Anonymous wrote:Almost 20 pages and no one responded simply that "basic bitch" attire is prevalent bc its generally (though not always) something that is flattering on lots of shapes and easily accessible. People who are basic AF, aren't people who have given up, they are people who want to look put together but also dont want to stand out too much or dont feel particularly creative or knowledgable. it's hardly the worst thing when it comes to style and fashion, it's just there.

Anonymous wrote:Just googled le pliage I had this bag 20 plus years ago in high school. Wow.

Anonymous wrote:Interesting thread. In DC -- or at least in the slice of DC I know -- being put together is generally a plus but being too fashionable can cost you credibility points. I can think of a particular practitioner in my field who is quite smart and good at what she does but made the choice to go all in on fashion and generally looking good (which, at a certain age, usually causes one to start looking frozen, and not good). Her name is often met with an eye roll. It's not fair but women are still judged on appearance more than men are. And if you're career is premised on being perceived as smart, experienced, and having good judgment, being too fashionable can undermine that perception.

Anonymous wrote:I will admit to being basic because I don’t care about fashion and do not have a huge budget for clothes (hello, mortgage, 529, student loans, etc.). That said, I always do my hair and makeup and think women who don’t look juvenile. What I do not do is buy all the brands that so many of these people do. I purposely avoid Le Pliage (I get almost a visceral reaction when I see them), Hunter, Tory Burch, Lululemon, etc. There are so many ways to dress without showing off a brand and I really scratch my head at all the conformity.