Men's Fashion: What’s the latest trend?

[Sanguis Mortuum]

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Want an example? Look at the Gucci loafer thread.
Most people here hate Gucci b/c it's "apirational luxury for the common masses" Tacky, etc.
Suddenly, they read some article about handicraft, and the sheep loves Gucci. See, handiwork trumps logos.
Or, there's just some lashback, and since everyone on SF hates Gucci, it's now cool to like Gucci.

Most Gucci shoes are still tacky or ugly, no amount of 'handwork' will change that. I, and others, have always maintained though that the horse-bit loafer is a classic, long before anyone posted any threads about their construction.

It is also a matter of price/quality ratio; the construction of their higher end products may be relatively decent, but they also tend to be massively over-priced compared to similarly constructed shoes from C&J/AS/EG/G&G/etc.

 

[Ianiceman]

Originally Posted by David Reeves

Was walking through my neighborhood the other Day and someone said, everyone wants to dress like a punk round here. Not me I was dressed up like Bill Bixby.

Did that make you angry? I wouldn't like it when you're angry!

 

[Gus]

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Want an example? Look at the Gucci loafer thread.
Most people here hate Gucci b/c it's "apirational luxury for the common masses" Tacky, etc.
Suddenly, they read some article about handicraft, and the sheep loves Gucci.

Really?

I thought it was because of the "Are these fake Gucci's" thread....

http://www.styleforum.net/showthread...ght=fake+gucci

 

[ColdEyedPugilist]

Originally Posted by presence

This member creates a post to get a discussion going, and he gets a bunch of douche bag answers. You people are a bunch of ******* assholes. If you don't have anything useful, or related to the post then keep your ******* mouth shuts and stay off the site.

And what if they don't? Then what? You gonna hurl a buncha deadly thoughts through their modems?

Mate, this is the Net. Even if you think you're a bada*ss in real life, it doesn't mean jack here. In cyberspace. Where anyone can assume any role they wish to without consequence. For good or bad.

So chill a little, eh?

Originally Posted by Samovar McGee

Seriously? Chill out.

What he said.

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Welcome to SF.

First, we here are obsessed with brands.
Spend some time reading here, and you'll get what "SF approved" means.
In fact, we are more obsessed with logos and brands than any segment of the fashion population.
However, its just not in the way you'd expect.
Here, we're brainwashed into hating any brand that is "common".
It's reverse snobbery for the clinically insecure.
Then, we blindly swear by another set of logos & brands that are "uncommon"
Just like the high school kid who now dislikes an alternative band that suddenly becomes huge.
If they started selling Boglioli and C&J at the every mall in the US, no one on SF would wear them anymore.
At SF, it's higher status to buy uncommon used clothing at garage sales than common brands new.
Want an example? Look at the Gucci loafer thread.
Most people here hate Gucci b/c it's "apirational luxury for the common masses" Tacky, etc.
Suddenly, they read some article about handicraft, and the sheep loves Gucci. See, handiwork trumps logos.
Or, there's just some lashback, and since everyone on SF hates Gucci, it's now cool to like Gucci.
With that said, I'm going to go put on some U2 and REM.

Oh, a good fashion tip?
Jackets that are short as hell.
Barely goes past your ass.
But, be prepared to throw it away in 3 years when it's outdated and out of style.
(Low gorge, fat lapel, pleated, baggy, high rise, wide ties, etc) <-- When this again is the rage in a few years, SF throws out their entire "timeless & classic" closet (yet again)

 

[alexandria]

Originally Posted by Reevolving

Welcome to SF.

First, we here are obsessed with brands.
Spend some time reading here, and you'll get what "SF approved" means.
In fact, we are more obsessed with logos and brands than any segment of the fashion population.
However, its just not in the way you'd expect.
Here, we're brainwashed into hating any brand that is "common".
It's reverse snobbery for the clinically insecure.
Then, we blindly swear by another set of logos & brands that are "uncommon"
Just like the high school kid who now dislikes an alternative band that suddenly becomes huge.
If they started selling Boglioli and C&J at the every mall in the US, no one on SF would wear them anymore.
At SF, it's higher status to buy uncommon used clothing at garage sales than common brands new.
Want an example? Look at the Gucci loafer thread.
Most people here hate Gucci b/c it's "apirational luxury for the common masses" Tacky, etc.
Suddenly, they read some article about handicraft, and the sheep loves Gucci. See, handiwork trumps logos.
Or, there's just some lashback, and since everyone on SF hates Gucci, it's now cool to like Gucci.
With that said, I'm going to go put on some U2 and REM.

Oh, a good fashion tip?
Jackets that are short as hell.
Barely goes past your ass.
But, be prepared to throw it away in 3 years when it's outdated and out of style.
(Low gorge, fat lapel, pleated, baggy, high rise, wide ties, etc) <-- When this again is the rage in a few years, SF throws out their entire "timeless & classic" closet (yet again)


wow thanks alot for your reply. That was a really interesting one, i thought completely opposite of it all. That's different and unique at the same time, i guess i feel the same way in that sense, people do eventually start hating certain things once they get too famous and you probably end up hating it, that's a fact.

 

[alexandria]

Originally Posted by Sanguis Mortuum

Most Gucci shoes are still tacky or ugly, no amount of 'handwork' will change that. I, and others, have always maintained though that the horse-bit loafer is a classic, long before anyone posted any threads about their construction.

It is also a matter of price/quality ratio; the construction of their higher end products may be relatively decent, but they also tend to be massively over-priced compared to similarly constructed shoes from C&J/AS/EG/G&G/etc.

i agree with that one

 

[alexandria]

Originally Posted by Man Of Lint

Welcome to Styleforum alexandria.

Thank you

 

[Master-Classter]

alexandria.... click &quot;multi q&quot; and you can quote several people and reply to each individually within your same post...

 

[musicguy]

Don't listen to reevolving. He's nuts.

This threak sucks.

 

[Kenneth Cole Haan]

Originally Posted by Reevolving

First, we here are obsessed with brands.
In fact, we are more obsessed with logos and brands than any segment of the fashion population.
However, its just not in the way you'd expect.

It's reverse snobbery for the clinically insecure.

If they started selling Boglioli and C&J at the every mall in the US, no one on SF would wear them anymore.

To the extent there is any 'obsession' (nice use of a psychologically charged word) with brands, it is only because the brands have developed, in many cases over decades if not centuries, a consistency of high quality traditional manufacturing and quality.

The brand obsession of the average LV purse-ho or Gucci-logo wearer though is based on status signaling. 'We' are obsessed with the quality, not the brand; the masses of middle-class shoppers are obsessed with the opposite. It is not their fault, they simply have not had the SF-based education and exposure needed.

The key difference is that 'we' can back our brand preference with fact, such as the quality of materials and worksmanship, whereas the LV purse-ho's know nothing but that it makes them feel superior to show off in an overpriced logo-ridden product.

They will never sell C&J in American malls because the populace fundamentally does not understand or respect traditionally made shoes to support such a market presence.

You do have a funny line with images of SF members throwing out their 'timeless classic' wardrobe every few years. Not true but funny as hell!