What do you mean, no shells?!

amother

Seagreen

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 10:10 pm

amother wrote:

A light thin 3/4 sleeve summer cardigan over a sleeveless top is way cooler than a shell underneath in the summer.

Not if the sleeveless top is low cut, as most of them are, and I therefore have to wear another layer under it, besides the cardigan on top.

seeker

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 10:23 pm

amother wrote:

For those who are makpid, that is not enough.

http://www.yalnewyork.com/inde......html

This page has some that might work, depending on your neck.

Depending on your NECK?! Honey, they're $70 each, my neck is not the part that has an issue with that.

amother

Seafoam

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 10:33 pm

amother wrote:

My take on shells - white shells under sleeveless or short sleeves are long out. Obviously I am wearing a shell under a sheer top/blouse but if its a dark top, dark shell. I also have some short sleeved tops that I wear with gray or black tees underneath but it doesn't have that shell look. It's part of the style. I dress well, so you can trust me Wink

Is this true for teenagers too, I can't believe that their camp wardrobe has to be completely re-done cuz of the new "'rules' but don't want them to be nebby either. I was going to start a thread and then saw this one Smile

seeker

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 10:34 pm

For all those replying to those saying "it has to cover where a necklace falls" - that is not a rule, it's a guideline. Like if you're trying to teach people (especially teenagers looking for something ambiguous to jump on) what it means to be covered modestly, you need to draw an imaginary line somewhere. Elbows and knees are a kind of natural point of reference. But what are you going to do on top? So they devised various ways to describe what a tznius neckline looks like. "Collarbone" is a popular one. Personally it's the bane of my existence because I have a high, protruding collarbone, so shirts that would be fine on just about anyone else not only fall below my collarbone, but conspicuously so - so that even if I were OK with it, anyone accustomed to the collarbone guideline (which many people are) is going to think I'm ignoring tznius, which is not the case, I just think my body is an exception to the rule. So anyway, Rav Falk of the yeshivishly popular book picked a necklace as a guideline, which is actually a pretty clever idea except that depending on your personal contours it could be rather restricting.

L K

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 11:27 pm

Seeker, are there any other neckline guidelines that you are aware of, aside from the one described in rav Falks sefer?
Aside from his description, the only one I'd ever heard was "covered collarbones" but that doesn't define what area on the sides of the neck must be covered. One could have covered collarbones and a very revealing boatneck top.

seeker

Wed, Feb 15 2017, 11:37 pm

L K wrote:

No, I'm not aware of any other guideline that covers side/back. I think people who don't go with that just use their own judgment, and as long as that works it's fine. My point was that the necklace thing was devised as a guideline to help describe what appropriate wear looks like - not as an interpretation of halacha per se. If you're looking to give people clear rules, then you need to draw a line somewhere.

WastingTime

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 1:05 pm

I think you can wear a long sleeved shell under a sleeveless dress if it blends. Otherwise looks like a little girl with a jumper. Also with tops, the white or black shell under acolorful short sleeve or sleeveless shirt often sticks out. But I have a very classy goldenrod leatherish wrap around vest that I wore with a navy skirt and same shade navy long sleeved shell the other day (and a nice chunky necklace) and looked very chic (IMHO)

amother

Seagreen

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 2:00 pm

WastingTime wrote:

When shells under sleeveless or short sleeve tops first came in, I thought it looked strange, and I kept wearing whatever clothing I already had (which is probably whatever is in style now, now that shells are out). Eventually I gave in, and bought some of those types of tops with shells (only when I needed clothing anyway). And now suddenly everyone has decided that that look, which was considered nice for several years, is not nice at all and looks strange.

Sigh. I can't keep up with this.

sleepybeauty

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 3:15 pm

amother wrote:

It already was then... :-(

Oh please

Just because something isn't trendy, it doesn't mean it's nerdy. You'll look great as long as your clothes fit well and you look put together.

Last edited by sleepybeauty on Thu, Feb 16 2017, 4:10 pm; edited 1 time in total

WastingTime

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 3:51 pm

amother wrote:

Honestly it was only brought to my attention here on imamother some months ago that the look is officially "out". But from the start I tried to only use the shell under short sleeved/sleeveless tops if it blended- otherwise it reminds me of jr high when we used to cut the bottoms off our white sweat socks and then use the tops as sleeve legntheners (Bruriah anyone?)
Also in the Israeli summer- it is so hot. I find a sleevless shell with a 3 quarter shirt is so much cooler than a 3/4 "shell" with a sleevless on top. I actually used that logic to keep warm in the winter- a long sleeved shirt under my sweater keeps me warmer than another layer on top...

In the end of the day though, who really cares. Unless you are trying to be accepted to the fashion design industry, if you look put together what's the difference if some snooty "fashionable" women don't agree with it ( unfortunately, I can include myself in that category)!

amother

Seagreen

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 4:59 pm

WastingTime wrote:

Thanks for making me feel better Smile

ETA: And, btw, I didn't go to Bruriah, but I did hear about that sock/sleeve thing from friends who did. Very Happy

greenfire

Thu, Feb 16 2017, 11:54 pm

why buy such expensive shells when you can buy 100% cotton long sleeve t-shirts for $5 from walmart or clearance at old navy

anyways I cannot imagine any guy getting so turned on by collar bones that one has to choke themselves l'shem a man-made mitzva ... maybe the pearls will turn them on or a noose [50 shades darker]