Fashion for the Modern Age
Manolo says, at last, the stylish full-body condom.
Home | Manolo for the Home | Manolo for the Big Girl | Manolo's Food Blog | Manolo for the Brides | Manolo for the Men | Teeny Manolo | Ayyyy!
Manolo Moda | Basement of the Bargains | Consolation of the Shoes | Gallery of the Horrors | Manolo's Forums | Manolo's Newsletter |Talk to Manolo!
October 14th, 2005 at 12:42 pm
Textured, for the pleasure of the female.
October 14th, 2005 at 1:13 pm
Wait - didn’t I see these characters in Cirque du Soleil?
October 14th, 2005 at 3:44 pm
“Does this make my thighs look fat?”
October 14th, 2005 at 3:48 pm
“What has it got in its pocketses?”
October 14th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
I’d kill for a big bag of gummy bears right now.
October 14th, 2005 at 5:31 pm
Geez, I thought my saddlebags were bad.
October 14th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
Gack. Please see my previous pontifications about designers and their inflated egos. (Say. Do you suppose that’s what those bulges are for? Storing ego?) No, I guess not.
What I started out to say was, I want to sue. I invented this look way (way) back while playing tennis and stuffing balls in my shorts and shirtsleeves. (Now now, get your mind out of the …) And I don’t want to hear about prior art.
October 14th, 2005 at 6:25 pm
Now we know where Michael Jackson has been hiding.
October 14th, 2005 at 7:00 pm
The taste is all in the mouth.
October 14th, 2005 at 7:12 pm
Fashion for the ugly
October 14th, 2005 at 7:17 pm
One-bagger, two-bagger, …
How many bag-equivalents are these outfits? Total coverage, no apparent apertures. Can’t even see the *eyes*, for bog’s sake. The *window to the soul*!
Oh, right. Nevermind.
October 14th, 2005 at 8:49 pm
Uh, call girls for the Blue Men Group? Oh my!
October 15th, 2005 at 4:01 am
I kind of like it. Of course, it’s not fashion. Fashion is the intersection of art, craft, and yes - practicality. Art and taste are not the same thing. (Don’t get me wrong - taste and fashion are wonderful things, and they are of course the reason I read the Manolo with his incomparably sage judgement on these matters.)
This, instead, is art applied to playing with expression of the human silhouette. Taken for what it is, it’s fun and well done, no?
October 15th, 2005 at 4:21 am
No.
October 15th, 2005 at 4:53 am
For some reason I think of tumors and B science fiction films.
October 15th, 2005 at 9:03 am
In the future we will all be claymation.
October 15th, 2005 at 9:10 am
I’m disturbed that their hands are showing. You’d have to have a hella good manicure to stand up to this.
And desertwind, I saw the gummy thing, too. They are like gummy mannequins.
October 15th, 2005 at 10:09 am
i have to believe that an artist would have made some effort to find a better, smoother filler-material than wadded-up newspaper.
but at least the models were allowed to cover up their faces, to avoid humiliating recognition.
October 15th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
condom avec les panniers. pourquoi?
October 15th, 2005 at 5:48 pm
Someday the full-body condom will be available in all stores- and in fun flavors like raspberry and orange, as seen here.
October 15th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
How can she even see in that thing?
October 16th, 2005 at 9:04 am
It is both ugly and uninteresting.
October 16th, 2005 at 9:25 pm
I saw a very strange opera years & years ago called “Help, help the Globolinks.” These are globolinks, I’m sure of it.
October 17th, 2005 at 8:03 am
The orange one looks like she has stuffed her gardening hats in her leotard.
October 18th, 2005 at 9:34 am
the Diva Leigh Says:
Uh, call girls for the Blue Men Group? Oh my!
Thank you, Diva, for helping me clean my keyboard. Most amusing! :-)
October 18th, 2005 at 3:41 pm
Somewhere in the great beyond, Leigh Bowery is laughing.