The top five worst fashion trends ever
Leggings as trousers
Two words: Camel Toe. Just don't do it to yourselves, or us for that matter.
Two words: Camel Toe. Just don't do it to yourselves, or us for that matter.
Give a nod to those bold colours with these red leggings from Asos
One actress, come designer, who has not been as successful as the Olsen Twins in her foray into fashion is Lindsay Lohan, whose collection for Ungaro two seasons ago bombed.
However she’s not giving up. Earlier this week we told you that LiLo was planning on extending her 6126 line from leggings to handbags and tops, and we’ve managed to get hold of some pictures from the lookbook, which also seems to include minidresses and leather vests.
According to NY Mag the lookbook’s intro, which tells of Lindsay’s inspiration, reads: “The iconic Marilyn Monroe and the timeless, confident glamour she represents.”
Hmmm we’re not sure about this but we want to know what you think of the first shots of the collection? Are they great or are they grim?
Let us know by leaving your comments below.
Fact for the day: did you know that in France, a girl wearing a winter coat with a miniskirt and bare legs is said to be dressing “a l’anglaise”? It’s true, I heard it somewhere.
Now, I’m not suggesting we should all be cowering with collective national shame – after all, our oh-so-chic Gaelic cousins have never quite understood British style endeavours. Across the channel, fashion rules prevail with the force of William the Conqueror. No black with brown or navy, no cleavage, no garish makeup, no dyed hair, non non non! We, meanwhile, are categorised by our somewhat ‘laissez-faire’ attitude toward dressing (I believe in translation that means “falling headfirst into a wardrobe and wearing whatever comes out stuck to you”), complete with daring ‘dos, colour clashing and yes, maybe, a little flesh-flashing when the mood takes us.
But I can’t help feeling that on this occasion, maybe we should pay heed to les femmes françaises. Because if they think that the English are a nation of under-clothed Cinderellas, wandering numbly through the snow with our legs out, I’m afraid I’m inclined to agree with them. Zeut alors.
Unseasonal bare legs are becoming something of an epidemic, sweeping the country like a monster from a ’50s B-movie. It’s practically sport, on an average night out, to keep a tally of every girl you see sporting the stilettos-and-blue-veined-stubble look, complete with massive coat poached off a man under the guise of helpless femininity (Why these blokes never just say “You should have dressed for January then, you silly bint” will remain an eternal mystery). Bonus points if it is raining, or she is walking barefoot and carrying her shoes.
Why, then? Aside from a lyrca allergy or maybe malaria, I can’t find a single reason for bare legs with a mini before June. Our shops are well-stocked with tights of every colour and print imaginable, leggings are still riding first-class on the trend train, and this season we have the additional pleasure of socks to toy with – yet so many women still plump for the chicken skin and hypothermia.
Obviously British Weather is partly to blame. In our flighty climate, particularly during these transitional months, it’s hard to know what to wear. Put on the big coat and the sun will come out, put on the little jacket and it will start snowing as soon as you get to the bus stop. And this is coupled with our traditional hardiness, and proud optimism where the onset of summer is concerned. It’s the same reason we go out and buy a Calippo as soon as we hear a bumblebee, and spend our bank holidays sitting on pebble beaches under a blanket saying “Well, isn’t this nice?”
Then there’s the celebrity factor. Celebs do bare legs all the time, and yes, most of the time they look ruddy gorgeous.But as far as I can deduce, being famous means you become suddenly impervious to weather. You don’t feel cold, or wind, or rain, and so you can stay committed to the cause of leg-baring on red carpets throughout the winter months. As an antidote to this deception, I suggest you look in the mirror before a night out and ask yourself: Am I a celebrity? Am I going to the Brits? Or am I in fact a normal girl, going to a Wetherspoons in Chorley?
On that note, ladies, think of all the great reasons there are to keep your legs covered until summer. For starters, the obvious: you won’t need to shave! You’ll save so much time! Take up crochet or something (in fact, crochet yourself some long johns, there’s a plan). Then the almost-as-obvious: you will be WARMER. You can stop borrowing coats from men, you won’t have to do that frostbitten hobble to the kebab shop, and hell, you might not even NEED the kebab because you won’t be losing as much of your body heat through your thighs.
There are also style kudos to be earned – much as the WAG contingent of our glossies has been trying to persuade us otherwise, true fashionistas know the truth: miniskirts were just made to be worn with tights. Think about it; it’s the reason they were both invented in the ’60s. With tights you can go even shorter, cover your modesty, save yourselves from blisters, make a handy tea strainer if needed, and avoid people asking if you’ve ever witnessed an English November before.
Yes, I am prepared to add this matter to the list of Things the French Get Right, under steak, Chanel, cheese and Thierry Henry. Come summer, you can frolic around as bare legged as you like. But for now, I will say zis only once: leave the goosebumps on the frogs’ legs, and keep yours under wraps.
Photo: The Saturdays out on the town in January. Yes, January.
Credit: Will Alexander/Wenn.com
Lauren Bravo writes:
Rules are made to be broken, that’s how the old adage goes. And so it normally is in fashion, where rules like ‘blue and green should never be seen’ and ‘steer clear of horizontal stripes’ have been broken with such regularity that they now exist only in quaint 1930s books and the occasional WI meeting. We start kicking against clothing regulations early on in life with school uniform, rolling our waistbands over and making our ties short and stubby as a low-maintenance way of sticking it to the Man.
Then later it all becomes a bit more relevant, when we stop earning house points and start earning style points. Fashion rules are thrown at us from all directions, each with the promise it will deliver that magical word, “flattering” (and those even more magical ones, “thin”, “young” and “almost a bit like Scarlett Johansson”). I say they’re thrown from all directions, but of course it’s largely whatever direction Trinny and Susannah happen to have been standing in – though they’ve fallen off the radar in recent years, to this day I still hear them shrieking “Deep Vs! Three-quarter sleeves! Put DOWN the polo neck!” every time I go shopping.
But this is all a very round-about way of bringing up a delicate topic. Which is, not to beat around the, um, bush or anything: crotches. Crotches seem suddenly to have risen to new prominence in our society, and I think they need attention. No, hang on, the ISSUE needs attention. The crotches need as little attention as possible.
The problem began about four years back, when leggings made their triumphant return to our wardrobes. It was an unlikely lycra renaissance for a generation who remember our mums in them not so long ago, but leggings managed to be one of the most dominant trends of the noughties. Their appeal was based, initially, on coverage; thicker than tights, we could wear long tops as ‘dresses’ and pelmets as ‘skirts’ without shame of reproof. They were the get-out-of-slutty-free card. And they were warm to boot.
But their service to us was part of a fashion deal – to avoid making the same mistakes our mothers did, leggings had to be worn with more caution this time round. The unspoken rule, or at least so I understood it, was this: we had to keep the crotch covered at all times. Whether with tunics, dresses, shorts or skirts, leggings had to stay layered beneath things. It just made good sense. I thought we were all agreed.
Apparently not. For all of a sudden, across the nation, hemlines are rising and crotches are emerging. People are wearing leggings with t-shirts. With blouses. With cropped tops even. Whether it’s deliberate fashion anarchy or just that everybody has forgotten the rule, I’m not sure. Or perhaps it’s because, in these times of recessionista thrift, we can now pass off three millimetres of clingy spandex as “trousers”, like they used to make birthday cakes out of hat boxes in the war. Perhaps.
Either way, I feel something needs to be said. It’s one of those rare looks that is as unappealing on short and tall, curvy and skinny alike. Not that I’m electing myself as the anti-crotch front, running around the streets handing out aprons to protect women’s dignity – if the crotch-bearing is a conscious act, I have no right to interfere. But somehow I don’t think it IS conscious. I think something has wandered off course somewhere in the grand scheme of trend development, and we need to get it back on course. So I’m going to say it once more, in a very loud, clear voice, and then sit back and hope it takes some effect. Ahem . PUT. THE CROTCHES. AWAY.
(I’d like to apologise for the number of times I’ve had to use the word ‘crotch’ in this article. But it could have been worse. At least I never said ‘cameltoe’)

Can you believe Lindsay Lohan’s legging collection 6126, which came out last week, has already sold out? Frankly, we can’t. Is this some sort of trick where they released a very limited stock? Not according to Intuition shop owner Jaye Hersh.
“Everybody loves to wear leggings, and everybody wants a piece of Hollywood. Lindsay is Hollywood,” Hersh told New York Magazine.

For those willing to pay a silly higher amount for their leggings, then Lindsay Lohan’s 6126 label is just for you. The starlet’s debut range is now on sale at Shopintuition.com for those who are really keen. The collection features a jazzy variety of knee pads, glitter and side zips. My favourite? The leopard ankle gloves, of course ($42)… Miaow! Amazing what one can do with a bit of stretchy fabric and a glue gun, isn’t it?

Lindsay Lohan is known for her uniform of black leggings – and not necessarily in a good way.
But apparently it was too hard to resist the opportunity to make a quick buck to pay for all those stints in rehab/substances that get her into rehab in the first place.
That’s right, Lindsay Lohan has launched a line of leggings likely to be celebrated by 13-year-olds and starlet wannabees everywhere.

When it comes around to be time for tights next year, there will be another option for customers looking for fun, funky hosiery.
Steve Madden, the trendy shoe designer, will be debuting a range of tights, socks, and leggings in stores in July.
As you can see, the brand has already forayed into the world of leggings as well as a few socks.
It must have been successful since the new range will provide many more choices.

Shiny Style has told you how much we love sequin dresses and sequin leggings, but we also love sequin miniskirts. Sequins are huge this fall as a quick way to create a nighttime-glam outfit and to turn heads as soon as you strut into that bar or party. Victoria’s Secret has a great sequin skirt for only $98, perfect paired with a crisp white button-down and black pumps.
[Image: Victoria's Secret]

Even with the season’s slew of dark-dye leggings matched with minidresses and tunic tops, there’s still room for denim extravagances for a more formal look. These Dolce & Gabbana zip-detailed skinny jeans are a warmer addition to the skintight cotton and lycra bottoms that we’re coveting this season, with zip details and gold tone logo plate on the rear. The likes of Jessica Alba has already been spotted in a navy pair by Rich & Skinny, but D&G offers something a little more chic. Right in step with the grey hues this year, these are a quality pair to pull off with both long and short tops this fall.
From:Debenhams show us how to avoid tanning disasters this year