Random fashion thoughts

Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by thekunk07, Aug 1, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GraphicNovelty

    GraphicNovelty Senior member

    Messages:
    5,487
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Location:
    NYC
    

    That posits a freedom from social constructions regarding presentation of gender, to which conformity has certain rewards. Being able to just roll with it and have that be appreciated assumes a lot about the individual and their situation in society.

    I think the goal is to mediate your desire to do your own thing with your desire for the rewards of conformity. Dress as goofy as you want, as long as you can still get laid :D.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  2. tween_spirit

    tween_spirit Senior member

    Messages:
    3,395
    Likes Received:
    3,367
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    Location:
    conceptual forest
    

    but what are the rewards of conformity? if you just do your thing, however outside of societies norms it may be, you'll eventually find yourself surrounded by people doing the same thing. That seems a lot more rewarding than carefully manicuring something only to end up surrounded by people nothing like you. Isn't this basically what allows subcultures to exist?

    I mean it couldn't be easier to take some basic social cues from whatever circle it is the person you want to get in bed is in, and apply those for a few hours and get laid, or maybe even develop a serious relationship based on this. this is what people do all the time. there's no challenge in that though, no sense of reward or self worth. I also mean this in a way that translates to other things - friendships, jobs, etc. we're all sociopaths in the end, aren't we? or is that just the delusions of a sociopath..

    That said, it's very, very important not to exclusively surround yourself with like-minded people :) I mean this of course in a context larger than just getting laid as well.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  3. GraphicNovelty

    GraphicNovelty Senior member

    Messages:
    5,487
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Location:
    NYC
    Yes, it's important to find your niche, and that is ultimately more rewarding than fixating on status, but at the same time, I think most people in this forum are unique in that many of us have excused themselves from the status game, mostly because a good chunk of us are already fairly high status individuals (in the sense that most of us are upper middle class straight men who have the social freedom to care about expensive clothing).

    It's easy for us to be comfortable with our lot in life because our lot in life is pretty damn good.
     


  4. A Fellow Linguist

    A Fellow Linguist Senior member

    Messages:
    2,343
    Likes Received:
    3,851
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Tween I think you're asking a lot, maybe more than you realize. Also, GN, I think I know what you're getting at re applying the usual theory, etc., but I wonder if you had something specific in mind?
     


  5. skitlets

    skitlets Senior member

    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    1,878
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Location:
    DC
    

    I think the majority of people on SF are broke college kids. Or broke recent graduates (me).
     


  6. GraphicNovelty

    GraphicNovelty Senior member

    Messages:
    5,487
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Location:
    NYC
    

    My big problem with applying feminist theory to men's issues (warning,: highly theoretical):
    A big part of the problem men have with feminism as it relates to men is it's marxist grounding in the concept of the patriarchy (i.e. that men as a class oppress women as a class). When talking about men's issues, there's only one role for men within this particular type of feminist discourse: the role of the oppressor who rejects femininity. I think that crazy, andrea dworkin-esque assertions like "all heterosexual sex is rape" are, in fact, internally consistent with this conceptualization of gender relationships, but repudiation of such conclusions doesn't often follow with repudiation of the conceptual foundation.The whole explanation here http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/ and the response by the commenter here http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/#comment-6028 sums this issue up pretty well: the dogmatic adherence to marxist "patriarchy" concepts does more to obfuscate men's issues, and bend over backwards to cast men as the "villain" (it also does a lot of shitty things like discount men's voices within the feminist movement, but that's completely secondary to this discussion). And it's not like this is some fringe belief--any time the concept of "the patriarchy" is deployed, it's a reaffirmation of this "men as oppressor class" concept. .

    I also have issue with the whole framework of "domination" that runs through marxist writings. As women find their way into--and become entrenched in--higher steps on the economic ladder, these so-called systems of domination break down to the point of meaninglessness. Looking at alternate political philosophies such as Confucianism, I think it's a lot more revealing to look at situation in terms of what sort of reciprocal relationships exist within a power structure. Men have certain "sources" of power (the main source for men, imo--economic power--is quickly eroding as more and more women enter the workforce and our society continues to become post-industrial) that they might use to get what they "want" out of women, but women are not simply lacking in power and the ability to get what they "want" out of men, as they posses certain resources themselves. Institutional views are also somewhat lacking, as the alleged "power" that men have (as a class) over women (as a class) by control of institutions is not evenly distributed among all men. Indeed, there are a great many situations where that power doesn't exist at all and the balance of power favors women.

    In general, when talking about gender roles and men, it's much more illuminating to think about reciprocal relationships where power is exerted across individuals on a fairly "level" playing field. It should be acknowledged that men are at the mercy of societal expectations that are not set by them. This runs totally counter to the hierarchical view of most feminist thinkers, and as such, I don't think feminism is the right discourse by which to approach these issues. However, rejiggered feminist analytical tools can applied to men's issues, with a focus more on concepts such as status and relationship to masculine expectations and conditioning, rather than (IMO) outdated systems of domination and control.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  7. Fuuma

    Fuuma Franchouillard Modasse

    Messages:
    25,918
    Likes Received:
    10,529
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    


    The dominant are as much prisoners of the relationship of domination as the dominated (Marx). Even Marxists aren't that stupid...
     


  8. wogbog

    wogbog Senior member

    Messages:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    856
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Location:
    west canada
    

    Nah, Kant saved philosophy from Hume by using the transcendental unity of apperception to derive the categories and defeat skepticism!


    Sounds like he needs to explain Y better. :p
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  9. GraphicNovelty

    GraphicNovelty Senior member

    Messages:
    5,487
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Location:
    NYC
    

    Classifying an individual solely in terms of their role as a member in a system of domination severely limits the discussion.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  10. wogbog

    wogbog Senior member

    Messages:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    856
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Location:
    west canada
    
    Warning: I know very little about feminist theory.

    I think this sentence is consistent with the feminist theory you presented though, since men (as individuals) could be under societal expectations set by men (as a class). Saying that men as a class oppress women as a class doesn't entail that individual men necessarily have power.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  11. A Fellow Linguist

    A Fellow Linguist Senior member

    Messages:
    2,343
    Likes Received:
    3,851
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    

    Wait do you honestly think that? I was just making a joke.

    GN, I was planning on making a long response to your post, which I largely like, but Fuuma beat meat to it. And he did it concisely, so there's that. Just to be short I think you're both right to an extent.
     


  12. Brothersport

    Brothersport Senior member

    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    1,052
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    

    Jesus Christ these academia circlejerks.
     


  13. hendrix

    hendrix Ill-proportioned

    Messages:
    9,463
    Likes Received:
    3,719
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    

    Sorry, I don't have anything against long discourses from art majors, but i think you are the one that completely missed the point. You're arguing different stuff to what she was saying. Is that what a straw man argument is? anyway, i think that's what you're doing. Go back and read the actual meaning of what she was saying rather than just the words.


    kinda what she was saying.
     


  14. wogbog

    wogbog Senior member

    Messages:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    856
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Location:
    west canada
    

    Kinda. I mostly thought Kant was funny to bring up because the conversation was about jargon and Kant has my favouritest jargon. Hume's a tough nut to crack. Kant's response is clever I'm not sure it totally works. I should probably believe philosophy is still doing stuff since it's my major... :embar:
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


  15. Lane

    Lane Senior member

    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    694
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    Location:
    dunno
    

    ron paul is awesome, obama sucks

    teger still thinks his opinion is law, etc etc



    it was a joke, it became something more because ToJ headmaster got butthurt over something so trivial.


    he posted a comment from another forum, he could have easily addressed me there, and not made a big deal out of it.


    happy new years
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by