Taylor Swift in Maria Lucia Hohan

Posted on December 12, 2012

You guys, Taylor Swift just made her First Holy Communion!

Taylor Swift attends The GRAMMY Nominations Concert Live!! in Nashville, Tennessee in a Maria Lucia Hohan dress paired with Christian Louboutin shoes.

Maria Lucia Hohan Spring 2013 Collection

Oh, whatEVER, Taylor. We can’t.

It’s not that it’s a bad dress. It’s actually quite cute. But we’re just so over her virginal princess schtick; especially since her frantic dating history – girl canNOT go 5 minutes without a new celebrity boyfriend – tells a different tale. At least when Madonna wore white lace, she was being ironic about it.

 

[Photo Credit: Getty, marialuciahohan.com]

    • http://fafafab.tumblr.com/ fafafab

      I think Taylor and Lea Michele should swap wardrobes for a while

      • Rand Ortega

         It could be a Lifetime TV Movie– The Princess & The Pauper!
        (They could bitch slap each other to decide which is which! That I’d watch!)

        • http://profiles.google.com/sauchih Sau-Chih Feng

          The Lady and the Tramp.

      • leave_Blake_alone

        That would be fantastic! (for a little while)

      • Little_Olive

        I was thinking Taylor/Miley (or even Taylor/Lindsay, but that would be a bit cruel). I do not think I could stomach Lea in all these prissy-dainty frocks.  

      • formerlyAnon

         I don’t think Taylor has the curves for Lea’s wardrobe.

        • Zubair Ghumro

          Excuse me but Lea doesn’t have curves…she’s the skinny hobbit from slutville.

          • Jess_face

             What the hell.

      • Zubair Ghumro

        Oh My God…What a perfect but unfathomable idea. Love it!!

    • sharialbert

      I LOVE YOU GUYS!! EGGGGGGGGGSAAAAACT-AAAAAAAllllyyyyyy

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_U5LTVYHX32MGMMXR33G7TOXVR4 Magdalena Monzerrat Ontiveros

      Yeah, I think she is much more funnier than she appears to be with all this dresses.

    • TonyGo

      She bugs.

    • Michelle Cruz

      I am curious what you think of what she wore to Z100 Jingle Ball Press Room red carpet. She’s wearing black and it is something very unusual!

      • Jessi03

        I just saw those!  I think she looks like Kim Basinger in Batman.

    • DeborahJozayt

      I can’t wait to see her wedding dress some day. I don’t know how you can top some of this stuff.

      • MissMariRose

         I’m sure she’ll take as many attempts as she can to get her wedding dress right.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jessica-TallGirl-Freeman/1043623567 Jessica TallGirl Freeman

        ..in which you will not be able to find one piece of tulle, silk organza, pearls or clear Swarovski crystals for a year.

      • Sobaika

        As long as her wedding day doesn’t involve wearing a freaking doily.

    • http://twitter.com/katshimmers Kat Wright

      She is my “I hate you for no reason” person. This says why. 

      • lovelyivy

        It’s not unreasonable! The fact that she is actually playing Joni Mitchell in a movie fills me with all kinds of ragey disgust. And I’m not even a huge Joni Mitchell fan, I just think she deserves someone so much better than the strategically vapid Taylor Swift.

        • Sobaika

          … seriously?

          • http://twitter.com/tangodiva Tanya Wade

            That is a crime against womanhood and Canada.

            • j_anson

              Right? Christ, I hadn’t heard this before, but it’s RIDICULOUS and I’m going to take a great deal of pleasure in not seeing it.

        • Rand Ortega

           Please tell me you’re joking. Please.
           A chill just went up my spine signalling the rumors of the world ending are true.

        • FrayedMachine

          This has to to be a lie.

          • E. D.

            It better be a lie!

        • Alexandra Simons

           Joni would NOT approve!!! This is outlandish news.

        • getouttadodge

          But celebs can do such a good job depicting famous stars! Just look at Lindsay Lo– nevermind.

        • formerlyAnon

           I don’t even harbor negative thoughts about Ms. Swift and this horrifies. Joni Mitchell (or, at least, my shallow over-simplified teen view of her) imprinted on me like a mother duck on ducklings.

          I suppose, if she’s playing her in a movie they’re going to allow her to sing The Songs?  She’s never sung anything so good and the album will sell gazillions and they’ll give her credit. Jesus wept.

          • BrooklynBomber

            I don’t even harbor negative thoughts about Ms. Swift and this horrifies. Joni Mitchell (or, at least, my shallow over-simplified teen view of her) imprinted on me like a mother duck on ducklings.

            It’s like we’re the same person.

            • formerlyAnon

              I’m pretty sure there are thousands of us.

        • Lilithcat

          Someone is making a movie about Joni Mitchell?  Oy.

      • http://twitter.com/stellaphone Stella Zawistowski

        No…you have a reason. Such a good reason, too.

    • http://www.facebook.com/fiddlecub Kevin VanOrd

      I like the way she looks here, but then again, I have no feelings regarding her public persona one way or another, and don’t listen to her music. She is, at very least, consistent, and cultivates a look that is generally lovely and polished. I recognize Taylor gets a fair share of bitter kitten hate, but I’d rather see Taylor’s (perhaps disingenuous?) smile than Kristen Stewart’s clearly smug presence any day of the week. And as princess looks go, I prefer this much more than Elle Fanning’s look featured yesterday; Taylor looks happy to be there, at least.

      • Sara__B

         Amen!

    • http://twitter.com/stellaphone Stella Zawistowski

      BARF

    • http://profiles.google.com/hawkeye1978 Kristin Hanson

      I’m unsure of what’s going on with her top half.  Is there no lining under the lace dress?  It seems from the shadows that I’m just seeing a flesh-toned bra. 

    • sockandaphone

      also she was so irritating to watch in that show. And she did beat-box. I had second hand embarrassment.

      Like I really dont understand what is so great about her. 

      • NC_Meg

        I’ve seen her beat box a few times and it makes me cringe like nobody’s business. (HER beat boxing, not beat boxing in general. If you can do that well, I admire you.)

    • http://twitter.com/Lily1129 Lily

      It’s such a shame that I roll my eyes at this because she actually does look really beautiful, and the dress is exquisite. But I just cannot deal with her twee bs anymore.

    • http://www.katidom.com/ Kati B

      I wonder if I’d like the dress better if she’d had a sash or belt? Or would that just make it look even more little girly? I agree w/whomever said “she bugs”. That’s so exactly how I feel about her. I find her tiresome. 

      • Tatiana Luján

        I think I would like the dress much more.

      • Tatiana Luján

        I’m picturing the dress with a burgundy velet belt.

        • NC_Meg

           I hate velvet but I think that would look really cute. Also season-appropriate.

    • lrhg

      If this dress was on Emma Stone with some color or accessories somewhere I would think it’s adorable.

      On Taylor, I just want to throw her in something black and slinky. 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LBVEYMFKM4YOWI5CXE4QCUMSQY M

      That’s a really old-fashioned and kinda sexist criticism.

      • http://www.theseabirdmonastery.co.uk/ Ailsa

        I really hate to say this since TLo are usually so feminist and anti-slut-shaming, which is one of my favourite things about this blog, but I have to agree, it rubbed me the wrong way too. I think we ought to move past the idea that white lace = virgin, because it’s just another way of reinforcing the old virgin/whore dichotomy. Taylor does cultivate a good-girl image in white lace and pretty blonde hair, and she’s dated a lot of people, but I really can’t get behind making any kind of a link between how a girl dresses and her sex life. It winds up just encouraging people to judge women’s behaviour by their appearance, as in “short, tight and black = slut”, and we all know how much that kind of judgement contributes to slut-shaming and rape culture. She looks pretty. Girl can dress however she wants and date whoever she wants, let’s not judge her or conflate the two.

        • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

          There’s no slut-shaming here. There’s pointing out that the image she tries so hard to sell is both unrealistic and at odds with her own behavior.

          • http://www.theseabirdmonastery.co.uk/ Ailsa

            I’m DEFINITELY not saying you’re slut shaming! I’m just saying that the idea that clothes mean anything in reflecting sexual behaviour is a factor in slut shaming, and I wish as a society we could all stop thinking that. 

            • FrayedMachine

              This is definitely true but to try and deny that she’s not playing into that is also kind of… nonsensical. Her whole image is “I’m the super sweet and safe girl next door”. In one of her own songs she, in many ways, ‘slut shames’, by calling out girls who wear short skirts and look a certain way and how they’re most certainly not as good and dependable and safe as she is. The whole idea that clothing can play this kind of an influence is silly but she sure as hell is guilty of it.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Clothes mean everything to a celebrity in terms of the image they sell to the public and she’s made her name by selling an outdated image of wide-eyed Disney-Princess purity. We don’t think it’s wrong to point out that it’s at odds with her own personal life.

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LBVEYMFKM4YOWI5CXE4QCUMSQY M

              Just because a woman has a lot of boyfriends or even has promiscuous sex, it doesn’t make her un-wholesome or impure, that’s all I’m saying. And there shouldn’t be one certain look/style for “people/women who are having sex.” I understand the role you guys have as fashion critics, but it just rubbed me the wrong way, since it seems like everyone is saying “come on Taylor, we all know you’re secretly kinda slutty, so why don’t you dress like it?”

            • FrayedMachine

              I’m all for progressive imagery but when you write songs that have lyrics like;

              “But she wears short skirtsI wear T-shirtsShe’s cheer captainAnd I’m on the bleachersDreaming about the day when you wake upAnd find that what you’re looking for has been here the whole time
              She wears high heelsI wear sneakersShe’s cheer captain and I’m on the bleachersDreaming about the day when you wake upAnd find that what what you’re looking for has been here the whole time”

              She’s not going for progressive imagery. Especially since the girl who’s being physically described is also being described as being prissy, bitchy and high maintenance.

              I don’t think TLo’s trying to say that women should dress a certain way to be a certain way. I think what’s being said is that she’s kind of a major hypocrite. Who she actually is and the kind of image she’s trying to sell are constantly clashing and that doesn’t come off as progressive, it comes off as cold and calculated. Something clearly done for publicity reasons.

            • pistachiocaity

               FFS she wrote that song when she was a teenager, I’m soooooooooo sure that you never said anything sexist as a teenager.

            • FrayedMachine

              Oh, right. We’re using the age argument. That because she was younger, she’s exempt from any sense of responsibility. Except no, not really when that same mentality is being carried over into her adulthood. So yeah, no.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               “Just
              because a woman has a lot of boyfriends or even has promiscuous sex, it
              doesn’t make her un-wholesome or impure, that’s all I’m saying.”

              Okay, great. But we never said she was impure or unwholesome. We never called her slutty. We never even said she was promiscuous. You seem to be reading way too much into what we said. Her childlike image does not match her adult life and we find it somewhat annoyingly hypocritical.

            • Lane

              “You seem to be reading way too much into what we said. Her childlike image does not match her adult life and we find it somewhat annoyingly hypocritical.” That isn’t how you framed your post, though — you worded it a bit more nicely, but said she presents a virginal image when her dating history shows she clearly isn’t a virgin. Then you referenced a hyper-sexualized pop star — and how she dressed in relation to whether or not she’d had sex — as a point of comparison. You agreed with a post suggesting she should own her sexuality through her clothing.

              I really hate for my first posts here (I’ve been reading you guys for years) to be feminist-policing and defending Taylor Swift. I don’t even LIKE her. But I think it’s disingenuous to act like the whole point of this post, and your responses to it, were coming from a place of “She should dress like a grown woman rather than a little girl.” Maybe they were, but that’s certainly not what it looks like. You comment on the age-appropriateness of people’s clothing all the time, and it never sounds like this.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               You are free to think what you want, but we’ve been very clear and consistent about what we meant.

            • Lane

              I’m a little saddened that you’re insisting what you MEANT is what matters without addressing or acknowledging that your actual words, and what they implied, can be problematic. I feel like I explained myself pretty well, and your response amounts to, “Whatever. WE know what we meant.”

              You’re annoyed over people putting words in your mouths but then expected us to infer a message that wasn’t as clear as you think it was, as evidenced by some of the reactions here. 

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               Alrighty then.

            • j_anson

              I’m always ready for some good ol’fashioned feminist policing ( :) ), but I’m actually with TLo on this one. I find Taylor fair game on this kind of thing precisely BECAUSE she works so hard to sell the twee virginal school-girl image. She’s making a great deal of money, in what I think is a very calculated way, off selling that image to teens, and it’s not subtle, and it very much is encoded in her clothing choices. If you’ve never done so, watch the video for “You Belong with Me.” It LITERALLY ends up in a face-off between the Good Girl in a white princess dress, and the Evil Bitch Who Doesn’t Appreciate her Man Like She Should does in a red, skin-baring dress. She’s choosing to evoke particular sexual roles with her clothing; I don’t think calling her out for evoking and selling an ethic she doesn’t actually play by is unreasonable. By all means, she should have as much sex as she wants, with whoever she wants. But doing it while making money off selling an idealized virgin school-girl image to impressionable teens is kind of gross. I think pot should be legal and people shouldn’t be punished for using it, but I still think it’s fair to call out, say, a politician who runs on hard-line drug policies but smokes up in private.

            • Lane

              “but I still think it’s fair to call out, say, a politician who runs on hard-line drug policies but smokes up in private.” Or the anti-gay politicians who get caught with their pants down in airport bathrooms. I get that much, but I think that type of criticism would only apply if Taylor 1) is pulling the Britney/Jessica card and proudly announcing her virginity in interviews, or 2) singing about sex. As far as I know, she doesn’t do those things. She seems emotionally immature, so it makes sense that she’d present a Disney-fied version of herself in her songs/videos. I don’t think that’s any less valid of a way to approach her image/presentation than the full-on X-tina Dirrty thing. It’s just a matter of which direction you’re exaggerating in.

            • j_anson

              No, I disagree. For me the critical point of the analogy is that both Taylor and the hypothetical legislator are PROFITING from the construction and sale of a (damaging) image. When someone is benefiting from selling you an image that has a socially damaging set of constraints attached to it, while privately pursuing a lifestyle free of those damaging constraints themselves, it’s totally fair to call them out on it.

              TLo aren’t calling Taylor out because she’s wearing a white dress while actin’ slutty (I don’t, in fact, get the impression they think she IS acting “slutty”.) They’re calling her out for profiting from presenting a certain image, with connotes a particular set of behaviors and social norms, as desirable when in fact her private life suggests she doesn’t think that lifestyle is desirable or want to conform to those social norms herself. The dress is a symptom, not the fundamental problem.

            • Lane

              Yeah, we’re not going to agree on this. My point was that I think Taylor views on romance (and indeed, herself) through a Disney princess lens — she hasn’t really graduated to reality as far as relationships are concerned, and so that’s how she writes songs, comes up with music video concepts, dresses, etc. She seems to me like the type who ascribes deep significance to short flings where there is none, and that’s a whole different kind of problem than the one we’re talking about here.

              There’s a whole host of reasons why she isn’t any kind of feminist (or any other kind of) ideal, but how she dresses vs. what she does — especially when we don’t even really know what she does — isn’t one of them, IMO. To be honest, I’ve never read “virginal” from anything she wears, unless “virginal” means “not showing a lot of skin.” She doesn’t generally wear minis or bear cleavage. So what? It’s not like she’s walking around in empire-waisted party dresses with sashes and bows and mary janes all the time, or is scared of showing a little shoulder.

              “TLo aren’t calling Taylor out because she’s wearing a white dress while actin’ slutty (I don’t, in fact, get the impression they think she IS acting “slutty”.”Neither do I, and that’s an extreme interpretation of what they said that I’m not ascribing to them. They did, however, appear to coyly reference her perceived sex life as a way to criticize her for dressing “virginal.” And I explained why I think that’s a valid interpretation of what they said. Hell, that was the only way I was able to read that post. It’s their complete failure to acknowledge that or defend their comments on that front that’s bothering me so much — according to them, that’s obviously not what they MEANT (and a lot of reactions around here are suggesting it WASN’T as obvious as they think), so using problematic language that reflects a whole other problem re: women’s issues shouldn’t matter. To me, it should.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Don’t put words in our mouths. At no point did we say or suggest that “using problematic language that reflects a whole other problem re: women’s issues shouldn’t matter.”

            • filmcricket

              For me the best analogy would be Johnny Depp, who dresses like a hobo even though he owns, like, an island in the Caribbean. For a while it’s like, “Oh, that’s Johnny, how quirky!” and then eventually it’s like, “Get over yourself, dude, you aren’t fooling anyone, and besides, we can see the effort it’s taking you to dress like you take no effort, so try washing your hair.”

            • http://www.theseabirdmonastery.co.uk/ Ailsa

              Well, I definitely agree with you about her image being constructed this way. I guess I’m just uncomfortable with (reductively) the notions that good girls wear white and bad girls wear black and that since she’s dated a lot of people Taylor is a “bad” girl being perpetuated. Basically I wish that clothes would stop being cultural markers of morality, and while I don’t love her nice 50s lady aesthetic, I also dislike how people (not you) seem to think she somehow doesn’t have the “right” to dress like a “good” girl, when they perceive her to be sexually active. 

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               ” I guess I’m just uncomfortable with (reductively) the notions that good
              girls wear white and bad girls wear black and that since she’s dated a
              lot of people Taylor is a “bad” girl being perpetuated.”

              It is amazing how much people are putting words in our mouths here.

            • Laurenash

              You said that she was wearing a virginal white, even though her dating life seemingly doesn’t add up(to that of a virgin?). Even if she is a prostitute, she should wear whatever ladylike clothing she likes- just because someone probably has had sex or dates around doesn’t mean they should have an image to reflect that. Dating and sexual activity should have nothing to do with clothing choice, if someone doesn’t want it to. 

            • http://www.theseabirdmonastery.co.uk/ Ailsa

              I’m talking about cultural narratives, not specifically what you said. I actually said “not you”. 

              I just prefer to criticise social conventions and constructions of femininity and sexuality, rather than the women trying to exist and succeed within the social system that reinforces them. But I get that that is not what this blog is about.

            • j_anson

              I don’t think anyone thinks she doesn’t have the “right” to dress like a good girl. I think people are saying, she makes a lot of money selling herself as a virginal princess (sometimes in direct opposition to imaginary Bad Girl rivals, per the lyrics quoted above). By implication, that means she’s reinforcing that image/lifestyle – the virginal princess – as a desirable ideal for her fans. People are pointing out that she doesn’t live up to the image she’s selling, which wouldn’t necessarily be a huge deal, except that the image she’s selling – the good girl/bad girl dichotomy – is, as you note, pernicious and damaging.

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VZLU6YVO4BRTELTTH3GRAAMWZQ Dot

              A celebrity like Taylor Swift is a product. Pretending that her clothes and image aren’t carefully crafted and calculated is completely unrealistic.

            • Cristian Valenzuela

              Exactly.

              So now only virgins can wear white lace and if sluts wear white lace it has to be in an ironice manner? 
              No way. Fashion, as any form of expression, is about inventing, creating, re-inventing and deconstructing meaning. We shouldn’t be so critical about static and fixed symbolisms associated to certain colors and materials. 

          • Nicholas

            This article is quite good on the subject. People who don’t have time to read it all can read from “Taylor Swift is a feminist’s nightmare”.

        • Kayceed

          In short, I agree. Also, I think TS is absolutely one of the smartest celebrity dressers out there. She knows her audience better than most.

          She takes a page out of Marlene Dietrich’s book, “I dress for the image. Not for myself, not for the public, not for fashion, not for men.”

        • mhleta

          If she were a civilian I would totally agree with you, but for a celebrity every style choice has a marketing aspect to it that has to do with the image they are trying to promote and, ultimately, with appealing to the demographic to which she is marketing herself. She is very deliberately cultivating an image that is palatable to parents of young girls, an image that says, “I’m an not a threat and it’s ok for your daughters to want to be like me.” This is to say, she is marketing herself to garner the parental seal of approval. I’m ok with that up to a point but I think it’s time she recognized that her fans are growing up and it’s ok for her to grow up with them. It becomes a problem to try to play both sides of the coin when your fans are young girls. Brittany Spears turned it around the other way. She marketed herself to YOUNG kids, and still had dolls of herself in Toys R Us, while at the same time doing specials from Vegas in a skin tight jumpsuit with a snake winding around her legs. My daughters were little at the time and it was an issue for me as a parent, believe me. I agree, though. This has been an interesting discussion, very much of a hot button issue. I’ll be giving this more thought. 

      • filmcricket

        Is it old-fashioned to wish that an adult woman would own her sexual activity instead of pretending it doesn’t exist? I mean, I guess one could argue that all the twee dresses don’t necessarily mean she’s aping virginity, but white lace is still a cultural signifier and I can’t believe she (or her handlers) aren’t aware of that. 

        • Tatiana Luján

          Why do you have to dress a certain way to own it? Has se ever denied having slept with any of those people? I think she just feels pretty in this kind of clothes.
          I don’t care about her or her music, so I’m not being deffensive of her. 

          • FrayedMachine

            I feel pretty in pretty little numbers like this but it’s not all I wear. The obsessive attachment to this kind of styling is a commitment to uphold a specific kind of image. It’s not about feeling pretty. It’s about looking wholesome and safe.

          • Beardslee

             She likes girly stuff – so what?  “Say yes to the dress” is full of women older than she is who are at the bridal store specifically to look like a princess, sexual history aside.  I agree with Alisa.  Let’s get past all this, and by this I also include the delusion that  wearing skintight revealing clothing, apparently is the only way to broadcast that a girl is all grown up.

            • Tatiana Luján

              I absolutely agree.

          • filmcricket

            That’s fair. I don’t really have a horse in this race either, I’m just throwing it out there as a point of discussion. I don’t think anyone who’s ever had sex out of wedlock (or whatever) has to dress a certain way, just that *she* tends to dress like a little girl a lot of the time still. The infantilizing of women through fashion bothers me no matter who’s doing it or who’s wearing it. She just happens to be an egregious example of it.

            • FrayedMachine

              thissss

            • Tatiana Luján

              People have a predisposition against her. Her clothes aren’t as infantile as people think they are.
              Her facial expresions and the way she styles her hair, ¡that is infantilizing!

            • FrayedMachine

              Her clothes complete the entire look and are the backdrop to the infantile portrait.

            • pistachiocaity

               the demographic that she’s seeking to appeal to is tween/teenage girls, her twee fashion sense makes perfect marketing sense (as evidence by her record breaking sales).

              Also, all I know about TSwift’s sex life is that it’s none of my business.

        • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

           “Is it old-fashioned to wish that an adult woman would own her sexual activity instead of pretending it doesn’t exist?”EXACTLY.

          • Laurenash

            If she doesn’t want to own her sexuality in what she wears, she shouldn’t. It’s old fashioned to assume that anyone should dictate how she expresses her sexuality besides herself.

          • Cristian Valenzuela

            But what is this supposed to mean?

            Why is it that wearing white and lace mean that she’s “trying to hide something”? I don’t think that has to be the case.

            I would love to fool around every night, and then wear white lace, and NOT have it be a) a contradiction with my actions, or b) an irony or political satire.

            I just like to fool around with cute guys AND I also just happen to like white and lace, regardless of what it culturally symbolizes. Maybe Taylor Swift thinks the same way.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Please see our many, many, many responses throughout this thread. It’s not about white lace or sex. It’s about basing her career on an image built around stereotypical “good girl” style and lyrics and living a very public personal life that’s more in line with the way most grownup women live. A dichotomy between what she’s selling and what she’s living. And considering her fanbase consists mostly of young girls, we tend to think it’s worth making note of that.

              If you don’t agree, that’s fine.

        • Lane

          She seems to generally prefer colorless, uber-girly clothing. A white lace dress was eventually going to happen just through the law of averages. And I agree with Tatiana — why does she have to own or acknowledge anything about her sex life through her clothing?

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

             Why does she dress like a little girl when she’s a grown woman with a career?

            • Lane

              The dress doesn’t really read “little girl” to me at all. Conservative and bridal, maybe.

            • twocee

               Yeah, I agree.  I don’t see little girl.  I see frou-frou and her definition of “feminine.”  I don’t see this as any more girlish than when Christina Hendricks pulls out one of her outfits with the geegaws and bows and crap.  That is their definition of dressing like a “lady.”

            • Laurenash

              .

        • http://www.facebook.com/fiddlecub Kevin VanOrd

          I suppose my own thoughts on this are: why must someone own their sexuality in the way they dress? We see any number of sexy getups here–sometimes ones bordering on dominatrix attire–but no one would ever suggest that Anne Hathaway is failing to own her non-dominatrix sexuality by dressing that way. Is it not ok for someone’s sexuality to simply not be a part of her image? Taylor seems comfortable and happy dressing in pretty dresses–and I think that should be ok. 

          It’s perfectly fine, of course, not to like a celebrity. I just don’t know if tearing Taylor down for this particular reason is reasonable. Heidi Klum has tight-and-shiny; Helena Bonham Carter has crazy-chic; and Taylor has pretty princess. And I am glad that there is that kind of diversity in fashion and female image. 

          • filmcricket

            I dunno, I saw a number of comments that Hathaway wasn’t pulling off those boots the other day, most likely because they conflicted so strongly with the relatively wholesome image she has cultivated so far. (Also, they were ugly, and probably only Angelina Jolie or Charlize Theron could believably pull those off.) And while I’ve yet to see anyone speculating on the bedroom shenanigans of HBC and Tim Burton, don’t we all kind of have an idea that she’s kind of kooky and weird because of how she dresses?

            As I said above, I really hate infantile clothing for grown women. Taylor Swift is legally an adult, with a multi-million dollar career and several past relationships that she’s publicized through her work. My own feeling is that it would be nice if she’d stop dressing like a 12-year-old, but I can understand the why others would disagree.

            • http://www.facebook.com/fiddlecub Kevin VanOrd

              Maybe my disconnect is that I don’t see the dress as just one for a 12 year old; certainly the model is older than 12! But it is true that it’s impossible to escape one’s clothing history. If this had appeared on another woman of the same age, styled similarly, this conversation likely wouldn’t be happening; the wonderful T-Lo wouldn’t have made their comment, and we bitter kittens wouldn’t be digging so deeply into the sociological implications of the clothing.

              I agree that the tweeness gets old, and I think that frequently about Michelle Williams as well. After all, we discuss how expected certain celebrities get are their style choices, to the point of monotony–and Taylor is one of them. Taylor clearly grates both T-Lo and the kittens at large, and that’s perfectly fine. I just wish we could just say “My God, she irks me–but hey, cute dress,” rather than draw parallels between the way she dresses and the expectation that she can’t just look the part of a virgin, but must play it as well. I have never seen that kind of strong parallel drawn before in this blog, or such vehement negativity, so it surprised me, and apparently, I am not alone. 

            • filmcricket

              No, the model’s not 12, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a childish dress. That’s what I mean about the infantilizing of women through fashion: designers make these little girl dresses and grown women are expected to wear them. It looks like the stuff I dressed my dollies in when I was 6, and that’s fine, but it’s not a good way to be taken seriously as an adult. It’s just one of many ways in which the fashion industry continues to be oppressive to women.

              As for Ms. Swift, I really don’t care that much about her, and I agree with some of the folks above who said there are worse role models for tween girls. Like I said in reply to someone else, the best analogy I can think of would be Johnny Depp, who pretty consistently dresses like a recently homeless hipster when in fact he owns his own island. He cultivates an image of someone who doesn’t care how he looks, when it’s clear that he cares very much. Taylor cultivates an innocent, virginal image when we know – through her own songs, not just the paparazzi – that that’s not who she really is. I don’t blame her for who she has sex with – hell, if I were young, pretty, and famous, I’d do the same – it’s the inauthenticity that I think people are bothered by.

              And the other thing is, we tend to demand more authenticity from our musicians than from our actors. Actors by definition are pretending, but we like to imagine that we’re getting a real piece of our rock stars through their work. So Taylor is perhaps unfairly paying the price for those expectations.

      • FrayedMachine

        To be perfectly honest, I can understand where they’re coming from. The way she acts is completely opposite from the image that she’s trying to sell and that gets boring, tedious and outright hypocritical. The girl’s whole image is that she’s wholesome, that she’s safe. That she’s a one guy kind of gal and that she’s not going to put it up and out for anyone, but her dating history begs to differ. I don’t think it’s about shaming her sexual behavior and/or her history. It’s more of a “Please stop bullshitting us about the kind of person you are because you’ve made it very clear that this is all very much true”. It’s Old Fashioned and Sexist for Swift to try and write songs that damn this kind of behavior and mentality while being guilty of it herself.

        • twocee

          Is it possible that Taylor herself is stuck in this role, whether she wants it or not?

          She built a career being exactly what you described – wholesome, safe, not a “slut.”  It was a great way for her to distinguish herself from the rest of the music.  But what happens to her “brand” if she moves away from it and becomes more “real?”  What happens to her fanbase, which is comprised of a lot of teenage girls and their mothers who like their daughters having an idol who isn’t wearing thigh-highs and flashing her crotch to the world.  She ditches that and then suddenly she becomes Mylie Cyrus in the post Hannah Montana years.  She loses her niche and who knows if she is talented enough to get a new one (answer, probably not).  I know if I were on the gravy train that she is on, I sure as heck would ride it for as long as possible, hypocrisy be damned.

          There are plenty of celebrities who have a particular image that is nothing like their real life.  Whether they cultivate being a “dumb blonde” when they actually are quite smart or pretend to be outgoing when all they want to do is melt into the carpeting, or turn into a vamp for every photographer they see — I would guess that 90% of what we see from any celebrity is an act.  Some acts grate on people more than others — Taylor Swift, Gwynnie, Lea Michele — I’m sure there are others who routinely get called out by the BKs on this website.  But even the more “liked” celebrities are just an act. 

          • FrayedMachine

            Then that’s her perogative. If she wants to ride the Hypocritical Gravy Train then go on, chug chug chug a long, but it doesn’t mean we can’t criticize her for it. It’s why a lot of people are so very tired of Lea Michele. She plays a wholesome character on t.v. so in order to break from that, has to remind everyone every single time she’s on the red carpet that she is, in fact, a very sexy and attractive character. That’s totally cool. Go for it. But when it’s every single time? Do you expect everyone to remain interested? Do you expect everyone to constantly praise you for your image to box yourself into a certain representation? A specific character? 

            You can argue that a lot of the celebrities out there are just acts, and that can very well be true. But the majority of these acts are people who’ve perfected their act. They’re so good at their act that we don’t even care that they’re acts. They’re so good that we don’t even -realize- that they’re acts. The people who walk the red carpet who get constant praise are good at perfecting their image but are doing so in such a way that it doesn’t actually caricature what is that they’re going for. It comes off as significantly more sincere, and far more realistic and easy to connect to and this is where people like Swift fall short. It feels like they’re, quite literally, cramming who they are down their throat, reminding you that THIS IS ME THIS IS ME DON’T FORGET THAT THIS IS ME.

            And I’m sorry sweetheart but there’s no way the world’s not going to get bored of all that screaming.

            • twocee

              But the comments on here at least are very different between Taylor and Lea.  The criticism of Lea is that she’s always. doing. the. same. thing.  Not that she plays a conservative character on TV and that her “real” life is different than the vamp she tries to be on the red carpet. 

              Taylor Swift is criticized for doing the same thing all of the time, but with the additional criticism of being a hypocrite for cultivating a different public image than her real life.  If Lea was regularly criticized for being a hypocrite as well, then fine.  But it only seems to be called hypocritical when a “bad” girl in real life tries to “pretend” to be a “good” girl in public.  I suppose that we want everyone to flaunt their bad behavior, ala Lohan?

              And then of course you have all of the criticisms of K-Stew, who I think IS being herself on the red carpet, to such an extent that everyone hates her.  So that brings me back to my point — even those that people like are acts.  As you say, they are well done acts (sometimes), but they are no less acts than Taylor or Lea.  So why don’t we call them all out on it?

            • FrayedMachine

              But they are the same thing. The majority of comments regarding Swift is that she’s always doing the same damn thing. The other part of the comments are similar to what you’ll get for Michele, that she’s doing it to over compensate. Here, the situation is that she’s doing so in order to achieve an image that she does not personally upkeep, so why the obsessive facade?

              I don’t think anyone’s hoping for people to have flawed behavior. I think that when people make criticisms like this, it’s an acknowledgement of how much of show The Red Carpet is, and it’s very easy to pick up who’s looking to be a caricature and who’s looking to be interesting. Lea Michele and Taylor Swift are looking to be caricatures. 

              Stewart is just a different story all together that I’m not going to touch. I don’t even keep track of criticisms of her because the girl’s a hot mess half the time. 

              But uuhhh… as I said, their acts come off as significantly more sincere? Let’s look at someone who’s fantastic at their game. Cate Blanchett. That woman is put together pretty much all the time. Her act is that she is an incredibly strong and confident woman and she brings it all the time, even in the characters that she plays in movies. Mind you, who knows if this is actually how she is in real life because she’s not one to be caught in tabloid news left and right. Want to go with someone in their age group? Emma Stone’s a girl who more often than not pulls off the very kind of energy that Swift is trying to sell – A very sincere wholesome girl next door. The only thing is that she’s not cramming it down your throat. She simply embodies that energy. She doesn’t always dress wholesome and innocent, she definitely steps out of her box and has more than her fair share of misses but the girl’s act is something that we can still buy. Again, is that how she actually is? I have no idea because she, too, is a girl who’s life is out of the tabloids.

              Basically at the end of the day, it’s damn laughable that Swift is still holding onto this train as tightly as she is. The whole world knows her act is fake, and like I’ve said before, I fail to understand why we’re expect to buy it? They’re also people who tend to have their acts together as a whole. They’re not trying to sell a product that they can’t even make themselves in their day to day life and if they can’t, they certainly do their best to keep the rest of the world from knowing. 

            • twocee

              “But we’re just so over her virginal princess schtick; especially since
              her frantic dating history – girl canNOT go 5 minutes without a new
              celebrity boyfriend – tells a different tale. At least when Madonna wore
              white lace, she was being ironic about it.”

              I would agree with you that the criticism is about her being a caricature if it weren’t for the above statement from TLo.  If they had left it at simply we are tired of her virginal, princess schtick, I don’t think the comments would’ve lit up like they have.  But they then slammed her schtick as being somehow worse because her personal life does not live up to the public schtick.  THAT is where I think the conflict comes from.

            • FrayedMachine

              It is worse, though, because she’s trying to sell something that she isn’t. Like I’ve said a million times over, it’s insincere, it’s boring, and the fact that she wants people to still actively buy it is incredibly tiring. To be honest, I see that as them saying that she needs to just open up to her behavior. It’s not like sleeping around is a -bad- thing. Neither is having a new boyfriend every other week. What is annoying is that she’s trying to sell the world a reality that isn’t true. No where in what they said was there ‘slut shaming’, or tut tuting over hyper sexual behavior. What was stated was very simple and clear:

              We’re not buying what you’re selling.

              ETA: And you know what? Anyone who believes that defending her is in favor of anything feminist related, read this article. Swift is a horror show for feminism and I fail to understand why anyone would try to use anything about her as a positive representation for progressive thinking. This picture alone says it all.
              http://autostraddle.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/madonna-whore.jpg

              http://www.autostraddle.com/why-taylor-swift-offends-little-monsters-feminists-and-weirdos-31525/

              She’s not about being progressive by reclaiming the color white and showing the world that anyone can wear it. She’s about holding onto the old ways of thinking and people for some reason are buying it. UGH.

        • Elaine Lang

           I agree…it isn’t even about sexual experience to me…Hell, for all I know, she sent all those guys home with a peck on the cheek after every night.   Or, for that matter, a wild night on her custom bedroom trapeze.    Don’t care. 

          What’s weird is that a girl who has a CONSTANT stream of boyfriends punctuated with a CONSTANT stream of TMI breakup songs is still dressing/acting like she is Rapunzel down from the tower.   Given her relationship/songwriting MO, I’d expect her to dress like Kristin Stewart and carry a copy of Sylvia Plath under her arm at all times.

          • formerlyAnon

            Now I live for the day T.S. is photographed carrying a copy of Plath’s poems. Thank-you for that image.

    • Little_Olive

      I have to know what was the boob solution there. 

      Other than that, pretty lace but to much of it. Cute dress, esp the skirt. 

      On Taylor, prissy as hell, so NO. 

    • AuntieAnonny

      Annnnnnd scene.

    • randy bruskrud

      Are those sox marks above her ankles? 

    • teensmom99

      The hair is really bugging me.  This look would have been better (not good; just better) with better hair.  It’s like she went to Jessica Biel’s hairdresser and said “that!”

      • Tatiana Luján

        I would have liked if she had tied her hair in a ponytail, wore a belt and different, not so bridal, shoes.

    • BazoDee

      Thank you gentlemen for saying what the rest of us are thinking!!

    • lovelyivy

      I can’t with this chick. I would say she’s on the top of my Unreasonable Celebrity Hate list, but I feel my dislike is TOTALLY reasonable. Not buying her brand of bullshit.

      • http://www.facebook.com/josefranciscobejarano Jose Bejarano

        I hope that you’re in middle school because I can’t think of much more pathetic than an adult with an “Unreasonable Celebrity Hate List.” Whoever started that bullshit should be taken out back and put down Old Yeller style.

        • lovelyivy

           Wow… I am shocked that you haven’t heard of this before, and rather alarmed that you are so personally offended by what I think about disposable celebrities and their culture.

    • rissa42210

      How many white/cream/sparkly dresses can this girl find?!

    • jilly_d

      Ugh. WHEN is she going to grow out those bangs so she can quit peering out coyly from under them? TAYLOR, STAHP!!!

    • mhleta

      On one hand, I appreciate being mindful of her influence on young fans with her style choices, (unlike, say, Miley Cyrus). On the other hand, they are also paying attention to her conduct, so if she’s going to bang like maw-maw’s screen door, there’s little point in dressing like a she’s saving herself for marriage. Perfume on a pig, my mom used to say.

      • B_C_J

         LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

      • http://www.theseabirdmonastery.co.uk/ Ailsa

        I really object to this comment. It’s gratuitously sexist and judgemental. 

        • mhleta

          Please don’t misunderstand the metaphor; I’m not calling her a pig. I actually like her and I appreciate how invested she is in her fans. She’s very generous and respectful of them at concerts and, by all reports I’ve heard, she’s a lovely person. It can’t be easy to be young and single in the spotlight, but she really hasn’t made much of an effort to keep her many relationships at all private–it’s pretty much a given that if you date her and break up with her, you’re going to end up being hung out to dry in one of her songs–she’s similar to John Mayer in that regard (whom she also dated.) She’s gotten a lot of mileage from her many dalliances, so the virginal horse has left the barn, as ’twere. (You get than I’m not calling her a horse either, right?) This is to say, it’s probably time she broadened herself a bit in her style choices to reflect who she REALLY is as a woman.

    • Fordzo

      Her boobs are looking at me.

    • http://joyouslifesf.wordpress.com Kiltdntiltd

      Anytime I see her I get an uncontrollable urge to fall aslee,…….zzzzzzzzzzzz

    • http://angryfemur.tumblr.com Andrea Lane

      You know, when Taytay first came on the scene, I rolled my eyes at yet another saccharine, faux-virginal pop princess, but now I’m totally on board with her batshit-insanity. You go, girlfriend.

    • B_C_J

      It’s a pretty dress and I appreciate that she always dresses like a lady especially when you consider the age of her fan base.  I do have an issue with the fit of the dress.  It seems a bit big especially when you look at the waist and the underarm area.  The hair and especially the bangs are not doing her any favors.

    • YousmelllikeAnnaWintour

      Barbie with bangs.

    • http://twitter.com/Alyssa_T_Robot Alyssa T. Robot

      communion barbie! now with MORE lace!

    • http://aldonsusi.blogspot.com/ Susi R

      Well, I like the dress.

    • http://www.ellenciompi.com/ NurseEllen

      Why is she holding up three fingers?  Did she get three nominations?

      Leaving aside the virgin/whore arguments, I don’t care for this look because 1) I was OVER lace at least a month ago, and 2) I’m also over “monochromatic” as a style statement.  There’s too much sameness between the dress color, her skin tone, her hair color, the shoes, and even the backdrop.  An altogether boring look.

      She’s young, she’s skinny, she’s gorgeous, she’s famous, she’s got money, and she’s got the world at her feet.  There’s no reason she should look this uninteresting in public.

    • PeggyOC

      First Confession comment = beverage snarf.  Also, that’s completely the wrong bra.  Either go sexy and wear a color that shows up, or go completely nude.  That dark beige is not your skin tone and just looks like “Hey, we can see your bra!”.

    • SewingSiren

      After the musical gold butterfly one, she really can’t go back to plain white lace. It needs floating iridescent bubbles or  pink wings and a wand… 

    • Judy_J

      So very Taylor Swift.

    • Annabelle Archer

      At this point I kind of just want to punch her in the face.  Is that wrong?

    • cam_lo

      Also those shoes make her feet look positively ginormous. 

    • Tatiana Luján

      I like this dress and I think the proportions are better on her than on the model. The shoes are bad, a belt would have been nice, the hair bugs me a lot.

    • FrayedMachine

      To be perfectly honest, I don’t know why anyone would bother reviewing anything that she wears anymore. It’s the same story every time and yes she’s polished and put together but it’s so boring and bland every. single. time. JUST to keep up face of the wholesome girl next door. Talk about commitment to image. Maybe she’ll actually dress sincerely for a change if we actively act the way we’re talking – completely bored and disinterested.

    • thecitysleeps

      I feel sorry for all the girls who think she’s amazing and have her as their celeb role model/person I wanna be when I grow up.  She’s so bland.  That hair?  I just can’t.

    • LauraWL

      Spot on with the first communion comment T-LO. I think my problem with her dressing is that its very twee (I see twee more than the virginal thing) and I just can’t stand twee. (See also Zoe Deschanel) Swift obviously has had several adult romantic relationships and is a good business person, so the twee-ness is infuriating to me. 

    • Stacye Griffin

      Can we start an “Of Course” hashtag for Taylor Swift a la Lea Michele? It’s useless and tiring for me to wax poetic about her terminal blandness anymore.

    • librarygrrl64

      Hahahaha! Really should have been accessorized with a crucifix and a white Bible in her hands.

      • SewingSiren

        And a little pearl edged veil!

        • librarygrrl64

          My veil didn’t have pearls! I WAS ROBBED!!!

    • mozzer0906

      Any woman who willingly sleeps with John Mayer (aka whose manparts are a veritable swimming pool of STIs) can not pull off the “look at me I’m so virginal” shtick   

    • Cristian Valenzuela

      You guys are a bit douchebags in this post. Yes, queen douchebags.

      If Taylor Swift were a man, and had many hollywood girlfriends in a short ammount of time, it would not even occur to you comment on it in a funny-critical way, nor would you use it in any way to comment on the meaning of his clothing selection. 

      • RebeccaKW

         I don’t believe T-Lo were criticizing the amount of boyfriends she’s had.  I think the point is that Taylor Swift promotes an image of girl-next-door, virginal sweetness, which is at odds with her true life.  Who cares if you are sleeping with half the town-own it, ignore it, whatever.  But don’t cultivate an image of something else.  And, there is no ‘virginal’ look for men, so this type of statement couldn’t be made about a man.

        • twocee

           Why not?  I don’t dress the same at the office as I do on a Saturday night.  I have to cultivate a much more put together image than that.  Appearing on the RC for Swift is absolutely no different than we normal people going to our office jobs.  There are certain expectations.  One major expectation for her is that she dresses, oh, I don’t know, pick an adjective: demurely, conservatively, blandly, twee.  They are all the same thing.

          But to criticize the way she dresses BECAUSE her real life doesn’t match that image does seem to cross a line that most other celebrities don’t have to deal with.

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

            ” Appearing on the RC for Swift is absolutely no different than we normal people going to our office jobs. ”

            Boy, do we EVER beg to differ. The red carpet is worlds apart from anything approaching the average person’s life.

            • twocee

              Well duh, OF COURSE it’s different.  I don’t wear $10,000 dresses to sit in a boardroom meeting.  I don’t have handlers, stylists, and a diamond encrusted dog collar for my teacup poodle.

              The point — showing up on a red carpet is part of their job, just like showing up to work every morning is part of mine.  And they are expected to dress and act a certain way.  Swift has made a lot of money acting like the virginal princess and if she’s to continue making that money, she is going to want to keep up that appearance.  I’m really not sure why it is so hypocritical for Swift to put on the act but it’s not hypocritical for the 1000 other stars who put on equally false acts.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               “Well
              duh, OF COURSE it’s different.  I don’t wear $10,000 dresses to sit in a
              boardroom meeting.  I don’t have handlers, stylists, and a diamond
              encrusted dog collar for my teacup poodle.”

              It goes way beyond that. Her entire career, like all celebrities, is based entirely around marketing and selling a certain image to the public, filtered through a mass media lens, and playing upon cultural norms and expectations.

              “I’m really not sure why it is so hypocritical for Swift to put on the
              act but it’s not hypocritical for the 1000 other stars who put on
              equally false acts.”

              No one has said otherwise. We have constantly criticized other celebrities for flogging silly, mismatched or unbelievable images, from Tom Cruise to Lea Michele.

            • Cristian Valenzuela

              I still don’t think its selling a different image.

              Isn’t it possible to wear a lot of white+lace and ALSO have a lot of sex, and NOT be considered hypocritical or ironic?

        • Lane

          I feel as if you missed the point of Cristian’s post while inadvertently identifying the problem: “And, there is no ‘virginal’ look for men, so this type of statement couldn’t be made about a man.” Exactly. Women’s clothing invites speculation about their sex lives while men’s generally does not. Why do you think that is?

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

            That’s a good question, but you’re being naive if you don’t think she is deliberately putting forth a good-girl image by dressing this way. Taylor didn’t invent this cultural norm, but she’s flogging it for all it’s worth.

          • RebeccaKW

            I’m not defending the fact that men and women have been held to different standards.  But the fact remains that there is no way to apply this statement to a man.  However, statements are made about a man’s ‘douche-bagginess’ based on clothing and hair.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Statements are also made about men who flog a manly-man, “just regular guy” image that’s clearly at odds with their privileged life a la Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt and his attempts to dress like a biker. That’s not perfectly comparable to what we said about Taylor here, but it’s all part of the same discussion of image vs. the reality of celebrities’ lives.

        • http://kburnell.livejournal.com/ burnell

          I’m hesitant to say that though.  While that may be the image she favors–I respect that she’s never made any claims about her sex life.  As far as my knowledge goes, Taylor has never suggested she was a virgin, or was going to “wait until marriage” like the Jessica Simpson/Britney/Jonas Brothers crop of pop stars.  I agree that the way she dresses does give off that vibe, but look at what Britney did: claimed she was a virgin and dressed far from it.  Taylor has made no such claims to being a virgin, and for that, I find it difficult to actually criticize her for favoring white, princess-y dresses (except that they’re a little on the boring side).  She seems to like them and, boring or not, they look good on her.  Since she’s never claimed to be a virgin, I don’t particularly think she’s guilty of being hypocritical.

          The point is, she doesn’t need to be a virgin to earn the “right” to wear white princess-y dresses.  She could be the village slut and still wear them if that’s what she likes.  She can wear whatever the hell she wants.  We are also free to critique her for that, but I’m not sure her dating choices should reflect the way we see her fashion choices.

          • twocee

             Excellent comparison to Britney-I’m-a-virgin-but-I-dress-like-a-Hollywood-hooker.

          • mhleta

            Touche.

          • RebeccaKW

             But, her dating choices and how she uses that feeds into her image.  No, you don’t have to earn the right to dress as you please and you can cultivate any image you want.  But that can grate on people or that can win you fans.  I don’t care who she sleeps with and she can wear whatever she wants.  But she seems disingenious, to me, which seems a common thread in TS posts.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=645442822 Sophia Vaccaro

            I could not have put it better. Very well said. Some people just don’t like to show the goods. It’s just about what you are comfortable in. I personally like Taylor a lot, but I don’t like this dress and if I was in her position would be extensively uncomfortable wearing it. 
            And yes, there is an image being cultivated, and sometimes what she says grates on me too, but i think people are forgetting that what she wears just around town, even in the not-staged pap shots, is the everyday version of this.She just likes it, it annoys some people cause it’s not their thing, even me, who has been to both her concerts, but her living the life of a “real woman” should not mean she has to dress differently to reflect that. And still, I would rather hear my little cousin say “I wish I could use my own volition to get a record contract, just like T!” than the not-quite-as-personally-inspiring stories of many other young starlets who are not even close to being well-spoken.

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        Yes we would.

    • ojosazules

      Thank you. Girl is going to run out of possibles by the time she is thirty.

      • formerlyAnon

         No way. She’ll move on to men older than she is – first celebs, then Very Successful men. Then she’ll marry someone who understands her career and has a full and absorbing professional life of their own. The kind of people you naturally meet when you haven’t flown in anything but first class or a chartered/private jet in fifteen years. If she were a country singer there’d be an outside chance that she’d meet a “regular guy” and try for a successful marriage with him, but I doubt it.

        • Rand Ortega

           She’s not a country singer? Huh. News to me. More pop?

          • formerlyAnon

             That’s how I think of her. But I’m not a fan, so maybe I’m wrong?

    • Lane

      I can get criticizing her for being one-note, predictable, twee, and terrified of anything resembling color. But implying she’s some kind of hypocrite for liking conservative, super-girly clothes while dating a lot of guys (which to me implies serious co-dependency and self-esteem issues more than anything else) makes me kind of uncomfortable. Especially when you don’t invoke other celebs’ perceived sex lives when criticizing them for dressing in a similar fashion. You just call it twee.I love you guys, but Alisa has a point on the judging-women’s-behavior-through-appearance thing.

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        We constantly judge celebrities for the images they’re trying to project and whether or not it works for them. This is no different. Jude Law was judged today for dressing in a way that doesn’t work for his age. Anne Hathaway has been judged all week for dressing to generate Oscar buzz.

        And please note that we never once mentioned her sex life. Everyone in the comments section did.

        • twocee

          What was this, “especially since her frantic dating history – girl canNOT go 5 minutes
          without a new celebrity boyfriend – tells a different tale. At least
          when Madonna wore white lace, she was being ironic about it.” unless it was a comment about her love/sex life?  You are cutting a very fine line if you are saying that you weren’t implying that she’s spent the last few years sleeping around.  Especially when you bring in the comparison to Madonna.

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

             It was a comment about her dating life. We make no claims as to who or how many men she’s slept with.

            The comparison to Madonna had to do with her iconic white lace outfits from the ’80s.

            Hey, how about that? Our words meant exactly what we said and not what other people keep trying to apply to them. We used the word “dating” and that was meant to refer to … dating! We mentioned Madonna’s use of white lace and that had to do with … the fact that she is also wearing white lace! AMAZING.

            • Saviour Mcdonald

              so what is the implication then? She should stop wearing white lace because she dates a lot? In your eyes how many guys should you be allowed to date to earn the right to wear a white lace dress that you like? I don’t think you were slut shaming, and I think people get accused of that way too much, but I don’t know that your post is a clear as you think it is. 

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Well it’s certainly not ever going to be clear to the people who insist on putting words in our mouths. Not coincidentally, all the people who took our words at face value seem to have no problem with this post.

              There’s nothing in there about her “right” to wear white lace or how many guys she should be allowed to date. It’s about the stereotypical image she sells and how it’s at odds with her own life; a life she uses as fodder for her own songs. It’s all tied together and when people insist such topics should be kept separate from each other or never discussed at all, we think they’re being just a bit disingenuous.

            • Saviour Mcdonald

              I wasn’t actually offended by what you wrote, and like I said I don’t think you were trying to shame her about her sexuality. Swift herself presents more feminist problems than your post about her. I just don’t think it is unreasonable to read this post and feel like you were making a comment about her sexuality. I didn’t mean to offend. 

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              It’s all good. We’re not offended. Just clarifying.

            • Rand Ortega

               TLo, while already being famous, I think being misquoted this much officially makes you celebrities. : )

            • formerlyAnon

              Got a chuckle out of this one.

    • formerlyAnon

      My personal tastes say that that dress is too young for anyone over 16.

    • MoHub

      Of course.

    • http://houseofestrogen.typepad.com/ Ann

      Will she EVER wear a different silhouette? The full skirt works for her, but I feel like she wears the same dress for every event just in a different color. Boring!

    • ankali

      I think at this point she’s just fucking with TLo.

    • Joyce VG

      What is UP with this girl?  The dress is very cute. But she’s beginning to be less and less cute and she ages. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/FHLWSE7HQKOWJ43KJLAKHKERAU Bailey Lovell

      Completely agree with you, and this is coming from someone who has been Team Taylor since her first single.  But, like you said, her dating history is ridiculous.  Anyone who dates John Mayer and Harry Styles, who has been very open in interviews about his sexual experiences, should just give up trying to push her virginity on us. 

    • TieDye64

      Give me an ironic Madonna over this tooth achingly sweet stuff any day.

    • http://vhanna26.typepad.com Vera

      Swifty doesn’t upset me so much, and normally, I love her fashion choices, but I can’t on this dress either.

    • Lilithcat

      Somehow I don’t think the nuns would approve of a see-through dress.

    • warontara

      There’s a difference between liking conservative/girly/twee/demure/young/virginal looks and packaging/marketing yourself as all of those things, while not really walking the walk. And that is what bugs with her. It’s a marketing scheme and not a very well-concealed one at that. I don’t care how many people she’s dated, slept with, etc. (or not), none of that bothers me. Lol my own dating history is just as sordid. But the clean-cut, tweenage, stereotypical good girl image that she and her handlers push would be tiresome even if it were true! So the falsehood of it just makes things more irritating.

      All of that said: I actually like this dress. With more interesting hair and better accessories, it could’ve been a knock-out.

    • IamstillAnonymous

      Let me begin by saying I am not a Taylor Swift fan.  I don’t care one way or the other.  That said, I am continually amazed at the number of people who criticize her for not dressing like a whore.  Have we truly become so inured?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Arjay-Gallo/1336876862 Arjay Gallo

        From a style-perspective, my problem isn’t that she’s not dressing like a whore (which is terrifically anti-feminist to say,) but that her “wholesome, chaste, virginal” thing is so style-less. Michelle Williams plays roughly in the same sandbox, but she’s always exhibited more style (either bad, or good) than this slice of white bread covered in mayonnaise.

      • MilaXX

         There is  very wide berth between not dressing like  ho and this syrupy sweet fake virginal persona she tried to work.

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

         Has anyone here criticized her for not dressing like a whore?

        • IamstillAnonymous

          Some have needed to be more verbose to do it, but, eventually, yes.  The gist of many of the posts– your own included –implies knowledge of her morals, or lack thereof, and have criticized her for dressing in a style that directly contrasts your perception of her private life. 

          I have seen you chastise people for not sticking to the intent of this board – fashion. No one would (or should) get away with describing a woman as an ugly, old, squinty-eyed hag who should dress her age, but, for some reason, the rules change with this young woman.  Somehow, in her case, it’s fair game to critique the clothes on her back based on what is perceived she does on her back. 

          As I said, I don’t care about Ms. Swift one way or the other.  All I know is when I see her photos I see a beautiful young woman who presents herself modestly and appropriately.  I really don’t care what she did last night, or with whom she did it.  What I care about is that she most likely will never expose herself in a “wardrobe malfunction,” deliberate or otherwise.  Our daughters, and society on a whole, could use more fashion role models like her to emulate. 

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

             “Some have needed to be more verbose to do it, but, eventually, yes.  The
            gist of many of the posts– your own included –implies knowledge of her
            morals, or lack thereof,”

            We absolutely did not. You’re bringing that to the table on your own.

            ” and have criticized her for dressing in a style
            that directly contrasts your perception of her private life. ”

            This is not a “perception of her private life.” She quite publicly dates male celebrities and either writes songs about the relationships/breakups or refers to them in her many interviews. Her image is largely based on her romantic history.

            “I have seen you chastise people for not sticking to the intent of
            this board – fashion. No one would (or should) get away with describing a
            woman as an ugly, old, squinty-eyed hag who should dress her age, but,
            for some reason, the rules change with this young woman.  Somehow, in
            her case, it’s fair game to critique the clothes on her back based on
            what is perceived she does on her back.”

            Again, this is all you, bringing your baggage to the table. We make no claims as to what her sex life is like and we DEFINITELY have no problem with anyone, woman or man, who has an active sex life. We do, however, constantly talk about celebrity image and whether or not it reflects reality.

            ” All I know is when I see her photos I see a beautiful young woman who
            presents herself modestly and appropriately.  I really don’t care what
            she did last night, or with whom she did it.  What I care about is that
            she most likely will never expose herself in a “wardrobe malfunction,”
            deliberate or otherwise.  Our daughters, and society on a whole, could
            use more fashion role models like her to emulate. ”

            And comments like these are EXACTLY why we think it’s worth pointing out that her very public personal life is at odds with the image she sells to so many young girls. From where we’re sitting, it’s you who’s making assumptions about her morals based on her clothing. You have decided that because she dresses in a manner that you call “modest,” she’s worthy as a role model. That’s entirely your right to think that way, just as it’s entirely our right to think that she’s selling an image at odds with her behavior.

            • IamstillAnonymous

              Geesh, Guys, I feel your tension from here.  Petty meanness and wild accusations really aren’t necessary.

              I assure you I have no baggage or ideas about either Ms Swift’s morals or sex life, and nothing I’ve said supports your theories.  How many times must I say I really don’t care?   It’s of no concern to me whether or not she is as virginal as she looks.   My original point remains – I am more interested in the reality of what she is wearing, how it fits and how it is accessorized than how it fits into her imagined (or imaginary) lifestyle.  Oh, just so we are perfectly clear on this: My last sentence to you was, “Our daughters, and society on a whole, could use more _fashion_ role models like her to emulate.”  Fashion, Gentlemen.  I thought that was the topic on this board.

              Respond if you need to vent some more, but know beforehand that I am finished with this conversation and will not see it.  Honestly, your lack of comportment is disappointing.  I thought better of you, but now I have a mental image of the two of you having a hissy fit meltdown because someone had the temerity to have an opinion of their own.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              “Petty meanness and wild accusations really aren’t necessary.”

              You accused us of criticizing her for not dressing like a whore. You don’t get to pull this card now. 

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              “Petty meanness and wild accusations really aren’t necessary.”

              You accused us of criticizing her for not dressing like a whore. You don’t get to pull this card now. 

               And we just love the adorably passive-aggressive “I’m disappointed in you and I think much less of you now but lalalalala I’m not going to listen to anything you say in response to me” crack. You have all the right in the world to have your opinions. You don’t have the right to have your opinions go unchallenged, however. No one does. But by all means, make accusations and then flounce off when someone calls you on it.

            • IamstillAnonymous

              “Petty meanness and wild accusations really aren’t necessary.”

              You accused us of criticizing her for not dressing like a whore. You don’t get to pull this card now. 

               
              And we just love the adorably passive-aggressive “I’m disappointed in you and I think much less of you now but lalalalala I’m not going to listen to anything you say in response to me” crack. You have all the right in the world to have your opinions. You don’t have the right to have your opinions go unchallenged, however. No one does. But by all means, make accusations and then flounce off when someone calls you on it.
              ______

              This retort just popped up in my Email (Dec. 14).  As I have no idea which of you I am addressing,  I assume your posts are at least mutually agreed upon.   Heretofore, I thought of you two as urbane and articulate.  You have not disappointed me, and I don’t know why you jumped to that assumption.  I still think you’re articulate.  I also, however, now think you shriek, which is why I tried to withdraw from our ‘conversation.’   It had nothing whatsoever to do with differences of opinions on fashion, although it is gracious of you to permit me to have one. 

              My observation (was never an accusation) was that this particular woman gets reviewed harshly by many solely because she chooses to dress demurely.  Yet again I stress that, in my opinion, what she does, with whom or how frequently she does it should have no bearing on what is said about what she wears.  Instead of discourse on this topic, though, our ‘conversation’ turned into pop psychology using inflammatory terms such as “baggage,” “passive-aggressive” and others.  I do not tolerate bullies, Sir(s).  This is me, calmly walking away without a single flounce or flourish.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               “This retort just popped up in my Email (Dec. 14).  As I have no idea
              which of you I am addressing,  I assume your posts are at least mutually
              agreed upon.   Heretofore, I thought of you two as urbane and
              articulate.  You have not disappointed me, and I don’t know why you
              jumped to that assumption.”

              Um… because you wrote this:

              “Honestly, your lack of comportment is disappointing.  I thought better
              of you, but now I have a mental image of the two of you having a hissy
              fit meltdown because someone had the temerity to have an opinion of
              their own.”

              No “assumption at all.

              “My observation (was never an accusation)”

              You said this:

              ” I am continually amazed at the number of people who criticize her for not dressing like a whore.”

              To which we asked:

              “Has anyone here criticized her for not dressing like a whore”

              To which you replied:

              “Some have needed to be more verbose to do it, but, eventually, yes.  The
              gist of many of the posts– your own included –implies knowledge of her
              morals, or lack thereof”

              So, yes, you made an accusation of us, and yes, you told us you were disappointed in us. And now, yes, you are flouncing away in a huff (again), maintaining you were “bullied,” because we replied to the actual words you wrote, which were inflammatory and accusatory.

      • mhleta

        Missing the point completely. We want her to dress her age. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Arjay-Gallo/1336876862 Arjay Gallo

      I cannot STAND this girl. It’s not that she dresses like your grandmothers end-table, it’s not that she has had huge amounts of relationships. I can be annoyed with, but can understand those things. My REAL problem with her is how others and herself (ESPECIALLY herself,) assert that she’s this wholesome, good person when evidence says otherwise. She’s written songs, shaming girls for owning their bodies and doing with them as they see fit. She tells girls not to get drunk, because “it’s not cute.” Every single “villain” in all of her videos have been painted as “sluts” and are therefore bad, while she’s been the “virgin” and thereby better than those trashy girls by virtue of keeping her legs closed. Can we talk about how her first single named a guy she had a crush on by NAME, effectively making him this callous, insensitive man for not fawning over poor, sweet T-Swift and making her cry? Or how she’s had a creepily obsessive and toxic relationship with every ex-boyfriend ever, as evidenced by her songs? Or how one of her CDs had a song called “Mean,” wherein she chastized people for being cruel, and on the SAME CD she had a song that included the lyrics “She’s better known for the things that she does on the mattress, whoa” in reference to some horrible vile woman who enjoyed and sought out sex, while ignoring that apparently her boyfriend in song couldn’t be trusted? Or what about the time she gleefully took a photo next to a guy with a swastika painted on him? Or how about like here, where she desperately clings to this image of virginity, while going through multiple relationships, while shaming people who GO THROUGH MULTIPLE RELATIONSHIPS?

      So yeah, take your pick.

      inb4 rebuttal: I’m not at all saying it’s bad or wrong to live this “innocent” life or what have you. But she’s living it and then claiming that any girl (only girls, mind you. Girls are supposed to be pure and virginal and can’t own or enjoy their bodies obviously,) who doesn’t live like her is a “bitch” or a “whore” and not as good and cross-legged little angels who save it for marriage.”

    • merciblahblah

      A-FRIGGING-MEN. GARRRRHHH. Irrational. Hatred. Abounds. You, sirs, hit the nail on the head. Gross.

    • Imasewsure

      You have to be edgy to rock this dress. This is the opposite of edgy

    • Rand Ortega

      TS is the  “Mom” from  “Futurama” of pop music. She’s cherubic, old fashioned, sweet & demure in public; then sheds the outer trappings of her brand persona when the camera’s aren’t on to be acid tongued, chain smoking & skinny (It’s an analogy. Please don’t take the comparison literally– I know TS doesn’t smoke). If TS would change up her look, aka Miley, there wouldn’t be any discussion on the dichotomy of her music & how she dresses in public versus her dating habits. But she dresses this way ALL THE TIME! & at 22, it’s gettin’ old, predictable, not to mention too young looking.
      My question: What’s wrong w/ knowing & calling a celebrity’s public persona out for being an illusion?   Don’t we laugh at Tom Cruise & his lifts? Or Ian Somerhalter’s (perceived) douchbag persona/clothes habits yesterday?
      Aren’t they using collective perceptive imagery to present themselves a certain way? Isn’t that what branding is all about?

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        Nail on the head.

      • MilaXX

         preach!

    • MilaXX

      this one needs to have several seats. The virginal dress with the visible black bra and then she wants to pose throwing up hand signs? ho’ sit DOWN!

    • http://www.facebook.com/aboutelle Ashleigh Boutelle

      seriously!!! her wardrobe must be so beige

    • http://www.facebook.com/jody.corbett Jody Corbett

      Sorry guys, you’re sounding like a broken record. This is her look, you hate it, move on. I was disappointed at the “she has a zillion  boyfriends” comment. You’re better than that, I know you two aren’t “slut shamers.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/D.D.D.Dino Dino Bonačić

      i think she could be singing some nicki minaj songs right now. SO APPROPRIATE.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F73LIJ3SJGI5AJQMXMWXCKILHI Pamela

      It looks like her bra is matched to her hair color.

    • bertkeeter

      I’m OVER her hair style in this more than the style of the dress…. Tedious!

    • http://TheDoseofReality.com/ The Dose of Reality

      I’m the cheese that stands alone, I guess. I think the dress is gorgeous and looks much better on her than the model. She looks pretty. 

      • mhleta

        She always looks pretty. I think what’s frustrating people is that she seems to always project this same dimension of herself when she’s actually got a lot more potential style range. She could let go of the little girl at a birthday party thing and go for a more womanly but still elegant look.

    • altalinda

      The nuns will have to give her a talking-to about wearing a slip or liner before going up the the altar.

    • j_anson

      TO be fair, I don’t think most moms would approve of a white lace dress WITH NO LINING for First Communion, which is what this is. I think she was aiming for subversive, but to me it’s reading more like “showing the goods without actually being sexy.” Also, that hair is doing her no favors at all.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=790818401 Laurie Landry

      Very pretty dress. Wish it was on just about anyone other than Tay. 

    • Kyle Crawford

      #1 It’s December. Other than that could be cute sleeveless and some pop of color shoe… 

    • Lane

      I just… what? Guys, really?

      “We used the word ‘dating’ and that was meant to refer to … dating!”
      Yes, but you also said she presents a virginal princess image but her dating history clearly paints a different picture (I’m assuming you’re referring to her virginity or lack of it, as I’m not sure how dating paints someone as a non-princess). Are you saying you WEREN’T trying to imply she’s not a virgin? Because I don’t know how else to read that, unless I’m supposed to be picturing Taylor holding a paintbrush and easel.

      “We mentioned Madonna’s use of white lace and that had to do with … the fact that she is also wearing white lace!”No, you said that at least she wore it ironically (i.e., the singer of “Like a Virgin,” the clearly non-virgin author of the “Sex” book, wearing traditional virginal clothing). Come on, guys. Why are you pretending context doesn’t exist?

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

         You are so ridiculously hung up on the word “virginal,” which is a descriptor of her clothing style, not a statement on whether or not she’s had sex yet. It’s getting outrageously literal.

        We’re not going to agree on this and you’ve already let us know how “saddened” you are by that, so we think it’s best to disengage at this point.

        • Lane

          So… you mean only exactly what you say, except when I take it too literally. Got it.

          Thank you for responding by not actually addressing any point I made or answering any question I asked. Disengaging myself now, as I’m sure we all think this is pretty ridiculous for entirely different reasons.

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

            Funny how, when we refer to her “virginal princess” schtick, you take the first word absolutely literally, but not the second. Why not wag your finger at us for claiming she tried to pass herself off as royalty? Because you’re being highly selective as to which words you want to take literally and which words you want to change the meaning of. This is why we’re disengaging. We’ve explained ourselves too many times already. Most of the people who read this know that we’re not making claims as to her virginity OR to her royal blood line.

            • Lane

              “Because you’re being highly selective as to which words you want to take literally and which words you want to change the meaning of.”

              So are you. I also focused on “virginal” because you did — you referred back to it by saying she isn’t what she’s presenting herself as (i.e. virginal — your words, not mine) because of her dating habits, and explained why I didn’t think you were referring to the princess thing when you mentioned said dating habits.

              You’re also kind of destroying your own “We mean exactly what we say” argument by telling me not to take things literally.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

              Actually, no. I’m not trying to change the meaning of any words. You mentioned context. Well, “virginal princess schtick,” in this context, is a fairly obvious analogy that fairly obviously refers to her image (hence the use of the word “schtick”) and is not meant to be taken as a literal reference to whether or not she’s had sex or whether or not she’s of a royal blood line. This is so obvious that I have to assume you’re arguing the point simply for the sake of arguing.

              On the other hand, “dating”  and “white lace” do not mean “sex,” nor do they mean “whore,” “slut,” or “promiscuous,” no matter how many times people try to argue otherwise, nor is there any contextual reason to think that those words mean those things. 

              The bottom line is, you are arguing the meaning of the words with the person who actually wrote the words; the person who keeps telling you that they were not meant in the manner you’re arguing. I get that you took them a different way. I don’t even mind that you took them a different way. I do, however, mind when you tell me I meant to say something other than what I actually said or think.

              And I will once again point out that the vast majority of people who read this post and responded to this post, did not see fit to claim that I mean something other than what I actually wrote or meant to say. You have an interpretation. As I have said, you are free to have that interpretation. Your response to that was to dig down even further and insist that your interpretation was the right one and that you were “saddened” that I don’t agree. 

            • Lane

              “Actually, no. I’m not trying to change the meaning of any words. You mentioned context. Well, “virginal princess schtick,” in this context, is a fairly obvious analogy that fairly obviously refers to her image (hence the use of the word “schtick”) and is not meant to be taken as a literal reference to whether or not she’s had sex or whether or not she’s of a royal blood line. This is so obvious that I have to assume you’re arguing the point simply for the sake of arguing.”

              No. I was arguing that I was reading for context, and explained myself. You were arguing that you meant exactly what you said and nothing else. NOW you’re telling me to read for context and asking me to interpret the totally obvious analogy you were making. I held you to the standard you were asking me to read the post for, and when it didn’t work, you backtracked and have to explain what you REALLY meant.

              I insisted that my interpretation had merit — hence me saying that might not be what you meant, but that’s how I read it and how it could (and has) come across to others. I explained why. Others have addressed why it’s problematic. You rolled your eyes at it rather than actually addressing it or acknowledging that yes, your post could be construed that way. THAT’s what saddens me — not that you don’t agree with me, but that you think my unease at the tone and content of the post is so clearly wrong-headed and ridiculous.

            • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

               Honest to God, I don’t know how anyone could come away with the idea that I rolled my eyes or didn’t address anyone’s concerns. I specifically responded to people’s concerns and explained myself over and over again. I probably did so with you more than any one person in this thread. That I didn’t agree with you doesn’t mean I “rolled my eyes” at you.

    • Lane

      That was supposed to be in response to a post on page 4, but it somehow ended up here. Sorry.

    • http://twitter.com/WaxPoesis WasPoesis

      Why so much Swifty? #SoOVERit I would rather see this dress on ANYONE ELSE. How about a regular feature of a fabulously dressed unknown or up-and-coming starlette? Would love that more than Swifty every other day. 

    • Trisha26

      She looks like one of those little girl jewelry box ballerinas – and just as plastic.

    • Lisa M. (ReVoir) Kramp

      I would love to see that dress on Christina Ricci. Her? Meh.

    • Zippypie

      TWEE AS FUCK.  Thank you, TLo.  I love your periodic Swifty postings where I can now use this iconic catchphrase.

    • quiltrx

      It’s unusual to get “twee as fuck” and “Grandma’s for-special tablecloth” in the same look.

      Seriously, I’ve wanted to like her (I do enjoy some of her songs, and she was great in that ep of ‘CSI’) for a while…but this whole dating-go-round that just seems to produce an endless stream of I-hate-that-guy songs REALLY clashes with the image she’s trying to get us to buy.

    • silaria

      Guys, I love you, and your site, and I shaer your distaste for this girl.  So… why do you keep covering her?  I ask in all seriousness.  Do you enjoy rolling your eyes at her?  Are you inflicting her on your audience as a way to share the pain?  Or do you do it because you feel obligated to as a fashion blog that must stay relevant? 

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        Well, wouldn’t it be boring if we only covered people we liked?

    • BeaDee

      This would be such a sweet look on a ten year-old! No one older than 13 should have a dress like that combined with that hair.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bob-Sponge/100000465550991 Bob Sponge

      And what’s the three-finger hand gesture supposed to mean?

    • http://howtofaint.tumblr.com/ How to Faint

      At least her shoes match her bra.

    • Laylalola

      I’m beginning to think it’s really not worth posting anything about T.Swift anywhere unless it’s going to get the seal of approval from her spin machine. (Which is ironic, considering she freely blasts scathing opinions about whoever she wants, whenever she wants, and isn’t asked to rein it in.)

    • http://www.facebook.com/sarah.souffriau Sarah Souffriau

      Where does she keep finding those white dresses? Sheesh!

    • http://promiscuouslola.com/ Cate

      “At least when Madonna wore white lace, she was being ironic about it.”

      THIS. OMG. I hate her face.

    • neofashionista

      UGGGHHHHHHhhhh
      seriously tired of her
      Love your commentary TLO

    • iCouture

      Honestly, what is the point in featuring Taylor on this blog anymore???   Just to bitch, complain, and tear her apart??….

      Please someone enlighten me.

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        Why do people pretend that we only ever criticize her when a click on the “Taylor Swift” tag shows that we compliment her quite often?

         

        • iCouture

           Quite often?….I personally disagree.    I guess people love to hate.  Its almost painful reading the comments when you feature her in a post.  Oh well, I know I know, I can choose to read or not  :)

          • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

            You can disagree all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that we compliment her outfits quite often.

            And yes, you should skip the posts if they bother you.

    • mom2ab

      Why all the hate- slap a grownup belt on it, add some interesting shoes and put her hair up and it would be quite chic

      • glennethph

        But she didn’t so instead of chic, it’s faux-virginal.  And as TLo said, not in the fun-ironic Like a Virgin kind of way.

    • Nicholas

      Wait, what happened here? The comment was originally posted as a response to TLo’s reply further down the page.

    • Rebecca Jay

      Oh, FFS already girl.

    • pistachiocaity

       Why should she, instead of dressing in a conservative and feminine way*, dress in a way that pleases adult men? Oh right – she shouldn’t. She’s either dressing for herself or dressing for her audience, neither of which are adult men.

      *which is different from ‘little girl’

      • http://www.tomandlorenzo.com/ Tom and Lorenzo

        As I said, it’s amazing how many people have read this post and decided to simply make up the things contained in it. At no point, anywhere in this post, can you find us saying something like “She should dress in a way that pleases adult men.”

    • guest2visits

      I think she’s just being herself; and it’s not a bad look for her.  I don’t mind the serial dating, I know lots of girls and boys
      doing the same; and it’s the right age for it.  I’m not hearing about her drunk under a table somewhere, or making a husband
      out of every guy she meets, or a handbag full of perscription or or otherwise. Her songs annoy me a touch; but I could say that
      about 50 other songsters right now.  I think she does alright in fashion land.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mj.brown.39 Mj Brown

      HELLO PEOPLE. SHE IS WEARING A DRESS MADE FOR ADULT WOMEN. WHY IS THERE EVEN AN ARGUMENT HERE???? and she looks amazing in it, fyi. get over yourselves.

    • http://www.facebook.com/chasity.mcdonald.33 Chasity McDonald

      Can I ask what type of clothes would be more consistent with her dating history? I’m not trying to be obnoxious I just wonder how you would have her dress?