Out with the new and in with the old…consignment is the new black, people!  LAB Consignment has officially gone physical with the launch of their new store located in the back of Silver Falls Vintage (15 Ossington Ave).

LAB Consignment is your golden ticket if you are looking to purchase gently used vintage & designer women’s clothing, shoes and handbags.  The true beauty of LAB Consignment is that they truly have something for everyone: affordable vintage pieces for those thrifty fashionistas (can I get a hell ya!) – as well as designer labels for the less price sensitive stylistas out there.

If there is one variable that differentiates LAB Consignment from its competitors, it is LAB’s focus on what is hot in fashion today, a.k.a they’re trend-centric.  We’re talking bandage dresses, blazers, oxfords, rompers and of course scrunchies – to name a select few.  Rest assured LAB’s merchandise bares no resemblance to the more-than-sometimes smelly & sweat-ridden Mariposa tanks you may find at your local thrift shop.

This certified StylistaFashionsita was lucky enough to have the opportunity to interview the founder of LAB Consignment, Ms. Lauren Baker, about the ins & outs of her hit consignment shop:

Stylista Fashionista: Where do you get your inventory?

Lauren Baker: All of my merchandise is consigned from friends of mine who are actors, musicians, stylists and designers – or from friends of friends.

Stylista Fashionista: Who is the typical LAB Consignment customer? Your target market?

Lauren Baker: It’s pretty vast actually.  My customers range from the vintage shopper to the fashionista who wants to be able to afford designer labels but cant necessarily pay Holt Renfrew prices – Instead they will but it here.  I really aim to please everyone and it seems to be working!  I feel that I have something for everybody.

Stylista Fashionista: What designer labels do you carry?

Lauren Baker: Marc Jacobs, Herve Leger, Vanessa Bruno, Dian Von Furstenbrg, Chanel.  We also carry designer denim labels such as Habitual, J Brand, Acne, APC and Robert Rodriguez.

Stylista Fashionista: How often do you replenish your inventory?

Lauren Baker: It really varies as I accept inventory on a strictly seasonal basis.  On average I get new items in weekly or sometimes a few times a week.  For example, last week I had a consigner bring in 150 pieces ranging from shoes to denim – so at this point I am not accepting any more summer items.  However, I will begin accepting Fall merchandise in August.

Stylista Fashionista: Do your items ever go on sale?

Lauren Baker: LAB Consignment doesn’t hold traditional sales.  The way it works is once an item hits the floor it is stamped with a date.  After 30 days, the item’s price will be reduced by 20% and then after 60 days it will be reduced by 40%.  So basically things are almost always on sale.

Stylista Fashionista: I understand you do not currently carry menswear.  Is there a possibility of expanding into menswear?

Lauren Baker: Oh yes absolutely!  Bringing in menswear is definitely part of the long term plan down the road when I have a bigger space.

For more information on this fab boutique hit up www.labconsignment.com

Happy Consigning people!

words and photographs by: Carine Rozen

Unless you’ve been under a rock for the last few years, you’re probably aware of some of the following: a) American Apparel makes clothing; b) it’s not an American Apparel ad if it doesn’t have butts; followed (natch) by c) Dov Charney likes hot, scantily-clad chicks.

What with all the drama that’s been surrounding the disclosure of the clothing retailer’s controversial hiring tactics, it seems like everyone is up in arms and wants to be the first to call out the company that sells those ubiquitously colourful hoodies with the white strings.

Gawker has been leading the coverage of AA’s “New Look” controversy for awhile—they’ve managed to obtain a smorgasbord of internal memos and guidelines instructing new and existing staff on how to be “on-brand” and represent the store’s ‘new direction,’ described in one email as “Classy-Vintage-Chique [sic]-Late 80′s-Early 90′s-Ralph Lauren-Vogue-Nautical-High end brand,” with the ultimate aim of abandoning the day-glo popularity that helped it soar over the last few years. I guess they cornered the market on rainbow-bright street wear; now Mr. Charney’s set his sights on a “more sophisticated, expensive, classy direction.” Ugh, right.

I guess that means this is out.

To ensure that new hires and current staff remain “on-brand,” store staff will have photos taken of them and sent off for review. All new hires and promotions require this cyber-approval—you’ve got to make the cut before you’re eligible for a pay-check.  Gawker and The Cut blog did some sleuthing and turned up this sound-bite from an insider—“Your looks determine your position and pay rate, not how effective you are at your job”—which, of course, is totally sound business practice for a company that’s on the verge of defaulting its creditors with huge losses of profitability. Of course! Pushing a more expensive and exclusionary aesthetic and letting go of fugglier staff boasting “just ok” work ethics is totally just like scooping money with both fists—pay fewer people less and SIMULTANEOUSLY make people spend more money. Oh Dov, you’re such a mastermind.

This is his job?

Regardless of the company’s absolutely brilliant business plan, I guess a lot of people are getting their (American Apparel on-brand) bloomers in a twist. Gawker managed to get their paws on a full and complete “New Standards” manual that admittedly does seem pretty restricting, but I don’t quite think I’m ready to call foul play and join with the ranks calling AA out for being racist and discriminatory (a quick glance at any of the comments on the articles posted will assure you that the internet is totes giving Charney a mean stink-eye). And while anonymous sources everywhere are perfectly willing to claim that they were told they were “too heavy for that crop top” (seriously…) and that AA only hires skinny white chicks, the fact of the matter is that for all the inappropriate personal stuff that Dov’s had on his legal plate, so far they haven’t had to shell out, oh, I don’t know, $50 million dollars in restitution and had to establish an office for diversity training, like one other notoriously select clothing brand. There’s a dress code at every job, and some are policed more puritanically than others. After the initial story hit, The Cut bloggers spoke to a bunch of different clothing retailers re: their hiring practices and dress codes, and the results are fairly innocuous and predictable: people get hired based on the image of the shop they are going to get hired at. This is a purely business-buiding strategy that’s been at work, blatantly, in our advertisements for decades; AA on-the-floor sales girls are just walking billboards to sell you the duds they’re wearing—if they’re hot and svelte and look like they belong in an AA ad alongside Dov’s ever-changing facial hair, so much the better.

I totally want to buy that... err...

But on the other hand, while I didn’t go to each of the brand’s seven GTA locations to count caucasians versus non-caucasians, the raunchy, Helvetica-on-white, sexualized (and mostly unclothed) print ads don’t always paint AA a consistent shade of pale. What I’m mostly saying is, crap, I agree with Dov. I don’t mind walking into a shop and seeing clean faces wearing the essentially basic pieces in interesting ways—there’s a certain amount of escapism inherent in consumerism. It’s not accidental that the brand image is so structured, nor that the ads are made to resemble porn. I’m not saying I’m 100% with a company who very frankly states that “plus-sized clothing is not our demographic” (source)—a comment and attitude that seems to have forced Dov into a little bit of back-pedalling in a recent interview—but I do applaud them for being relatively transparent when it comes to dealing with it. In the back of your head you can’t help but listen to your own private Dov and go “so they hire hot people? I don’t understand the problem.”

I feel like this whole thing would totally fizzle if, to continue the trend of full-disclosure, the brand would come out and start calling its sales associates “models”—what they essentially are. Would anyone bat an eyelash then?

Apparently, flip-flops are a contentious issue. I guess most people don’t think about them that much. They’re a commonly acquired, cheaply-made staple for warm months that don’t really require much contemplation for the average individual.

The debate extends from fetishization (for all you foot-worshippers out there), to a pretty sizeable contingent of those who think that flip-flops just don’t make sense. I decidedly take up the call-to-arms for the latter, firmly believing that a) flip-flops are gross, b) feet are gross, c) dudes’ feet are especially gross, and therefore pretty much no one should wear them—and that those who wear them most frequently should often-times be the first ones to abstain (especially dudes).

Uh, sure there are exceptions. Laid-back, California coast attitudes pervade year-round for the Hollister beefcake. Some dudes can wear a pair, where it’s warm, and still look like they mean business—and they don’t look like douches. I guess.

I don’t know. I guess I feel like flip-flops are stupid off the beach, out of the shower room, or on the feet of pretty much anyone, male or female. And I guess that’s not a popular attitude, given how frequently one is confronted with an awful pair of feet shod in nothing but a piece of plastic and a toe thong.

D'aww.

Whatever.

Lucky for me, I guess, these are a perpetual staple for warmer-weather, and there are millions of awful looking renditions worn proudly by college co-eds, mother-and-daughter mall-shoppers, and patios in the summer. You can get them Ugg-ed, whether you’re a lady or a guy, perpetually-beloved and berated Ed Hardy makes them, you can get rhine-stoned Havaianas, if you’re so inclined. Women’s flip-flops are especially bad, but at least, perhaps, the wearer will have put on a coat of nail-polish or whatever, and generally have taken pains to make sure that their feet didn’t look like they’d been conveniently neglected for about the last million years.

I guess I just don’t get the appeal of sliding into a pair of flip-flops. I don’t see why you wouldn’t rather, you know, actually put on real shoes. I don’t see why toes need that much freedom. But I also don’t understand why Tevas still exist, I don’t understand why someone would wear these, and I don’t see why it makes sense to let bad boys like these out in daylight:

Long and short of it, for gents and lasses, is to crush your feet into a pair of pretty shoes pretty much all the time, especially if the shoes are prettier than your feet. And if you don’t, just keep them out of my face.

Wikipedia Definition: Sunglasses or sun glasses are a form of protective eyewear designed primarily to prevent bright sunlight and high-energy visible light from damaging or discomforting the eyes. They can also function as a visual aid, as many glasses or “spectacles”  exist featuring coloured, polarized or darkened lenses. In the early 20th century they were also known as sun cheaters (cheaters being an American slang term for glasses).

-Ray Ban Wayfarer: can neves go wrong

The Bad

These days glasses, in addition to being functional, are also used as a form of expression, or to make a fashion statement. That being said what kind of fashion statement are the people shown below trying to make? Check these guys out, I mean throw in Dr. Drew and Jersey Shore might as well be Fashion Rehab with no results, not a means for uh, “inspiration”.

like….really? You can’t trust a guy who wears white sunglasses.

It’s beyond me why some of these sunglasses are still in production. Now that the sun is beaming, everyone has brought out their shades and some of the fashionably challenged masses are walking around like they are ready to watch a 3D IMAX movie or something.  And the worst part is most of the douche’s have girlfriends, ladies- it’s up to you to stop your man from spending 200 bones on a pair of swarovski incrusted ED Hardy glasses.

I just threw up a little in my mouth thinking about it.

Fellas please leave the diamond-incrusted attire for the ladies. Thanx.
And next, if your still stuck in that 80’s nu rave/neon 90’s thing, please get out! It was cool in that era and mabes like 2 years ago, but now not so much. Like yeah I’ll admit there alright from time to time, but when you look like a character that just stepped off the set of Hot Tub Time Machine then something’s gotta change.

I mean c’mon bro, just because you look like a transformer doesn’t mean Megan Fox is going to nail you…ever.

Whoa there Corey Hart

Unless your black and name is Hollywood (a la Mannequin) do not wear these…ever.

And if your still wearing this style, STOP! It’s over…just stop.

When it comes to glasses it really is one of the most important accessories. It’s on your face. And we all have to look at you. So be kind and don’t be chinsey when purchasing. And for those of you that opt for the “bargain bin”  because “all your glasses always break” on you, it’s because they’re shit. Really, when u spend 5 bones on glasses, what were you expecting?

ANYWAYS, I think I got my point across, now here’s some DO’s for sunglasses this summer.

The Good

OBVI! Leave it to Gags! Looks amaze!

Ksubi sunglasses can hide your eyes and deflect the sun and the glare from ordinary people who want to catch a look. Around $200-$450 for Ksubi’s and luckily most trend setting stores on Queen West are carrying it now.

Check it out www.ksubi.com

(PS It’s effing Tony from Skins)

Now if your one who appreciates potent design, while being confident about your own style, the new collection by Tom Ford is for you. Sexy and sophisticated but, not too much to overshadow the wearer’s personality. Available at Holt Renfrew, starting at $249.99 and up.
-Check it out www.tomford.com

Ok, guys. I have a confession to make—I own a pair of sweatpants. In fact, I own several. One pair are the comfiest and softest pair of worn-in, forest green American Apparel ones that have seen me through many a sick-day, mental-health-day, or lie-on-the-couch-and-surf-the-web-day.

That being said, they’ve never actually been in contact with direct sunlight in the six or so years I’ve been wearing them. I insist on keeping it that way—and for good reason.

I don’t care how many fashion blogs are trying to tell me that it looks chic and smart. They are, in the immortal words of Seinfeld, a very effective way to communicate: “I give up. I can’t compete in normal society. I’m miserable, so I might as well be comfortable.” Jerry’s right. it should seen like a no-brainer: jogging pants wearers so obviously don’t give a shit about their own aesthetic wellbeing that we ought not to acknowledge their crimes against society, even as they are imprinting the image of soggy, sweat-ridden nether parts onto our stylistic memory.

Seriously, guys, thanks.

So for the longest time, it only made sense to think of sweat-pants in public as worn by high school girls (with Uggs), high school boys (with trainers), college kids (with anything they could find), moms who decided not to step into their Mom-Jeans, and old men whose elasticized waistband barely clung to their giant beergut. Or, legitimately, joggers and those who sweat, wearing them to or from a sweaty activity. Dudes in sweatpants can be chalked up to comfort and sloth—they “offered the non-judgmental comfort of flannel pajamas while creating the illusion that aerobic activity was on the horizon,” writes Sean Macaulay over at The Daily Beast. Ditto with high school girls—once emblazoned with words across the droopy, shapeless butts, they acquired instant, lazy, comfort-appeal. Whatever. At least we didn’t have to deal with reeeeeeal people trying to pull these things off.

courtesy of style.com

Alexander Wang S/S 2010 and LAMB S/S 2010

courtesy of style.com

Alexander Wang Resort 2010

So. What gives? What’s with this whole jogging-pants-on-the-runway deal? Wang did it, L.A.M.B. did it, Marc Jacobs did it, Isabel Marant did it, rag & bone did it, Yigal Azrouël did it, etc, etc, etc. How did sweat-pants turn into “the most stylish things you can wear“? Why the hell do people thing they can be worn with heels? I seriously don’t get the irony of a sartorial statement that evokes images of sweaty balls or chafing thighs even on the most female, attractive, and svelte. At best. At worst we’re thinking of the mysteriously stained iterations worn by kid brothers, or the urban deranged. Really.

the urban deranged

courtesy of me.

And it’s not just a localized, mini-trend for the fashion elite. (Though, it kind of is.) Check out any major retailer. Alongside the familiar jersey versions we’re used to seeing and can’t get out of our heads, pretty much everyone has jumped on this “athletic-inspired” bandwagon. A cursory search of fashion-forward retailer ASOS will leave you replete with a smorgasbord of options. A different retailer shows this pair, even daring to go so far as to call its cropped, cargo style “absolutely chic”. Fast fashion shops have moved them out of sportswear and put them front and center with the rest of their on-trend items—H&M, Zara, F21 are all guilty. And then there are a plethora of websites and blogs that purport to be your sartorial guides, with step-by-step instructions for the fashion inept, or pictorial aids for the fashion forward.

photos courtesy of www.garancedore.fr/en

I don’t know. I can’t deny the comfort of a well-worn jersey anything—I can even get behind some of the subtler manifestations of the athletic trend. But I don’t give a shit who made the pair of $1000 sweatpants that every was blogging about earlier this year—you can pair them with a pair of superhigh heels and I still think that you look like someone who should be featured on peopleofwalmart.com

Remember these? (courtesy of peopleofwalrmart.com)

I guess I can always chuckle to myself that the non-strategic walking (jogging?) sweatpants disasters are unwittingly taking style cues from a dude called Wang.

I’ll leave you with a parting nugget of wisdom: it’s got to be bad news if even jeggings are a step up.

Words by: Cat

Hourglass pear shape whateves, I respect the curvy women out there, but frankly if I wanted to see curvy women I would gawk at Kirstie Ally’s fucking Twitter all day. There’s an old saying that goes, “You can never be too thin or too rich”, quoted by basically everyone from Paris Hilton, Kate Moss to Nikki Sixx. Well my friends it is entirely true. And lets be honest if the Vera doesn’t fit you, well then, you alter yourself to fit the Vera.

For instance: the Kardashian sisters designed a recent line for BeBe, a medium is a small a small is an extra small, and well…etcetera, etcetera. We’re in a generation where if your not skinny well then lets face it, your not that cool. It’s clearly obvious that we are more attracted and drawn to thinner more fit people than larger/curvier people…clearly. And when everyone and their mom has and effing diet book or diet plan out there, how hard can it be.

I’m not saying starve yourself. Come on, enjoy those amazing pizzas from big slice, those poutine’s from Poutini’s, but if you’re going to indulge in such things, then you’re going to need some heavy workouts. If that’s not your style than do it my way and skip 3 or 4 meals and DANCE, DANCE, DANCE the carbs away.

I’m not saying saying drop everything and become a total skelator, but really you’re not the only one that has to look at yourself. Just love yourself and the skin your in and don’t stretch it out. And if that doesn’t make you feel any better, this will…SPOTTED KE$HA…TOTES GAINED A FEW POUNDS!

Words: Gay Rob