just don't get the accomplishment in all this.
I looked at the photo at the top of the NYT story and thought "This is 'man repellent'? She's very attractive." Reading down, the only clothing item I could find that might be 'man repellent' was what the writer called "an oversized gray sweater with fringes and braided fabric along the arms."
But men don't look for those things; I hadn't even noticed it in the photo.
I think it's more aptly summarized as "clothes women wear to communicate to other women they're trying to be unattractive to men." Or something.
Kevin at December 19, 2010 9:02 AM
Your analysis sounds right to me.
There are men who go about in woman-repelling clothing. See here for instance:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/09/noooooooooo.html
If there's a red-blooded woman out there who finds this sort of thing appealing, speak now or forever hold your peace.
Martin at December 19, 2010 9:12 AM
She sounds like a little kid. You know, one who figures negative attention is better than no attention at all?
Steve Daniels at December 19, 2010 9:20 AM
heh, sounds like a challenge.
the reality is that there is not much clothing that will repel men. Though I'm sure a saggy pajama bottom with cuffs that drag on the floor and are dirty, coupled with an oversized dirty sweatshirt prolly goes there. My guess is the princess would never wear that.
They are fairly correct that women wear specific clothes for other women. What men are interested in is how those clothes draw the eye, how they give your body form. We're not interested in the clothes, rather what's inside them.
But if you want to repel a man, you will probably figure out a way to succeed. after all, it's more fun to chase a girl who is trying to attract, than one who is giving you the evil eye. though I know there are some guys that see a challenge in that too.
SwissArmyD at December 19, 2010 9:32 AM
Like trolls on a message board. They cannot gain positive attention from the content of their posts, and given the choice between no attention and negative attention, the latter is preferable.
So, since Leandre Medine cannot entice the gaze of men, she decides to repel it, claiming that that's her objective.
Yeah, right.
I could give her points for honesty if she admitted that she's a plain Jane whose attempts at attracting men have met with minimal success.
Patrick at December 19, 2010 9:39 AM
I deplore the blog as book-bait, but I spent most of my unmarried years trying to look like Annie Hall, and with no false modesty, I had to fight men off with sticks. (Not beat them off with sticks, you pervs.) Guys like some mystery, I think. Of course, I was pretty much a self-proclaimed sure thing, too. (It was the late 70s, what did you expect?)
KateC at December 19, 2010 9:51 AM
It's not always the look that is repelling. I hate the sound of hard soled shoes, usually high heels. If you want attention why not just yell "Look at me."? No need to sound like a horse in a courtyard.
ray at December 19, 2010 9:57 AM
And women in New York who have become fans of her blog have begun using it as a verb, as in, "I am totally man-repelling today."
That's not using it as a verb, it's using the gerund form as an adjective.
An example of verb usage would be: "Kate sure man-repelled the guys at the singles bar last night."
dee nile at December 19, 2010 9:59 AM
Except, Patrick, this girl is beautiful. Really beautiful. She's going to get checked out no matter what she's wearing. (Maybe that was the motivation for the blog? I hate getting cat-called, so does my sister and she dresses frumpy to avoid it. Unfortunately it doesn't really work.)
I think this girl's premise is dumb, but I also think a lot of "high fashion" is silly - her outfits don't look much more ridiculous than what's on a lot of designer runways. She's just trying to do something different to get herself noticed, and hey, it worked! I think this is less about feminism and more about a 20-something who wants to be a fashionista but doesn't really have any talent, so she's going for sensational instead.
Sam at December 19, 2010 10:02 AM
Isn't this blog just a commentary on hipster fashion. She gives instructions on what to wear then says "Congrats! You look like an asshole, don't travel above 14th street." She's just playing around on the interwebs. I think it's funny, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVmmYMwFj1I&has_verified=1
Gspotted at December 19, 2010 10:14 AM
I think clothes that repel men would be stupid high-fashion things, like the women wear in Sex and the City. I've never seen the show, but I've seen the movie poster and the TV ads and wondered who would find any of those women attractive.
The truth is that if you're an attractive woman - or man - it doesn't matter what you wear in most cases. A beautiful woman could wear a thrashed flannel shirt and it would be attractive because of the contrast between her beauty and the threadbare shirt itself.
Kevin at December 19, 2010 10:14 AM
Really beautiful.
No she isn't. She's young. There's a big difference. In a few years, she's not going to need a special outfit to repel men, because women with features like hers don't typically age well.
fashionista at December 19, 2010 10:27 AM
Real men don't like feathers.
(Except maybe Latin Americans... Those boys are whack).
Crid [cridcomment at gmail] at December 19, 2010 10:32 AM
Oh c'mon- she looks alright, no need to get nasty.
Her blog is funny and gimmicky enough for loads of press-good for her!
Gspotted at December 19, 2010 10:33 AM
Not to your taste, definitely annoying, but still pretty. I personally hate Angelina Jolie's big forehead and pouty face, but I know she's good-looking. .
Sam at December 19, 2010 10:48 AM
She's not promoting it, she's mocking it. I read the article before reading your blog and thought to myself, "People are going to miss the irony entirely." Indeed.
From the NYT "trend" piece:
Last year, inspiration struck while visiting Topshop with her friend Rachel Strugatz, an online editor at Women’s Wear Daily. “We were laughing at how everything was so man-repelling: acid-washed harem pants and enormous shoulder pads, and I just said, ‘That’s it! That’s the blog,’ ” Ms. Medine said.
As for whether she’s dating anyone, Ms. Medine declined to comment. “I think men like things tight and simple,” she said. “It’s not even about slutty, tiny dresses from Bebe because that’s not very becoming of a woman either. But to guys, harem pants don’t exactly shape the body, shoulder pads are unusual because you look like a linebacker and sequins are a cry for attention.”
elementary at December 19, 2010 11:13 AM
Re: Harem pants. As a former belly dancer, we certainly didn't think of them as a man-repeller, but we didn't wear them to do our shopping, either.
As I was taught it, the point was so a woman could do some of those moves without showing the movement of her knees. Keeps the dance more fluid.
They are also very comfortable.
Pricklypear at December 19, 2010 11:37 AM
As a (presumably) normal male, I have always boggled at the stuff that comes down the fashion runway. It is almost universally hideous. Why does anyone find any interest in this sort of self-indulgent crap? It is of a piece with much of modern art: make something senseless, and watch the idiots fawn over you, because they assume there some some deep meaning.
I forget what museum it was, somewhere in New England: A bunch of welders doing some construction in the musuem assembled a pile of scrap metal in a corner, and it was "on display" for a couple of years before the museum realized that it had been fooled. To me that was a quintessential demonstration of the worthlessness of most so-called "art".
a_random_guy at December 19, 2010 12:03 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/19/what_an_ass.html#comment-1804174">comment from a_random_guyIf you aren't too chunky, all you really ever have to do is wear a black dress that follows your curves and some jewelry.
Amy Alkon at December 19, 2010 12:20 PM
Many moons ago I was talking to a lady who was a military spouse -- she absolutely refused to buy "trendy" clothes. She knew what her clothing budget for the year was and bought stuff that would last and still always be acceptable.
For example she had both pencil skirts and A-line skirts that were in basic colors. Same with her slacks. Her blouses were the same -- solid color without the shoulder pads. She took care of herself. In winter she had classic, simple sweaters.
She always was attractive no matter what she wore. That is what I call style.
Meanwhile I went to a Waffle House last night. Its about 20F, there are 3-5 inches of snow on the ground (on the grass and unplowed stuff). I see a women walk in, with a guy, wearing shoes similar to those in Leandra Medine's blog, but solid black. They looked good, but how comfortable and warm could she be?
I like a lady, when we're dating, to be as attractive as they can be when out with me. But I'd rather have her be practical and comfortable when it comes to having X inches of white sh** on the ground and freezing temperatures. (Besides they generally make it up to me in front of a nice warm fire. ;-) )
I like good looking ladies -- but I will never jump on them for being frumpy if there is a practical reason. The ironic part is that I learned this at my sister's feet, literally. Our high school had the yearly picture drill for the sophomores and juniors in November. My sister dressed up for it -- wearing a dress and open-toed heels on a really frosty November day. We had a bus stop shelter that we kept candles in to help warm us up. She nearly burned her toes on a candle trying to keep warm. ;-)
Jim P. at December 19, 2010 12:49 PM
While this may temporarily soothe their egos, as years go by these women will become increasingly bitter for being rejected by men over and over (a self-compounding situation as bitterness is unattractive), and probably increasingly try blame men for their (probably fairly predictable) state of loneliness and inability to find a satisfactory life partnership as they grow older and less attractive and their biological clock ticks ever louder.
One has to sort of wonder, what's the point? But there seems to be one silver lining for humanity: These women are doing us the favor of effectively voluntarily removing their dumb genes from the gene pool.
Lobster at December 19, 2010 2:10 PM
"the reality is that there is not much clothing that will repel men"
Perhaps I'm fussier than some, but I find a woman dressing ugly and plain (signaling a lack of internal recognition or comfort of her own sexuality; frigidity) a huge turn-off. Women who dress to show off their sexy feminine side - love that. They don't even have to be that attractive; it's more about (1) being in touch with your own sensual side and (2) making an effort to look nice and look feminine. And Amy is right with "all you really ever have to do is wear a black dress that follows your curves and some jewelry". Visit certain Western-European countries (e.g. Belgium) - wow! - you see the women there really understand this, and dressing to look good is regarded as normal, not culturally as a bad thing. I was amazed how even in the cold of winter they can dress to look so good, so feminine, so elegant and sexy.
Fashion 'trends' that set out to look ugly (this definitely isn't the first in recent years) are perhaps just one manifestation of modern cultural nihilism (cf. http://www.atlassociety.org/why_art_became_ugly "Why Art Became Ugly").
Lobster at December 19, 2010 2:28 PM
Everyone gets that Medine's intent is satiric, right?
She's demonstrating her eye by showing us the dark side of the force. Zappa taught his bands to play the music he hated perfectly, so that he could mock it.
Crid [cridcomment at gmail] at December 19, 2010 2:29 PM
"she absolutely refused to buy "trendy" clothes. She knew what her clothing budget for the year was and bought stuff that would last"
One of the goals of the 'fashion industry' is to create artificial scarcity in a market where natural scarcity would otherwise be extremely low, as clothes can last years. Nobody would spend as much as most people do on clothes if they weren't brainwashed with the idea that you 'can't be caught dead' in last years clothes. Even the idea of clothing as "seasonal" is strange to me.
Lobster at December 19, 2010 2:32 PM
“I think men like things tight and simple,” she said.
Not too simple, though. I still have to have a conversation with her.
ba-da-BOOMP.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 19, 2010 2:35 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/19/what_an_ass.html#comment-1804299">comment from Crid [cridcomment at gmail]I would say her intent is getting attention.
Amy Alkon at December 19, 2010 3:05 PM
Hmm. Clothes may make the man, but the woman makes the outfit.
One of the finest things I've ever seen was a woman at the racetrack wearing $1500 of Dainese motorcycle armor. Yeah, that frilly stuff in WoW has its counterpart in real life.
And Debbie Harry wore Hefty bags on Saturday Night Live years ago. Mmmm-mmmm!
Radwaste at December 19, 2010 4:02 PM
How is this ANY different than the dreadful way all too many women dress in Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, and I'm sure a lot of other places in North America?!
Robert W. (Vancouver) at December 19, 2010 4:31 PM
This young gal appears quite cute, despite the clothing. I'm guessing she's right: any young man foolish enough to reject her and other young woman based on something as temporary as that day's clothing is making a mistake.
In a way, her clothing can, at times, sort for shallow. And if I was still young, I'd be pretty interested in the details of the young body underneath the clothes, the possibilities of the young body in other clothes.
This whole schtick reminds me of the stereotype of the librarian who takes off her eyeglasses and lets down her hair, proving dowdiness was a disguise for something a great deal more gorgeous.
Sanitation Man at December 19, 2010 5:56 PM
I think the Montreal/New York aesthetic is to be fit, hot, and well-dressed so they can shoot you down for being interested, then get together over apple martinis and talk about the awful guy who expressed an interest.
Maybe this is for women who are afraid we won't be interested, so they dress to reject before we show any interest, and then they can all get together to drink apple martinis and talk about how awful men are because we don't make a pass or express any interest, and the ones that do make a pass have no taste because, my god, look how we're dressed, waiter another round please.
Simple and tight actually works pretty well for me. I drive a Jeep, though.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 19, 2010 6:01 PM
The Manhattan hipster community: where common sense goes to die.
SanMan, it's not necessarily a matter of being rejected because of clothing. It's a matter of not being noticed in the first place.
Rad, you remember Dale Bozzio and the Tupperware bra?
Cousin Dave at December 19, 2010 7:32 PM
Not only are they deaf and dumb, they could be goin' blind... No one notices.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at December 19, 2010 8:15 PM
I honestly don't get the whole idea of "man repellant". WHY? Unless you are a lesbian, why would you want to repel men?
Maybe I'm an idiot, but I love men. Yeah, some of them are jerks, but some women are as well. I think this is less about her attire and more about how she somehow thinks hating on and "repelling" men is hip, cool, and trendy. It's not. It's rude, misandrist, and frankly fucking annoying.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a "big" girl, (working on it, back on the low carb diet!) and I still try to dress so that my man doesn't think I'm a total fat slob with no respect for myself. Come on, I'd be grossed out if he didn't shower for three days and wore baggy sweatpants and a t-shirt all the time, why then would it be okay for me to do that? It's basic common courtesy that you try and look good for your mate, regardless of the assets (or lack thereof) you have at the moment.
Or, maybe I've had one martini too many. :D
Daghain (formerly Ann; going through an identity crisis!) at December 19, 2010 9:07 PM
Daghain, I think when you're plus-size you realize you can't afford to be a slob. Many people will forgive a fat person if they're jolly and clean. Few people will forgive a fat, depressed slob.
This smacks of vanity to me, "I'm sooooo hot that I have to fight off the guys! Gosh, poor me, they won't leave me alone!!!"
NicoleK at December 20, 2010 1:48 AM
My take on her and her blog was completely different - she isn't actually trying to repel me, but is trying to show how cutting edge fashion can be really fucking awful.
She'll pull together outfits that are inpired by or direct copies of runway fashions...then proceeds to mock them by discussing how you'll never get a man wearing that outfit. Because straight men don't understand the layering of granny sweaters and nursing home curtain patterns or pants that make your crotch look a mile long. This is because men are just willing to acknowledge what a number of high fashion, and many of the blind followers, refuse to: the stuff is shit ass fugly.
I thought her blog was more of a big joke, poking fun at these absurd trends. Instead of coming out and saying "hey look at these really ugly outfits that Designer X wants us to pay a million dollars for!" she's making it funny. It never seemed like her goal was to make men think she's unattractive 4realz...she'll take a really cute look and runway-ify it so that it's hideous and the message, to me, is "if you want to look good, and want me to want you, keep it simple."
Or maybe I missed the entire point.
Gretchen at December 20, 2010 6:22 AM
"she isn't actually trying to repel me, "
Should be "...repel *men*" ha.
Gretchen at December 20, 2010 6:31 AM
"She's not promoting it, she's mocking it."
This. She's writing a blog making fun of how unattractive high fashion can be, while also admitting she likes it. I share her view. I like fashion (though I won't pay the prices for the high end stuff), but I am aware that much of it is intended to do something other than maximize the attractiveness of the wearer.
Of course she wants attention, Amy. Would you be writing your blog if no one ever read it?
Astra at December 20, 2010 7:02 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/19/what_an_ass.html#comment-1804850">comment from AstraAstra, a little snarly in the comments this morning -- just replied to the other you left on another entry.
Fashion intended to "do something other than maximize the attractiveness of the wearer" is moronic -- unless you are a woman who is interested in women and would like to have as little male attention as possible.
If you're getting attention by promoting this you're leading women astray in a way they're already way too astray already.
Men like to see a woman's waist. If you'd like to get or keep a man, it's best to not dress to cover it up or look like you might be with child.
Amy Alkon at December 20, 2010 7:22 AM
Sorry, but pregnant women in pregnant clothes are hawt. Just kidding. I think?
It looks to me that this chick is just goofing on women's fashion and isn't trying to start a man repelling trend. She has a sense of humor -- which is attractive.
Jason S. at December 20, 2010 7:56 AM
"Astra, a little snarly in the comments this morning -- just replied to the other you left on another entry."
Perhaps. I thought I was just being blunt, in the style of the blog hostess.
"Fashion intended to "do something other than maximize the attractiveness of the wearer" is moronic -- unless you are a woman who is interested in women and would like to have as little male attention as possible."
Your friend Little Shiva's outfit had value, despite being one that did not appear to be intended to maximize the attractiveness of the wearer. Fashion can be a form of expression, an art form, a political statement, etc. Personally, I wear clothes that are flattering and professional, but I can appreciate the other aspects from afar.
Astra at December 20, 2010 8:44 AM
Seems a lot missed the sarcasm in her posts
It's about fashion conscious people. People who work in the industry & are up on all the trends. What's the right shoe height this season, heel thickness this season. The kind of super focus on "fashion" that regular people just don't do.
I love the site. Funniest reading evar!
.....
This site has become a little more pearl-clutchy lately. What no plug for the Psychology Today? Has it been 5 minutes.
MeganNJ at December 20, 2010 8:54 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/19/what_an_ass.html#comment-1804953">comment from MeganNJWhat no plug for the Psychology Today? Has it been 5 minutes.
Sorry to disappoint you:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201010/the-truth-about-beauty
I only wish I made even a single dime more for "plugging" it.
Amy Alkon at December 20, 2010 9:00 AM
Good call
MeganNJ at December 20, 2010 12:39 PM
Wait. Haven't the Olsen twins been wearing clothes like these for years?
Willa at December 20, 2010 12:52 PM
Her blog seems pretty clearly satirical to me. I might even call it clever, if I recognized even half of the fashion/brand references. I fail to see the objection.
snakeman99 at December 20, 2010 1:24 PM
This is satire. If what she wants is attention, I can think of worse ways that writing something clever and entertaining...
deja pseu at December 20, 2010 2:09 PM
"that" should be "than"
deja pseu at December 20, 2010 2:13 PM
What Astra and Gretchen said.
Also, "Fashion intended to "do something other than maximize the attractiveness of the wearer" is moronic -- unless you are a woman who is interested in women and would like to have as little male attention as possible."?
Don't lesbians also like a woman to be attractive?
The ones I know certainly seem to.
Sigivald at December 20, 2010 3:24 PM
(And the follow-on I left out, which is:
And it's not like what would make a woman attractive to a lesbian and what would make her attractive to a straight male are that different, outside of the subsets of lesbian culture that are devoted to some Costumey Look.
I've certainly noticed that the "bull-dyke in leather" and "short-haired lesbian in flannel" are by no means universally approved looks among the set of women who prefer other women.)
Sigivald at December 20, 2010 3:26 PM
It's. A. Joke.
The author of the blog is a thin, conventionally attractive woman who clearly puts a lot of time and money into her appearance. She's not saying "ladies, you should dress this way to fend off men because men suck"; she's making fun of how high fashion can be so inexplicably unflattering and off-putting to dudes.
Moreover, I doubt Medine would be writing this blog or dressing like this if she weighed 200 pounds or had a nose like Pinocchio. But because she's build like a runway model, she can probably get away with dressing like bag lady without actually ever sacrificing any male attention. And dressing like this won't actually repel ALL men; rather it serves as a discreet signal that she is wealthy, high status, and fashion conscious, which may be desirable to men in certain social circles. So she "repels" all men except a certain subset that she's looking to attract. Clever. (The same applies to men and women that dress goth, or emo, or head-to-toe J. Crew-they're sending a signal to the specific people they want to attract.)
And fashion DOES have other purposes rather than looking attractive. You might dress a certain way to look professional, or intelligent, or artsy, or just fashionable. That doesn't mean you shouldn't look attractive while doing so, but it's not always going to be the primary objective. Some women don't get this either. You'll see women like this on "What Not To Wear" wearing hot pants and fake eyelashes to the grocery store because they think it's their best look, when in reality it looks trashy anywhere outside of a nightclub. And with the spectrum of looking attractive, there's a lot of room for self expression. Amy shows her waist wearing cocktail dresses around town, I show mine in shorts and a tank top. I bet both our choices have more to do with personal preference and self expression than thinking "what is the number one best item I can wear to look most attractive to men?"
Shannon at December 20, 2010 6:37 PM
"So she "repels" all men except a certain subset that she's looking to attract"
No man I've ever heard of wants their woman to look plain and ugly.
Lobster at December 21, 2010 3:32 AM
I was at a bar with my girlfriend this weekend, and there was a particularly conservatively dressed girl that was extremely loud and obnoxious. My girlfriend turned to me and said "Girls like that only do missionary"
I thought it was pretty funny. She started saying it to our friends which some felt was TMI :)
plutosdad at December 21, 2010 8:48 AM
"No man I've ever heard of wants their woman to look plain and ugly."
Yes but some men do want their woman wearing whatever came down the runaway at Chanel or Marc Jacobs this season, even if it's inexplicably and unattractive, because it reflects on them and their status. Women who dress like this are probably looking to attract a man like this.
Shannon at December 21, 2010 1:43 PM
> I thought it was pretty funny.
It ain't true, though.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at December 22, 2010 10:11 AM
Leave a comment