Sustainable Menswear?

[Nobilis Animus]

Yup, supporting the environment is a breeze when you only have to entertain it as a hypothetical

Oh, spare us the virtue-signalling. It's nearly as bad as the pseudo authorities.

 

[FlyingHorker]

I find that the SW&D side is both friendlier and more knowledgeable and open about broader issues about style, which is one reason why I spend most of my (limited) forum time over there these days.

Any threads you'd recommend?

 

[dieworkwear]

Any threads you'd recommend?

Lots to explore there, but "Random Fashion Thoughts" is the main chatroom. Meaning, just a general place to gather and chat. The other threads tend to be more specific to a topic. I agree with FlyingMonkey that SWD nowadays is generally friendlier/ less combative.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

Yes, wouldn't want to have any controversy or dissenting opinion. It hurts the sensitive mind so horribly.

 

[dieworkwear]

Yes, wouldn't want to have any controversy or dissenting opinion. It hurts the sensitive mind so horribly.

Nobody minds a dissenting opinion, man. It's just not an enjoyable discussion to constantly have to deal with bad "i am a gentleman" jokes, really dumb information, terrible opinions (not dissenting ones, just ignorant ones, like how an actual tailor had to correct you while you argued with him on technical tailoring matters), constant sniping, etc etc etc. It just doesn't make for a very enjoyable convo. It's not fun. It's not educational. It's not a community.

 

[Panama]

I don’t have an issue with sustainability. I don’t have qualms about making the planet a healthier and more prosperous place to live.

What I do have a problem with are the Sahibs telling us what we should and shouldn’t buy, going so far as to say don’t buy cheap cashmere. Setting aside the relative meaning of cheap ($80 @ UniQlo is cheap to some and unaffordable to others) it smacks of a certain sense of entitlement. That there are those in life who deserve, and others who don’t. That certain fabrics and products are for us and not for you.

by the way, some of these sentiments are echoed by those who don’t seem to have a problem with the human toll associated with the production of these goods. I’m speaking of slave labor practices in many countries that produce the goods and services we consume.

if that’s immoderate, obnoxious and/or pretentious then color me guilty.

How much is a Costco Cashmere?

 

[Nobilis Animus]

Nobody minds a dissenting opinion, man. It's just not an enjoyable discussion to constantly have to deal with bad "i am a gentleman" jokes, really dumb information, terrible opinions (not dissenting ones, just ignorant ones, like how an actual tailor had to correct you while you argued with him on technical tailoring matters), constant sniping, etc etc etc. It just doesn't make for a very enjoyable convo. It's not fun. It's not educational. It's not a community.

Bad jokes aside, to which I fully admit, I'm interested to hear more about the really dumb information I've posted.

Care to point any of it out? I hope that's a neutral enough request.

 

[Count de Monet]

@Keith Taylor I’ll freely admit to being almost totally ignorant about all things Mongolian (though I CAN find it on a map). So here is a sincere question:

Are we to infer the Mongolian governmental authorities are powerless to enforce land use rules in the country? Or do they simply not want to for fear of hurting its “cash crop”?

Well, maybe that’s a pair of questions.

 

[Panama]

I find that the SW&D side is both friendlier and more knowledgeable and open about broader issues about style, which is one reason why I spend most of my (limited) forum time over there these days.

Isn't that for young people?

 

[Keith Taylor]

@Keith Taylor I’ll freely admit to being almost totally ignorant about all things Mongolian (though I CAN find it on a map). So here is a sincere question:

Are we to infer the Mongolian governmental authorities are powerless to enforce land use rules in the country? Or do they simply not want to for fear of hurting its “cash crop”?

Well, maybe that’s a pair of questions.

It’s not so much that they’re powerless to enforce them, more that there are very few land use rules to enforce.

Mongolians are a very unusual people because it’s a nomadic culture. Until relatively recently - the middle of the 20th century - almost everyone in the country lived nomadically, shifting with the seasons along with their herds. In 1950 the capital of Ulaanbaatar was home to only 70,000 people while the other 90% of the population at that time roamed around. Even today close to half of the population still live nomadically to some extent. My own father in law lives in a ger that could be packed up on the back of a cart in a sweaty afternoon.

As a result of this the concept of private land ownership is still fairly alien to Mongolians. They’ve made their peace with it in the cities where there are fixed structures and it makes sense, but if you suggested that the countryside could be similarly owned they’d look at you as if you’d gone mad. It would be like suggesting to them that the government could take ownership of the air.

I think if any government tried to impose land use rules on herders who have been roaming with their animals since the days of Chinggis Khan they wouldn’t make it to the next election, but in any case it would never occur to politicians to try to impose them, because they themselves would be horrified by the idea. The national culture is so entwined with nomadic life that it would be unthinkable to change it.

With that in mind they’d have to approach the problem from a different angle. I dunno, tax goat ownership? They need to get creative, though, because at this rate there won’t be much steppe left to save a couple of decades from now.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

by the way, some of these sentiments are echoed by those who don’t seem to have a problem with the human toll associated with the production of these goods. I’m speaking of slave labor practices in many countries that produce the goods and services we consume.

Broadly speaking, therer is a significant overlap between people fighting for better labour standards the those fighting for sustainability (I know because I've been an activist for most of my adult life, going on 30 years now). It's only people who don't genuinely care or do anything about either, who will disingenously try to play off one in against the other.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

Your fight does not seem to be yielding much fruit.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

Your fight does not seem to be yielding much fruit.

Damn the fruit, how much cashmere can we expect? That's all I want to know.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

With that in mind they’d have to approach the problem from a different angle. I dunno, tax goat ownership? They need to get creative, though, because at this rate there won’t be much steppe left to save a couple of decades from now.

here, we subsidize farmers so that they don’t overproduce and crater prices.

a subsidy to herders to keep their herds small could be paid for by an export tax to be paid for by the buyers and used to do this. Buyers will pay because where else would they go.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I promise I'll be done after this, but this rudeness really ought to be addressed.

Nobody minds a dissenting opinion, man. It's just not an enjoyable discussion to constantly have to deal with bad "i am a gentleman" jokes, really dumb information, terrible opinions (not dissenting ones, just ignorant ones, like how an actual tailor had to correct you while you argued with him on technical tailoring matters), constant sniping, etc etc etc. It just doesn't make for a very enjoyable convo. It's not fun. It's not educational. It's not a community.

(bad "i am a gentleman" jokes)

Are jokes really bad if someone laughs at them? More to the point: what do you care? Your obvious dislike for anything with a whiff of 'gentleman' in it suggests that you are either 'triggered' by this word in particular, or that you have difficulty separating sarcasm and satire from ordinary writing, or that you are especially bothered by jokes you don't find funny. Regardless of which it is, I'll be sure to put an '/s' at the end of my jokes from now on when I know you're likely to take part in the convo. Or you could just... I don't know... scroll past them?


(really dumb information/terrible opinions)

This is particularly rich coming from a fashion blogger, but I suppose one can't think of everything at once. Since you decline to provide specifics, I assume that you aren't referring to any of my posts which have to do with my personal opinions on style, and more the ones which contradict some deeply-held #menswear orthodoxy - as evinced by the fanciful colouration of 'ignorant,' as though there were a singular body of wisdom to be learnt.

Some people prefer their tailors to work for them, and not the other way round, you see. And when a tailor's opinions are sometimes contradicted by the opinions of other tailors (and by your own admission, the approach of a tailor to his work is constrained by his previous experience - i.e., a house style), one can be forgiven for assuming that the word of a single tailor is not sacred knowledge, no matter how pretty his shoulders.

As far as other information is concerned, I try not to speak about things with which I have no direct experience. Even when I do, the opinions I form may be mistaken, but it's rather impudent of you to call them dumb. From other posts, it appears that you once attended graduate school, and yet you hesitate to add references for your assertions of other people's views (it must have been a STEM field). I realize that you are a fashion blogger, and so the success your trade relies upon the cultivation of a beautiful aura of insider information and fundamental knowledge in a field of studies so wide-ranging that any honest human being could hardly lay serious claim to it without risking becoming a laughingstock to outsiders. That said, when your own posts contain patently unhistorical information or sweeping, authoritarian generalities without much evidence beyond your own opinion or the opinions of other bloggers, whose own expertise is as uncredentialed as anyone else's, but presented as informed (by whom?) as opposed to ignorant, the matter is quite out of my hands. We cannot be partial individualists - we either all are or none.


(It's not fun. It's not educational. It's not a community.)

Hmm... fun is debatable. In my experience, sniping of threads usually occurs when the topic has exhausted its point, or when the point of the topic sucked anyway. As far as educational: that is true. I have never made it my mission to educate anyone on the subject of clothing, mostly because I have no patience for it. More importantly, I have always thought that buying fancy clothing and cultivating your own style should be an individualistic pursuit, and not one that defers to higher authorities. I suppose that also applies to community, since a well-mannered group of people discussing ideas is probably a good thing, but a communal mindset of what is and is not a proper opinion to hold is assuredly a bad one.


At the end of the day, all of this is just clothes. I suppose that is where most of my amusement comes from as I poke fun at the ideal of the #menswear fashion lifestyle - absurdity. If we cannot laugh at the present, we risk becoming cantankerous old groots.

Perhaps I am one also - but at least I have a butler. (/s)