Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by A Fellow Linguist, Aug 13, 2012.
I even kept some of your precious turns of phrase. And one m-dash!
This thread is great, though. Good idea, and good criticism.
Goddamn, this is my new favorite thread. Sent the link to my GF, think she'll appreciate the fits/discussion as to the nature of female aesthetics.
That Orwell essay was brilliant.
^ It's actually just half the essay, google the rest if you didn't it's worth reading.
Maybe, it's because I'm a fan of intellectual jargon; but it literally took me an hour to figure out which was the infamous post that so many deemed to be; "oh, so contrived."
I did, great read
Tomorrow's headline: THREE STILL TRAPPED IN GQ'S MALE GAZE NIGHTMARE!
more as the story develops...
Hope dantebykiko doesn't mind if I cross post this from the Yohji thread...
Can we make a similar thread for men?
Not that I know how to frame it, but --> why is it that women dressing in the unconventional ways shown above usually look awesome, while men going the same route would - chances are - look like complete idiots ? Female in weird garb still projects sexuality (at least from male point of view), while a male in weird garb almost certainly does not project power.
If so, is this not a subtle perpetuation of the sexist undertones, regardless of the stated intention? Saying "China is doing well, but the Chinese really need to step up their human rights and environmental game" today surely sounds ostensibly better more enlightened than simply hating the "dirty chinks" (circa 1920s), but is it really that different?
I think its because the sexualization and resultant oppressive conditions that come from what gender norms do to women are much more dire. Us dudes have it relatively easy and historically/still are a big part of the oppression. So no one cares about it as much.
However , I think that if you wan't to change how certain presentations are expected of women, then you need to do the same for men. If there is a requirement of masculinity from menswear then I do not think you can remove the insidious implication that those masculine traits must to some degree be more appropriate for men than women.
What has been posted here but very rich, very thin, very alluring women in expensive garments? The idea that anything in this thread is even a half-serious comment on...well, anything....is, as someone suggested, a joke.
MC has Recent Non-Sartorialist Looks to view/discuss men's clothing worn by non-forum participants. SW&D's Bright Future Thread includes inspirational sartorial images of hazily-defined 'older dudes'. Check them out.
But I think this thread does do some good things. Even if the images we use are of wealthy and attractive women, it still speaks to perhaps a more liberating approach to fashion. In the same way the images of these kinds of rich women are used to do bad things, perhaps this alternative type of imagery gives some answer to that? So yes we do not alleviate the bias that comes with selecting thin and attractive women but maybe the presentation and undersexualization take some of the pressure off. This compared to say a dolce and gabanna runway?
Separate names with a comma.