Way Harsh, Tai: GQ Ranks LA as 2nd Worst-Dressed City
Many residents of our fair city consider themselves fashionistas. Whether they shop on Rodeo, or at boutiques in Silver Lake, or at thrift stores, the well-heeled masses pride themselves on their sense of style. It will come as quite a slap in the face, then, that GQ has ranked Los Angeles as the second-worst dressed city in the country, coming in second only to Boston (a double-whammy affront to this blogger, hailing, as I do, from the mean streets of Boston and having lived in LA for ten years now).
The ranking places us far behind grunge-infested Seattle, hipster Brooklyn, turquoise-infused New Mexico, and even fucking Pittsburgh.
Anyway, if you're looking for someone to blame, look no further than Melrose Ave. LA ranks so low, they say, in part because of an abundance of Ed Hardy clothing -- "Why should we expect Angelenos to ever recover from the aesthetic thrill of Ed Hardy?," writes author Maxandra Short. "It's smart if you think about it, why actually get a full body tattoo when you can buy the sartorial equivalent of one, with rhinestones?"
That reasoning, of course, isn't unique to those who live elsewhere. Most Angelenos with even the slightest respect for fashion and decency will point and laugh at our rhinestone-clad brethren. But don't be too quick to heave a sigh of relief! The next style criminals that the venerable men's magazine implicates are far more prevailing: they are the women and men among us who seek to look ten to twenty years younger than they actually are. Writes Short:
Fantasy-dressing reigns: men dress like boys, women like tweens, and middle-aged women like the trophy wives they once were.
Ouch, dude. Let this serve as a lesson to watch out for GQ writers the next time you're out of the house (and headed to the Botox salon).