Ugly Jeans Face-Off

madewell-ugly-jeans

One of a Kind Designer Distressed Jeans [by Madewell].   $225

“Lovingly demolished, these dirty-wash skinny jeans feature paint splatter and shredded holes. 5-pocket styling and single-button closure. Wrinkling at front. Worn spots and heavy distressing throughout. 10″ leg opening.”

radcliffe-bf-jeans

The Oxford Twisted Outseam Boyfriend Jean from Radcliffe. $210

“Radcliffe combines everyday wearability and an understated luxury in every garment with a deep understanding of how women want their clothes to fit and complement their shape.”

This is a tough call. The Madewell jeans are lovingly demolished. When was the last time you lovingly demolished something? The other nght, I stepped on a huge cockroach. I wasn’t feeling the love, I have to admit. Hm.   The splattered paint might give this pair the edge, in that it’s pretentious. You’re not only pretending that you keep your battered old jeans, but also that you’re an Artist.

However, the Radcliffe Boyfriend Jean is such an oxymoron! You’ll never have a boyfriend if you go out wearing these. And I like the Radcliffe mission statement: a deep understanding of how women like their clothes to fit?! Hahaha!

I do realise that I have a perverse fetish, deriving pleasure from ugly jeans. What’s that called again? Being a cunt? Or is there a more specific term for it?

This entry was posted in Disorders, Fashion, Words and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Ugly Jeans Face-Off

  1. Queen Michelle says:

    Quite frankly the women who’d wear either the slippers in the first photo or the ugly assed, too big, stiletto’s in the second photo DESERVE to wear those jeans. FOREVER. And in doing so shall remain without husband or child as punishment for such bad shoe choices.

  2. Sister Wolf says:

    Queen Michelle – In their defense, they were probably given the shoes by a stylist. I’m thinking that no shoes on earth could redeem either of those jeans. You’d just be an Ugly Jeans girl with cool shoes. You would be more tragic than ever.

  3. Shot the stylist over the stilettos – actually they didn’t use a stylist just some c*** off the street. In fact the same off the street c*** is used in the radcliffe jeans shot, don’t ya think the body looks like a bloke pulled off the street with a quick leg wax.

    I think the term you are looking for is jeanilingus – pleasure derived from the visual stimulation of viewing ugly jeans. If you stroked the jeans in addition to viewing then this would be jeanilinctus!

  4. honeypants says:

    I was actually thinking more like denimfreude.

    Both of those jeans are so hideous. They remind me why I went 10 years or so without owning a pair of jeans at all. I’ll be happy to take $200 – heck, I’ll take $100 to “lovingly demolish” some jeans for these morons.

  5. Ann says:

    Those Boyfriend Jeans are hideous! I mean, just atrocious! Radcliffe claims to posess a “deep understanding of how women want their clothes to fit and complement their shape,” but those jeans neither fit nor complement anyone’s shape. I am here to tell you that is NOT how I like my clothes to fit, in that I actually LIKE them to fit, which those appear not to. Seems simple enough, hmph.

    Maybe if the model clicks her red shoes three times, she’ll go away?

  6. I think the Radcliffe jeans get top prize, if only for managing to make a model look simultaneously stumpy-legged and like she’s wearing a loaded diaper.

  7. dust says:

    And this ugliness doesn’t come cheap either!

  8. Sal says:

    The second pair get my vote. Just look at the crazy spread-legged posture the model has to take to even keep those UP.

  9. alittlelux says:

    the dropped crotch is sooo flattering on the boyfriend jeans! very katie zombie holmes.

  10. Mark says:

    I vote for Radcliffe, too. The fit is so dumpy. You forgot the other irony: any woman who attends Radcliffe College would never have a boyfriend–like all those women’s colleges, it’s a lesbian hot-bed.

  11. I vote for the Radcliffe’s because I own a couple pairs (sadly, not the ridiculous drop-crotch boyfriend jean) and deeply understand their understanding of how I want my jeans to fit. That, and I was able to wear one pair till almost the 5th month. Buy them at Daffy’s if you can, ladies, they’re $30 and some are just shockingly normal jeans.

    I miss you, Sister Wolf! I apologize for my absence, the pregnancy brain has me addled at work and barely able to finish projects.

  12. Maja says:

    iheartfashion: I tried on a pair of boyfriend jeans like those the other day. I looked, indeed, like I was wearing diapers.

  13. Bex says:

    My husband used to wear paint-spattered jeans, but then, he IS an artist…and then he stopped because he found out the lead in the paint apparently goes into your skin and causes cancer or something.

    And those jeans above are just butt-ugly. “Lovingly demolished” my ass.

  14. Sonia Luna says:

    $225 dollars for some ugly as fuck jeans … no thank you!
    A 12 lt. bucket of emulsion paint is only 14 euros, come round and paint my house!

  15. Charlotte K says:

    The human in the 2nd picture does not look like a woman!

  16. WendyB says:

    I’m scared! Hold me!

  17. hammie says:

    oy ya ya! I think if you held a gun to my head I would wear the first pair, but only until I could turn the gun on the arseholes who thought such shit was worth 200 dollars. Really? The second pair should be free with a bumper pack of Tena lady Pads – a full pack of which will fit in the crotch. Or maybe you buy the first pair, contract thrush and have to wear the second pair while you get through the course of pessaries?

  18. Thanks for the informative post!

  19. cardy uggs says:

    Have a excellent day! Thanks for sharing. :0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *