1. Welcome to the new Styleforum!

    We hope you’re as excited as we are to hang out in the new place. There are more new features that we’ll announce in the near future, but for now we hope you’ll enjoy the new site.

    We are currently fine-tuning the forum for your browsing pleasure, so bear with any lingering dust as we work to make Styleforum even more awesome than it was.

    Oh, and don’t forget to head over to the Styleforum Journal, because we’re giving away two pairs of Carmina shoes to celebrate our move!

    Please address any questions about using the new forum to support@styleforum.net

    Cheers,

    The Styleforum Team

    Dismiss Notice

Thoughts on the Sartorialist

Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by TheBatman, Jul 27, 2016.

  1. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    See, this too is a shaky assumption. The fact is we just don't know what the average man on the street thought of women in Greece. Certainly a few philosophers had some degree for scorn toward women, but if you step back, it's literally only a few dudes who all knew each other who were saying this. It would be like if the only American writings that survived a nuclear apocalypse were from Donald Trump, how much could we actually say about American society? The answer, of course, is not much. Despite hoe tempting it might be to say otherwise.
     
  2. dieworkwear

    dieworkwear Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,565
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    

    *tips fedora
     
    6 people like this.
  3. Mojo1990

    Mojo1990 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    443
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2014
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    

    I'm positing explanations

    I've said that people go through a process of rationalisation which subverts the "neural" default behavior in humans. How have I arrived at this? Well we know how the consumption of pornography can literally rewire the brain. In this same vein young children who were "initiated" (we would now say abused) had experiences contrary to what they would normally have experienced had they not been part of that society. My presumption is an objective one, in that "normal" human beings (considering evolutionary biology) when left to their own devices, void of cultural influences, would primarily desire sexual relationships with that of the opposite sex. It is precisely because of certain "extreme" cultural values that led men to justify their exploitation of young boys, all the while continuing to engage in sexual rights with women
     
  4. dieworkwear

    dieworkwear Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,565
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    

    wut?
     
    2 people like this.
  5. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    This is objective, true, but it is also meaningless. It's impossible to prove or to draw conclusions from it because you'd never be able to take away cultural influences, even the most minor ones. Because of that you couldn't say one way or the other what the sexual repercussion of having no culture would look like, even if you could begin to define what having no cultural influences even means.
     
  6. Mojo1990

    Mojo1990 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    443
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2014
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Child studies have, although not conclusive, shown differences in male and female preferences and behaviour from really early on.

    Anyway this is way off point
     
  7. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Child studies aren't even close to existing in a cultural vacuum. Besides, those studies have come under a lot of doubt recently. They are more often a lightning rod for gender politics than anything you can draw a reliable conclusion from.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2016
    1 person likes this.
  8. meso

    meso Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,820
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Location:
    Long Beach, CA
    [​IMG]
     
    2 people like this.
  9. WordsAndThings

    WordsAndThings New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2016
    Location:
    Chicago
    In the same way that, say, Yohji's oversized relaxed style isn't everybody's cup of tea... we can still appreciate an aesthetic balance. The pic in the OP is a relatively simple, well matched ensemble that manages to pair basics without being either too boring or too garish. One element of bright color (the pink headband), a clean and balanced tanktop/jeans, and a fun pattern on the Gucci bag. The two bracelets add some necessary accessorizing. It's fairly clear why Scott would have chosen it; it takes a simple bag, tanktop, and jeans yet manages a hint of flair. It's a way of paring things down without either seeming too severe (eg Prada, Jil Sander, etc) or too relaxed (Gap, Banana Republic). Reminds me of some of the old-school Helmut Lang.

    If you just look at the items according to color/pattern/seasonal rules... it's really not a bad matching (again, though obviously not something everybody could wear).
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2016
  10. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,345
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    I'm not really sure where you get old (I assume pre-NYC) Helmut Lang from the outfit.

    I mean, it's not a bad outfit, but it looks pretty unremarkable to me. I am not sure how this outfit was chosen by the OP, but for me, the proportions, the patterns, and the accessorizing, none of them stand out to me. Some of Scot's subjects are immediately arresting, but I'd agree with the much heard opinion that a lot of it is just... okay.
     
  11. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    It seems the man-bat has lost interest. In like a lion, out like a lamb.
     
  12. TheBatman

    TheBatman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    65
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Well hello! It's the pearl clutcher! You woke up from your fainting spell? Good to have you back.

    This has been a fruitless conversation filled with nothing but personal insults and bizarre PC thought policing. So yes, I lost interest.

    But I have to admit, your Victorian fainting spell was very entertaining, so it was worth it for that at least.
     
  13. double00

    double00 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,696
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2014
    Location:
    Not Where but When
    naught to do with threak but this is an arresting thought.

    do you really mean you try to remove your personal experiences (or "bias") from fit crit? i feel like i'm missing something here...
     
  14. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,345
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    

    I can't remove personal bias from my analysis, but I can and do try to be extremely self-critical and see whether my opinions, especially negative ones, are founded on sound principles within the realm of fashion, design, etc...
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    This is the correct way to go about things, IMO. Much has been said about bias in academics, for instance. Especially in the humanities. Post modernism did much damage to the notion of objectivity, however, I believe that even if we know we can't be perfectly objective it is still worth while to be as objective as possible. A healthy recognition of our limits in this regard also goes a long way.
     
  16. derrida26

    derrida26 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    523
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Lucky for me I guess that my instinctual first impressions just always happen to reflect the fundamental nature of reality?
     
  17. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,345
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    I think that a healthy approach is to assume that you are wrong, and proceed from there. Put up all of the strongest arguments against your position, and see if the arguments in favor of your position hold, or fall under assault. If they do, re-examine your position. Assume that your moral framework is flawed. That will allow you to examine your premises and value judgements critically. This goes for all political positions (assuming for a moment that all positions are inherently political.)

    BTW, this goes for all political stripes. While the prevailing view here is that @TheBatman 's views are silly, and certainly, he himself lacks some critical thinking abilities, none of us should pat our backs on a job well done. When the opponent is lacking, that doesn't mean that your argument is clearly right. It just means that you have a inferior opponent. While you don't have to do this is public, it's useful to question the premise, for example, that "gender normative" is necessarily a bad thing, and that tolerance and acceptance of queer culture is necessarily a good thing. There are plenty of things that we certainly do not support, tolerate, nor condone. Why then, do we accept gender fluidity as something that should be tolerated when it could just as easily be not, has historically not been, and is still viewed by much of the world as either a psychiatric condition or worse. Even within the small minority in the "global culture" who are connected by the internet and franky, upper middle class conveniences (like relative ease of access to international travel), acceptance of queer culture is relatively new. Try finding references to transgendered individuals even a decade ago. In LGBTQ, the "T" and "Q" parts f that acronym are fairly recent. Remember that Don't ask, Don't tell was a product not of the 1950s or whatever, but of the 1990s.

    tldr: don't accept anything, including your own worldview, without rigorous and critical self-examination. Also, just because your opponents are dolts doesn't mean that you are right.

    Right?
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    You make several points that I think are key. The one I want to focus on is the one that I believe most of the general public has the hardest time with. Which is to say, questioning the held beliefs of what is, or what you perceive to be, the moral majority. When I saw moral majority I don't mean christian conservatives, but rather the moral ideologies of whatever in-group you might identify with. This is one of the consistent problems that undergraduates have difficulty with. As an example, there was a grad/undergrad class on the Old South that I had. When the subject of the slaveholders themselves came up the undergrads, and many of the gradate students as well, recoiled at the thought of even considering the historical situation for their point of view. The institution of slavery, and the slave-owners themselves, were immediately discounted as evil, backward, and not worthy of examination. Most of us, myself included, wouldn't hesitate to classify slavery as a great evil. However (and this is the challenge of history) a person can still assume that mantel temporarily if only they have the courage to. Imagine what it might be like to think that blacks are inferior, imagine what it might be like to think that you are doing them good by enslaving them. And then you can come out of it, come back to your world, and be better from having examined something horrible from the perspective of someone who thinks it good. This was the challenge that was issued in this class, although it was hardly met at all. Through this exercise it becomes clear how tenuous our seemingly rock solid moral assumptions are, and that no doubt the people of the future will hold moral beliefs very different from our own.
     
  19. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,345
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    This is one area in which I think that we are sorely missing old debate styles, in which each team or individual is GIVEN an argument to defend. They may personally agree with that position, or it may run counter to everything they hold dear. The point is to develop critical thinking skills and the ability to articulate a position without resorting to any emotional appeal.
     
  20. Caustic Man

    Caustic Man Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,335
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    I remember doing that. Very instructional and very needed today. Especially with the insulating affects of social media (which I believe allows us to carefully select our friends and news, rather than be exposed to new ideas).
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by