DH, Anita Rani and the see thru dress

[DontShow]

Going to a ball soon, and I want to wear something lovely, also fashionable.

I was looking at more transparent dresses, as they seem to be in and I definitely have the figure for this. I am 46.

DH said it's all inappropriate. He's never really been fussy about me looking sexy before, he has always liked me to look classy, I call it Princess of Wales style.

So I said, what about Anita Rani, she is my age and looked amazing. "Let's see" he said, "I have always thought she is beautiful". So he looks at the photo for a while, says nothing about her, but says I should not wear something like that as it would be sad.

So, AIBU, or do you need a divorce like Anita to wear what you want at 46?
She has credited her divorce as the catalyst for wearing this, and I think she looks amazing frankly!

There’s no fool like an old fool. Darl you’re pushing close to 50. Pack it in and wear something nice.

And if it was black it might be “sexier” the white just blinds you.

I think @DontShow and her DH should go together in these outfits. Make their mark as the power couple. They'll certainly make an impression.

Only adjustment needed is more flattering underwear for both.

This sounds more like internalised misogyny than empowerment. I could buy empowerment comes from not giving a shit about what anyone thinks and refusing to feel judged. But not giving a shit only about what women think while caring so much about what men think just sounds like you think men’s opinions are more important and women’s opinions don’t matter.

You missed my point.

If an average man (i.e. not someone who was avant-garde) was wearing a see-through suit so we could all see their underwear at a professional event he would be ridiculed and called names that imply that he is perverse.

Being “sexually desirable” per se doesn’t make you powerful , it makes people wanting to f-uck you. Powerful is Hillary Clinton changing laws in congress, not my next door neighbour going clubbing in a mini skirt.

Yes but theses days a widely-cast concept of “empowerment” has morphed from true empowerment to a more palatable- sounding term for “doing whatever the hell I want regardless of impact or consequence, particularly for others.”

I don't think the two stand comparison. Men, average or otherwise, don't wear transparent suits. I see someone has dug deep to find one, but I'm sure few of us have ever actually seen one on a man in any setting. A man in one at the event would be shocking to most, because such clothing in men is simply not a 'thing'. We don't therefore divide men up into the 'attention seeking' 'trashy' 'desperate' group who would wear one and the 'classy' 'elegant' 'age appropriate' ones who wouldn't because all men are in group two by default.
There is no male equivalent to the dress. I don't mean literally, as in see through, I mean clothing for men that's read to be inviting sexual interest/ desperation as its default (as oppose to merely showing of a body they are proud of) So the closest comparison we can come up with is a man wearing something so 'not done' it would have people assuming him to be either unwell or joking. The last thing anyone would assume was he was wearing it to attract sexual attention from women.

Thinking about it the only comparator I can think of is the medallion man, with overly tight trousers, shirt unbuttoned to show chest hair and said medallion. Men who favoured this look often did believe it made them look sexually attractive to women, with women typically thinking it looked sad and funny. However, I don't think there's a contemporary equivalent look for men.

How can anyone think that's a good luck. 😳

I saw a pic recently of a mother of the groom wearing very similar. 😮

Bet the bride was thrilled

You're being a bit pedentic. I think you're both on the same page.

There is no male equivalent to the dress. I don't mean literally, as in see through, I mean clothing for men that's read to be inviting sexual interest/ desperation as its default (as oppose to merely showing of a body they are proud of)

it is quite literally not difficult at all to find a male equivalent. Google "man see through clothing". Just one example from the red carpet https://www.usmagazine.com/stylish/pictures/celebrity-men-who-rocked-sheer-shirts-on-the-red-carpet/

The google has other, full outfit, sheer versions

It defies belief that Harry Styles gets away with what he gets away with.

Random Dad at school event is less likely to rock the sheer pussycat bow without at least someone wondering if he was ok.
( cue MN posters envisaging their DH in a pussycat bow and wincing).

Grey tracksuit bottoms.

Harry Styles is in a different league from most men though, isn't he? I mean, not only good-looking but almost on a different plane of existence, celebrity-wise. One celeb who hasn't got away with that kind of clothing is Sam Smith. Jason Mamoa ( is it him? I think it is!) looks great, but it's the twinkly sexy smile that makes him look good, rather than the clothes, IMO. He looks as if he doesn't take himself too seriously. (unlike some!)

He’s quite a high bar for your average Dad, that’s true!

Though I say that and then think if a group of men were saying this about some celebrity female (“ she’s quite a high bar for your average mum”) I’d think 🤢 So maybe I retract that …

Women until recently wouldn't consider wearing transparent dresses to work/school events which is what the original post is about.

Suits with bare chests would be an example for men. It is the same level of sexual attention seeking and is something that superstars where on the red carpet but would be eyebrow raising at a work or school function.

Anita looks fine, but this is not appropriate attire to attend a school function. The trend of transparent dresses specifically over underwear (not over other types of clothes) is just crap and attention-seeking.

I agree with this.

Transparent looks nice if over the shoulder area etc.

There’s a wedding dress discussion going on on another thread where one of the dresses is see through done right.

https://www.net-a-porter.com/en-gb/shop/product/self-portrait/clothing/midi-dresses/guipure-lace-midi-dress/31840166392379754?cm_mmc=LinkshareUK--TnL5HPStwNw--Custom-_-LinkBuilder&utm_source=rakuten&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_campaign=UK_2116208&utm_content=UK_Skimlinks.com&utm_term=TnL5HPStwNw-SaZgp57YkaBCIpFUO9vXFQ&ranMID=24448&ranEAID=TnL5HPStwNw&ranSiteID=TnL5HPStwNw-SaZgp57YkaBCIpFUO9vXFQ&siteID=TnL5HPStwNw-SaZgp57YkaBCIpFUO9vXFQ&linkshare_siteID=TnL5HPStwNw-SaZgp57YkaBCIpFUO9vXFQ&linkshare_affiliate_mid=24448

It’s not formal enough for a ball but something like that but full length (and not in white so less bridal) might be OK.

Edited to say: you need to look at it on the models. It’s a lot less dowdy than it looks in the first picture

Wow, that really is lovely!

Still a bit net-curtainy, but Stately Home net curtains rather than Nana-went-to-B&M Bargains net curtains.

Extra bonus points for the lack of visible Big Knickers.

Tom Jones is as example of someone who loves to attract attention from the female of the species using clothes - white shirt with almost all of the buttons undone to reveal his hairy chest, spray-on shiny trousers (probably commando) ... nobody thinks he's unwell or joking, or desperate - the normal reaction he gets is that women throw their knickers at him!

To be fair . If I had to go to a school event with dh and he turned up in some sort of 'look at me' monstrosity. I'd. be mortified . I know people can and should be able to wear what they want but I just couldn't walk in the door with him.

I think dresses like this particularly in middle age can look very 'try hard' which is the opposite of glamorous or elegant.

I would not throw mine.