Is it OK to wear clothes made by Harvey Weinstein’s wife?

With the sexual cheap sexy clothes harassment scandal hitting the fashion world now, whose work should we no longer enjoy?

Let’s start with this, the artist-v-the-art question, one that now seems necessary to ask on a daily basis, as the Weinstein tsunami continues to sweep through the celebrity world, either destroying all in its wake or else throwing into relief various abuses that were simply shrugged away for too long, depending on your perspective.

Most sensible people, despite what rightwing commentators claim, understand there are various degrees of abuse being alleged, and Dustin Hoffman allegedly saying gross stuff to women in the 80s is obviously not the same as Harvey Weinstein allegedly raping women and threatening to destroy their careers (claims he denies). But, hey, guess what, guys? Both are unacceptable, and it is unnerving when men generally considered good guys are accused of predatory behaviour. So the only surprise about Condé Nast International’s announcement last month that they would no longer work with Terry Richardson, after years and years of rumours, was that it took so long for them to make that announcement.

But Louis CK’s admission on Friday that he had exposed himself to women, after years and years of rumours (you might be spotting a pattern here), was a little different. Yes, many women knew about the rumours, but it was easy to put them out of mind when Louis CK would do his feminist skit about how men are “the worst thing to happen to women”. Well, more fool us, I guess, because all the time we knew – we knew that women were saying Louis CK exposed himself to them. And that Louis CK dismissed those as rumours for so long proves that he assumed that being a powerful white man would protect him from any eventual comeuppance. Welcome to a new dawn, guys.

Look, I am all for evaluating art on its own artistic merits – I do, after all, still count Radio Days and The Purple Rose of Cairo (directed by one W Allen) as among my favourite movies. But when the art is so clearly flaunting or minimising the artist’s abuses, the question becomes moot. Louis CK’s long-awaited movie, the creepily titled I Love You, Daddy, is about sexual ethics and celebrities who abuse them, so it’s not exactly a surprise that the distributor pulled the film.

I have spent more money than I want to think about going to see Louis CK’s standup routine, but forgive me if I’m really not in the mood right now to watch Louie, his sitcom about a sexual loser who is often horrible to women. Similarly, Woody Allen’s near pathological insistence on making movies about how irresistible old men are to much younger women is at least as off-putting now as the movies themselves. Incidentally, the much-acclaimed-in-its-time-and-now-next-to-forgotten film, American Beauty, really is quite a watch these days, given that it includes one storyline in which Kevin Spacey’s character is accused of having a relationship with a teenage boy, another in which he is sexually obsessed with his child’s best friend, and a third about how being closeted drives a man to insanity. Fun Friday night movie for all!

I have written often over the years that it is inexcusable for a magazine to employ Terry Richardson, whose highly sexualised photographs are inextricable from the stories of his alleged abuse, and for a celebrity – who has the power to choose any photographer they want – to be photographed by him, given the long-running rumours about his alleged abuse of models (which he denies). (On a sidenote, one of the biggest political mysteries of all time must be how the hell Barack Obama agreed to be photographed by Richardson. Do Obama’s people not know how to Google? Does he?) It is frankly obscene that Condé Nast International waited this long to make a stand, having presumably just bided their time until Richardson’s much-copied style was starting to become passe, so they felt they could drop him without incurring any damage to their all-important artistic credibility. Apologies for the crudeness, but duck those people, as autocorrect would put it.

More and doubtless worse stories about others will come out soon, but the really interesting issue regards a label run by two women who haven’t abused anyone.

Womens clothes Her Mums clothes

Georgia body shapewear May Jagger on experimental make-up and borrowing her Mums clothes

With a model for a mother and a rock star for a father, it would be fair to assume Georgia May Jagger has learnt a thing or two about fashion and beauty in her 24 years. I dont really get styling tips from my parents but I have borrowed clothes from my mum, so I think in that way Ive put some of her clothes into my wardrobe but I think for me its an individual thing. Fresh off a flight from Los Angeles to her native London, Vogue phoned the English beauty to talk fragrance (she is the face of Mugler scent, Angel Muse), dry cheeks, and her interiors obsession.

“Its kind of funny, Im not actually making this up but the Angel fragrance is really nostalgic for me because my mum used it when I was younger, and I used to remember being obsessed with the shape of the bottle.”

“I love experimental makeup because I think it gets so boring when its always the same and its really fun to learn how to do different things came to the realisation a couple of years ago that I was going to try to use different makeup for different things on my face because thats something that most makeup artists do so Im always using a lipstick as my eye shadow or something like that. I didnt know very much about how to apply makeup before I started working as a model. I think its more about how you apply your foundation, building things up slowly rather than caking the product and trying to put on as much as possible.

Closing the gap between style

Dear Answer Angel Ellen: Why can’t I find fashions that fit and flatter my “curvy” (well, some would say overweight or fat) figure? I am so tired of looking and not finding. Not finding online. Not finding in stores. I’m a professional woman who needs and wants to dress in appropriate workwear and day to evening clothes. I have money to spend. Why don’t retailers and clothing designers understand this? Can you help?

Dear Betsy: I hear you! This is one of the most frequent cries for help I find in my email. The average American woman is not a size 6. She’s closer to a 16. She is not inclined to wear low cut, too short, too tight dresses to work. She has plenty of other things to do besides a job, caring for others and, in her “spare” time, shopping for clothes that suit her needs and dimensions. Is anybody out there listening?

The answer is yes, kind of. Retailers and designers, especially online, are getting the message. What’s taken so long? Even “Project Runway” (thank you, Tim Gunn!) is now featuring models in a huge range of figure types. (And the competing designers on the show dressed them in an array of styles, some inventive and flattering, others — horrors — in what looked like poorly constructed muumuus.)

To get you started, check out The folks who run the site don’t require that you hit the plus size tab when scrolling through their fashionable and affordable offerings. They get it. The site offers the same dress in sizes XXS through 4X, or sizes 0 to 36. For them, it’s good business. No more disappointment when you click on a style you love and see that it doesn’t come in your size. lets you customize its clothing (sleeves, length, neckline) in sizes 0 to 36W. For curvy women who still like the hands on shopping experience, Lord Taylor is a popular stop.

Dear Answer Angel Ellen: This question might not be your area of expertise, but I have just about given up on finding a crate that my dog can’t break out of. Do you have any ideas for me?

Dear Nicole: It turns out I am an expert on this very thing, thanks to a Houdini like beagle who has chewed his way not only out of those plastic crates from PetSmart but also metal ones with bars that this wily animal figured out how to chew, bend and squeeze his way through.

What you want is the Alcatraz of dog crates. It’s the ProSelect Empire Dog Cage. It is expensive (344.61,, hard to transport, so heavy it needs wheels to move it around and not foolproof. The beagle in question quickly figured out how to use his nose to nudge open the sliding locks, so we had to resort to using three giant carabiners to keep it locked securely. Since then: No problem.

Why the womens sweat suits look of party season is one you can’t move in

According to Ernest Hemingway, the experience of writing is easy. “All you do is sit down at a typewriter, and bleed.” Of course, Hemingway could also have been talking about the experience of writing while wearing a particular style of dress. It’s a dress that is doing the rounds on the red carpet. It’s on the pages of Vogue and at the ritziest parties. We’re calling it the poser dress. You might not literally bleed when you wear it, but it is so fitted, it renders the simplest of tasks – walking, kneeling, waving, praying, swallowing, laughing and, yes, sitting – almost impossible. What a time to be alive.

Full length, long sleeved and fitted – often “like a sheath”, wrote one critic without euphemism – the poser dress has been on our radar since late August, when the autumn collections crept on to our feeds. An umbrella term for the sort of floral printed dresses made by Balenciaga, then Zara and Topshop, the summer versions were accessible. And fun. They often came with a slit (good for stairs), were worn with a nice white boot and enjoyed an Arcadian existence on Instagram and the frow. Then the clocks went back and the poser dress was reborn as something dark, moody and gothic.

Don’t be alarmed. The poser dress has two key attributes, but both make it surprisingly wearable. One is the shape, which is fitted but shows very little skin. Hurrah! And second is the fabric, which can be jacquard, silk, chiffon or lamé – something stiff. Leading the charge is The Vampire’s Wife, co founded by Susie Cave in 2014. Her neo goth “floor sweepers” (her words) have become the sleeper hit of the season. Cate Blanchett, Ruth Negga, Salma Hayek and Kate Moss all wear her; Moss even nicknamed them “Little House on the Prairie dresses”. Alessandra Rich does something pricier in lace and nostalgic prints. As do, on the high street, Topshop and Zara. See also Erdem, Emilia Wickstead and Self Portrait, whose dress of the year was rooted in its immovability. The experience of wearing one is interesting. A bronze version by The Vampire’s Wife isn’t as hot as you imagine, but effectively feels like you’re in a condom. Or are a mermaid. Either, really.

If we want to put a pin into what’s happening now in womenswear, then this dress is a good start. For one, we are entering festive party season. And, as is tradition, we tend to reward social obligations with a new dress that also keeps us warm and covered. That you look best standing still makes them ideal for photographing, too (if we needed proof of the power Instagram wields over fashion, look no further). But with most physical activities ruled out, to wear the poser dress is also to telegraph your status as someone who doesn’t have to walk too far, doesn’t plan to sit down and doesn’t plan on eating too much. You could call it the Uber dress. You could even call it the 1 dress. The onus is on how it looks rather than how it feels, the neo goth commodified.

Added up, it’s stuff such as this – the idea of wearing a dress that stops you from doing anything – that gets fashion a bad rap, especially when presented in as stratified a society as this. For shame. One could easily make comparisons with caged crinolines, or corsets. We usually associate the idea of liberation in fashion as utilitarian, of allowing us to do stuff. For women, it allows us to be more than a gaze. But just as John Berger made the case that how we are directed to look at something determines what we see, in wearing something that celebrates the female form without making it the focus, the poser dress is actually empowering. Fashion historian Monica Sklar agrees: “The idea of control over the shape of a women’s body to match the times is always there, [but] it’s more so a question of who is in control and who is getting what out of the equation.” Being in control of how someone looks at you “through maintaining a stationary [position] is empowering”.

These dresses reflect a move away from glam sexualisation of women’s bodies, and the poser is emblematic of what we now deem sexy. Ten years ago, before the Daily Mail co opted the phrasing, the New York Times declared the Pour Me Into It the dress of the season, based on the late Hervé Léger’s bandage dress. Short, tight, booby, this style of dress was constructed for the female form but became the object of the male gaze. By contrast, the poser dress is sexy without flashing flesh – the body is implied, and – unusually – there is no cleavage. Sklar agrees: “The idea of romanticising the female human form does not necessarily indicate it is all designed for male gaze.” You also need a body to wear it – it’s not a dress for models, so it’s unlikely you’ll see this on the cover of Vogue.

Last week, a new womens sweat suits exhibition opened, focusing on how we photograph the body in fashion. Posturing: Photographing the Body in Fashion celebrates fashion photography, but its focus is on the way the models stand, rather than what they are wearing. It posits that how you pose in a dress is more important than the dress itself. “In many ways, the function of fashion photography is to advertise the garment,” says co curator and fashion curator Shonagh Marshall. “So how we stand affects how we look at the clothes far more than you realise.” If, then, the poser dress is designed to be worn standing still, all power to the woman wearing it. Just don’t try typing in it.

This is what clothing for disabled people could be like if more designers were inclusive

Finding clothing womens sweat suits that can simply be put on isn’t always easy, making this line even more vital. The collection is a follow-up to the Spring 2016 children’s line which also featured adaptable items, according to Bloomberg. Now the brand is taking the kid’s line and expanding it to men and women! Think shirts with magnetic buttons, one-handed zippers, and hems that easily open

Think red, white, and blue staple pieces that are both stylish and functional. It’s important for shoppers of all walks of life to be able to express their personal style! Especially with the ’90s having a resurgence, it’s great that everyone can stay up to trend without sacrificing functionality.

The collection starts at $29.50 for a T-shirt and goes up to $129.50 for a coat. Although, since Tommy Hilfiger is known for high-quality items, it might be worth it to consider these investment pieces. Hopefully in the future there’s a way to combine both functionality and affordability!

13 things women’s clothes need more of

It’s no secret that the female fashion industry can be kind of problematic. Y’know, what with the constant perpetuating of body image issues, never-ending lack of inclusivity and various other damaging aspects that need to be addressed asap.

But on a smaller scale, there’s also a whole lot of little, everyday problems within women’s clothing that are just frickin’ infuriating af.

For example, where the pockets at?

We’re about to get ranty up in here, because there’s SO many things that the high street gets very, very wrong when it comes to women’s clothing. Boobs are mistreated, periods are ignored, and slogan choices are often so bad that it leaves you wondering how to unsee a t-shirt.

Hold on tight, because it’s time to go IN on 13 super annoying, oh so real things that women’s clothing really needs more of, please. And make it snappy.

The majority of female human beings need to keep a tampon on them, so why have clothing companies not figured out that somewhere to stash ‘em would be helpful?

Keeping them in your bag is all very well and good, but what happens if you feel THE FEELING when you left your bag somewhere else?

Petition for all dresses, jeans and jackets to have one tiny, handy tampon-sized pocket popped into the lining to help save our light coloured undies from disaster.

What is it with men getting all of the effing pockets in the fashion industry? They get them in their jeans (front and back both useable), their t-shirts, their jackets…

Meanwhile, girls are left emotionally betrayed and confused by either tiny, shallow pockets that fit NOTHING inside, the travesty that is fake pockets, or zero pocket action altogether.

It’s a pocket patriarchy. We could probably write a pretty good heartfelt ballad entitled ‘The Pockets I Never Had.’

There’s a big night out on the cards and you’ve found the perfect dress. Hallelujah.

But wait a dang minute… There’s some kind of criss cross, loop de loop, plunging crochet macrame origami action going on back there, that leaves you with no choice but to go bra-less. WHYYY.

A venn diagram showing dresses you like, and dresses that can be worn with a bra would probably show ZERO overlap.

Global and local: the fashion conundrum

From Manish Arora’s international appeal to the youthful French twist at Atlein and Jacquemus, designers conquer the language barrier.

Since the autumn collections and my usual travel hopping – most recently from Belgium to Lisbon to Marrakesh – I have been pondering the fashion conundrum. How can a designer be both local and global?

The big brands’ concept of presenting identical shop windows in each city has faded slightly. Yet there is still a sense that to make it worldwide, there has to be an international look. And this so often produces a brand bland – a disaster for lesser-known labels. Without a vast budget to promote sales each season, and, crucially, a money-spinning accessory line to fund the clothes, how can designers keep a personal identity?

The struggle is tough enough for small but established brands where designers have name recognition but not the budget to back that up – although the success of Dries van Noten, for example, proves that consistently good design can find a place in a crowded industry.

For those starting from scratch, the struggle for recognition has been helped by digital development. Who could have imagined a decade ago that a fashion-student start-up could offer clothes online across the world? Or that local success stories from Australia or South America would spread through the international market?

But the reality is that there is no golden path to success for individual designers – and that many of the most talented new arrivals are sucked into big brands looking for talent. Two cracking good shows – from his own JW Anderson line and from LVMH-owned Loewe – have taken Jonathan Anderson from London’s East End to worldwide success, illustrating the fashion dream of all fledgling talent.

I studied four designers – two from India and two from France – to gauge the international stories.

Only a year ago, Manish Arora was jazzing up his colourful show with a dog whose fur was dyed blue. This season, the show was held in an elegant mini-palace on the Champs-Élysées in Paris. And the designer raised his game as he launched his first fragrance, “Ready to Love”.

Over the past 20 years, Manish has used skill and humour to weave together a personal style that had initially seemed to both accept and to laugh at the tropes of Indian style: the gaudy colours, the over-the-top decoration, and patterns on the wild side.

But there womens sweat suits comes a moment when a successful fashion designer breaks through the barrier of time and place and becomes universal. Manish has achieved that, not so much masking his Indian heritage but absorbing it. The opening outfits for Spring/Summer 2018 were streamlined and casual, with wrap dresses that were gently patterned.

A burqa ban on the 150 women sweatsuits?who dare to wear one

Austria’s burqa ban comes into force today (Oct. 1). The law is expected to affect just 150 women—that’s 0.03% of the Austrian Muslim population and 0.002% of the entire population.

Under the new law, devout Muslim women wearing the full-face and body veil in public will be fined €150 ($177) on the spot. The ban was part of a larger package of measures defended as a way to integrate migrants. The requirements include making all recent migrants participate in classes to learn the German language, as well as Austrian norms and values.

The government’s decision to ban the burqa sparked protests across the country. Austria’s own president, Alexander Van der Bellen, had opposed the law, saying: “It is every woman’s right to always dress how she wants.” The move was largely seen as a knee-jerk reaction to the rise of the far right in the country. In 2016, Austria narrowly avoidedelecting a far-right candidate in what turned out to be one of the most dramatic presidential elections in its history.

To avoid accusations of Islamophobia and racism, the law doesn’t just ban face veils worn by Muslim women. The government has been careful to use language that states the bans includes all face coverings, with certain exceptions.

The number of women who wear face veils is minuscule throughout Europe. In France—the first European country to ban the burqa, in 2007—government documents showed the ban would affect 1,900 women, 0.04% of the French Muslim population and 0.003% of the total population. In the Netherlands, which implemented a partial burqa ban in 2016, there are 100 to 500 women who wear face veils.

Despite this, Europe continues to wrestle with an issue that affects so few of its citizens. In December 2016, chancellor Angela Merkel called for burqa ban in Germany, saying “Our law takes precedence over codes of honor, tribal or family rules, and over sharia law.” However, the numbers show that such a ban would affect relatively few women in Germany, where studies indicate that 70% of Muslim women don’t even cover their hair.

Europeans—citizens and politicians alike—greatly overestimate their country’s muslim population. According to a recent survey conducted by Ipsos Mori in 40 countries, French respondents were most likely to overstate their country’s Muslim population (the average French estimate was that 31% of the country’s population was Muslim, when the actual figure is 7.5%). The same is true of Belgian, British, German, Italian, and Dutch participants.

At the heart of Europe’s far-right propaganda is the myth that Muslims are overtaking Europe and pose a risk to the Western way of life. The obsession with the burqa suggests those views are crawling into the mainstream.