Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by thekunk07, Aug 1, 2009.
newyorkranger fought in the ufc tonight. gj on the win.
TBH, i think you're missing the point of both feminism and the article.
Her point is not that the magazines reduce men to 1d stereotypes or that sexualisation fixes that. It's that painting everything in rules and saying "buy this brown paisley pocketsquare to go with your navy suit and blue tie" babies men to the point they a) can't think for themselves and b) lack the confidence to just say " fuck it all i'm gonna dress the way that looks good (i.e. sexuality).
As you may have noticed, i am quite a champion of PC-ness. However, even I don't think that people should have to avoid terms like "sexuality" to escape the buzzword-association people seem to have when they read words, and not the real meaning behind them.
this is a knee-jerk response to Drew's comments.
IMO, he would not disagree with what's being said here; just that his point was different.
this MC article explains it well: enjoy your fashion cycle
I was about to defend Lane when i thought he was clearly joking in that thread (although i don't have a sufu account so he could've said some other stuff). He then went on to spoil it with some of his responses.
no, uncontrol is right. ron paul does suck.
What's going on with Blackbird? Despite the high prices, I've enjoyed frequented the site and blog for years, because their buys and styling were worth the visit. They've made some really weak buys through the last year, though, and what on earth is with this vintage collection? $120 for a blue sweatshirt with stains on it? Really?
Their customer service remains immaculate, but some of this other stuff is almost uncomfortably bad to page through.
tbh, i can't believe anything is a cheap as $120 now. Even if it is a blobby piece of crap.
what is a knee jerk reaction, my post or the backlash against trends ? if the former, then i disagree, and if the latter, well it was his comment to begin with so cannot be a backlash as it is originally what he mentioned ...
that article didn't start out too well, suggesting that skinny pants for men were on the ascendancy in the past decade. it would seem this is a fashion cycle that has been around for quite some time, so you should question whether it's really a cycle at all ?
then talk of no longer noticing trends after your 30s -- well how many posters here are in or past their 30s ? if it's in reference to the general population it is not really relevant to SF which is a hobbyist's community (aside from lurkers that come for sales codes or those just wanting to look better than avg. person in street which is fine) so i don't know what that article explains well aside from the obvious fashion trend cycles...
Some asshole will buy this.
I like Blackbird for stock pictures.
scootering doesn't get that blood flowing
I came back early today from CT and was so blown away by how warm it was that I skated all day in basically a long sleeve shirt, an unbuttoned chambray, and an unzipped light cotton jacket
and I get cold very, very easily
That's who Hendricks reminded me of. WAR NYR.
To be clear: I agree with everything you wrote. I assume it was in response to Drew's comments. So yes, the former - I don't think anything you said is in disagreement with his comment.
the article was written in 2008. I don't know when skinny pants "came back" but i think there's clearly a mainstream cycle. Also, just because he said the general population don't notice trends after their 30s (could be true, i'm not 30), doesn't discount the rest of the article's relevance to nerds. I think your post, and the article, dispel the common mis-interpretation of the "fashion is temporary, style is permanent" quote. It's kinda saying that it's ok to wear things that you like, and, most importantly, things that seem "classic" are also often part of a trend.
and what Drew was saying wasn't the opposite of that:
i.e he's not saying that it's wrong to like these things, just don't take it as a way of life or anything like that. It's experimental stuff which; which makes it almost inherently flawed. Which doesn't stop it from being enjoyable, or even influencing the future of mainstream clothing. Just that it's not serious i think.
It's fashion, it's fun, enjoy it. it's not the embodiment of your personality or whatever.
The people at Assembly New York do a lot of dyeing of vintage stuff too (and now have their own line), but they seem considerably more consistent, and fits in with the "goth ninja" look (well, more like boho ninja these days) of the store and all their wares. Blackbird vintage doesn't look better than the stuff I used to buy from vintage stores in Boston for about 6 times less.
Was going through some of my old photos from a few years ago to as recent as 6 months and I have to say, some of the worst mistakes of my life have been haircuts.
also made some killer petit pains au chocolat today, I need to utilize Kichi service to get me some rad japanese bakeware
And that's the problem. They can slap on copy to these pieces championing how grunge they are or whatever. It doesn't take away from these things looking like the chaff you'd pass over in even the shabbiest thrift shops. "Vintage" sections in boutiques that predominantly sell new items are kind of an inherently flawed concept because shop owners don't appear to sink many resources into acquiring stuff that isn't junk. And in the rare instances there's something worthwhile, the price tag is usually lofty enough that you might as well sink those funds into something better.
It wasn't always a flawed concept. American Rag pioneered this a couple of decades ago, and they were amazing at mixing vintage with designer with true streetwear for a long time. That store is a shadow of what it was once.
Yeah, but it has raglan sleeves.
This has nothing to do with your last post, but my ladyfriend's bosses (husband and wife) had a holiday party on Thursday, and their six-year-old son was way into Beyblade. I felt slightly less bewildered having known in advance that this was a "thing". Interesting to see it in the wild.
I still maintain that they're just oversized Spinjas.
Separate names with a comma.