Recent purchases - Part II

yessssss willy with the pshop

i totally have a mancrush on you. no ****. okay, maybe a little

where is the sword?!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ummm wow schorl x sympathy of soul bracelet deerskin + silver 925 + tourmaline

looks cool, I assume this is a yjp or proxy thing yeah?

yeah http://team-bryan.com/SHOP/schorl-0610067053.html

Originally Posted by scott.m

Click to expand...

who wants a banger in the mouth?

Also,
No one looks right wearing fashions on a bus. Trains work, but buses? Nah.

Watch Buffalo '66

Also I really dislike cars, can you guys discuss this stuff in your own car threads? I don't post artbooks or furniture I buy in here, it's for fashion-related purchases.

^ we'd like to see nontheless

Originally Posted by BB1

Click to expand...

A more interesting question is why do so many people feel their car is a reflection of themselves, similar to how clothing is often viewed?

With clothing the link is far more direct since people will frequently mistake a perfect fitting, well styled outfit as being one in the same as the person wearing it. The psychologist J. C. Flugel even coined the term "confluence" to describe this phenomena of mistaking one's clothing as being an actual part of the person themselves. But with a car this association is far weaker.

Yet in American society most people spend hugely disproportionate amounts of their income on new cars every few years, and relatively little on clothing. If you spend a while watching the cars come and go in a parking lot, it is not difficult to spot $40,000+ new vehicles with the people getting out of them looking like they buy all their clothing form Walmart or Costco.

To the average American a $500 pair of shoes is an unthinkable level of luxury! (Recall the big deal made a couple years ago over John McCain's $500 shoes). Yet a $40,000 car is seen as very sensible to many or perhaps even a level of luxury that one deserves, never mind that $15,000 cars exist that might suit their transportation needs too.

How did we get this point? Why the difference?

A few comments, in bulk and with no discussion of correlation between them as this isn't a dissertation:

1)\tAmerican cities weren't initially built in the middle-ages or earlier which means the restriction about being able to go to nearby market on foot to sell/buy your wares wasn't in place (you had people using horse carriages or even trains). The end result is that you have, on average, much larger cities sitting within huge distance on each other. This isn't a world built for public transportation or walking/biking but for car transportation.
2)\tThat whole frontiersman mythology has been successfully translated to cars from the start and they stand for individualism and liberty. This is further reinforced by American pop culture and car marketing/advertising.
3)\tOwning a car is an easy way to signal status as it requires virtually no knowledge or taste just enough money to buy one (it is also recognized by almost anyone for the same reasons). In fact this is why in certain social strata where cultural capital is paramount you'll find many people openly shunning cars and the ensuing culture. These people will often pay a lot of money buying/renting small places in prime locations when they could have bought a huge house elsewhere and drove a luxury car when they had to move around. It's usually not even an option they'd consider as not being central or having a luxury car would actually harm the image of themselves they've built. You'll notice that car enthusiasts (it appears we've got a couple here) will work around the inherent vulgarity of car culture by developing a taste for certain esoteric modifications, being very selective in the designs they like (i.e, "BMW sucks now") and generally using signs of recognition and a meta-language not understandable by the average car buyer, kinda like the MC suit wearers or SWDers do when discussing clothing (Margiela good Dsquared bad, Borrelli good Armani bad).
4)\t Liking cars is masculine (power, freedom, risk taking, active vs passive, phallic symbol), liking fashion is feminine (ornamentation, passivityVs the (male) gaze, socialization, that whole **** culture). You're not a ****** are you?
5)\tCars are uniquely American, fashion is an European thing.

#1 also happens to be reinforced by tearing down and rebuilding everything (as if nobody was alive 50 years ago, must start anew !)
You can even extend the latter part of #3 to any enthusiast/hobbyist and esoterism
#5 is a bit weird but otherwise good general observations here.

Funny you say that fuuma, the bmw forum I was on ten years ago was the MC equivalent (small group of automotive purists), there has been nothing else like it since. In fact me and a prominent MCer have been homies since then

talk about my awesome bracelet

Originally Posted by Uncontrol

Click to expand...

talk about my awesome bracelet
It looks like something you might find poking out of belladonna's posterior in a squirting/domination vid this is probably more my issue than yours.

Originally Posted by willy cheesesteak

Click to expand...

holy **** I couldn't for the life of me figure out what was going on for at least 15 seconds.

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Click to expand...

A few comments, in bulk and with no discussion of correlation between them as this isn't a dissertation: 1)\tAmerican cities weren’t initially built in the middle-ages or earlier which means the restriction about being able to go to nearby market on foot to sell/buy your wares wasn’t in place (you had people using horse carriages or even trains). The end result is that you have, on average, much larger cities sitting within huge distance on each other. This isn’t a world built for public transportation or walking/biking but for car transportation. 2)\tThat whole frontiersman mythology has been successfully translated to cars from the start and they stand for individualism and liberty. This is further reinforced by American pop culture and car marketing/advertising. 3)\tOwning a car is an easy way to signal status as it requires virtually no knowledge or taste just enough money to buy one (it is also recognized by almost anyone for the same reasons). In fact this is why in certain social strata where cultural capital is paramount you’ll find many people openly shunning cars and the ensuing culture. These people will often pay a lot of money buying/renting small places in prime locations when they could have bought a huge house elsewhere and drove a luxury car when they had to move around. It’s usually not even an option they’d consider as not being central or having a luxury car would actually harm the image of themselves they’ve built. You’ll notice that car enthusiasts (it appears we’ve got a couple here) will work around the inherent vulgarity of car culture by developing a taste for certain esoteric modifications, being very selective in the designs they like (i.e, “BMW sucks now”) and generally using signs of recognition and a meta-language not understandable by the average car buyer, kinda like the MC suit wearers or SWDers do when discussing clothing (Margiela good Dsquared bad, Borrelli good Armani bad). 4)\t Liking cars is masculine (power, freedom, risk taking, active vs passive, phallic symbol), liking fashion is feminine (ornamentation, passivityVs the (male) gaze, socialization, that whole **** culture). You’re not a ****** are you? 5)\tCars are uniquely American, fashion is an European thing.
Thanks, those are all interesting and accurate comments. But what about the angle of how the stronger distaste for elitism in America affects the acceptance of that which is inaccessible to the masses? Your point #3 seems to touch on the subject by echoing the same thing I originally said-- i.e. how it requires little knowledge or taste to buy a car. Expensive cars feel accessible to the everyman, but expensive clothing is not and is thus viewed as elitist. And America clearly has a stronger distaste for elitism than Europe. Thus I feel any discussion of this subject should ideally address this area.

Originally Posted by nahneun

Click to expand...

I'm honestly not sure how you're framing your understanding of American culture, but you're wrong. Having discrepancies in financial wealth automatically assumes differences in class. I don't know why you think America dreams of becoming a Marxist utopia. If anything, America celebrates individualism more than any other modern country.
Bullshit. Differences in wealth do not automatically assume differences in class. Haven't you ever heard of the concept of the nouveau riche, watched the the Beverly Hillbillies, or known someone who was wealthy yet adhered to the values of lower class society? And what exactly did I say that implies I feel America dreams of becoming a Marxist utopia? I actually said that Americans dream everyone has an equal chance to become wealthy, they nearly celebrate displays of wealth, but they dislike displays of class difference and elitism. Americans like to believe that displays of wealth are not displays of class difference. Try actually discussing the concept of class difference with the average American-- many will get angry! But you can happily discuss expensive cars with even the poor.

Originally Posted by BB1

Click to expand...

Thanks, those are all interesting and accurate comments. But what about the angle of how the stronger distaste for elitism in America affects the acceptance of that which is inaccessible to the masses? Your point #3 seems to touch on the subject by echoing the same thing I originally said-- i.e. how it requires little knowledge or taste to buy a car. Expensive cars feel accessible to the everyman, but expensive clothing is not and is thus viewed as elitist. And America clearly has a stronger distaste for elitism than Europe. Thus I feel any discussion of this subject should ideally address this area. Bullshit. Differences in wealth do not automatically assume differences in class. Haven't you ever heard of the concept of the nouveau riche, watched the the Beverly Hillbillies, or known someone who was wealthy yet adhered to the values of lower class society? And what exactly did I say that implies I feel America dreams of becoming a Marxist utopia? I actually said that Americans dream everyone has an equal chance to become wealthy, they nearly celebrate displays of wealth, but they dislike displays of class difference and elitism. Americans like to believe that displays of wealth are not displays of class difference. Try actually discussing the concept of class difference with the average American-- many will get angry! But you can happily discuss expensive cars with even the poor.
Your problem is that you extrapolate too much, make very very strong generalizations from a very limited sample size, and fail to see your own logical fallacies. You formulate your arguments by only seeing things you WANT to see, no matter how little it actually reflects the American population. Please step out of your tunnel and try to examine these issues from numerous different angles. First off, expensive cars are most definitely NOT accessible to everyone. Perhaps knowledge of expensive cars, but most definitely not the purchase of. Again, this is largely because of cultural constructs, which I will not reiterate because both Fuuma and impolyt_one have been on point about. Fashion is not ELITIST, it is just TOO comprehensive for the average American to digest readily. Esoteric and intimidating, if nothing else, but that does not make it elitist. I know kendo and you don't. Does that make me elitist because I know something a disproportionately small sector of the world population knows about? Again, you are making a faulty logical connection; correlation is not causation. If anything, American hip hop culture is more strongly associated with ostentatious and flamboyant displays of wealth than European culture ever will be (hello, bling bling?). Such culture is more pervasive in America than it is anywhere else in the world. I am honestly very curious where you are obtaining your information that Americans hate displays of wealth more than Europeans do. Is this simply because they are more accepting of expensive clothes? Perhaps then, you should look at the roots of American and European fashion. The roots of elite American fashion is most strongly associated with Brooks Brothers (that sort of preppy look and trad suits). On the other hand, look at the couture fashion houses of Europe: Dior, Chanel, Lanvin, etc. etc. A completely different aesthetic. This, perhaps, is the answer you were looking for. American culture focused on practicality, systemic manufacturing, and mass production (Ford cars, gun production during the Civil War, etc.), which is why cuts are less of a focus. As long as it fits, it works. European houses explicitly focused on individual handiwork before the boom of pret-a-porter. The above, however, does not address the issue of perception of elitism through clothes or other material possessions. Please elucidate how Americans are CLEARLY more against elitism than Europeans are. If clothes are your only measure of elitism, you need to rethink your argument, because it ******* sucks. Your statements are strong, but you have no real evidence to back up any of your claims (and please, don't use an example that applies to 0.00000001% of the population and say it applies to everyone as you have been doing).

Originally Posted by BB1

Click to expand...

Most Americans tend to believe in (or perhaps hope for) a society with no social classes where the main measure of success is financial wealth.
No social class = Marxism. Hello? That is the most basic tenet of socialism. Anyway, the real problem with the above quote is that it is an oxymoron (China is the closest to what you are speaking of, but look at what's happened to it. it's ******* impossible. absolute social equality is an impossible ideal, ESPECIALLY if you allow capitalism into the equation [and as we all know, success in a capitalist market === more $$$$$$$$$$$$ than any other possible situation that can be applied to the mass]). And I am sure most Americans do NOT believe in such a society (you think America wants to become an idealized China?). Differences in wealth = differences in class. This is impossible to escape. Let's take China, for example, a real capitalist communist nation. Emerging bourgeois community from the growth of capitalism led to excessive consumption of material goods, which is an obvious display of wealth AND OF CLASS DIFFERENCE. HELLO, I AM RICHER THAN YOU SO I CAN BUY THESE THINGS THAT YOU CAN ONLY DREAM OF. I AM BETTER OFF THAN YOU. MY LIFE IS BETTER THAN YOURS. And you say people are accepting of displays of wealth but they are not with displays of differences in class? You think Americans are that dumb that they think those two things are mutually exclusive (well... I suppose you may have a point on the stupidity of the average American, but seriously? wow.)? You must be ******* out of your mind, dude. Differences in social class doesn't mean one person is a noble and the other is a commoner. Feudalism is over; we live in a capitalist world now. Some people fare better than others. You think success is equal? Having the same potential for opportunity does not mean you will realize that potential. You think everyone has the same opportunities to succeed? Nope, tough luck, try again. If Americans hated elitism as you so claim, there would be no need to buy fake LVs, Guccis, Pradas (all obvious attempts to mimic the rich and to put oneself in a higher social standing than one may actually be in). I'm sorry to be really blunt here, but you honestly need to take off your rose-colored lenses and rethink your ENTIRE perception of the world.

Originally Posted by BB1

Click to expand...

Thanks, those are all interesting and accurate comments.

But what about the angle of how the stronger distaste for elitism in America affects the acceptance of that which is inaccessible to the masses? Your point #3 seems to touch on the subject by echoing the same thing I originally said-- i.e. how it requires little knowledge or taste to buy a car. Expensive cars feel accessible to the everyman, but expensive clothing is not and is thus viewed as elitist. And America clearly has a stronger distaste for elitism than Europe. Thus I feel any discussion of this subject should ideally address this area.



Bullshit. Differences in wealth do not automatically assume differences in class. Haven't you ever heard of the concept of the nouveau riche, watched the the Beverly Hillbillies, or known someone who was wealthy yet adhered to the values of lower class society?

And what exactly did I say that implies I feel America dreams of becoming a Marxist utopia? I actually said that Americans dream everyone has an equal chance to become wealthy, they nearly celebrate displays of wealth, but they dislike displays of class difference and elitism. Americans like to believe that displays of wealth are not displays of class difference.

Try actually discussing the concept of class difference with the average American-- many will get angry! But you can happily discuss expensive cars with even the poor.

Really? I can't even count the number of people who have told me, "I just need a car to get me from point A to point B." These are the people that also couldn't give two ***** about style as well. Then there are the people who have their generic 'expensive' clothing and generic 'expensive' car.