And then there were the other dresses. A rash of them. And what did they all have in common? Ill fitted, ill designed chestal regions. Let me explain . . .
Sin 1: Gone Swimming
So you know the two fingers thing, for putting a collar on a cat? So you don't do it too tight? The same does not apply to the bodice of a dress. If one is less fortunate up top, one needs to be fitted properly just as much as us over endowed. I can't decide if this dress was too tall in the torso for her, or just too big. In either case, I'm under the nerve raking impression anyone with a few inches on the girl could just look down and . . . jackpot.
Natalie nearly made my favorites list. You know, Fashionable Reader, how I love a 1950s silhouette and polka dots? And then she turned sideways. Sigh.
Why? Why? Why? Someone should have stopped her. Colin, please, make it go away.
Sin 2: Down Under
Are there boobs there at all? Where did they go? And how will they get back? They could be gone forever! Oh, no, save them! I'm panicking here.
Sin 3: Side Cleavage
Need I say more? OK, I will. Cleavage is good in moderation but only in a frontal central location, not the side, not the tush, and not the toes. It's just like perfume.
Sin 4: Absences Does Not Make the Breast Grow Fonder
Bad color choice, why would you want to look naked and fluffy? Both dresses look as if they need to be worn under something else, either that or there's some strange bird furry naked chicken fetich I don't know about.
I'm reminded of that famous saying.
Sexy is running a feather down your lover's body,
Kinky is doing it was a rubber chicken,
Perverted is using a live roster.
Or something. Now where was I? Oh yes . . .
Sin 5: The Lovely Bones
Goes to dressmaker and says, "You know I really want it to look like my breastbones are on the outside. Tres chic!" Let's not even talk about the entire absence of cleavage. If you don't have it, showing your sternum doesn't make it magically appear. Modesty is required for either extreme.
