^ You act like we attacked him... fair points GG.

Easy now feller. Suggesting to match one's complexion has nothing to do with some newfangled "feminisation" or whatever it is you're going on about.

*Late edit*
This has been bugging me. It could well be that thinking about colour and complexion was never part of any Ivy style (I doubt it) but to state this is coming from a recent "feminised", "taste maker", even "orthodox" perspective is an assumption that reveals more about yourself than about me.

Colour theory is older than this style and to have the sensibility to see what works best for your individual features should be part of the arsenal of anyone with a good pair of eyes. Brownshoe considered matching frames before we even suggested it. I'm not saying matching your complexion is the law. Ignore it all you want - I know I do sometimes - but to me it's just common sense to at least consider it. You should try it yourself GG, it can do wonders for your cuteness factor.

Last edited by 1966 (2009-06-06 02:02:01)

^ plain and simple = really nice

Not really Ivy look (maybe in parts)

Button Down black and White Brutus check shirt
White Fred Perry Jumper with black and grey pipping
Blue Levi's (Small turn up)
Black Sock
Black and white Trainners (again)

Not pure Ivy but i'm happy with that

Cheaney is a shoe manufacturer Alex, not a shoe model.

Last edited by Suitedbooted2000 (2009-06-10 02:42:34)