Why I Stopped Dressing My Truth

This post uses affiliate links.

Before I begin, I think some people who are really into DYT would say that I never did in the first place. And they may be right–I never went full-on on what would be a recognizable T3 look.

And there’s a couple of reasons for that. The first is that some of it just isn’t my style. I knew from past experience that some things wouldn’t flatter me, and some of it, I just don’t care for the aesthetic. The other is that some things, like the jewelry, are literally too big and heavy for me. I have tiny earlobes, small wrists. I have ordered a couple of pairs of studs from the DYT store, and they are always larger than I expected when I receive them. They show the earrings on a ear on the website, but my ears are just that much smaller.

I don’t think I’ve typed myself incorrectly. My movement is very Type 3. But T3 fashion doesn’t necessarily express what I want to express. While theoretically, it should be a looser framework into which you can inject your personal style, T3 generally looks earthier than I go.

Whenever I look at other systems, I have to say that I just always come back to Kibbe. Whatever else I’m thinking about with style at the time (and I’m writing about this right now for the new workbook), Flamboyant Gamine is always the sun that any other style system floats around. If a system isn’t compatible with FG, it isn’t going to work for me.

I tried to combine them for a while… judging both the yin/yang balance of an item on me and whether or not it fit the T3 keywords. But in the end, this just felt too stifling. In addition, my style has started to shift to where “edgy” has taken a less prominent role. So while I previously liked the edgy aspects of T3, it no longer feels like who I am. I could definitely not wear T3 jewelry, and I don’t want to cut my hair short in a T3 way; I like my current haircut, which is probably a 1/4 or a 4/1 cut.

I still really appreciate the self-exploration aspects of Energy Profiling. I just no longer feel like the aesthetic aspects of it fit who I am. I feel like Flamboyant Gamine expresses my essence really well, and I am happier dressing that way than I am when I try to add T3 into the mix.

For instance, this dress is on my list… there’s no way it would fit T3. But it would be a dress I would feel comfortable and confident in.

Martha Dress, Boden, $150

Martha Dress, Boden, $150

Have you tried Dressing Your Truth? Do you find that your energy type’s clothing suits you, or have you found that other style systems work better for you?

Like Style Syntax on Facebook for updates and extra content!

9 Comments on Why I Stopped Dressing My Truth

  1. Caro
    March 4, 2018 at 7:55 pm

    Yes I tried it a few years ago & was typed as a T1 by Anne. The DYT aesthetic for older T1s is so unappealing to me that I find it hard to take them seriously. I agree it is too simplistic; since Kibbe nearly all image/colour systems seem box-like & simplistic though.

    Reply
    • stylesyntax
      March 5, 2018 at 5:28 pm

      <3

      Reply
  2. Nancy
    March 5, 2018 at 10:48 am

    I tried DYT as well. Carol typed me as a T4/T1. From the energy profile perspective I felt this was a good fit and I use those ideas still when trying to understand other people. But the color and styling advice threw me into a period of great confusion.

    I always have worn dark Autumn colors and have been consistently typed in that category – must recently through 12 Blueprints. I have a yangN body type. I’ve never felt as uncomfortable as I did trying to dress as aT4. I felt stuff, rigid and fake. Most of those colors wore me. If someone made a comment on what I was wearing I noticed it was directed at a color or a specific item, never a “wow you look great today.”

    Reply
  3. Gina
    March 7, 2018 at 1:46 am

    I’m always in a state of confusion because I was typed so many things. I always go back to dyt because it was my first one. Sometimes I feel that it’s too warm for me. I have a lot of faith in 12 blueprints draping results when I see them on others. And I guess for myself too. Not sure how I feel about dyt in a daily basis. It feels aesthetically opposite of what I genuinely like.

    Reply
  4. L Lee
    March 24, 2018 at 4:22 pm

    Love your blog! Thank you! Relate very much to your journey. I too Couldn’t relate in a total “ahh hah! – that is IT!” way to Kibbe. I think it is due to my 5.0 height and felt more like a dramatic Romanic Ingenue than anything – more Marilyn Monroe-ish, but for a 5.0″ woman, there appeared to be no place for that in his work.

    With Dressing Your Truth (as a Type 1), it felt too “cutesy” and one-dimensional. It was a gift in the sense of feeling the energies of the different types, but at the same time, something felt totally lacking so tracked Jennifer Butler down and did a session with her. No help on the secondary, but did put me as an Early Spring with Nymph/ Angel. (didn’t know what that meant at all and time ran out and couldn’t ask).

    Still lost, next was the journey to see if maybe the secondary had a role to play in expressing something real and genuine. Very frustrating that I was unable to isolate even after buying Jane Sergerstoms original book on the subject, so I studied Fashion Feng Shui to see if they had answers. Dead end there too.

    But Back to DYT for a moment … (call me a rebel) … I have to say that I have a sort of “conscientious objector” view with Carol that has been difficult since the beginning. I was turned on to the early work of Jane Segerstrom and it is almost totally identical! I agree with others that Carol’s calling this ‘Her work” is a bit ….well,…..??? … fill in the blank.

    Thanks to your Blog I finally was able to read Caygill’s book without investing a small fortune. (Thank you!!!) Her section on “Special Types” felt like the clouds parting and was waiting for angels to sing! Ha! However, finding the descriptions vague, I tracked John Kitchener down to do a session and did one with him last week and it turns out that he isn’t into the “special types” at all, however, he did say that in the Kibbe work, I would be a Soft Gamine…. a bit of progress!

    Still a bit disappointed in figuring out this “thing” that wants to express in an authentic way; I’m now investigating Fantastical Beauty! Was thrilled to see you have already explored these waters!

    It would be interesting to see if we could get petite women together to see if we can crack the Gaygill’s code (in a functional and clear way), of how to see and therefore interpret what she was seeing in the fantastical nature of petite women!

    Thank you again for your blog! What a fun adventure this is! <3

    Reply
  5. L Lee
    March 24, 2018 at 5:24 pm

    P.S….. If this helps anyone … John Kitchener said the reason this has been so difficult in my case is that I have 2 secondaries – (Winter and Fall). This confirmed what I was seeing with the Fashion Feng Shui system where I related to Fire, Water, and Earth.

    Also, when I asked Jennifer Butler how she would dress me, she said “biker chick” and “like Charlize Theron.” Not sure how Nymph/Angel fits into that ???

    The confusion in all of this is that I was born a toe-head brown-eyed blonde, and in Caygill’s work, she said all brown eye’d springs are Robin but that the special types co-mingle – (to use my own words).

    Anyway … love to hear your thoughts since it looks like you are in the same boat. haha! <3

    Reply
    • stylesyntax
      March 24, 2018 at 6:53 pm

      Kitchener understands Kitchener… he doesn’t understand Kibbe. 🙂 Kibbe puts people into one of four seasons, and any season can be any Image ID.

      I wonder why you haven’t looked at TR… TR is actually far smaller and far less yang than the Internet shows it to be. TRs are actually described as *smaller* than SGs in the original Metamorphosis book, believe it or not! If your bone structure is wider, then R itself would certainly work. If it’s narrow, then TR. SG, I couldn’t say, but if you’re relating more to Marilyn, I’d stay with the yin-dominant categories… SG is almost half yang. R, TR, and SG are *all* going to be small in stature. One of the issues is that the people who stole Kibbe’s system have made TR especially far more yang than it is (most of the celebrities they “type” as their TR equivalent are FN, FG, etc.), and then SG is presented as being entirely yin when it actually almost equal, as I said. 🙂

      The Four Types have been around forever. I don’t really put much stock into everything about Jane Segerstorm, blah blah blah. It’s such an old idea. Carol is just the best at marketing.

      If you are very interested in Caygill, I would go to a Caygill analyst… There is a group on Facebook called Suzanne Caygill Color Legacy, and you can find many analysts there.

      Reply
  6. Cristina
    March 25, 2018 at 11:11 am

    For similar reasons I could never get beyond the energetic pieces of DYT. I found that layer very validating and useful and do think of it in terms of my self presentation. But, verbatim it just doesn’t work for me. (I think I’m 4/2)

    Reply
  7. Shawna
    May 29, 2018 at 11:16 am

    I have a love-to-hate sort of reaction to Dressing Your Truth. I think that the simplicity attracts me somewhat but from the first time I encountered it I knew it was basically garbage. It’s too limited and I just don’t buy the idea of the colour palette being matched to ‘energy’ rather than the actual colours of the person. My colouring is purely warm but if I am anything in terms of energy and personality I am a 4. Out of curiosity I have tried out all of the types and none work for me without so much tweaking they are simply not the types anymore. All of this is personal but it is also my opinion that a large number of the makeovers are quite awful. Add to this the dubiousness of Carol’s claims and the wacky new age stuff and it’s all just a great big NO.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Privacy Preference Center

Necessary

Advertising

Analytics

Other