or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

whnay.'s good taste thread - Page 461

post #6901 of 13589
I don't mean to piss on your sand castle, but if you think style & taste are subjective or personal, aren't you in the wrong thread?
post #6902 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivar View Post

Don't be daft. It's a perfectly legitimate analogy.

oh i see, im daft for not agreeing with someone else. that is perfectly ok. good to know.

i will spell it out then.

the swastika has become the symbol for the nazis, who systematically and brutally tortured and murdered millions and millions of people in an attempt to purify the human race. that is about a great an oversimplification as i can think of, but this is not the place for as essay on nazis.

that being said, that is the connotation of the swastika. for me, its a heavy word, not one that is thrown about lightly, simply to make an example of why wearing a yellow cap is unstylish and should be avoided by people who dont want the association that comes with it.

the more that that term, and terms like that, are used as frivolous anecdotes, the cheaper the meaning of the word. that is something that many many people find to be abhorrent. its not about the analogy being non-sensical, its about having the respect not throw around words that literally make people cringe when they hear it, as it may be a reminder to them of their own family members that were senselessly murdered by the truck full. its a word that belongs imo, in the most serious of relevant conversations alone.

that is my stance, and its the last i will say on the topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bboysdontcryy View Post

Because that's the main point, and you keep bringing it up so I have to deal with it every time you bring it up?

You quoted me and impute meanings I don't mean to what I wrote, so won't I have to clarify what I mean by putting what I said in context? Or should I let you stretch what I mean?

no, you keep bringing it up. i said it once, and apologized for it many times. not only that, i have even explicitly stated that i understand why you prefer to avoid certain associations, and respect it, merely that they are not associations that bother me personally.

you made an analogy to illustrate your point that i find offensive. i have explained above exactly why. as i said above, that is not going to change.

on the principle of association avoidance, i think we fully agree on the idea, its only what we personally choose to do that differs. as well, you think the swastika is merely an academic word that may be used at whim as an example for any conversation that discusses associations with a symbol, i strongly disagree. i think that about sums it up, and that is all i have to say on the matter.

no hard feelings.
post #6903 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loathing View Post

I don't mean to piss on your sand castle, but if you think style & taste are subjective or personal, aren't you in the wrong thread?

Golly. So there's a universally-agreed opinion (heck, let's make that, universal on this thread) on whether the inclusion of a specific item will make or break one's style quotient?
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


no, you keep bringing it up. i said it once, and apologized for it many times. not only that, i have even explicitly stated that i understand why you prefer to avoid certain associations, and respect it, merely that they are not associations that bother me personally.

you made an analogy to illustrate your point that i find offensive. i have explained above exactly why. as i said above, that is not going to change.

on the principle of association avoidance, i think we fully agree on the idea, its only what we personally choose to do that differs. you think the swastika is merely an academic word that may be used at whim as an example for any conversation that discusses associations with a symbol, i strongly disagree, i think that about sums it up, and that is all i have to say on the matter.

no hard feelings.

In the post immediately preceding your query as to why I keep on bringing up your 'foolishness' point (like I am doing right now), I did so to emphasize my point which is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bboysdontcryy View Post

I was dealing with the premise of your point. Your comment/point about 'foolishness', and how not wanting to wear smth despite its 'negative connotations' is foolish, is what I read as being a specific example of the underlying premise.

Is the bringing up of your 'foolishness' comment meant to be the central point of this quotation above? I think not. Rather, the emphasis is on: 'I was dealing with the premise of your point.'.

And that 'foolishness' comment (I'm bringing it up again) is used to clarify what I mean lest I be mis-quoted and mis-represented.
post #6904 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loathing View Post

I don't mean to piss on your sand castle, but if you think style & taste are subjective or personal, aren't you in the wrong thread?

No worries. More of a concrete castle at this juncture. biggrin.gif

I do in fact think of taste and style as inherently subjective. Thus, I am hesitant to issue blank refusals or judgement. I used to be quick to do that (back when I was simply reciting the "rules" rather than realizing their use in the context of my life), but not so much now. That's not to say that there aren't blatant displays of things I immediately hate, I'm just not someone (in my own mind) to say something is objectively incorrect. Advice? Sure. Insight? Absolutely. Chiding? Not so much.

The interesting part is that I agree with most every "tasteful" example placed here. My proclivities match what is discussed or agreed upon here almost 100% of the time. However, just because my tastes align with those mentioned here doesn't mean that what strikes my fancy is the only acceptable way one can conduct themselves.
post #6905 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by bboysdontcryy View Post


In the post immediately preceding your query as to why I keep on bringing up your 'foolishness' point (like I am doing right now), I did so to emphasize my point which is:
Is the bringing up of your 'foolishness' comment meant to be the central point of this quotation above? I think not. Rather, the emphasis is on: 'I was dealing with the premise of your point.'.

And that 'foolishness' comment (I'm bringing it up again) is used to clarify what I mean lest I be mis-quoted and mis-represented.

very well. still, like i said above, there are essentially 2 points where we disagree and that is not going to change. i think we can leave it at that yes?
post #6906 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

very well. still, like i said above, there are essentially 2 points where we disagree and that is not going to change. i think we can leave it at that yes?

Fair enough. Disagreements between men are part and parcel of differences between human beings.

Though at a broader level, there's a school of thought which holds that moral truth is not subjective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism
post #6907 of 13589

Wow.  This thread needs some tender ministrations from a Dub.Hon.

post #6908 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

the more that that term, and terms like that, are used as frivolous anecdotes, the cheaper the meaning of the word. that is something that many many people find to be abhorrent. its not about the analogy being non-sensical, its about having the respect not throw around words that literally make people cringe when they hear it, as it may be a reminder to them of their own family members that were senselessly murdered by the truck full. its a word that belongs imo, in the most serious of relevant conversations alone.

[...]

you think the swastika is merely an academic word that may be used at whim as an example for any conversation that discusses associations with a symbol, i strongly disagree.

I think you're being silly, hypersensitive, and borderline anti-intellectual. By this reasoning, you could take umbrage at almost any historical comparison.
post #6909 of 13589
Sooo about those fits that are in good taste...
post #6910 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willin View Post

Sooo about those fits that are in good taste...

RDiaz had a nice one earlier. I like the bold blue of the tie. In my opinion, still in good taste, but adding some visual interest. Nicely done.
post #6911 of 13589

I don't see anything wrong with this combination. Given my sartorial knowledge, that might mean that the problem is me. Any feedback would be appreciated. It's difficult to see in the small photo, but if you click on it you can see that the tie has a neat pattern of purple circles.

 

post #6912 of 13589
manton does not like tattersalls, but I'm not sure that makes it bad taste...
post #6913 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDiaz View Post

manton does not like tattersalls, but I'm not sure that makes it bad taste...


I didn't know that. Has he gone into why on here? I happen to like tatersalls more than I liked white shirts and crimson ties (two things he swayed my opinion on), but I'm curious to hear what he has to say. I should probably buy his book.

post #6914 of 13589
not sure why, but maybe he was just referring to the larger scale tattersalls...
post #6915 of 13589
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDiaz View Post

not sure why, but maybe he was just referring to the larger scale tattersalls...


I'm recalling something about not liking patterned shirts where there's much more ground than pattern (for example, white shirts with a fine blue stripe or vice versa), and tatersalls certainly fail that. It doesn't bother me, though I do find shirts with uneven stripes are tough to pair with ties.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread