Fashion

[ECBG]

[KALLIE]

I'm NOT a fan of handkerchief skirts or see-through tops on wedding gowns. IMO, strapless gowns look BEST on women who are thin and not busty.

[Caligurll]

Love the dress, but don't care for the gold bow or belt, whatever that is.

---

@ECBG wrote:

---

[shoekitty]

I will be so glad when the strapless wedding gown phase is over.  Strapless should be worn by  someone who looks good in them.  I think brides to be are not seeing a wide selection in something other than strapless.  It is beautiful on someone who is a good weight, and at least firm in the arms and back.  But I have seen them on beautiful women who weigh close to 300, lbs, with huge arms that are flabby.  Stapless gowns on brides suffering from back acne.  They should wear something sheer that covers the strapless area.  The gown Kylie Kardashian is wearing is stunning, and could be worn by many women, including woman of size.  I think the sheer over the arms is actually more attractive for all women, small or large.  I am 68, and don't have the firm, slim body of my youth (to put it mildly).  I have a heck of a time finding tops with some kind of sleeve. When I was looking for dress to be a guest at the wedding, it was a frustrating awful experience.  I felt like an outsider, LOL!

[Desertdi]

I guess times have changed............Back "when"........it was unheard of (and not allowed) to wear strapless in  church..........................

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@Lipstickdiva wrote:

IMO nothing is timeless for years and years to come.  There are always changes made to the lines, material, shape, etc. that cause something to look dated years down the road.

Yes there are dresses that are uber trendy but very, very few people can pull out their wedding photo 25+ years later and the people looking at them not know the dress/style is from 25+ years ago.   Same with bridesmaids dresses if for nothing more than the color of them.  My mom's bridesmaids wore the same style of dress that I had to wear for my friends wedding.  You could tell though our's were a more modern version. 

I've been married now for 25 years.  Looking back at my pictures, I still remember how much I loved my dress the day I wore it.  Is it a dress I'd pick out now?  No because I was married in 1990.  I still look at the photos and think it was pretty and it suited me and the time. 

---

I agree .....  the dress should compliment the woman and the occasion.   Some weddings are more formal and some are more relaxed.    The primary consideration should be for the day, not what people "might" think 30 years from now.

[sharlee]

---

@Desertdi wrote:

I guess times have changed............Back "when"........it was unheard of (and not allowed) to wear strapless in  church..........................

---

True, and I personally wish that churches in general would have stood firm on this.

Any bride determined to display her cleavage, back and shoulders could wait until the reception, and wear some sort of jacket, stole, bolero or whatever for the ceremony.

[wilma]

---

@sharlee wrote:

---

@Desertdi wrote:

I guess times have changed............Back "when"........it was unheard of (and not allowed) to wear strapless in  church..........................

---

True, and I personally wish that churches in general would have stood firm on this.

Any bride determined to display her cleavage, back and shoulders could wait until the reception, and wear some sort of jacket, stole, bolero or whatever for the ceremony.

---

@sharlee@ @Desertdi

I sing a lot of church weddings, and believe me I have seen it all. I personally don't think all the cleavage is necessary, but that seems to be the style. I see more strapless gowns on brides with way too much chest exposed than I ever cared to see.  I also see them hiking up their gowns during the ceremony like they are afraid they will spill out.  Maybe they should have thought of that before choosing that style.

[Eliana]

I came across this and thought it would be darling for a more casual and/or outdoor wedding.