Trousers/Pants

leopard print jumpsuit

Stella McCartney leopard print jumpsuit

Isn’t it amazing how totally unsexy an animal print jumpsuit can be? Or… maybe not. Honestly, the words “animal print” and “jumpsuit” in the same sentence normally have us thinking more along the lines of “Bet Lynch from Coronation Street” than “sexy model wearing £590 high fashion item”. This one, however, just makes us think, “So THAT’S what it would look like if the Teletubbies lost a ton of weight and decided to spice things up in the wardrobe department!” We actually think we preferred Bet Lynch, but what about you? Are there times in your life when you find yourself standing in front of your open closet saying, “If only I had an animal print jumpuit!”? If so, you…

Green velvet high-waisted trousers from River Island

High Street Shopping Pick: Green velvet high-waisted trousers from River Island

Is it just us, or is anyone else well and truly over the low-rise waistband? Don’t get us wrong: we’re not asking you all to do a Simon Cowell and start walking around with your waistbands somewhere around your chest, and we firmly believe the words “high-waisted” and “tapered leg” should never, ever appear in the same product description. Ever. This isn’t the 90s, after all: no one wants you to look like an extra from the cast of Friends. At the same time, though, we have to say, we’re happy to see some retailers starting to venture back into the world of trousers that hit at the natural waist, as opposed to around the hips or above the belly-button. These…

male model in dungarees

Modelling is Hard: Dungaree Edition

It’s tempting to think the problem here lies mostly with styling (and, perhaps, with the lack of ironing): or maybe that should be the lack of styling. When you really sit back and take a look at it, though, can you see ANY way of styling these  in a way that would make them suddenly acceptable? Or suddenly worth spending more than £500 on? We can’t. But if you can, we’d sure love to hear your suggestions… [Buy them]

clown pants

Clown pants: now on sale

OK: first person to come up with a plausible way to wear these pants without looking like a clown wins a Fashion Police cookie. We have a feeling our cookies are safe. Which is good, because, well, we kinda already ate them all… [Buy it]

penis pants

Do you see what we see? Marni’s genitalia pants

Er, guys? Quick question, just to reassure ourselves we’re not seeing things: does anyone  else look at these pants and see… well, a kind of crude depiction of the male genitalia, such as you might see graffiti’d on a wall, on on a desk in a high school? If you CAN see now it now that we’ve mentioned it: do you think you’ll ever be able to UN-see it? Because we certainly can’t. Just for the benefit of those of you who CAN’T see what we’re talking about, and who are sitting there tut-tutting about “Those Fashion Police officers and their dirty minds!”, let us just quickly reassure you that we’d have arrested these even without the you know what: Great…

leggings as pants

Leggings as Pants: Now worn *without* pants

We’ve been saying for a long time now that leggings are not pants, nor should they be worn as pants. We have a horrible feeling we’re fighting a losing battle with this one, though, because not only are these leggings being worn AS pants, they’re also being worn WITHOUT pants. Underpants, that is. Because there’s just no way you’d be able to avoid a VPL in these, is there? This just CANNOT be comfortable, can it? Wouldn’t you just feel so exposed, knowing that  you were just a few short centimetres away from a citation for indecency from the real-life police? All we can say is that if you’re buying these, please think carefully about the fit. Too small will…

stuck together clothes

Stuck Together Clothes Crimes: The Leggings-Shorts Combo

It’s Friday, so we’re going to start this arrest with something positive, and say we appreciate the effort to prevent a leggings-worn-as-pants situation by covering the crotch area with shorts. We’ve always said that we can get on board with leggings-as-pants as long as the crotch is covered, and that is… well, almost the case here. We could argue that crochet doesn’t exactly make the best crotch-coverer, but hey, it’s a start. On the flip-side of this, we also appreciate the attempt to make the shorts less, er, revealing  than they would be on their own, by adding the leggings underneath. Crochet shorts just don’t really work without something solid under them, do they? All of that said, however, the truth…

leggings are not pants

Leggings are not cycle shorts, except when they are

Now that fashion brands have managed to convince so many of us that leggings are, in fact pants (If you need proof of this statement, we’d like to invite you to come for a stroll around the mall closest to the Fashion Police HQ any day of the week. It’s hard to find people wearing anything BUT leggings-as-pants there…), they need some other horrible fashion trend to damage our eyeballs with. Enter the leggings-worn-as-cycle-shorts-and-legwarmers look. Didn’t see that one coming, did you? The text next to these leggings on the Modcloth website talks about athletes, and podiums and triathlons, and that kind of thing. We have absolutely no idea what any of that has to do with these leggings (unless, of…

short shorts

How Short is Too Short? Nicolas Andreas edition

Welcome to the short-short edition of How Short is Too Short? We’re pretty sure we could get the word “short” into that sentence another couple of times at least, but we’ve already typed the word “short” so many times in this post that it’s started to lose all meaning. And, you know, it’s a short post. Groan. Anyway, on to the pressing matter of the shorts, how short they are, and whether that shortness is too short… The thing is: at first we didn’t even realise these WERE shorts. We thought they were knickers. And because we thought they were knickers, they didn’t really give them much thought at all, beyond the observation that for such big knickers, they sure don’t…

pink jumpsuit

When jumpsuits go bad

Some, of course,  would argue that jumpsuits are almost always bad. Others believe it all depends on the jumpsuit – and the person wearing it. Right now, though, we’re incapable of even thinking about the bigger picture. Nope, all we can think about is how the fact that this particular jumpsuit – which is a TUXEDO jumpsuit, no less – is such a perfect match for the model’s skin tone that at first glance she looks naked. Then, on second glance, she looks like she’s wearing some kind of corporate “fat suit”. Well, it IS almost Halloween, after all… Did we mention it costs £750 to look like this? Now THAT’S scary. [Product Page]

shant shorts

Crime of Fashion: The Shant Shorts

Introducing the Shant Shorts: part shants, part shorts, they’re the perfect solution for those days – and we all have them, don’t we? – when you really want to wear a pair of tiny little hotpants, but feel that sheer, lace leggings would be a little more appropriate. Wait, what are we saying? There’s really NEVER a time when sheer leggings are appropriate, lace or otherwise, is there? And while the addition of the shorts will certainly keep you safe from the actual police, we’re afraid you’ll still have to hide from our fashion force, because we most definitely consider these to be a crime of fashion. Now, who’s with us? [Product Page]

the most unflattering pants in the word

Possibly the most unflattering pants in the world

> Anytime we see pants like these, we can’t help but assume that the body underneath them is exactly the same shape as the pants. You’re doing it now too, aren’t you? You’re imagining her unfortunately elongated torso lurking underneath her specially-made pants, her crotch about two metres away from her belly button. People who have bodies shaped like that are the only people who have a reason to wear these pants. Everyone else who paid £299 to look like this is going to have to accompany us down to the station: you all have some explaining to do… [Product Page]

Leopard Papillon Utility Pants

Crime of Fashion: Matthew Williamson Leopard Papillon Utility Pants

It’s one of the great mysteries of the Fashion Universe: how on EARTH did these Matthew Williamson animal print pants make it to the deep-discount section of the Shopbop website, reduced from the original $660 to a mere $198. Oh no, wait: for a second there, we forgot we were speaking to our fellow Fashion Police officers, not label-hungry fashion victims. The REAL question in that case, is why do these even exist? Who would pay $198 for them, let alone $660? And why are they sold out in all but one size? (If you wear as US 6, by the way, it’s your lucky day…)

ugly sheer pants

Just when we thought shants couldn’t get any worse…

…Roberto Cavalli had to go and prove us wrong. Again. We’re guessing these totally sheer pants just weren’t quite revealing enough as they were, hence the need to cut giant holes in the hips. Because who WOULDN’T want to showcase their hips like this, framed by the flimsy, animal print fabric of a pair of shants? WHO, we ask you? And to think you can have all of this for the bargain price of £304, too! Walk, don’t run, people… [Buy them]  

too long trousers

The Foot Snatcher Strikes Again

It’s been a while since we heard from our old enemy the Foot Snatcher, who, as you will recall, sneaks around the fashion world, stealing the feet of helpless fashion victims, and leaving them looking like their legs got chopped off at the ankle. Say what you like about skinny jeans, but they’ve certainly helped keep the Foot Snatcher at bay. At first glance, we thought this was another Foot Snatching crime in action. On closer inspection of the evidence, however, we can just see the toe of this model’s shoe peeking out from the hem of her trousers, so we can stand down the alert. Really, though, this image is just an excuse to show you how ugly these…

saggy shorts

Saggy asses are never in style…

Well, it’s hard to understand why THESE didn’t sell out instantly, and, indeed, why they STILL haven’t sold out, despite having been reduced to just £12 from the original £40. And by that we mean, “It’s not hard to understand AT ALL, is it?” Excellent work from the model here, though, who’s desperately trying to distract us from the ugly shorts by pulling some interesting poses. “Whee!” she’s saying, “Look at how much FUN I’m having here, with my invisible jump rope! What do you mean, ‘ugly shorts’? Who, me? No way!” Are you convinced? Click here to buy them if you are! [Thanks to Gracie for the report!]

worst leggings in the world

Contender for the ‘Worst Leggings in the World’ Award

There is no ‘Worst Leggings in the World’ Award. Well, not yet, anyway. Actually, we don’t think there should EVER be a Worst Leggings in the World Award: partly because it would be a major mistake to actually REWARD such bad behaviour from the fashion world, but also because there’d be no point: these leggings would win. Unless, of course, they were disqualified on a technicality. Can you call these “leggings” when they don’t really cover the leg? It’s one of the mysteries of the universe. That and the fact that they even exist at all… [Buy them]

Barbie tracksuit

The Dress Like a Toddler Trend Returns: Barbie Girl

You know, we would absolutely LOVE this outfit…. if we were five years old. And if it was 1982. Given that we’re adults, though, and it’s 2012, we have to ask ourselves why we’re logging onto ASOS.com and entering straight into some kind of strange alternate universe in which it’s acceptable for grown women to wear Barbie tracksuits, the likes of which their five-year-old nieces would probably dismiss as a little bit too 80s… We feel like if we were to somehow come round to the idea of wearing this, everything would be different. We would no longer fight crimes of fashion, for instance: we’d be too busy braiding each other’s hair and discussing which My Little Pony is the best.* Do…

ugly harem pants

Harem Hell: Drop crotch AND VPL

It shouldn’t really be possible to create a VPL on such a sad, saggy pair of pants, but gosh darn it, if Not Shy haven’t gone and done it! (‘Not Shy’ is the name of the brand, by the way. And it’s a good name, because you really wouldn’t want to be shy when you’re showing your underwear to the world, and strongly implying that you’re carrying something in your crotch at the same time, hey?) We know the main argument usually given in favour of harem pants (Aside from the always-entertaining “SO! EDGY!”, obviously, which is the first line of defence fashion criminals give for basically ANY ugly item of clothing…) is the same one used for Crocs and pyjamas…