Is this dress too white for a wedding guest?

[Macadamia20]

Normally I'm in the camp of if you need to ask then it's a no but keen to hear what other's thoughts are. Is there too much white?
Thanks!
https://www.riverisland.com/p/pink-satin-floral-twist-front-midi-dress-938381

Absolutely fine

It's really not. There's no danger of it being mistaken for the wedding dress at all

People on here are so strange about ‘too white’ for weddings. Are you likely to be mistaken for the bride? If not then it’s not too white. I like the dress btw and unless you’re planning slippers with it I don’t think it looks like a dressing gown either.

@TheCommonWoMan - but that is a completely different dress, and completely different pattern

Either way, I think most people on this thread have said the dress asked about on this thread isn't "too white", it is the odd design / cut of it that people are commenting on.

No it's lovely and I don't see any resemblance to a dressing gown. Mine is thick and fluffy with a hood!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Premium-Bridesmaid-Dressing-Sleepwear-Nightwear/dp/B098DPDW5L/ref=mp_s_a_1_8_sspa

Your point is?

That looks nothing like the dress, what with it being a front opening, wrapover gown tied with a belt.

I think it’s lovely, very pretty. I once wore a cream skirt and jacket, zesty green blouse with navy accessories for a wedding. This was before the invention of mumsnet, I’d never heard of not wearing white/cream to a wedding before. If you love it wear it 🤣

1. I was replying to the poster who said that her dressing gown was thick, fluffy, and hooded. Her dressing gown is not representative of all dressing gowns and a resemblence to her type of dressing gown is not what half the thread respondants are seeing. I gave a photograph of the kind of dressing gown that we are seeing a resemblence to in OP's dress.
2. The front split and twist front of OP's dress are sufficiently visually similar to the style of belted wrap robe I supplied the photograph for, particularly when the robe is slipping open during wear, that around half of this thread's respondants are seeing the resemblance. Especially when both are modelled by a model putting her bent leg through the gap in the front.

That around half the thread's respondants don't see the similarities between the dress and a particular type of dressing gown is a phenonemon akin to how some people see butterflies/bats/vulvas/orchids in Rorschach blots whilst other people just see coloured ink, or the optical illusion where some people see two faces in profile whilst others see the outline of a greek vase. Neither set of people is wrong in their perception. However, if around half the people I asked thought that garment X resembled garment Y, I might reconsider wearing garment X even if I didn't myself see the resemblence.

The OP's dress looks nothing like what you posted. Nor is it anything like the optical illusions where the things being seen are fixed shapes. The dressing gown you posted is a significantly different shape.

The depicted version of Rubin's vase can be seen as the black profiles of two people looking towards each other or as a white vase, but not both.

That's wrong. I have no difficulty seeing both

Not too white but agree with the dressing gown comments

It's not an all white or an off-white looking gown or a gown that is supposed to be pink/yellow but looks white under certain light. It also looks nothing like a wedding dress.
No one will mistake you for a bride in a floral, open fronted, semi-casual, dress.
You're all good.

Both the dress and the dressing gown have:

• a v-neck
• kimono-style rectangular loose sleeves
• a fiddly bit in the front centre, namely the dress's twist and the dressing gown's knot in the belt
• a distinct horizontal line around the waist, namely the dress's waist seam and and the dressing gown's belt
• midi-length hem
• large print featuring light pink

They differ only in the dressing gown being wrap-over and having a belt.

For half the thread respondents, the wrap-over and belt isn't a prominent-enough distinction to override the automatic "that's a dressing gown" reaction cause by the similarities I listed.

The vase wasn't the best analogy. I'm trying to describe a difference in pattern recognition more akin to seeing faces in clouds. You might be able to switch at will between seeing two faces or a vase, but you saw one of those things first.

@PhaedraTwo - if you read the thread though, half of people who have posted had the same thought.
Now, whether you 'see it' or not, would you want to be spending the day wearing a dress at what would generally be an elegant, 'dressy' occasion, knowing that at least half the people there think that is what it looks like, even if you don't see it yourself ?

The whole point of sharing what you are thinking of wearing on the internet is to get confirmation / validation that the dress looks good and is appropriate for the occasion. Now, whereas the response of "the internet" perhaps isn't what the OP was expecting, she will now have a perspective that she hadn't initially seen herself.
Obviously, she can still do what she wants about it, but you arguing that you can't see it doesn't invalidate the fact that many, many people had that thought pop into their head when they saw the dress.

No, it's lovely.