Listen, we are living in 2014, so first and foremost it's time to embrace the following sentiment: red carpet dresses are going to take risks and create controversy, and thank the lords. Style is about expressing oneself, and as of last night, MMVA co-host Kendall Jenner got the memo.
In case you missed it, the 18-year-old model went for a full-length, bejewelled dress, with slits that rose above her hipbones, which meant she wasn't wearing underwear, and which more than a few critics are hung up on.
"Why do one slit when you can do do TWO!?" she captioned along with an Instagram photo. (The answer: because, Kendall, SOME OF US would be prone to a horrible wardrobe malfunction from which we would never be redeemed.)
But unlike the rest of us, Kendall killed it — she killed it. The dress was beautiful, the long sleeves and high neckline balanced the slits, and girlfriend is a model, so she knows how to avoid what would undoubtedly happen to any normals who attempted the same thing. (I am queen of the normals, by the way — so don't worry, guys, we're in the same boat, here.)
What's disappointing, however, is the fixation on Kendall's lack of under garments as if it's any of our business. The number of red carpet dresses that require no underwear due to fabric type or sheerness (or something) is only growing, but dozens of thinkpieces are still being fuelled by their so-called "controversy." But newsflash: the people wearing these pieces are professional clothes-wearers. These are actors and singers and models who are paid money (by companies) to wear clothes and look good in them. Worst-case scenarios have been accounted for and already kiboshed. And even if they haven't been, what's the worst that can happen? I mean, really.
You don't have to like Kendall's dress, and you don't have to dress like Kendall, but she took a risk and made a choice, and good for her. YGG.
Comments