Thoughts on the Sartorialist

flowcharts said:

edit: guess I shouldn't have fed the troll.

Click to expand...

Not an argument.

robinsongreen68 said:

honestly man i suggest YOU look into a basic course in philosophical aesthetics. intelligent people do not talk like this in 2016.

Click to expand...

This is not an argument.

And your statement, "intelligent people do not talk this in 2016." I would suggest that "intelligent people" do not write like you do EVER, in any year. First of all, we are writing - not talking. Just in case you forgot the difference. Second, do you have any data or research to verify your claim that intelligent people don't express themselves in the way I have? Or if you believe "intelligent" people don't hold the views that I do, is there anything I have written you SPECIFICALLY disagree with? With reasons and evidence?

For cryin' out loud. At least have a coherent thought if you are going to respond to someone like me, who took the TIME to provide SOUND ARGUMENT to support my conclusions.

Please, for God's sake, just google what a sound argument is. Then maybe, with a little bit of practice, you might be able to respond "intelligently."

You are dismissed.

Beauty in the classical sense is just one of many aesthetic goals.

That said, from a classical perspective, the outfit that you referenced in the OP arguably emphasizes traditionally beautiful male features. Strong brows, lean square shoulders, etc...

The "classic" suit and modern masculine garments is a fairly recent invention. We've rather clumsily built arguments that they emphasize the male form, but and there are a lot of much older clothing and gromming traditions, both Western and Asian, that would have more in common with that guy's fairly tame queer fashion.

Your own perceptions may be less based on classical ideas of beauty and more on your social conditioning. Just some food for thought.

Lol, this guy (i.e. OP)

LA Guy said:

Beauty in the classical sense is just one of many aesthetic goals.

That said, from a classical perspective, the outfit that you referenced in the OP arguably emphasizes traditionally beautiful male features. Strong brows, lean square shoulders, etc...

The "classic" suit and modern masculine garments is a fairly recent invention. We've rather clumsily built arguments that they emphasize the male form, but and there are a lot of much older clothing and gromming traditions, both Western and Asian, that would have more in common with that guy's fairly tame queer fashion.

Your own perceptions may be less based on classical ideas of beauty and more on your social conditioning. Just some food for thought.

Click to expand...

Some awkward writing ("We've rather clumsily built arguments that they emphasize the male form..") but nonetheless a coherent response.

Points for writing something of at least some merit AND for not being a politically correct stooge.

Spehsmonkey said:

Lol, this guy (i.e. OP)

Click to expand...

Gee. Thanks for the "i.e." because I had NO CLUE you were referring to me while making a feeble attempt at being insulting.

I mean, are you trying to make some kind of point? Or are you intentionally trying to be thick?

That is all.



TheBatman said:

Some awkward writing ("We've rather clumsily built arguments that they emphasize the male form..") but nonetheless a coherent response.

Points for writing something of at least some merit AND for not being a politically correct stooge.

Click to expand...

I'm writing from a phone getting 1x in the middle of nowhere riding home. You're lucky to get full sentences.

LA Guy said:

I'm writing from a phone getting 1x in the middle of nowhere riding home. You're lucky to get full sentences.

Click to expand...

Yes. I am oh so lucky. I am thanking my lucky stars. I can't wait until I get full paragraphs! Please, oh please hurry!

LA Guy said:

We've rather clumsily built arguments that they emphasize the male form

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that. We might be able to say that they emphasize the parts of the male form that is idealized in western culture(?). If you accept the notions of that culture then the arguments become pretty well founded. True, step outside that context and they become less so, but even in that case the suit, and the aspects of masculinity that it emphasizes, is pretty much accepted across the globe now. Having grown up surrounded by traditional Indian modes of dress I know what you mean when you suggest that there are other ways of thinking about the masculine aesthetic that are interesting.

FWIW, carefully applied snark is fun, but too much of it kills interesting conversations (which this thread had the potential to generate a lot of). I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears (ironic because you're supposed to be some sort of man-bat) but I thought it worth saying anyway.

TheBatman said:

Yes. I am oh so lucky. I am thanking my lucky stars. I can't wait until I get full paragraphs! Please, oh please hurry!

Click to expand...

I'm waiting for your counterpoints. You really have not given much substance in your OP or subsequent posts. I mean, opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to back it up with more than just personal preferences.

Caustic Man said:

I'm not so sure about that. We might be able to say that they emphasize the parts of the male form that is idealized in western culture(?). If you accept the notions of that culture then the arguments become pretty well founded. True, step outside that context and they become less so, but even in that case the suit, and the aspects of masculinity that it emphasizes, is pretty much accepted across the globe now. Having grown up surrounded by traditional Indian modes of dress I know what you mean when you suggest that there are other ways of thinking about the masculine aesthetic that are interesting.

Click to expand...

I certainly think that "classic" Western dress does emphasize some traditionally valued masculine characteristics - after all, a lot of the garments derive directly from military garb, which is as tied to a projection of physical prowess as any form of clothing, short of actual armor with exaggerated chests, shoulder protection, and codpieces.

That said, there are clearly other forms of dress that likewise emphasize the male form, and perhaps do so better for different body shapes. I've heard older Chinese, in particular, say that the western suit often does a disservice to the smaller East Asian frame, and that the traditional Chinese robe, in drapey silk, with a banded collar and a cleaner, longer, front, gives a longer line to shorter men and and does not require a bunch of tricks to builld up narrower shoulders.

I don't know as much about Indian and also Middle Eastern traditional garb, but those also seem to use similar elements that are not found in the western suit. I see those elements used by some modern designers as well, but don't know the fidelity to the original concepts.

Caustic Man said:

I'm not so sure about that. We might be able to say that they emphasize the parts of the male form that is idealized in western culture(?). If you accept the notions of that culture then the arguments become pretty well founded. True, step outside that context and they become less so, but even in that case the suit, and the aspects of masculinity that it emphasizes, is pretty much accepted across the globe now. Having grown up surrounded by traditional Indian modes of dress I know what you mean when you suggest that there are other ways of thinking about the masculine aesthetic that are interesting.

FWIW, carefully applied snark is fun, but too much of it kills interesting conversations (which this thread had the potential to generate a lot of). I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears (ironic because you're supposed to be some sort of man-bat) but I thought it worth saying anyway.

Click to expand...

1) Your first paragraph is unclear. I don' t understand what you are trying to get across. I suggest you take a little bit of time to read your writing out loud to yourself before submitting. That is an old technique, but it may help you to catch your muddled sentences and thoughts. You seem like you have some interesting things to say, but your writing needs work.

2) Read my original post. Very thoughtful, well written, more than enough material to have a good discussion with. Read the responses I got. Politically correct nonsense. A bunch of MEN on a MEN'S style forum clutching their pearls and fainting because I criticized what is presumably a homosexual. GASP! How dare I! There were one or 2 responses with a modicum of substance, but even at that there wasn't much to debate. They were just statements of opinion. If someone says "my favorite color is green..." how do you argue with that or discuss it? And btw, I haven't noticed that any forum members have defended my right to have a differing point of view. I don't need anyone to do so, but just making a mental note of it.

3) Man-Bat is a villain and a character with a completely different set of skills and abilities. He literally is a half man - half bat due to the side effects of a serum meant to give man echo-location ability. I am Batman, a masked crime fighting vigilante with peerless martial arts ability, but nonetheless a human being. So if you were trying to be funny you failed miserably.

You are dismissed.

LA Guy said:

I'm waiting for your counterpoints. You really have not given much substance in your OP or subsequent posts. I mean, opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to back it up with more than just personal preferences.

Click to expand...

Oh wow. You MUST be joking. I was cracking my literary knuckles in preparation for your textual beat down... but then I realized you were trolling. Expertly done! You stole my patent response (which is basically "that is not an argument") and gave it right back to me.

But surely you must be trolling, because you obviously read my posts and therefore obviously know the many reasons for my well formulated opinion. Right? I mean, surely you are no dunce! Only a dunce would seriously accuse me of having no arguments, since that is what I have been accusing everyone else of. So, give yourself a big ol' pat on the back for not being a dunce.

Well done sir!



.... On the other hand, if you were seriously attempting to critique my posts, then I should say it is highly ironic that you are an admin of an online forum because you don't seem to have the ability read and detect arguments. But surely this cannot be the case.

Less than a day and he made it onto my block list. That may be the fastest yet.