Disrupting Flattery: Those COS Outfits - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Dressing

About: Fringe Trend: Oversized Long over Oversized Cropped

Welcome! Read about what to wear and how to wear it on the YLF Blog. Join the YLF Forum to ask specific questions or just chat about fashion and personal style. Or check out the curated list of things we love in YLF Finds.

Outfits Ensembles Trends Advice

Disrupting Flattery: Those COS Outfits

Gaylene

Veteran

Laura's comment really stood out for me in today's comments:

"Not everyone wants to look sexy/flattered/attractive all the time. There are ways to claim your power using fashion that don’t involve prettiness or sex appeal and, in my opinion, COS is hitting some of them with this line."

Laura's thought, combined with Lyn Slater/Accidental Icon's posting (below), have got me pondering our instinctive reaction to view clothes which "disrupt" the feminine hourglass shape as ugly and unwearable.

"Conceptual Fashion uses the body as a site for communication. Postmodern philosophers like Foucault maintain that the body is inscribed with cultural and gender meanings and becomes a text that tells the story of the social context that the body is constructed in. This process not only shapes the body but in many cases disciplines it as well, for example, what bodies are considered to be objects of beauty. Some conceptual designers have understood this and use fashion and clothes to disrupt dominant discourses and narratives about the female body."
http://www.accidentalicon.com/

As my aging body grows ever further away from the cultural ideal of the beautiful hourglass with a firm, high bosom, small waist, and shapely (but slim!) hips, I'm wondering if I ought to readjust my feelings about dressing for flattery. What struck me about the COS images this morning was how I focused on the model's face, instead of her shape, in those "unflattering" outfits.

Is working towards flattery the enemy, or the salvation, for those of us who aren't tall, young, slim woman with hourglass shapes. Can a woman "disrupt" the dominant ideal of the female shape and still be seen as feminine and attractive? Why is dressing to focus on the face instead of the female shape seem so revolutionary? And, finally, to build on Laura's thought: Given the majority of women are not model worthy, what do we risk if we decide to NOT use fashion to project prettiness and sex appeal?

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts.

Dressing

52 replies

Latest reply was from judy

Lyn D.

Veteran

I never aim for 'sexy' but always 'attractive!'
I don't wear heels or clumpy trainers, and take the middle road.
In-between is most comfortable for me- oversized is not necessarily 'un-feminine' but more not practical for an active lifestyle

Astrid

Veteran

We have a few COS stores in Berlin and I regularly go and have a look. I don't own anything from there, but I like to look all the same. Broaden my horizons maybe? Somehow looking at these clothes before visiting stores with more tame fashion makes me feel braver to make unconventional choices in the "safe" range those offer. When I browse at COS I usually feel like I'm completely out of my element. I don't fit into this store. But I love to look at the style the women who shop there have. To me they usually look interesting, fierce and self-confident. I don't think for one moment about the idea of figure flattery when I look at them.

ETA
Just wanted to add that I find the attitude and confidence attractive. So maybe an outfit isn't conventionally flattering and some people might snub the look because of that, but to others it can be something positive.

catgirl

Veteran

You know I love this topic! I dress for many reasons - to feel powerful, relevant, strong, fierce, Indian, prepared, and comfortable, for starters - but being conventionally sexy or attractive isn't one of them. I think those are equally reasonable and understandable goals, they just don't speak to me as personal objectives. .

I do wear colors that flatter though!

Will chime in more when not on phone.

LaPed

Veteran

Lyn -- that is the same reason I don't go for exaggerated silhouettes, whether oversized or bodycon. Those garments typically aren't practical for someone who is active, outdoors, and moving around a lot. Comfort/practicality always has a say in what I wear.

gryffin

Veteran

Gaylene - very interesting thoughts as always. It's funny how you focused on looking at the models' faces because it has always been my goal to have people "see me" and not necessarily the outfit. I think I adore black, in part, because of the "jewel box" principle. Since I have pale rosy skin, dark hair and eyes it forms a frame and brings attention to my face. I want people to talk to me, not my outfit. Although I do prefer long over lean silhouettes, in black of course, I don't think proportion is necessarily, flattering or not, what brings the attention to the face, but rather color and the quietness of an outfit. In the photo with the model in green - the green really looks beautiful with her hair and complexion and I really see her face, also the blue - in lighter colors I find her washed out and my attention does not focus on her face. But then I am not the person who checks out shoes or the outfit first. I always look at faces and only then take register the outfit usually as background noise unless it's wonderful or unusual in a negative way. But an interesting point. I will have to pay more attention to this.

approprio

(website)

Veteran

Yes.

Sal

Veteran

When we dress, we convey a lot of messages, some overt, and some subconcious, some of them could be:

- I am a powerful interesting person
- I am an approachable friendly person
- I am attractive and of child bearing age
- I am in the know about fashion
- I like to be comfortable
- I like colourful clothing

And I could go on...

Masking a feminine shape (whatever it is) in a fashionable way (as opposed to wearing oversized joggers and a mens tee) is sending a message too...

- I don't care if this is flattering or not, or
- Look at my face not my waist/bottom/breasts/legs
- I choose to dress this way

I guess it depends what messages we want to send...

I like the looks (although I would change aspects) but I would feel an imposter if I dressed this way now.

I believe dressing with an emphasis outside the body can still be attractive...I guess making a bolder choice about fashion whatever it is, can lead to people making judgements - whether we should or do care about them is a different issue. In some circles in NZ these looks would be mainstream, we have a full range of sub-groups of fashion, as would a full body tattoo look, or a Real Housewives look.

JAileen

Veteran

Even when I was young and had a tiny waist, I never tried to look sexy. That is just not me. Anyway, I think I was successful!

Now I just try to look normal, compared to those around me. I want to look approachable by my CASA foster kids, and when I go to court later this month, I want to be perceived as intelligent, responsible, credible, and competent. The rest of the time I try to look current and interesting. Still never sexy!

Style Fan

Veteran

I wrote about my thoughts on Approprio's post earlier. I liked the outfits and I wore something similar. What messages do we send out with our fashion? I have become less avant guarde in the last few years but that doesn't mean I might not start doing something different one day.
To me fashion is art. Art is expression. Art is also political. And fashion can be a political statement. Okay I will stop now.

Aziraphale

Veteran

Is working towards flattery the enemy, or the salvation, for those of us who aren't tall, young, slim woman with hourglass shapes.
It depends on your perspective, and how you feel about the unfairnesses associated with being a woman in a man's world.

Can a woman "disrupt" the dominant ideal of the female shape and still be seen as feminine and attractive?
I think so, provided she hits some of the other important notes that convey health and vitality, like good skin, hair and teeth. Because that's the bottom line when it comes to perceived attractiveness: does your physical self advertise a genetically sound, healthy individual? Bonus points, I suppose, for a body shape that suggests fertility (i.e., the "ideal" female shape), but it's not the be-all end-all. Case in point: we see almost all young children as attractive, even though they are not sexually mature, because everything about them says "health".

Why is dressing to focus on the face instead of the female shape seem so revolutionary?
Because we live in a world that's still hanging on to the past a bit, where the value of a woman is in part judged by her childbearing capacity. Thousands of years of culture (and millions of years of evolution) are hard to shift.

And, finally, to build on Laura's thought: Given the majority of women are not model worthy, what do we risk if we decide to NOT use fashion to project prettiness and sex appeal?
That we won't get wolf whistles from construction workers as we pass by? That we might endure less subtle hostility from insecure gals in the workplace? That we are less at risk for sexual harassment? Or, on the downside, that we might be passed over for a promotion by a sexist male boss? Lol. Seriously now. I think what you risk depends on your age, your education, your skills, and your confidence level. A woman who has more to offer than her looks and who knows this, doesn't risk much. (But you know this ).

rachylou

Veteran

I have to admit, when people stop with sexy/flattering/attractive - I find this beyond boring. It says to me: Breed, Buy a Beamer, Die... What's the point of that? Why bother? I could replace you with a cardboard cutout and it would be the same difference. I don't get it.

On the other hand, I can see how being more interesting than that can be threatening towards those basic goals. You'll be diverting resources and potentially may sacrifice pretty important things for the sake of the extraordinary.

In any case, my personal preference is looking lively. I think that's the truest, not boring, form of sexy/attractive/flattery.

Kaelyn

Veteran

As a tall young, fat woman, my only flattery concern has been trying to make myself look slim. And it's stupid. No matter how I dress, I still take up the same amount of space. So over the last few years, I've had to work on coming to terms with my largeness. I'm not the ideal. Even when I lose the weight, I still won't be the ideal because I'm not an hourglass. And then when I get older, I can uncheck the "young" box (not that that bothers me in the slightest, because I have never been afraid of aging!). I dress in a way that flatters me, more or less, but mostly I dress for my own happiness. I'm not going to say no to something just because it doesn't push me more toward looking like a pretty little hourglass. That said, I DO notice that I'm generally treated better on days I'm wearing something reasonably flattering and I've bothered to do my makeup. It's an awful bias in our society that we favor the pretty, but it's there.

Peri

Veteran

I'm with you on all of these points, and yet I still don't like those outfits! To me there is a difference between ignoring conventional flattery, which I usually do, and dressing to actively distort.

I wear long and fluid tops over long and fluid, semi wide leg pants. I know the expected thing is to wear long and fluid tops with skinny pants and I don't care. I value my comfort over whatever treat it might give someone else to see the shape of my legs. I know I would look thinner and taller in the more conventional slimmer cut trousers or jeans. I decide that isn't my priority.

The COS outfits to me didn't quite say that. They go so far as to distort proportions on purpose...to make the torso extremely long and the legs really short. They take the concept of eschewing conventional figure flattery and make it into a caricature. So I don't see someone making a beautiful feminist statement...I see (as someone has already said) someone saying "I'm am so gorgeous I can get away with this". Notice that they still used a tall, thin, young, gorgeous model to show the clothes. It won't be a women should not be judged on appearance statement until they put me and others like me modeling them.

Also, the outfits for me do the opposite of put the focus on her face. They are so strangely distorted that all I look at is her body!

unfrumped

Veteran

Gaylene, I get your point, I think, but if I do, I'm not sure what is the outfit rendition that is best, or that meets other goals. The above outfits are quite striking in their own way and so though they "hide" the female shape, they call attention to the body in another way (the voluminous material), and for me they don't really focus on the faces.
Now, they may indeed have a kind of power, and so if not based on evidence of "female-ness" maybe that is also what you are identifying.
Would an outfit have to be more neutral overall? Such as, not form-fitting but not itself an architectural space-occupying presence? Or would that be a form of invisibility?
Wherein lies the power of garments apart from the form of the wearer? Perhaps in times long ago some of it was in the fabrics--richness, rarity, fragility, huge human craft investment in the making, and actual gold and jewels woven in. Is there a modern analogy, not simply "designer", and one that foregoes figure flattery?

Helena

Veteran

This is a really interesting topic to ponder ... on the one hand, I think it's totally normal and healthy for humans to want to fit into the cultural norms, whatever those may be, and that is part of our collectivist brain, which has its pluses and minuses. I also think it is normal and healthy for humans to want to push beyond those cultural norms when they become stale or oppressive, and that is part of our individualistic brain, which has its pluses and minuses. The holy grail is the balance, and sometimes balance looks less like a straight line and more like a pendulum swinging all the way to one side, and then all the way to the other. I would suggest some of those COS outfits represent a bit of a pendulum swing, and the way it will be interpreted at street level will be a little more straight line.

I also think that sometimes we can do both of these things at once. I think teenaged girls can be brilliant at this, in fact. I remember as a teenager, throwing my wool uniform kitl in the dryer to shrink it, then pairing it will decidely masculine Doc Martens and oversized thermal underwear shirts from the mens department at Marks Work Warehouse. Simultaneously trying to be stylish and cool (the short skirt was all about style - I was shocked as an adult to learn how school uniforms were viewed by some!!), and not giving a crap about looking stereotypially feminine or flattering my figure. All at once, with little conscious thought given to the whole thing at all.

Not sure if that gets anywhere, but that's what was bouncing around in my head after reading this thread!

Anonymous

I am in total agreement with Peri. But wow. "Breed, buy a Beamer, Die." Guess I'll go make a cardboard cutout of myself and call it a day. Am I the only one who just wants to look reasonably put-together and approachable? To be more than my clothes or the labels on them? To not have a philosophical breakdown every time I go into my closet? To not Need To Say Something Important With My Clothing? To understand that looking presentable does NOT immediately translate to "sexy" or even "attractive"? To know that subtlety is a lost art and for people to know me for who I am instead of how I dress or who I wear is infinitely more important to me? I guess I don't belong here. Gaylene's questions are interesting, but I'm at a loss.

Gaylene

Veteran

First of all, thanks for all the comments. As usual, you are making me think hard about why I found COS so interesting this morning.

Lyn and La Pedestrienne: you make a good point how exaggerated silhouettes can be impractical for those of us who are active. but why does my sports gear feature nipped-in waists and form-emphasizing contouring around the butt. Not sure how those design features help my skiing or backcountry hiking.

Astrid: You’ve hit on exactly what puzzles me about why volume feels so controversial and why showing my shape seems like the “safer” choice even if I detest sexy, body-con clothing.

Una: I’ve often thought you and I dress for many of the same reasons—although I’ll substitute Northern European for Indian. I’m also vain enough to want some flattery, but not sure why flattery so often revolves around shape.

Gryffin: I thought it was interesting about how the lack of structure made me look at the faces of the models in a fashion shoot. It made me wonder why, as women, we often worry more about figure flattery than of “face flattery”.

Approprio: Yes? To disruption and revolution? Or to rejection of figure flattery as a primary goal of fashion and style? Or something else?

Sally and JAileen: I agree about the messages we send through our clothing, but what is it about not revealing my shape that would make people feel I was not knowledgeable about fashion, or not friendly, or not interested in being attractive. Why is showing the outlines of my body so important to others?

StyleFan: Why does it strike me as funny that hiding my aging shape in a voluminous silhouette can be a political statement—or send me careening into the avant guarde camp?

Aziraphale: I was hoping you’d answer some of my questions. I think you are spot on with your point about prettiness, youth, and glowing health playing a major role in this volume thing. Maybe because, with those aces, volume looks like a choice instead of a default? Unless confidence and insolence can trump the nascent hostility in denying others a glimpse of your mature shape.Too funny!

Rachylou: Nodding vigorously at “lively”! Makes me think of something I read years ago when the press was dumbfounded at Charles preferring Camilla over the beautiful Diana. One of his royal circle dared to comment that Camilla was never at a loss for male companionship since her male friends all swooned over her “interesting, lively” nature. In their eyes, Camilla would be more fun in an amorous romp than the svelte and lovely Diana.

Gaylene

Veteran

I have to run, but I'll be back later to read the rest of the comments. Thanks everyone!

Echo

Veteran

My first thought, even before going over to see the COS pieces and photos, was that I bet they used young, slim, attractive women to model the clothing. Like Aziraphale said, it is far easier to pull off looks like this when there is the subtle reassurance that there is a young, nubile woman under the tents, and people generally react far more positively (or at least less negatively) to young women dressed this way.

An older woman, IMO, would look cartoonish and silly in outfits like this (and I classify myself in that category, BTW, so I am not talking about other people). They will get themselves laughed at, not taken seriously for their brains instead of their bodies. There are MANY ways to dress so as not to covey "sexy" without throwing out being taken seriously with the figure flattery. We don't need to pretend we have a perfect hourglass figure, but dressing for business conveys an ability for business; dressing for a workout conveys the seriousness of one's intent to exercise, etc. I find myself a bit muddled over exactly what one might be dressing for with the COS clothing, as one certainly could not be taken seriously in most business places in that clothing.

Given that while I enjoy dressing well, I have always wanted people to notice ME instead of my clothing, I feel the COS clothing accomplishes just the opposite. Everyone would notice the clothing and only the clothing, IMO. Like Angie said, pairing one of the tops with structured bottoms might be a great look, but together these pieces all look costumey to me. And even though they might not be conventionally sexy or figure flattering, the still scream "LOOK AT ME!!!!!" at the top of their lungs, and that's rarely a good look for anyone.

Aziraphale

Veteran

*note: just to clarify, I didn't say that youth was necessary to be perceived as attractive -- rather, you just need to give the overall impression of health, which is also signalled by good hair (i.e. healthy-looking), skin (not necessarily wrinkle-free!), and teeth (infirmity is associated with missing or rotten teeth).

In terms of sexual attractiveness, youth always helps, but that's not what I was getting at.

Angie

(website)

Fashion Stylist

SO INTERESTING, Gaylene.

I applaud Aziraphale for answering your questions with academic insight.

I commend Andrea for getting to the heart of her feelings - I really resonated with what you said. That took courage too.

First, figure flattery is in the eye of the beholder. Full Stop. That's why I go on and on about our Personal Figure Flattery Priorities.

Second, the most creative and interesting outfits generally create the least conventionally flattering proportions. Although conventionally flattering proportions garner attention (because we are conditioned to find them appealing, pulled together and attractive), the opposite (like the COS outfits) garner as much attention because they are interesting and unique. And for the most part - the wearer of such an outfit is aware of precisely that (and Echo hinted at that in her comment). A person wearing a very arty and interesting outfit that is not conventionally flattering has done so to stand out and be different. They find that option superior over the "stereotypical attractive" option for all sorts of reasons. So although the outfit choices of the two hypothetical wearers is VERY different - the motivation of the outfits is the same. Both wearers are listening to how the outfit makes them FEEL. That to me, is a crucial point.

Anonymous

Yes, I think this type of figureless clothing is freeing. On a practical level, this type of clothing is warm and snuggly (or cool and breezy) and comfortable. Do you suppose it's an extension of the sporty luxe ethos, where comfort is king? Dunno.

I see from the comments that people feel that only the young and skinny can wear this type of thing. I sort of agree, but not really. Yes, right now, this is such a new silhouette, that only young people can get away with it. But if it ever becomes mainstream, just think about how DEMOCRATIC this silhouette is. Anyone that is the same height will look roughly the same in it...and now that I've written this, it seems a little "Brave New World" lol!

Anyway, for sure, with this silhouette, you'd have to look to the face to determine beauty. So yes, with this type of outfit, the face is paramount (and I guess the ankles, too).

crazyone

Veteran

It's funny, I almost feel like the opposite--as a younger person, I think there's more pressure to be conventional flattering--because you're more impressionable to trends/outward judging of appearance, and because you're often in the position of purposely trying to seek romantic attention. If I were older and happily married I think I'd care less about being conventionally flattering because I wouldn't be so worried about first impressions!

Anonymous

I do have something to say here, but it will be tomorrow. Very interesting and engaging topic.

Joy

Veteran

This is such a great thread with so many thought-filled posts. I agree with Aziraphale that health is huge as a look. As an older woman I find some freedoms in style but also more need than ever for balance and interest and not looking crazy.

Jaime

(website)

Veteran

Wonderful thread. I generally love COS and have quite a few of their items in my closet along with some other very body unconscious pieces. When I was young and more conventionally attractive I never played up the sexy factor. Now with an older face and grey hair I have never felt so free to adorn myself. But, and this is important, it has always been important to me, and more so now, to be fit and strong. Because I need to be able to walk quickly, lift heavy things, and hold my head high. That is my vanity and how I disrupt.

Janet

(website)

Veteran

I'm too tired at the moment to really respond to this, but I was actually distracted from the model's face in the COS images by the clothes, rather than the other way around. Maybe I'm unusual that way.

CocoLion

(website)

Veteran

In an age when everything is so easily on display, LOOK at how much attention these covered outfits are garnering. IMO this is a commercial response to the growing popularity of movements such as Lagenlook. I like these COS outfits more than Lagenlook which is too arty for my taste. I would select individual items from COS but not the whole look, I'm not tall / thin enough nor do I have the lifestyle.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

I think Denise is right about this.

Do you know Kaliyana? Japanese inspired design. Outfits have similar proportions. I've always found it appealing in theory but I am sized out of this range, and also the fabrics tend to work better for a temperate climate (from what I have seen). I think if this line had fit me I would have experimented with the look, although I'm not sure I'd ultimately stick with this kind of style. Not for reasons of conventional flattery but more because I suspect it would not feel authentic or practical to me.

Like Denise, I like the COS versions for the simplicity and minimalism, although I strongly disliked the colours in the ones we saw and would have been more receptive to tonal looks in white, or ivory, or navy, or charcoal, or even (even!) black. Or plum/ eggplant, maybe.

I think the drama of such looks appeals to me, even though in real life I can't see myself comfortably wearing them. Not because I am afraid of seeming unattractive, but because I can't imagine them working for me. Any more than full-on body con intentionally sexy works for me. I would feel fraudulent and not myself.

12