Dress and white trainers

[MJFEB2026]

Dated? Or still acceptable to wear?!

No I can't What does a gammon wear? Gammon usually refers to a right wing, middle aged man whose anger at the world causes him to be red in the face, hence the gammon - nothing about what he's wearing. If gammon is directed at a bloke it's due to his attitude, not his clothes.
Edit - apologies, forgot to quote @LeopardPrintFleece

Every year I read articles saying that the dress and white trainer look is out of fashion. Every year I also see loads of women wear that outfit. I think it's good people ignore it and wear what they like. There's difference to being fashionable and being a slave to fashion. We were just discussing this when out with friends at the weekend. One was saying how people wear the most hideous unflattering jeans now just because someone had deemed them fashionable. I had to agree.

Yes, maxi dresses and trainers do go together - Zara Tindall has proved it and we're copying her

But again, that judgement mainly comes from other women.

I am struggling to understand the issue here. We can’t complain we get it, when we are the ones to blame for doing it.

and it is woman on woman.

I completely agree with you. Apologies if I wasn't clear there - imo, women are absolutely the worst critics of other women's choices of clothes.

To me a 'gammon' would be wearing stereotypical 'dad' type clothes - safe, bland, possibly not very well fitting and definitely not fashionable! And be wrapped in a Union Jack.

But honestly that's just my interpretation, I know women overall get judged on appearances much more than men but I dont think it's fair to say men get off completely.

Not completely - but nowhere near the same extent imo.

Yes, it’s because it’s mainly women doing it. And they judge other women more harshly than they judge men.

But they do also judge men.

women judge other women’s clothes, their weight, their hair, their make up choices, their shoes, their food choices, their parenting choices.

it’s women who do this.

men will judge women, in a is she shaggable or not way, but thays as far as it goes, they don’t sit and criticise their skirt being not fashionable or wearing high heels, or hair an unflattering colour.

all these things come from women.

and then in the same breath they complain they are being judged more than men.
someone make it make sense.

Perhaps it's not the same women doing the judging as the ones complaining about the judging?
There's about 4 billion of us.

men will judge women, in a is she shaggable or not way, but thays as far as it goes, they don’t sit and criticise their skirt being not fashionable or wearing high heels, or hair an unflattering colour.

I would put it the other way: women may think that woman may look better with a different cut of jeans but that’s as far as it goes; they don’t think “wretched, fundamentally unfuckable and I wouldn’t be seen dead with her”.

Does anyone remember when Dustin Hoffman explained in an interview that, until he dressed as Tootsie and released he wasn't an attractive version of a woman, he hadn't thought unattractive women had anything to offer.
"“I said, ‘Because I think I am an interesting woman when I look at myself on screen. And I know that if I met myself at a party, I would never talk to that character because she doesn’t fulfill physically the demands that we’re brought up to think women have to have in order for us to ask them out.’”

And what’s that got to do with fashion? This is about clothing choices. Yes straight women don’t think about whether a woman is someone she’d like to fuck or not. What’s your point and how does it relate to the conversation.

What has the cut of jeans to do with fashion? Is that a serious question for a style & beauty forum?

My point is the one that I made: you were implying that men’s criticism of women’s appearance was more limited than women’s when in fact it’s far more fundamental.

No I didn’t that’s really interesting.

Tootsie looked like a man dressed as a woman.

Well yes he did, but that's not the point Hoffman was making.

What he said was true, and actually he looked pretty good just not what we have been conditioned to think of as 'stunning'.
(possibly not the right word but YKWIM)

He was surprised to realise that less attractive women could be really interesting. And it took him "becoming" a less attractive woman for him to figure this out.

He did but some people around here are so triggered by transvestim [ and/or conflate it with other things] that they can't bear it.

I don’t agree with you and I find your question on what’s denim style got to do with fashion laughable.

women can be brutal, just as brutal as men, if not more so. When it comes to judgement and words, and if you don’t know that,you’re a lucky woman.

Erm that was your question: And what’s that got to do with fashion?

As I said it’s an odd question for a style forum.

I’ve never said women aren’t bitchy but they’re not sizing up women a sexual or life partners so their criticisms are rather more superficial.

What does that even mean?

Not sure white trainers would be anyone's choice with those dresses though?
White trainers or converse or pumps or vans have been a summer staple since fashion began. White just looks good in the sun and goes with other summer stuff.
I do think as animal prints and bright trainers are lovely but clearly making them in fashion is about to flogging stuff rather than a fabulous new aesthetic.

That doesn’t really make a lot of sense though, as everything is for sale, you think of a type of trainer and you can buy it. Vogue isn’t trying to flog stuff. What puts something in is magazines like vogues opinion, but for it to be taken up widely by the population as a new trend.

Now swap the shoes for some white trainers (e.g. superga or stan smiths) and add that small cropped denim jacket. The vibe would be different.