• We would like to welcome Craftsman Clothing back as an official Affiliate Vendor. Craftsman Clothing is a brand for the refined men who want to look good with minimal effort, and care about products that are well-made. In additon to being a go-to brand for all things essential, Craftsman Clothing also offers bespoke outerwear that’s uniquely crafted for you. Please visit their thread and give them a warm welcome.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Random Fashion Thoughts (Part 3: Style farmer strikes back) - our general discussion thread

clee1982

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
12,207
Reaction score
1,682
how can you make fashion sustainable fundamentally (not question that we shouldn't do the incremental, but bigger questions).

I mean that means one coat every 15 years? how many outwear store can survive?
 

gettoasty

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
14,704
Reaction score
8,901
Consumer sentiment shapes regulations and government policies. So it does matter. We're seeing some of this in how various parties and politicians are slowly shifting their views on gun control based on a shifting public sentiment. Let's be real, we don't vote for politicians because they propose banning plastic bags or some specific policy like that. However, when public opinion shifts, representatives take notice and shift policies (to keep their jobs).
I am about to finish watching all five seasons of The Wire. Whoa
 

gdl203

Affiliate Vendor
Affiliate Vendor
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
39,595
Reaction score
26,735

Teger

Professional Style Farmer
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
22,597
Reaction score
7,565
some aggressively bad takes here. first off, what's sustainable and how does that relate to ethics? is wool more ethical because it's more sustainable than synthetic fabrics as its a naturally derived product, or is it less ethical because it requires exploiting an animal? do we judge sustainability from the fabric itself, or from the process that produces the fabric, or how durable it is, or what happens to it post-wear as it sits in our landfills? (the answer is all of the above)

the idea though that because personal purchasing pattens have limited effect vs. say, the entirety of H&M, that we should buy clothing without thought or concern is an extremely stupid sentiment, both because it promotes edgelord climate change brinksmanship fatalism that functions to remove personal responsibility ("well I can't do anything, so I might as well give up!"), and because it ignores the cumulative effect of consumer sentiment that Greg points out.

probably the best thing you can do is try to purchase clothing that is produced from durable fabrics from sources that aren't especially destructive to the environment and put together by workers paid a living wage, wear your clothing until it's worn out (or sell it through a second hand market if you no longer wear it), and try to limit consumption to what you need. the big caveat with all of this though is "if you can afford it." it's real easy for snobby white collar StyleForum posters with disposable income to talk shit about the person shopping at H&M while taking Instagram pics of an Eidos overcoat they wear twice a year.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
13,502
Reaction score
30,583
it's real easy for snobby white collar StyleForum posters with disposable income to talk shit about the person shopping at H&M while taking Instagram pics of an Eidos overcoat they wear twice a year.
I don't think these are the same things. High-end clothes can be recycled through the second-hand market for years and years and years. Margiela five-zips, EG Bedfords, Rick Intarsias, Kapital Ring coat, etc have remained relevant for more than a decade. People continue to buy them on the second-hand market.

For a variety of reasons -- brand snobbery, construction quality, and trendy design -- you can't do this with cheaper Zara and H&M clothing. That's the stuff that winds up in landfills and African rag markets, not some Yohji piece. Same for a lot of stuff coveted over on the CM side of the board -- Alden shoes, bespoke suits, J. Press ties, etc.
 

mmmargeologist

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
667
Reaction score
1,875
I don't think these are the same things. High-end clothes can be recycled through the second-hand market for years and years and years. Margiela five-zips, EG Bedfords, Rick Intarsias, Kapital Ring coat, etc have remained relevant for more than a decade. People continue to buy them on the second-hand market.

For a variety of reasons -- brand snobbery, construction quality, and trendy design -- you can't do this with cheaper Zara and H&M clothing. That's the stuff that winds up in landfills and African rag markets, not some Yohji piece. Same for a lot of stuff coveted over on the CM side of the board -- Alden shoes, bespoke suits, J. Press ties, etc.
I’d agree with this point. I also think spending a lot on clothes keeps you from spending a lot on other things resulting in less consumption. Ultimately though, having more than you need is always a sin from an emissions / conservation standpoint. Not to sound like I’m coming from on high (because I can’t).
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
44,156
Reaction score
17,717
some aggressively bad takes here. first off, what's sustainable and how does that relate to ethics? is wool more ethical because it's more sustainable than synthetic fabrics as its a naturally derived product, or is it less ethical because it requires exploiting an animal? do we judge sustainability from the fabric itself, or from the process that produces the fabric, or how durable it is, or what happens to it post-wear as it sits in our landfills? (the answer is all of the above)

the idea though that because personal purchasing pattens have limited effect vs. say, the entirety of H&M, that we should buy clothing without thought or concern is an extremely stupid sentiment, both because it promotes edgelord climate change brinksmanship fatalism that functions to remove personal responsibility ("well I can't do anything, so I might as well give up!"), and because it ignores the cumulative effect of consumer sentiment that Greg points out.p

probably the best thing you can do is try to purchase clothing that is produced from durable fabrics from sources that aren't especially destructive to the environment and put together by workers paid a living wage, wear your clothing until it's worn out (or sell it through a second hand market if you no longer wear it), and try to limit consumption to what you need. the big caveat with all of this though is "if you can afford it." it's real easy for snobby white collar StyleForum posters with disposable income to talk shit about the person shopping at H&M while taking Instagram pics of an Eidos overcoat they wear twice a year.
lol. Bro, most people don't have a background in moral philosophy and ethics. Without some type of reasonably well defined framework, it's virtually impossible to say with any degree of certainty whether one is being "virtuous" or not. At very best, you can default to some type of hybrid between a classical virtue ethics and deontological framework, but the type of consequentialist questiosn brought up here are not going to get you any clarity, simply mire you up so badly that decision making will be impossible.

Re. climate change - I suppose that I can try to engage in this discussion again, but only in CE. My take is that even the best proposals are basically choosing to sacrifice bunt in the bottom of the ninth, two out, bases loaded, when you are down by 10. Even if the best case scenario occurs, you are still fucked.
My personal belief is that this is because social justice and real mitigation of climate change are basically incompatible goals.
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
44,156
Reaction score
17,717
I don't think these are the same things. High-end clothes can be recycled through the second-hand market for years and years and years. Margiela five-zips, EG Bedfords, Rick Intarsias, Kapital Ring coat, etc have remained relevant for more than a decade. People continue to buy them on the second-hand market.

For a variety of reasons -- brand snobbery, construction quality, and trendy design -- you can't do this with cheaper Zara and H&M clothing. That's the stuff that winds up in landfills and African rag markets, not some Yohji piece. Same for a lot of stuff coveted over on the CM side of the board -- Alden shoes, bespoke suits, J. Press ties, etc.
I wonder if the rate of production and primary consumption can ever be matched by speed of the secondary market/recycling, etc...
 

Coldsnap

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
9,653
Reaction score
5,206
I'd say a good 70% of my closet is thrifted at $5-7 per item; LVC, Gitman Vtg, Engineered Garments, Aldens, Patagonia, Norse Projects, Wallace + Barnes etc. But damn is that shit rare to come across in your size and good condition. I've must have passed through 500+ things I bought and flipped before I kept one thing for myself. It's not something I'd really recommend for anyone, unless you're like my girlfriend and somehow looks good in everything I thrift her.
 
Last edited:

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
44,156
Reaction score
17,717
I think that something has to be both valuable AND retain a fair deal of value for it to be used "sustainably". The category that jumps out at me right now is vintage watches, which can retain a great deal of value relative to pretty much any other luxury category. Vintage watches regularly pass through a half dozen hands. @gdl203 knows a lot more about this than do I, I think.
 

gdl203

Affiliate Vendor
Affiliate Vendor
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
39,595
Reaction score
26,735
I think that something has to be both valuable AND retain a fair deal of value for it to be used "sustainably". The category that jumps out at me right now is vintage watches, which can retain a great deal of value relative to pretty much any other luxury category. Vintage watches regularly pass through a half dozen hands. @gdl203 knows a lot more about this than do I, I think.
Yeah when I was more in tune with the watch forums, I would see the same watch for sale every couple of years and would know exactly who had owned it along the way. Watch people are addicted to watches but their income doesn't allow them to have that many, so they enjoy a watch for a year (sometimes less) and sell it to fund the next shiny thing. Once in a while, a watch survives that ruthless cycle. They're called "keepers."
 

Lane

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
5,227
Reaction score
761
I've been considering thrifting myself now that my style isn't so distinct I'd have to buy from one of two brands. I don't see anything wrong with spending money where it counts like shoes and then thrifting the rest. However, it isn't because of pseudo-intellectual reasons like "im saving the environment." I do agree with dieworkgear, that if done right, you could be making a better impact on the environment by buying high end clothing. As long as you stick to a minimalist approach where you consider how often you actually wear your clothes, and sell off the excess. I mean in the end there are 7 days in a week, how much do we really need..

We've all made frivolous decisions online or inside cheaper stores, and maybe had an impulse purchase over stuff we didn't need since it was fast fashion. It doesn't mean we are evil, and I think it's much more edgy to suggest we individually should radically shift our consumer choices when statistically we are an anomaly in the grand scheme of things. Not to mention I couldn't imagine trying to impose these views on others. Fashion always reminds me of excess and overindulgence. I think the idea of "ethical" fashion is bourgeios, since poor people don't really have the time to think about whether or not something is going to impact the environment. They just need a pair of hanes Ts. To pride yourself in buying only "ethical fashion" kind of illustrates the bubble you are living in economically.
 

Featured Sponsor

HOW OFTEN DO YOU SHOP FOR CLOTHES ONLINE?

  • I mainly buy my clothes online.

  • I shop online only if there is a sale.

  • I shop online when shipping and returns are free.

  • I shop in store only for very expensive items I want to try on.

  • I mainly shop in store.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
425,053
Messages
9,126,849
Members
191,832
Latest member
randomnonce

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Top