When will super short dresses go out of style?
 

Seeing all of the bid day pictures makes me wonder when the super short dresses will go out of style. Anyone have a sense of when this trend will fade?

I, for one, will be glad to see this one go. The plunging on top and super short on the bottom just isn't very flattering on most women, even college women. :)

The skirt length echoes the economy. When we are doing well, the skirts tend to be longer. When the economy is in trouble, the skirts go up. Expect to see the skirts get longer when the economy improves.

In theory long dresses/tea length are "in" for spring/summer. I remember that the tea length was very in 20 plus years ago. But I think that many young ones, the ones with great legs, will be hard pressed to hide great assets.

Yes, I've seen that trend in history. Thin skirts with minimal fabric during the War and then big poofy skirts afterward.

I've heard trend forecasters saying that longer lengths are in this season! I love tea-length anything, and just-below-the-knee is always class. I'm so tired of the short, skanky dresses! I'm already tall, so the current trends make finding a cute dress really hard.

It's not like the dresses are shorter than they've ever been before. They're not, if you straight out measure them. It's just that:

1) Girls wear them with skanky stilettos (as opposed to clogs or chunky heels in the 1960s and 70s or flats in the 1980s).

2) They are (in general) waaaaaaaay tighter than they used to be.

3) They are made out of shiny clingy material (as opposed to my old fave, the stretch denim miniskirt).

4) They wear them without any hose or tights.

5) They aren't following the "skimpy on one half, covered on the other half" fashion rule.

6) There are too many girls with fat asses wearing them who either shouldn't wear them at all or should know to wear a slightly different style. But if you say that nowadays you're being a "mean girl." So women run around in things that make them look like crap.

Believe me, I wore some minis in my day that were just as short and tight as these...so did my cousins back in the 1960s...we just accessorized them differently.

No, it's the opposite...hemlines go up with the stock market. Short in the 20's, long in the 30's. Short again in the 80's.

Okay, it doesn't really work at all.

It always seemed the opposite to me.
Short skirts - good economy
Long skirts - not so good

I'm more concerned about the 4-inch and 5-inch and more heels. I can't wear them - ankle issues - but I'm astounded by them.

The only thing my mother always insisted on was that the clothes had to be flattering. We were never allowed to wear overalls (it was the 80s) since they make everyone look fat. I'd be saying the same thing to a teenager about low rise jeans that are so low they end up hitting below the fat line. eeewwww. I see that one WAY too often. And I suppose the looking like a hooker thing will pass one of these days too. But 33 is right. It's more obvious and more gross (grosser?) than in the past because of the growing (???) weight problem.

I have to say I'm happy as a clam to see the leggings and tunics back. It works so well in a hot climate when you still want to be covered.

You guys all sound like my mother. My skirts are too short. jeans too low. dresses too tight. etc. But I have seen pictures of her in micro mini skirts and pictures of her on her honeymoon with my dad wearing OMG string bikinis so skimpy that I am not sure that I would have the guts to wear.

I agree 100%.

Historically, yes, the hemlines went up during the war (WWII) because they were conserving fabric.

As for what's different "these days" than the minis that girls wore in the 60s and 80s, is just what 33 said - if you wore short on the bottom, you wore long on top. The ideal non-skank coverage rule - according to Cosmo - is 40% skin showing. So if you're showing your legs, no cleavage. If you're showing off the girls, wear a longer skirt, leggings/tights/opaque hose or pants!!

I personally can't do the tea-length look, or even below the knee for that matter, because I am super stumpy. At 5 1 3/4" and short legs, my waist isn't high enough to make the look work. So while the trends may be going towards flowy, tea-length dresses, I will have to stick with my tried and true shift dress silhouette.

I saw pictures of my mom in bikinis, crop tops, low rise pants, and short dresses when I was in junior high (and like all of my peers, in my I-desperately-want-to-look-skanky phase) and told her she wasn't being fair when she refused to let me wear short skirts. She then made all the points you just did, and that was one of my first my-mother-is-right-about-clothing memories. Yes, she wore those things but she wore them much differently.

My biggest pet peeves are #s 5&6. Why does sexy mean nothing but less-is-more these days? And the buy-for-your-size issue drives me nuts. It's not just your numerical size, it's also body type. My numerical size falls into the you-can-wear-that category, but my lack of toned muscles and high body fat percentage doesn't. I know this, so I dress accordingly. And at least on my campus I'm in the minority. IMO on college campuses it's a fear of the freshman 15. Most of us gain some weight at some point, and the logical thing to do is to then buy new clothes that fit. Instead of attempting to squeeze into something 2 sizes too small for fear off accepting that freshman 15. Know your body, try things on, and buy what fits. That's all there is to it.

And lastly, just because it's trendy doesn't mean you should wear it. Not all styles look good on all body types. I feel like everyone who shows muffin top should have to watch What Not to Wear.

I'm 5'4" and LOVE those heels. I'm a master at walking in them (ironically because I have weak ankles...apparently that's a thing and I was born with it). But what they shouldn't be worn with is super-small-and-tight dresses. As much as I love Kim Kardashian, she is no style icon.

I don't know how you walk in heels. I have terrible ankles from dancing and from several injuries. I CAN walk in wedges, but skinny heels turn my ankles out after just a few steps.

Yeah, sizes definitely aren't universal, especially brand to brand. You're right, it comes down to trying it on. My closet has pants in 2, 4, and 6 right now and they all fit. I don't care what the tag says, I'm buying the jeans that fit me best. And I'm a huge tailoring advocate. IMO it's better to buy fewer, high quality pieces and then have them tailored to fit perfectly than to buy a bunch of cheaper pieces that fit funky. Quality over quantity.

I guess I've always known to buy the style that's right for me and not what's in the magazine because of my shape. I'm 5'4", short waist-ed, and bottom heavy. Things that look bangin' on 5'9" models with long torsos and skinny thighs usually do not translate well to my body type. At all. So I've been finding the best alternatives to model-wear my whole life.

As for the shoes, I was apparently born with funky ankles...my mom had to do some sort of exercises with my feet when I was a baby to avoid my having braces on my legs as a child. But when I was serious about riding and started to compete I had to find exercises to help my ankles stay in position and I use them now to help me with the heels. I still can't ice skate or rollerblade (my ankles turn out completely) and I'm prone to ankle injury, but I've developed my own way of walking in heels over the years. Though to be honest if I'm going to be wearing heels all day I go for wedges. I can handle stillettos for a couple of hours. 8 hour days, not so much. The key is to walk on the balls of my feet, leaving almost no weight on my ankles. It's probably exactly what you're not supposed to do, but it keeps my calves toned and my stilletto wearing abilities in check.