Actually yes I am. English is my second Language also (working on my 3rd). I really don't know what the hell you are talking about with expressionism and all that so I can't argue. All I am saying is a style of clothing should not be making you "repugnant" because at the end of the day do your clothes REALLY say everything about you?
Your clothes and you in it say if you're dressed well or not. I think my use of expressionism and formalism were properly explained in the post, if you need some additional information I suggest reading a little bit about art, not knowing what "formalism" means is roughly the equivalent of not knowing what capitalism is. You know that much about economics so learn the very basics of art criticism and aesthetics. If you're not ready to do that much why would anyone care about what you think REGARDING AESTHETICS. I'm not judging you on other topics, not judging your character either.
the gaudy chain with the ornaments serving no particular purpose besides flash
Will try to have some outfit discussion, haha ... I actually meant to discuss this, but people here wear things simply for the sake of ornamentation all the time. Is Kunk's dick so large that he needs a 50" rise? Does mellow have some type of psoriasis that requires him to wear his clothes just slightly loose enough as to not irritate his delicate skin? No hate to either of these two -- they're both great -- and it's fine if you think the chain is gaudy and tacky, it is. I just find that "it's just for aesthetics/ornamentation!" a really lame argument to make when discussing style. Sometimes it's more subtle -- such as mellow's case, where his "anti-fit" works for him -- other times it's less subtle -- such as a drop crotch -- and sometimes it's screaming loud, like a bunch of chains with dangling metal cubes. Doing something for aesthetic value only should not be considered a negative.
Please explain why we should live (or that SF should operate) according to your own subjective standards. And poorly-thought-out standards, I'd argue. Those connotations are extremely outdated. It's like saying we should not use certain words because of their Old English meanings. It's like the dippy grad student who eschews khakis because of they're like, military, and like, a symbol of the patriarchy...man.
Because lighting will come down from heaven and strike you down. How fucking stupid are you? I'm arguing for taste and what I find of value and not of value regarding the aesthetics of clothes. It's a clothing forum, I'm not forcing anyone to agree with me. This is a place to discuss style, clothes, shopping, whatever and I'm discussing it. I have opinions on things, backed by a certain knowledge and background and I share it. Did you think I was about to send the fashion police to shoot you down because you dress like shit? This isn't the www.letsdebatechildmolestation.com forum. No children will be hurt if you don't agree with me, the world will merely stay a little less stylish.
Jesus, what an inevitably disastrous challenge concept that one was. I'd much rather & read this. Much more entertaining than past "Pop your collar brah you look like a fag" crew vs. "Why can't you appreciate my artistic sensitivities regarding clothing" crew throwdowns.
Not very profitably, is what I've been saying. Or do you think equating those who wear rugby shirts to rapists is a good way to go about it? EDIT: Please don't take this to mean people aren't interested in your ideas.