Can we talk about clothing brands and target demographics?

[CrkdLttrCrkdLttr]

Because I’m thinking about the brands that form the core of my ‘going out to meet other grown ups’ wardrobe, and laughing at the Margaret Howell mail shot I’ve just opened. (Socks and sandals photo.) Beautiful young model, and each garment will be wonderfully well made - but I know no one under fifty who wears MH. That’s fine - but I wish the marketing acknowledged the fact.

When a brand does make an effort to engage with the real buyers of its clothes I’m full of awe and gratitude - Raey at Matches is usually great at this.

Studio Nicholson hovers somewhere in between. Again, everyone I know (in the UK) who wears their clothes is older and richer than me, probably in a creative profession. Not a wispy 20 year old.

I never used to care. But I’m wondering if marketing is the reason 99% of the middle aged and older women on MN exclaim that there are no decent clothes for them. There are - but not every brand tells you so.

Love this thread.

I'm off to see my seamstress now!

Enheduanna, I think you're right about that, and I have wondered if things like grey hair are a status symbol now the way subtle expensive highlights used to be (and still are in some spaces). Beauty can be a way out of poverty so there is something about demonstrating that's not and never has been applicable to you with a look of magically aging better than your peers as you can embrace the 'natural' process without the consequences as they apply to others.

I'm not that young but definitely at the crossroads where the first differences are emerging. It's odd tbh.

But wrt to the actual young, if MN can hold on long enough I suspect gen-z might actually quite like the low tech noise free platform, you know, in the way they find tv show releases week by week refreshing and innovative 🙃

I joined this thread because I thought it would be about brands and who they were aiming their clothes at. It's turned out to be far more interesting than that.

My mother spent my teenage years trying to persuade me to get a perm. I resisted, mainly because I have wavy hair. She now just tells me to brush it. I don't own a hairbrush as they tend not to go through my hair. I comb it.
I have a close friend who tells me to get a chin length bob every time I see her. I never tell her how to have her hair.

The years have not been kind to my neck and I find wearing a scarf or a collar helps to hide the scragginess.

Mmm … I wonder if the reason maybe 90% of S&B threads feel ‘off’ to me is that we (the UK ‘we’) live in a culture where normal, non-celebrity women getting dressed is considered a superficial and inconsequential activity. So people only start a thread - shamefaced - at a moment of crisis - interview, holiday, wedding or whatever. Almost invariably indicating that they’re not the frivolous sort, “I live in skinny jeans and t shirts” but simply want a quick fix via whatever fits at a shop as like as possible to the brand they usually buy. Being accused of actively taking an interest in dressing, and how it evolves, on a day to day basis, is as much of a slur here as being accused of embracing feminism was in the late 70s.

Accused of feminism? By whom? I have always been proud to be a feminist, and I am so old that I remember reading my DM's Nova!! And equally proud to be stimulated by aesthetics and sociology of fashion. We have to wear something given our climate. There's NOTHING superficial or inconsequential about S&B given its economic importance to female owned and operated businesses. Remember the rage when hairdressers and beauticians had to wait longer than barbers for release from lockdown?

I'm not sure about that @CrkdLttrCrkdLttr.

I accompanied my mother at Greenham Common. Feminism and a love of clothes are not necessarily bad bedfellows.

They may be considered to be because womanhood is derided as a state. That's a fact.

But a love of clothes is always considered a bit suspect no matter what the sex. Dandyism isn't a desirable trait.

Maybe it's a lack of confidence on the part of the deriders. I dunno. I see clothes and dressing as everyday joy and I think that people who belittle that probably want it secretly.

Otherwise, why care?

Is it specifically an English / British thing? I'd never thought of that, I'd always just put it down to clothes and fashion being seen everywhere as a women's interest, even though men can be just as flamboyant, as pics of the military, judiciary or clergy can attest.

You’ve just articulated my main problem with S&B!

I hate, hate, hate the insinuation that it’s vain or shallow to care about what you wear or have an interest in fashion. For many of us fashion is the easiest way to engage with art and creativity in our day to day lives. It’s political, cultural and it’s economic. It’s evocative of time and places. It lets you experiment with who you are and your identity. And it’s bloody good fun.

I hate the double standard of women getting reduced to their looks time after time whilst simultaneously being looked down on for being into fashion or beauty. It’s pure sexism that the creative art arguably most associated with women gets looked down on as being frivolous or that we should be spending our money elsewhere (anywhere but on ourselves basically; spend it on the kids, give it to charity etc). I’m also sure a lot of the “dress me for x,y,z” are much deeper rooted than purely I need an outfit for “x,y,z” and much more about how that person feels about themselves and where their life is.

I think there's definitely a protestant/catholic divide but I think it's more of an echo these days than a persistent presence, more noticeable in how it ties into class (eg ideas of how new vs old money dress). I think a lot does have to do with men not liking being directed to so it's easier to frame fashion as feminine. It's changing though, but the only way you see straight men get into fashion is in a (pseudo) intellectual manner.

I think you're right @botemp with the Catholic/Protestant there is an underlying Protestant ethic in the UK even if the majority of people don't acknowledge it.

Hence, frippery, flamboyance is seen as Not Good in a way that it's not in the Catholic countries.

I was brought up as a Catholic obviously!

I get annoyed at the insinuation that someone is only slim and toned because they hardly eat and work out a lot. (e.g. the PoW, even though she has slim parents, seems very sporty and has tall slim DC).

I was brought up a Protestant and there was a 'Sunday best' attitude towards dress.

Partly because of an early childhood immersed in ornithological tomes, and partly because of a Georgette Heyer fixation around 12/13, not at all because of a misspent year of undergrad History, I retain a strong impression of the mating rituals of the human animal involving male decoration to attract a mate, with the female animal, who does the choosing, not being required to make the same visual effort. Male peacocking had high status, it’s only since dressing up became a female thing (demographic shift (?)) that it’s lost status. (Wild generalisation, obvs - too much migraine to write sense.)

But surely it's the Corinthian, for whom all manly arts, including dress, come effortlessly, rather than the overly fussing (feminised?) dandy who wins the prize?

I can't be doing with "keeping it for good".I buy something and wear it.

My husband is dreadful about this. He's discovered suits, coats and trousers he's forgotten about.

As a total contrast to the Mrs. Danvers, ascetic look, I have expanded my wardrobe to include Ankara prints and shapes. I find both companies to be very size inclusive, in fact they both state that they will alter to fit your measurements. African fashion expects you to have hips and boobs and takes them into consideration.

www.cumolondon.com
www.madkollection.com

1. Natural fabrics, mostly 100% cotton.
2. You can wear the clothes anywhere from a visit to a vet to a prize giving, or at least I have!
3. Despite being a pale Irish person, the right colours and shapes are bloody fantastic. I love the creativity of the prints.

I'm have jumpsuits and shirt dresses, everything has decent pockets that don't ruin the line of the clothing.

It's maximalism at its best. The Kemi Telford look at cheaper prices.

That's gorgeous.

Sika is the same ballpark

www.sikadesigns.co.uk/shop?category=DRESSES

I’m not sure I dress to try to look a certain way, or to look like certain characters. I buy things because I fall in love with them.

I have always greatly admired minimalist clean lines, the elegance of simple shapes, and longed to look like this. But I can’t seem to ever buy this look. I have devoured every Mrs Danvers and High Priestess link on here. I have carefully considered many items. Tried to learn from this thread how to put things together.

And then, when I actually get my buying head on, when I get that rush of blood MUST HAVE feeling, it’s not for a beautifully cut understated pair of trousers - which I actually really want to own - it’s for a flouncy Batsheva skirt and a brightly coloured Farm Rio dress. They arrived, by the way; the skirt is wonderful but the dress, predictably, is a mistake.

My wardrobe is full of colour, prints, floral explosions. A mixture of impulse buys and longed-for pieces I can’t get out of my head and let myself buy if they reach the sale. There is no curated look, I wish there was. I end up with skirts that have no tops that go with them, and vice versa.

I love clothes. I can scroll and scroll and scroll through photographs of lovely things, whether they are my ‘style’ or not. From the Little House on the Prairie puffed sleeves to the High Priestesses, I love looking at all of it. That’s why I’ve loved this thread. And it’s fascinating to analyse myself a bit, and think about what motivates my purchases.

For me every new item is imbued with the potential to re-make me. When I say I’m channelling Harriet Vane - it’s her spiky, truculent unease in the world that calls to me, rather than any impulse to copy her wardrobe.

During periods of stability and relative contentment I’d say experimentation - a flouncy dress when you’ve never worn one before - is healthy and part of our slow evolution as human beings. It’s not necessarily a negative outcome if in the end it’s sent back. But I’m somewhat dissatisfied with myself at the moment, so more likely to reimagine myself in a painfully bright pink frock.

I can’t imagine having a beautifully ‘curated’ wardrobe, because I can’t imagine ever having a fixed idea of my self.

I can’t imagine having a beautifully ‘curated’ wardrobe, because I can’t imagine ever having a fixed idea of my self
This resonates so much.

In my head I would love to be the person with the beautiful scandi classic style neutral capsule wardrobe, but in reality that's not me at all.

There was a YouTube video I saw that was good and they talked about most of us having a personal style with 1 main vibe and two sub-vibes.

E.g someone might be predominantly classic but with casual as a secondary style. Or someone else might be a mix of classic and bohemian.

It changed how I approached my wardrobe and now it's still not beautifully curated, it's got a more consistent language and colour scheme running through it.

What this thread has crystalised for me that deep down I like to dress as if every day is World Book (or Movie) day. Whether that's a good thing or not is beside the point - this is what drives me and recognising that is really helpful, so thanks to all.