what are you really actually too old for after about the age of 35, even if people say you aren't?

(216 Posts)
Peggotty Sat 09-Feb-13 18:07:26

Converse?
Superga?
biker jackets?

I'm nearly 37 and would probably wear all of these, but am I really basically too old for them?

MerlotAndMe Sun 10-Feb-13 12:31:32

I would think of bodycon dresses as being for older women though. 35+

BIWI Sun 10-Feb-13 12:33:18

Why?

MerlotAndMe Sun 10-Feb-13 12:34:19

and I really ADMIRE that confidence in the donatella lookalike! She could probably look 'better', but in a way, where would it get her if she already has the confidence.

MerlotAndMe Sun 10-Feb-13 12:35:33

Bodycon dresses are elegant, to the knee, quite plain usually. They flatter. They're not super short, off one shoulder, daring, striking etc.....

higgle Sun 10-Feb-13 13:07:10

Perhaps it is because when you look in the Isabella Oliver catalogue ( I know that is the old name, too decrepit to get my mind around the new one) the body con dresses are quite short, hoicked up and off the shoulder. I wear mine in a more demure way.

scarletsalt Sun 10-Feb-13 13:15:41

I like converse, but I dont really understand why everyone seems to think they are for young people. If anything 'Converse' for me conjures up the image of a 30 something school run mum.

I thought all the young'uns now were wearing those hideous high top padded basketball boot type trainers.

Mostly I think that people should wear what they want and you certainly dont have to switch to per una and fleeces once you hit 35. Having said that I do think that crop tops and very short (as in bum cheek revealing) shorts, should be left to the under 25s.

Sleepthief Sun 10-Feb-13 13:22:53

It does seem rather misogynistic to judge women on or try to police their appearances whether by face, weight, age or what they choose to wear - as though we have to look a certain way in order to fulfill some spurious notion of womanhood hmm. Anyway, style is totally subjective as this thread has demonstrated and what I think looks fab, the next person probably thinks mings to high heaven grin. So I will continue to wear what I like without reference to numbers or any other person - and if at nearly 39 that involves wedge trainers, hot pants and a crop top, or waterfall cardy, bootcut jeans and footgloves, or any other combination, that's my prerogative wink

MrsCampbellBlack Sun 10-Feb-13 13:31:45

true sleepthief.

But perhaps not the wedge trainers, hot pants and crop top all in one go. Unless you are Katie Price.

Megatron Sun 10-Feb-13 13:49:09

I don't really think about it to be honest. Sometimes I look at something and know that it would look too young on me but may look amazing on someone else my age (46). I wear things that I like; skinnies, scarves, converse, t shirts etc. I don't really give a shite what anyone thinks of what I wear tbh. My hair is my biggest problem as it doesn't seem to DO tidy and when it does I look like a newsreader which is not a look I cherish.

MerlotAndMe Sun 10-Feb-13 13:56:56

sleepthief, I don't like to see women judged for ageing but this is different.

It's fashion and the priority it holds that is the issue really. Do you still care more about being IN FASHION than you care about looking good. Young people can be forgiven for prioritising fashion above what looks better on them, but that's harder to smile at the older the wearer...

BIWI Sun 10-Feb-13 14:07:43

But why is that? Can you explain why? Because it is still judging ...

Sleepthief Sun 10-Feb-13 14:10:15

I don't follow fashion as such, Merlot (although am probably more influenced by the glossies than I would care to admit wink), but I think with age should comes the realisation that it is better to feel comfortable in your outer layers than to either look like you've stepped off the pages of Grazia, or suddenly start dressing in what other people deem an age-appropriate manner. I'm more flamboyant in my dress now than I was in my late 20s and I reserve the right to continue to age both naturally and a bit disgracefully grin without reference to anyone else's ideals!

TondelayoSchwarzkopf Sun 10-Feb-13 14:13:26

I totally agree with everyone BIWI has said and think responses have dodged the question. If it's just about dressing 'appropriately' or with your body / good points - why is there an age cut-off in the title of the thread?

I'd like to remind people that life expectancy for women in this country is 80+ so it seems a bit ridiculous less than half way through to start saying 'never again'. If you read Vogue or Tatler it is full of 50, 60 & 70 plus women wearing high fashion and looking great. At the other end of the scale my DM at 67 wears ACDC t-shirts, trainers and jeans and wouldn't give a flying toss if anyone felt it 'inappropriate'. It's appropriate for her.

To answer the question, I personally won't wear a wonderbra to the Hacienda* or a wedding dress again.

MrsMushroom Sun 10-Feb-13 14:13:48

Flowers in your hair. grin I have a mate...v attractive woman, but at 39 she's just highlighting how much her face is NOT like a rosebud whenever she wears a flower clip on her parting.

Bless her.

TondelayoSchwarzkopf Sun 10-Feb-13 14:14:52

*for obvious reasons

PonMeMerlot Sun 10-Feb-13 14:15:54

flowers in the air at 39 omg!

DontmindifIdo Sun 10-Feb-13 14:17:16

BIWI - I suppose it's because we assume that the older you are, the more you've already got that experimental phase out of your system and have now learned to dress in a way that suits you.

Like alot of things, the younger you are, the more acceptable it is to do 'foolish' things, but the assumption is as you've got older you will have learned from your mistakes and/or grown up. To not do looks like you're rather stunted in your development (someone mentioned about 40+ men dressed like skateboarders looking bad, it's not just the clothes that are wrong, it's giving out the signals that you are still in the mindset of a teenager that makes them look like fuckwits).

You should be proud of what stage you are at your life now, what you've achieved, your confidence from experience etc, dressing like you are despirately trying to look like you haven't had those last 15 years of life experiences/like you've never got past that teenage stage makes you look a bit like you're scared to grow up. Which is pitiful, not cool.

DontmindifIdo Sun 10-Feb-13 14:26:26

But also for dressing appropriately for your body, as I said up thread, by 35, a lot of the natural youthful gorgeousness of most of us has gone. Even when not pregnant (as I am now), my boobs don't defy gravity anymore, there's no gap between my thighs, I'm a couple of dress sizes bigger and everythings a lot less toned and more flabby - to look half decent takes more effort. The way I looked at 20, I could put anything on and look great, now I need to be more selective (I wish I understood this at the time).

Now, I don't have that figure to carry it off. It's not just thinness, it's a general "lived in" look my body's got.

PonMeMerlot Sun 10-Feb-13 14:26:59

yeah that's it really. at some point it makes you look the opposite of 'cool'.

retrocutie Sun 10-Feb-13 14:30:03

Bobbi Brown wears Converse and she is in her 50s. Personally, I think people should wear what they bloody well like.

BIWI Sun 10-Feb-13 14:35:51

I wasn't aware that wearing jeans, Converse and a hoodie, all of which have been given as examples on this thread, were experimental, though.

At 53 I weigh just half a stone more than I did when I got married, aged 30. And a year's hard work at the gym means that I'm actually more toned than I was then. So no reason why I couldn't/shouldn't wear the same kind of clothes.

MrsCampbellBlack Sun 10-Feb-13 14:38:50

But apart from the OP I don't think anyone else has suggested that converse are a mutton object. God normally on here they're thought of as pretty mumsy wink

I'm pretty much the same size as I was 20 years ago and my wardrobe is much better than it was then.

But I still know that there are some items I wouldn't wear as I'd deem them too young - micro-skirts, hotpants being amongst them. And I don't think that's being anti-women or ageist its just that some things are best left to teenagers.

Sleepthief Sun 10-Feb-13 14:39:15

I guess what I'm trying (clumsily) to ask is who gets to say what is appropriate/inappropriate for either your age or your body? And isn't it wrong (misogynistic) to look at another woman and say 'OMG would you look at the shape of that!' regardless of the fact she may be 98yo, size 30 and wearing aforementioned hot pants and crop tops - ie judging her on the basis of her appearance? Is it such a massive leap to saying Mary Beard shouldn't be on TV because she's not 'attractive' enough or Joan Bakewell because she's 'too old'?

PonMeMerlot Sun 10-Feb-13 14:40:03

yeh, jeans and hoodie is more like cloak of invisibility

E320 Sun 10-Feb-13 14:41:25

Bare arms (unless super-toned), low cut back & front, leggings & anything that clings to the Michelin-tyre rings, heavy make-up in the wrong shade for face, orange tans, one-tone dyed hair, very short skirts.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now