Looking for a little something for the lady in your life ahead of V Day tomorrow? If she takes sci-tech in her stride - and as the SO of an El Reg reader, we'd hope she does - how about a pair of these anatomically oriented geeky strides? Run up by Aussie outfit Black Milk, this pair of muscle leggings show exactly what's inside …
False Description - I want my money back!
Those are clearly trousers and a dress!
Oh god I just mad myself sound like a perv
"Oh god I just mad myself"
Hehe - is that the best typo ever? I'm gonna think about using it again!
edible material would be good but I prefer body paint.
Lowering the tone.
Spoken like somebody
who's never tasted grease paint -- forget the design; if you can keep your mind on sexy time when you've just had a mouthful of that awful stuff, you're a hornier man than I!
@AC: I don't want to fill up on an appetizer of edible material
right before the main course. :-).
Nice and all
but bloody $75 for one pair of leggings?
Welcome to the world of women's clothing.
If you can't measure the price of the garment in tens of pounds per square foot, it will never be bought by a woman.
I'm yet to work out exactly what it is that women's clothes are made of, because my cheap £1 T-shirts look *exactly* the same material (if not the same cut) as hers, but hers cost £10's of pounds for less actual material. Maybe they oxygenate them with rarefied air from the top of the Alps or something. Even her jeans cost more and I'm pretty sure the cost of denim is fixed and not reliant on whether you're making jeans for a woman or a man.
You could add up every bit of money that I've ever spent on anything I've ever owned (including historically, presents given to me, things bought for me, etc.) and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't come to 50% of what my girlfriend / ex-wife paid their *current* wardrobe (and that's not even counting shoes!).
womens stuff is actually a lot cheaper than mens stuff from designers.
then again we dont buy stuff all the time just 'because'.
This is because most men aren't quite stupid enough to pay four times as much for exactly the same thing with a label on it. Thus the potential rakeoff from the fuckwit tax is much lower and prices are correspondingly higher to compensate.
Also, when it comes to designer gear that makes a statement, while Primark do an olive drab T-shirt with a silhouette of a Chinook on it labelled "Big Chopper", none of the designer labels appear to for some reason.........
"If you can't measure the price of the garment in tens of pounds per square foot, it will never be bought by a woman."
Whenever I've bought clothes for women, it seems like the price is in inverse proportion to the acreage. Sensible sized clothes usually have a reasonable price, but those skimpy little numbers seem to cost a fortune!
Oh dear oh dear
If you've ever seen fabric cut by a designer to fit one particular woman you'll know why it's worth the money. There is also a mile wide difference between what your 1000 units/hour T short is cut from compared to the stuff that costs real money, but you don't just notice that in the way it falls - you also notice that in how long such clothes last.
I suggest you actually evaluate that world before you judge or comment - you sound about as knowledgeable as most board level directors talking about IT. Give it a shot - just once. Walk into a shop, say, Armani, and just buy a pair of jeans or a T shirt. Then buy another T shirt from your "regular" vendor and use them both as often. I'd give it at most half a year before the difference starts showing. You'll have the "expensive" clothing a lot longer.
Back to the female aspect - appreciate the effort they make to look nice, and don't forget to show that appreciation. It's a positive investment.
Women's clothing is priced by 1/square foot
The less there is the more it costs - and may it ever be so!
Price = 1/area wins the thread
Good laugh, and true too -- put that way, it makes you wonder why we bother buying our ladies lacy underthings at all. We know we'd rather just see them naked, they know that too, why beat around the -- and here come the cliche police. Okay, let's try another one, shall we?
Every year around this time I see men in Victoria's Secret, making it clear through body language that they do not belong there but have merely dropped in to have a painful blockage of the wallet extracted, also to pick up a couple of small bandages by which to attempt to salve the wound. Am I the only one to whom it seems these men must, as children, have been the same ones who could be absolutely relied upon to bypass the fad-of-the-season Christmas present in favor of spending the whole afternoon playing with the box it -- er, okay, sorry, I can see that one's not working either.
Oh, well, it's almost beer o'clock anyway, I guess you lot can finish it off for yourselves, eh? -- oh, and here they are again. All right, I'll go quietly, just let me get my --
"Back to the female aspect - appreciate the effort they make to look nice, and don't forget to show that appreciation. It's a positive investment."
How can a comment that ends with this phrase get downvoted? Truer words were never spoken, and a good piece of advice too blokes everywhere. Try to limit yourselves to women you're involved with, or want to become involved with though, lest you come across as a perv...
One could assume the downvotes are by people unattached. I wonder why..
(yes, I'm going for the site downvote record :)
I suggest you read http://www.birnbaumgarment.com/2011/09/10/the-300-denim-jeans-3/ which is from someone in the industry. The fabrics are the same, the costs are the same, even the factories are often the same. It's only the scale (Armani makes ten suits, some unknown brand makes a hundred thousand of the sam designs) and brand that makes any difference at all.
With all the patent/copyright suits doing the rounds just now, how long before Black Milk gets sued?
Consider Mario Cipollini's prior art
There is no patent or copyright protection in fashion, only trademarks
Watch this and learn: http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
It's Joanne Blakeley's TED piece about fashion. It's interesting, because it also explains why you can get those products with the logo's splattered all over - and why that doesn't really work either.
It's a very interesting, and rather enlightening talk. Educational.
Apologies for not creating a usable link, but I'll eventually work out how it's done in El Reg (anyone?).
And there I was thinking "I bet a guys version would sell really well among cyclists.... (Although it's generally best to stick to black around the crotch area -- light-coloured lycra tends to show off contours a little immodestly...
Is it wrong of me after that to think "Cippolini FTW"?
Those are cool!
Creepy but rather excellent.
Posted by Hard Reg *snigger*
I guess you liked them. nuff said
"Reg Hardware? But this is softwear..."
"but there'll be next year.."
If you give her these, there will indeed be next year, just not with the same woman
Nice looking girls, but why
do both front and rear of the dress show the front of the skeleton?
Mine is the one with the anatomical atlas in the pocket
Looks like they got my letter about making X-Ray clothing for girls, but I don't think they quite understood *exactly* what I was getting at.
should be made illegal on grown-ups. All women, regardless of body shape, look ridiculous wearing them.
Cool designs, though.
You really should stop putting off that appointment with your optician...
Speak for yourself, Cranston! (Quietly, too, if you don't mind, lest anyone overhear and think you're expressing a more general preference.)
Do those muscles stay the same size when worn by women with 52" thighs?
... wearing the skeleton top and a pair of those skin-stripped leggings next time you have to go through the Perv-o-scanner at an airport...?!
Or stand very still at one of Gunther von Hagens' exhibitions ... and then jump out at people.
What an awesome idea. Full outfit, including themed balaclava! I reckon you could sufficiently scare people to give old Gunther some new 'material' to work with...
When it comes to Aussie purveyors of feminine apparel...
I think they have some way to go to compete with micro swimwear specialist wickedweasel.com
AC quite obviously
PS Has anyone ever seen an girl wearing anything like this??? Mine wouldn't!
I'm sure wickedweasel would claim that it's all decent, but then again, swimwear that goes transparent when wet? Remember the NSFW tag next time, AC!!!
I only got as far as "Has anyone ever seen an girl" before I burst out laughing -- was there more?
"I think they have some way to go to compete with micro swimwear specialist wickedweasel.com"
Pah! I've seen some pictures of young Japanese women wearing bikinis which quite literally have the same area of coverage as three postage stamps!
Bwahahahaha. That's a keyboard clean...
re AC ~ meh#
re your other half refusing to wear such stuff..
Your obviously not paying her enough ;)
It's ok showing the musculature but...
...you know that muscles on their own don't work - you need to put a one in it.
Oh, wait a minute.... :-)
Downvote for spelling
Sorry, mate, but when it's the sine qua non of the punchline that you don't spell correctly, well, there's just nothing else to do, is there? Joke ruined. Better luck next time.
Bad to the bone.
And whose bone would that be?
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE
- Analysis Hey, Teflon Ballmer. Look, isn't it time? You know, time to quit?
- Murdoch Facebook gloat: You're like my $580m, 'CRAPPY' MySpace