that awful pink m&s dress...

[Bleurghghghgh]

Is now haunting me via ads, with additional horrific items! Thanks MN!

Daily Fail Wankers!

How on earth did they find someone who managed to make the dress look too small.

There's acres of fabric there!

Who are the daily fail trying to fool. It looks bloody awful. That one poor woman looks like a huge pink blob.
Not the kind of dress to wear if you're overweight.

Even my rubbish local M and S had piles and piles of them on the rack today - it indeed is the most horrid colour - cheap pink has never ever been good - and fabric. Just utterly horrid. I can't think of a single person I know looking even OK in it. Definitely don't know anyone who would want to wear it. M and s need to listen to their customers. They haven't got a clue at the moment - who on earth do they think these nutters are who like to wear bizarre designs in horrid fabric in the cheapest most unflattering to most skin shades ever colour? Honestly, I think most of us would be better at running the company than those people. KNOW YOUR MARKET!

I thought the very definition of a must have was that it was hard to get hold off. Find it hard to see that somehow you can wear that dress in a variety of places. Even if your work Colleagues would put up with the colour all day, do you want to be flashing half your back to your boss? Ditto taking kids to the park or Tesco. It's very much a going out fancy dress and not one you can get away with wearing more than once.

They've doctored the dresses on some of those pictures. It doesn't fall like that naturally or in real life

The two women who like it have had to size down so much to avoid swampage, their boobs are squashed flat!

It looks like a pink shroud.

Notice as well, that no one is in any hurry to show the back of the dress with or without models.

The Fail article is worth it for the DM's idea of a broad cross section of womanhood alone. A 'product demonstrator', an actress, a film extra, the "owner of a sarong firm", a 45 yr old who HAS A 14 WEEK BABY SHOCK HORROR, and a size 10 woman with a 'huge collection of dresses and an hourglass figure' who is married to a financial consultant from Gerrards Cross who may or may not be a professional lip purser.

The one thing they all have in common is that the badly-cut sleeves make their arms look all weeny and Tyrannosaurus Rex-like.

Gingernaut I noticed that too in the Fail article. Presumably they couldn't show the back because everyone's bra was showing above the too-low opening? Certainly there's no way that any of those fuller-busted women could get away with any of the "backless" bras available on the market.

Oh dear oh dear Grazia.

I was in the M&S near work today buying lunch and I saw a woman pick up The Dress from the display. I wanted to lunge towards her and wrestle it from her hands shouting 'Mumsnet says nooooo!' but then I realised that would have been odd. Fortunately, she put it back almost immediately with a WTF look on her face.

I saw the Guardian article which included it as well - the comments were great. It must be some grand piss take to keep promoting it surely.

Ooh It looks to me like Grazia just read the press release without bothering to look at the dress.

You only need walk past it at ten yards to see that the dress is minging!

I bet you the writer just picked up a press release and thought this'll fill some space.

They keep calling it a summer party dress. It's like a y7 fashion project gone wrong. Teacher - so remember everyone the project is to plan a summer dress. I know let's do it from neck to ankles, 3/4 sleeves and 100% polyester that get us top marks...

Possibly coincidentally The Dress is advertised on the first inside page of Grazia as well.
Not that I'm accusing Grazia journalists of being shills of course. Just seems like a bit of a coincidence.

If, like me, you can't do heels, I've found the perfect shoes if you're small of hoof.

Sainsbury's children's section

There's no way this thread will get into classics. Would prevent M&S from advertising on MN in the future wouldn't it

I have to say Melanie is pulling it off better than myself and ginger. Maybe nipping it in at the waist is the answer

No disrespect to Melanie, Ginge and you but , looking slightly less ridiculous is more accurate !

It's astonishing that the dress managed to make you, a person who looks good in a vest and shorts, look as terrible as you did.

I'm looking at a photo of my folks in the mid 1950s.

My God, they look sharp! Mum in a gorgeous, flattering, fitted dress, dad in a tailored suit and tie, both tidy, nice hair and smart... And this was not all that long after rationing ended (I think). Every shot when they were young - even on the beach it sitting in the garden, all turned out very smartly in amazing clothes (and they weren't rich).

Even ones of mum when she was a teenager, she looked like a model - the clothes, hair, accessories, matching hat, shoes and bag. Never a hair out of place.

What happened in the 60s???

My God, they look sharp! Mum in a gorgeous, flattering, fitted dress, dad in a tailored suit and tie, both tidy, nice hair and smart... And this was not all that long after rationing ended (I think). Every shot when they were young - even on the beach it sitting in the garden, all turned out very smartly in amazing clothes (and they weren't rich)

That really struck me watching this film. It's archive footage of ordinary people.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Scotland_with_Love?wprov=sfla1

I expect they also had very few clothes. I think that's the biggest difference.

Yes - looking at photos of my DM, she had very few clothes in the 50s and early 60s, mostly nice looking frocks, but then she started getting more ... including crimplene trouser suits, many from mail order catalogs.

They stayed relatively expensive until the late 80s when clothing retailers moved their manufacturing overseas. We were talking about this on another thread - I can remember saving up to buy quite basic things.

M&S were actually one of the last big clothing retailers to stop manufacturing in the UK. They were reluctant to move, as I remember, but said they just wouldn't be able to compete unless they did.

Also cheap man made fibres and dyes.