The WAYWT Discussion Thread

Originally Posted by Uncontrol

Click to expand...

Will try to have some outfit discussion, haha ... I actually meant to discuss this, but people here wear things simply for the sake of ornamentation all the time. Is Kunk's dick so large that he needs a 50" rise? Does mellow have some type of psoriasis that requires him to wear his clothes just slightly loose enough as to not irritate his delicate skin? No hate to either of these two -- they're both great -- and it's fine if you think the chain is gaudy and tacky, it is. I just find that "it's just for aesthetics/ornamentation!" a really lame argument to make when discussing style. Sometimes it's more subtle -- such as mellow's case, where his "anti-fit" works for him -- other times it's less subtle -- such as a drop crotch -- and sometimes it's screaming loud, like a bunch of chains with dangling metal cubes. Doing something for aesthetic value only should not be considered a negative.
This post was pointless outside of giving Kunk an opportunity to claim that he has a 50" dick. It's not "aesthetic value" it's shock value. You went to a lot of trouble to type out a long straw man argument when it was pretty obvious that my point was not an anti-ornamentation pro-spartan attitude (lol have you seen some of the **** I wear) but that the only reason the chain with baubles is there is for the sake of being flashy. As I said, your whole deal is very "LOOK AT ******* ME" and you seem all too willing to pass up interesting directions you could take what you do in favour of standing out for the sake of it. It's unfortunate because you could probably do better if you wanted to, and actually have the "don't give a ****" attitude required to experiment. But the way you're doing it now makes the end product, to be brutally honest, pretty uninteresting which is the exact opposite of what you're hoping for.

Originally Posted by Cacatfish

Click to expand...

It's interesting how many people who eschew the prep look will readily appropriate military inspired fashions, which are like the definition of stagnant, statist and aesthetically limited. What gives?
-It actually changed a lot over the years -Darker connotations are certainly not absent from many outfits worn here that I like, introducing the menace of military outfits into a style can be interesting. Some uniforms are certainly visually arresting. In fact I briefly toyed with the idea of contrasting the mediocrity of preppy bad guys in those teen comedies I mentioned with the raw power of certain military outfits but I was worried we'd go into "nazi blabla" too quickly. -The military introduces a lot of innovation, particularly in the use of materials and someone like Jun Takahashi (Undercover) is certainly great at translating them to designer wear. -Starting with the Vietnam war (maybe earlier but it was massive at that time) military pieces have been commonly appropriated into subcultural dressing so the connotations have sorta taken a 180.

This has been a most fascinating thread.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

Your clothes and you in it say if you're dressed well or not. I think my use of expressionism and formalism were properly explained in the post, if you need some additional information I suggest reading a little bit about art, not knowing what "formalism" means is roughly the equivalent of not knowing what capitalism is. You know that much about economics so learn the very basics of art criticism and aesthetics. If you're not ready to do that much why would anyone care about what you think REGARDING AESTHETICS. I'm not judging you on other topics, not judging your character either.

As far as this conversation, you seem to know what you are talking about. I might take that advise. Despite me being new here and my condescending comments I did join to learn more about the clothes I was buying. Can't hurt to learn these things. I am coming from the Health/Medicine field so my art knowledge is knowing the meaning of neo-clasicism and chiaroscuro

Originally Posted by noobizor

Click to expand...

Not very profitably, is what I've been saying. Or do you think equating those who wear rugby shirts to rapists is a good way to go about it?

EDIT: Please don't take this to mean people aren't interested in your ideas.

This is lame. I make a long post where I place this into context followed by a series of postings expanding on it and answering people and you still choose to present it like that. You're being disingenuous. For one I talked about connotations that clothing evoke not the actual behaviour of one particular wearer on SF, the date **** is a joke related to the teen comedies references, where preppies are commonly presented as douches. This has taken a hold on culture at large, sometimes for good reasons when you look at the behaviour of american college students.

Let's get ******* serious about style.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

-It actually changed a lot over the years
-Darker connotations are certainly not absent from many outfits worn here that I like, introducing the menace of military outfits into a style can be interesting. Some uniforms are certainly visually arresting. In fact I briefly toyed with the idea of contrasting the mediocrity of preppy bad guys in those teen comedies I mentioned with the raw power of certain military outfits but I was worried we'd go into "nazi blabla" too quickly.
-The military introduces a lot of innovation, particularly in the use of materials and someone like Jun Takahashi (Undercover) is certainly great at translating them to designer wear.
-Starting with the Vietnam war (maybe earlier but it was massive at that time) military pieces have been commonly appropriated into subcultural dressing so the connotations have sorta taken a 180.

You're right on with the last point, i was gonna say something along those lines starting with the beatniks. My own philosophy is that it also has to do with the image of the soldier as a heroic any-guy. What I was really trying to elicit with that question Though was: what is it about preppy fashion that gets peoples goat? Now I saw those same stupid teen movies in the eighties and hated the preps too (not by accident of course) but that still doesn't explain
More than a mild dislike. What inspires the teal ire?

moo, you should be wearing a kilt.

Originally Posted by Mr. Moo

Click to expand...

Let's get ******* serious about style.

YES

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

This is lame...I talked about connotations that clothing evoke... the date **** is a joke...This has taken a hold on culture at large, sometimes for good reasons when you look at the behaviour of american college students.

Originally Posted by mellowfellow

Click to expand...

thanks guys, pants is by +j.

dayum.

Originally Posted by AR_Six

Click to expand...

This post was pointless outside of giving Kunk an opportunity to claim that he has a 50" dick. It's not "aesthetic value" it's shock value. You went to a lot of trouble to type out a long straw man argument when it was pretty obvious that my point was not an anti-ornamentation pro-spartan attitude (lol have you seen some of the **** I wear) but that the only reason the chain with baubles is there is for the sake of being flashy. As I said, your whole deal is very "LOOK AT ******* ME" and you seem all too willing to pass up interesting directions you could take what you do in favour of standing out for the sake of it. It's unfortunate because you could probably do better if you wanted to, and actually have the "don't give a ****" attitude required to experiment. But the way you're doing it now makes the end product, to be brutally honest, pretty uninteresting which is the exact opposite of what you're hoping for.
You're so serious ... I know the chain is tacky. It is a tacky item. However, you make the mistake of assuming I wear it because it's tacky, because I want to draw people's attention. You assume that I could go in "better" (and that is really subjective) directions but choose not to because I would prefer to draw attention to myself. You're incorrect. I don't dress in any way to draw attention to myself; it's just an inevitable outcome of dressing the way I do. Everything I wear I wear simply because I like it and I want to wear it. When I put that chain on I don't think, "oh this is great, it's so loud and tacky and people will stare at me." I think that it's cool and that I would like to wear it. Sometimes it is really just that simple. And yes, I could go in directions that would please you and others here more than the directions I take. Maybe, incidentally, that will some day happen. If it does happen, however, it will not be because I seek the approval of anyone here; it will be because I decided on my own to move in that direction.

Originally Posted by noobizor

Click to expand...

Want to be less confused, read the whole sentence instead of removing the parts you don't want to acknowledge. Shame on you if you can't parse the information in a way that makes sense and only attempt to make a cheap shot, your trolling is getting repetitive. I guess this was my last try.

Your inconsistency is what's baffling. Here's the full post:

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

This is lame. I make a long post where I place this into context followed by a series of postings expanding on it and answering people and you still choose to present it like that. You're being disingenuous. For one I talked about connotations that clothing evoke not the actual behaviour of one particular wearer on SF, the date **** is a joke related to the teen comedies references, where preppies are commonly presented as douches. This has taken a hold on culture at large, sometimes for good reasons when you look at the behaviour of american college students.
It's the last sentence that's a doozy. Unless it's just a second language thing.

Originally Posted by noobizor

Click to expand...

Your inconsistency is what's baffling. Here's the full post:




It's the last sentence that's a doozy. Unless it's just a second language thing.

I dunno if you've noticed but I take what you say and post a retort to it. You just say "you're wrong". I'm not going to bother answering you unless you develop a cogent and explicit argumentation. Judging by your previous posting chances are we won't interact again.