Paleo Retiree writes:
Back here, Blowhard Esq. explored some of what tourist life is currently like in Vegas, with a special emphasis on what he called “hooker style.” My eyes having thus been opened, I was able to spot an inspiring example earlier today. She was walking into a small café, where she then ordered a cup of coffee.
But I’m not sure. Does her getup — which was quite striking, especially given how semi-slovenly everyone else was at 3 pm in and around this particular minimall — really qualify as “hooker style”? To me it doesn’t seem tacky or flashy enough. Her LBD (little black dress) … Her non-spike high heels … Pretty classy in their own way. Hence my verdict: What we have here is an example not of “hooker style” but of “escort style.” Important distinction!
Your evaluation?
Blowhard, Esq.
Callowman
Sherbrooke
Eddie Pensier
Enzo Nakamura
Epaminondas
Fabrizio del Wrongo
Fenster
Brundle Guy
Glynn Marshes
Paleo Retiree
Atypical Neurotic
Question Lady
Sax von Stroheim
Sir Barken Hyena
The Mistaken
Uncouth Reflections 
No handbag/purse?
LikeLike
No, certainly not hooker, too classy for that. She just looks well dressed to me, but of course, I’m hardly a fashionista. As you pointed out, among today’s Americans, anything not actively ugly gets your attention. She certainly would have gotten mine.
LikeLike
Skirt is far too long. Only slutty think that I see is the zipper on the back, or whatever it is. Nice legs though.
In San Diego I saw them all around the bars and nightclubs, they didn’t seem to like the daytime. Which might explain why I haven’t seen them around in Scottsdale: I’m never there at night.
LikeLike
You gotta be careful following women around and taking low angle shots from behind. Just say’n
LikeLike
Very nice legs. No stray bra straps. Her heels are still on the sensible side. Some kind of non-fishnet hosiery would have made her outfit a little more lady-like, but otherwise, I commend the absence of tacky accessories.
LikeLike
Upon further reflection, it occurs to me that this woman may be stuck in between two looks. Sensibly heeled shoes, nicely fitted skirt, and well presented legs on one hand. Overly large cut outs on the top, a visible center zipper lined up with a provocative center slit. Did she just leave the office on her way to happy hour? Is she going clubbing later and limiting her time on the high heels stashed in her trunk? Or is she just caught in between? Trying to look as classy and hot as possible but unable to fully commit either way.
An ‘A’ for effort in any case. I know that Paleo photog was dressed appropriately for this shot. It would be a shame to see some birkenstocked, baggy shorts wearing schlub chasing her around some strip mall.
LikeLike
I think the term “hooker” is being thrown around a bit too easily here. She’s just wearing a black racerback dress, paired with extremely sensible, low pumps. The so-called “visible zipper” you see–hence the name–is actually a fashionable design trend at the moment (as opposed to a more modest, invisible zipper), and is indicative of a high-quality garment. Getting them replaced isn’t cheap. I don’t see how such a functional element can be perceived as “slutty.” How else does one get into their dress, if there’s no closure? The dress may seem a bit short to some, but that’s probably because she appears to be fairly tall. And, as I probably don’t need to point out to some of the older readers/contributors of this blog, that length of dress became quite acceptable, even in the workplace, in the 1960s. It is 2012, after all.
LikeLike
Every hooker I’ve ever met has been nothing but nice to me, so I do not mean the term in a derogatory way at all.
LikeLike
I didn’t think you were. Those were legit hooker dresses. This is just a dress.
LikeLike
And, as I probably don’t need to point out to some of the older readers/contributors of this blog, that length of dress became quite acceptable, even in the workplace, in the 1960s. It is 2012, after all.
Yeah; but some of us here are Jacobites. We’d prefer the social order of 1612.
LikeLike
I’m with you on that one.
LikeLike
The weirdest thing was that it was 3 pm. At a sub-Starbucks coffee shop. In a nothing-special minimall. And here she was dressed as though for a hawt evening out. (And looking good — nothing against her look!) I stood behind her in line to see if she’d explain anything to the cashier but no luck. Who knows, maybe that’s just the way she dresses up all day long. Some people these days really do seem to get themselves up in everyday life as though they’re characters in a TV series.
It feeds into one of my current pet rants: many people these days seem to confuse reality and fantasy. They don’t just take hints from ads and movies, they really, really want to be the person on the page or screen. Is it the effects of prosperity? Digital media?
LikeLike
But is there anything wrong with dressing yourself up on a daily basis, rather than saving it for “special” occasions, as so many people have now come to do? I wear nice dresses and heels almost every single day, but it has nothing to do with wanting to be something I’m not (I don’t own a TV, and never watch movies!). I am constantly asked, “why are you so dressed up?” by friends and strangers alike, and I don’t have any reason, other than I think it is a sign of respect for myself, and for the people I come into contact with, even when I am not at work. I also yearn for the days when people used to dress up to go traveling and I make it a point to wear very nice clothes on planes, etc. Maybe it sounds old fashioned, but we take so many things for granted these days, and traveling used to be considered a privilege. (Also,on a more morbid note, if I’m going to die in a plane crash, I’d rather go down looking good, rather than wearing sweatpants).
So, that’s probably just how this young lady dresses for her daily activities, and I don’t find that unusual at all. I think it only stands out to some people because in this postmodern era we’re living in, we have gotten so used to seeing people dressed quite sloppily in public, that when someone comes around looking very polished, it make us do a double-take. I’m interested to hear more about your gripes with the reality/fantasy aspect.
LikeLike
Jecka — Did someone say that there’s something wrong with dressing up and/or looking nice? I’m a pretty relaxed guy myself but I’m all in favor of people behaving a little more classily than they generally do. And god knows I’m appreciative of the lengths the ladies go to in order to make themselves look appealing and/or appetizing.
But I think there’s a diff between galz getting themselves up nicely and galz walking around as though convinced they’re co-starring with Paris Hilton in a reality-TV series. The first is working with what she actually is, and she’s presenting a pulled-together version of herself. She looks to magazines, ads, fashion etc for hints and entertainment, and for help. Yay for that. The second is deluded, if not actually demented. She imagines that she’s both a star and the star’s p-r agent, and she’s deeply convinced that papparazzi cameras are trained on her 24/7.
I live near a college — the distinction between the two different kinds of galz is instantly apparent. And, FWIW, the existence of group 2 really emerged to me only in the last decade. Galz that shamelessly exhibitionistic/narcissistic were pretty rare before 2000. That’s why I think digitech (cellphones, computers, Facebook, reality TV shows, etc) may have had something to do with it.
Are you a fan of The Manolo, by the way? He’s really brilliant and amusing. You might get a kick out of him.
http://shoeblogs.com
Anne Enke’s another you might like. She’s often wonderful about sex and fashion. (She was involved with Victoria’s Secret during the brand’s great early years.)
http://www.anneofcarversville.com/style-photos/
LikeLike
I am a fan of the great Manolo, yes 🙂 I didn’t suspect anyone had a *real* problem with a woman (or man) dressing herself/himself up on a daily basis, I was just playing devil’s advocate since the discussion about this one woman’s rather mundane choice of dress had become so in-depth. I completely understand what you mean about the “celebrity” inspired appearance of many young women in the last decade or so. I personally conjure the image of a gal in some hideous logo-ridden designer get-up with large shades, carrying a chihuahua as an accessory to her $1600 handbag, a la Paris Hilton. Our “branding is everything” culture has made this site quite common, and I agree that it’s kind of appalling. It will surely be an interesting component of study to future fashion historians, but at the moment, it’s pretty gross.
LikeLike