web analytics

Outfits Guys Secretly Hope You’ll Wear? Not My Guy (I Think)

June 20, 2011 · 21 comments

in Personal Finance

I think many, many years ago, I had a subscription to the magazine Redbook.  My subscription was short-lived because I found I wasn’t really reading the magazine when it showed up, and honestly, many of the articles seemed pretty shallow to me.

Recently though, I was perusing the internet, and came across an article from Redbook called “5 Outfits Guys Secretly Hope You’ll Wear“.  In my mind, I was guessing that most outfits would be featuring low-cut tops, short skirts, and possibly stiletto heels.  What I found interesting was not necessarily what the article said men want women to wear, but the examples they gave of said outfits.  For example:

“Unbaggy Sweats and a Touch-Me Tee”.  I must admit, I still am not sure what a ‘touch me tee’ is, but then again, I have never claimed to be on the cutting-edge of fashion.  Regardless, guess how much it would cost if you were to replicate this highly desired look of what seems to be a simple outfit?  $207.50, just for the pants and ‘Tee’.  Yes, the touch-me tee is made of cashmere and costs $158.  The not-baggy-sweats are $49.50.  To complete this look though, you can also wear a ‘Spike Ring’ for $90 and a triple-wrap bracelet that you should wear as a necklace instead for $89. (Why not just wear a necklace?)

The question is, does my husband want me to spend $386.50 to be all glammed up in my sweats, T-shirt, ring, and bracelet-necklace?  I am guessing not.  However, there are other options…

The Pencil Skirt and Classic Heels???

So, according to the 50 man focus group, mini skirts don’t leave enough to the imagination, and men love a gal in a pencil skirt.   That is one choice I would have never guessed.  One guy actually said he likes the sexy librarian look as they look ‘flirtatious and inviting’, and could be ‘taken home to Mama’.  Ok, whatever.  Anyway, to pull off this preferred look, it will only set you back $958- including shoes, of course.  (But not jewelry.)  Again, cashmere is the fabric of choice, as the model was wearing a cashmere cardigan that costs $240.  Under the cardigan, the sexy librarian needs to wear a $322 lace tunic.  The skirt is the most reasonably-priced item at $98.  Pick up some pumps for $298, and you will ALMOST be all set.

To complete the look, you should also accessorize!!   Purchase a quartz pendant necklace for $695, a watch for $275, and some eyewear for $299, and your man will be thrilled!

Why Such Expensive Clothes?

There are 3 more outfits, all pretty much insanely priced.  If a magazine is going to suggest an outfit, why would the model wear clothes that are generally not affordable for the typical reader?  Do I really need to pick up some eyewear I don’t need so I can take on the look of a sexy librarian?  Must I always drape myself in cashmere?  Who is going to hand-wash all these man-pleasing outfits?  Can I survive having a wardrobe consisting of only 5 outfits, many of which will either drying flat or at the dry cleaner?  I may need multiple versions of each outfit.

This article just reinforced the reasons why I do not subscribe to Redbook…

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader. Thanks for visiting!!!

{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }

101 Centavos June 20, 2011 at 7:26 am

Not me, either. My imagination for Mrs. 101 is limited to heels and short skirts, and it’s not much of a secret. 🙂 I think Walmart or Target has those for way less than $386.


Kris June 20, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Well, then you have conflicting opinions from the extensive 50 man focus book that Redbook consulted. Pencil skirts are the only acceptable type of skirt because you can take that girl home to Mom!


101 Centavos June 21, 2011 at 7:29 am

“50 man focus group”, huh?
They must all be part of the Redbook staff.


Nicole June 20, 2011 at 7:35 am

Obviously you don’t handwash things you’re only going to wear once!

It’s always funny when they do the “get this expensive look for cheap” features and it is never cheap.


Kris June 20, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Oh I always love those articles too. “Look just like Angelina Jolie with this knock-off outfit from Sears…”. Quite often I think “the outfits don’t even look that similar!”


MoneyCone June 20, 2011 at 11:19 am

You can’t be a librarian and dress up like a sexy librarian! The salary simply does not permit! Oh, the irony! 🙂


Kris June 20, 2011 at 1:58 pm

I couldn’t even afford the unnecessary eyewear! I would have to pick up some plastic Harry Potter costume glasses.


Money Reasons June 20, 2011 at 11:53 am

I saw that article link on MSN, and I couldn’t resist clicking on it. After arriving at the site, it was obvious that the article was written by a female. While the outfits weren’t horrible, they were also pretty typical and not really what most males would wish their significant others would wear (okay, maybe the last undies outfit would fly).

And the prices of each outfit would make me freak out! I hope other women don’t fall into the expensive trap of believing that article.


Kris June 20, 2011 at 1:57 pm

So, eliminating outfit number 5, which outfit would you have chosen MR? Or, what outfit would you devise if it was not included in the article?


Linda June 20, 2011 at 12:51 pm

The magazine is getting paid to promote those clothes. And while the typical reader may not be able to afford them or will not buy them, they may look for comparable knock-offs at the discount clothing stores. Either way the result is the same: more clothes sold.

While I love the idea of a pencil skirt and cardigan, I don’t think it would look the same without the heels, which I just could not wear.


Kris June 20, 2011 at 1:57 pm

I agree that the magazine is most likely getting compensated. However, I feel it takes away from the integrity of the article when they model unaffordable clothes to go along with their advice. Wait, did I just say that Redbook would have integrity otherwise? Someone smack me.


Suba June 20, 2011 at 1:48 pm

My man will be mortified if I bought clothes for $1000 and I am sure he will faint if I said the entire $1000 I spent on just one outfit…


Kris June 20, 2011 at 1:56 pm

I would just be thinking of how I could fill up a whole closet for that same amount of money. The downside? My husband might secretly not like my outfits! 🙂


krantcents June 20, 2011 at 2:03 pm

I don’t believe this was generated by a 50 man focus group! At first, getting rid of the baggy sweat pants made sense, but a nice tee (cotton) and well fitting jeans can work well for me. It almost sounds like a paid article by the advertiser!


Crystal @ BFS June 20, 2011 at 2:16 pm

Hahaha, I saw that article but didn’t click on it. My man likes seeing me in clothes, out of clothes, between the two…in short, guys are picturing us naked no matter what we are wearing, so $400 sweats are probably a bad idea. 🙂

To be completely honest though, if we were asking our significant others what their favorite clothes on us were, my husband has said “Those jeans that ummm…well fit really well, you know…your ‘butt’ jeans and a shirt that doesn’t block the view”. Hehehehe. Simple creatures…


Crystal @ BFS June 20, 2011 at 2:18 pm

Oh, and the butt jeans were $15 at Walmart my blouses run $10-$30. Total cost of my husband’s favorite outfit on me is about $25-$45. 🙂


Kris June 20, 2011 at 2:27 pm

But what about your accessories? Non prescription glasses? Spike ring? (Whatever that is.)

I agree, guys are pretty simple. Like they even know the term ‘touch me tee’? How dumb.


Squirrelers June 20, 2011 at 3:08 pm

That article from Redbook overcomplicated things. Did they interview men, or do any research with men when compling those suggestions? Most guys are pretty simple creatures, and most wouldn’t be too keen on their wife/gf spending a fortune on clothes either. I don’t believe it must take a fortune to look nice and bring out the best in oneself from a self-confidence standpoint. But again, I’m one of the simple creatures I referred to:)


First Gen American June 21, 2011 at 9:36 am

The Redbook article is utter garbage. I can’t name a single heterosexual male that’s ever noticed my jewelry or shoes.

I’ve actually found the opposite to be true that men who have really beautiful wives would prefer them to dress down vs attract even more attention than they already do just being their gorgeous selves.


Amber June 27, 2011 at 9:43 pm

a.) “touch-me tee” – T-shirt that is slightly big, soft, but still shows some figure. So named because the material to boyfriends and guys looks easy to put their hands up or remove for an afternoon quickie. It takes about 10 minutes to find alternate versions , just look a little. I got a similar one on Victoria’s Secret online – Tax, shipping, shirt – 22 dollars. It’s easier than you think.

b.) Pencil skirt – Once in awhile a guy wants to be teased. Hence a nice, tight, longer skirt. It lets the guys imagination go to work as well as providing a challenge – seeing what it really is like under the skirt. Again look online, and you’ll find one for around 40 in under 10 minutes, a bit longer to find a cheaper one.

c.) The accessories – Someone commentted that guys prefer dress-down. They do! Notice how most the girls wore small or simple accessories? Again – Knock off. It just takes a little practice

The conclusion? – After spending my short life around guys and pretty much getting their opinions on multiple sexual questions, the conclusion is – Redbook knew what they were doing. The only difference between these outfits and a short skirt is these ones need some confidence or they are boring. It’s still all about sex, just in a different light. There are alot of guys who actually think these are sexy. Since it is a magazine all the clothes are overpriced. Duh. That’s why girls learned the art of bargain and look-alikes. Guys care about the look, not the designer. Get the same outfit cheaper, rock some confidence and see if your guy doesn’t notice.


Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: