/fa/ - Fashion

>>12795770
I agree, I think CdG considered how to present that collection very carefully so as to produce a fluid narrative.

CdG didn't introduce a new silhouette
It's the same old fucking silhouette but with the volume pushed to 500%.
CdG exaggerated the same old bullshit tropes and asked "but are your dicks now 500% erect to match?" or "is this shape 500% feminine?"
Softness whatever are the cliche descriptors of feminine shape.
And CdG challenged that by tinkering the function.

CdG produced an alien shape.
a amorphous shape which could only be recognised as a human if it was considered malformed, hunchback as you described.
CdG produced an alien (NON-feminine shape) shape by manipulating feminine shape tropes.
Therefore she showed that shapes are not feminine

Simply put: if i've used all the same ingredients (feminine trope) to make this cake (human-female) but multiplied them by x, then why is it no longer recognisable as a cake?

Maternal figure is a WHOLLLLE different discourse I honestly don't have the energy to expand on.

CdG alienated perceptions of femininity, that was CdG's critique.

SOMEONE MAKE A NEW THREAD

CHEERS,
G