What were they thinking?!
I sized them up, snickered, then scoffed. Lace on jeans? Wedding lace?
Then I remembered, there was this one time at my non-existent, early 90’s bachelorette party, that I could have worn these… Gawk and giggle with me now as we stare in awe of these most unique and wondrous jeans, together, and one click at a time.
Was it ever appropriate to wear such disasterous jeans, even in the late 80’s/early 90’s? Yikes. Well, baggy boyfriend jeans made a comeback…so you just never know! Could these come back into style in the distant future?
images via Wedding Belle Blues
Feast your eyes upon these disasters that Cheap Monday is calling fashion. They are fashion. FASHION CRIMES! Gah!!! We have denim here you should never wear, ill fitting jeans on skinny models and cut-outs where they should never be.
When’s the last time you thought, “Wow, those are some sexy knees!” Probably never. Obviously, Brooke Hogan is their new spokeswhore. *shudder* Probably because she does Cheap Monday, Cheap Tuesday, Cheap Wednesday……
The paper bag waist. These remind me of Jessica Simpson’s high-waisted fashion no-no. Who would do such a horrible thing to a “perfectly nice” pair of cropped/capri/highwater jeans?
Green Denim Chinos? Gross. Takin’ me to Kanye’s Never Shoulda.
Note* Homeless Person Chic is all the rage evidently… but more on that later.
Carry on clicking if you must, but I assure you it’s not pretty.
I love denim as much as the next person. However, I’m not a fan of the denim on denim look. It looks like Larry King is…
Denim jacket, denim shirt, denim pants, and are those denim shoes?! Talk about denim overkill.
What are your thoughts on this look? Do you like denim on denim? Or does it give you the blues?
Image via Wenn.com
In 1973, Italian Jesus Jeans ad with the line “he who loves me follows me”….
The Patent Office registrar said the name would cause greater offence than mere distaste to a significant section of the general public, based on the view of a “right thinking member of the public”.
He said the name was was “contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality”.
However, in 1997 the Patent Office approved French Connection’s application to register FCUK as a brand.
In the case of Jesus Jeans, the Patent Office argued that the name Jesus would be “debased” if it were used to sell jeans and other products offered by the company such as soap, scent and shoes.
The ruling said the value of the name lay in the belief of Christians that Jesus is the Son of God, and although other religions were practised in the UK, most British people would associated only this meaning to the word.
The company that owns the brand, Basic Trademark, argued that the name Jesus is a popular name and that there was a difference between offence that amounted to distaste, and that of offence that would cause outrage or attract censure by undermining religious values.
Lawyers acting for Basic Trademark, WH Beck Greener & Co, told The Times: “Moral grounds should only be raised where there is a question of public order. The use of the word ‘Jesus’ as a mark is not likely to inflame public disorder.”
The brand has successfully registered the name Jesus in Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, France, Italy, and Spain, but its rejection in the UK is not the first.