We Get It: Pants Go Under Dresses For Fall

This runway trend is so consistent, so blatant, that I'm feeling a little paranoid, and certainly out of this exclusive loop. Someone powerful must have played some fashion telephone starting in New York, who then called London, who then told Milan — that bitch— who snitched to Paris that this was the trend to put into their shows.

The verdict? I love it. For two reasons:
1. Personal reasons: this may be just me, but I'm not one to jaunt around in short shorts and mini dresses no matter what my age or physical fitness. That's not that I don't want to, or certainly post about them once or twice or thrice, but it's just that I'm too chicken to do it. Too much skin — too much going on in my head when I do. Things like, "ah, my thighs" and other girl-type insecurities. I subscribe to the notion of "less is more" while I am well aware the fact that this saying is probably the motto for short-shorts wearing gals everywhere too. I am a huge fan of being all wrapped up and comfortable, and realistic, and still feminine, sexy even.

2. Nothing groundbreaking here in this reason: I'm almost always cold. I live in the Bay Area and this strikes my sensible bones as a smart fashion move. Trendy and practical. Layers, people. I live in them. Offices, they have AC and I work in them. 


  1. My issue with this trend is that it'll likely add unnecessary bulk to my already wide hips.

  2. I'm so down for this trend, and I agree with all the reasons you listed, particularly the notion you can be covered up and still sexy!