MetaChat - Butt-baring formal wear? http://metachat.org/index.php?disp=comments en-US http://backend.userland.com/rss 60 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 02:40:49 +0000 c605852@http://metachat.org Maybe she didn't realize it was so sheer in the back? Some clothes only become transparent in certain light. Showing your rear is not really appropriate in any circumstance, and most people are glad to keep it covered, but there seem to be exceptions to every rule! http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605852 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 03:57:25 +0000 c605856@http://metachat.org Funny, TPS, in years of pondering this strange incident, that explanation had never occurred to me. It's definitely plausible. The only reason I still wonder is that it was very sheer. http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605856 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 04:35:52 +0000 c605859@http://metachat.org TPS is likely right - she probably had no idea of the transparency of the fabric in certain lighting conditions. http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605859 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 08:31:34 +0000 c605864@http://metachat.org Black is particularly bad for it - it can honestly look absolutely normal, or at most slightly sheer at some angles, then with the right lighting it is as sheer as stockings. It's also possible that it was meant to be worn with a slip but the slip got misplaced/forgotten.
It's also possible that it was meant to be worn with a slip but the slip got misplaced/forgotten.]]> http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605864 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 14:29:49 +0000 c605870@http://metachat.org http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1188 http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1188]]> http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605870 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 18:02:08 +0000 c605878@http://metachat.org Wow, galadriel, that's perfect. Ha ha. http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605878 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 20:14:59 +0000 c605879@http://metachat.org What a huge oops. Hope she didn't find out . . . that sort of thing can make you want to crawl under a rock, even many years later. http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605879 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Sun, 07 Oct 2012 22:38:41 +0000 c605883@http://metachat.org I wonder too if she didn't realize just how low the back went. As in, she thought it ended higher up than it did (or she was shorter than the dress was designed for, since so many dresses seem to be made for women 5'7" or taller). Perhaps she thought she was going for sexy, but ended up scandalous? http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605883 In response to: Butt-baring formal wear? Wed, 10 Oct 2012 01:32:21 +0000 c605984@http://metachat.org What a huge oops. Hope she didn't find out . . . that sort of thing can make you want to crawl under a rock, even many years later. I wonder too if she didn't realize just how low the back went. As in, she thought it ended higher up than it did (or she was shorter than the dress was designed for, since so many dresses seem to be made for women 5'7" or taller). Perhaps she thought she was going for sexy, but ended up scandalous? Typical of my tendency to overthink things while ignoring the obvious, I tentatively concluded that this was some rarefied, high-class allowance for showing a butt as long as it was in the context of elegant eveningwear. I even tied it to the scene in The Man With One Red Shoe where Lori Singer's character wears a formal dress showing a bit of crack. (Screenshot can be found in this blog post.) I do find it somewhat reassuring that this was likely no arcane high class thing, just an accident. I hope the woman would be amused that it is being debated thirty years later on the web. What a huge oops. Hope she didn't find out . . . that sort of thing can make you want to crawl under a rock, even many years later.

I wonder too if she didn't realize just how low the back went. As in, she thought it ended higher up than it did (or she was shorter than the dress was designed for, since so many dresses seem to be made for women 5'7" or taller). Perhaps she thought she was going for sexy, but ended up scandalous?


Typical of my tendency to overthink things while ignoring the obvious, I tentatively concluded that this was some rarefied, high-class allowance for showing a butt as long as it was in the context of elegant eveningwear. I even tied it to the scene in The Man With One Red Shoe where Lori Singer's character wears a formal dress showing a bit of crack. (Screenshot can be found in this blog post.)

I do find it somewhat reassuring that this was likely no arcane high class thing, just an accident. I hope the woman would be amused that it is being debated thirty years later on the web.

]]> http://metachat.org/index.php/2012/10/06/butt_baring_formal_wear#c605984