# Fashion and why you need it (even if you think you don't)



## PurpleLemon (Apr 15, 2013)

A particularly hard-headed INTJ friend of mine is of the opinion that fashion is pointless, as it would have him alter his appearance to other people's standards. He is content wearing dad-jeans with purely utilitarian running shoes. 

I'm of the contrary opinion that fashion, even when viewed as a type of submission, is a social necessity that would render anyone who doesn't engage in its use either categorically obstinate or lacking in intellectual faculties. 

--------------------

Let us explore some views:

_"It just seems so arbitrary to me, what's wrong with [fashion] staying, I don't know, constant for like 5 years? Who's going to suffer?"_ 

Nobody is sitting on a switch that reads 'Change Fashion,' it's not a conscious decision. It's like telling natural selection "Hey, why do you evolve so slowly, let's speed things up here! Snap Snap!" It's basically natural selection applied to clothing, and natural selection is never arbitrary. 
_
"I've never been wearing basketball shorts, sneakers, and high socks everyday, but updating your wardrobe every 2-3 years because everyone else is doing it seems superfluous."
_
Looking nice is never superfluous. And before you say that 'looking nice' is subjective, let me tell you that while you're right and while you may have your own opinion about what 'looking nice' is, people who are judging you based on your looks (because as shallow as it is that's what people do) don't compare how you look with _your_ opinion of what it means to 'look nice', they compare how you look with _their_ opinion of what it means to look nice. And before you say that you don't value the opinion of people who judge based on looks, if you can find a person that is completely immune to any visual bias please let me know where these people are and bring me to them. I have a couple friends that would benefit from meeting them.

_"If I had infinite money and time I would have less of an issue with it."
_
Look at it as if you were presented with the choice to pay $200 and be more attractive or save the money and don't. It's an investment to future success, it boosts your confidence and your perceived virility and adequacy.
_
"I know it's more attractive to keep up with fashion, that's why it's dumb. People shouldn't base attractiveness on how I present myself. It's dumb that doing what everybody else does to the latest swivel and turn of trend buys you attractive points."

_While it may be dumb, it is how it is. If for some reason you still think that improving a person's perception of you is a valid way to become attractive, do it for the results it gives, not for embracing the legitimacy of the practice. Aesthetics have to be understood as dynamic. The same argument could be made "It's dumb that to have an attractive figure you have to workout and eat healthily."

_"Being attractive isn't dumb. The fact that needing to buy new things all the time to continue being attractive is a borderline hyper-capitalist societal degradation complex. Consumerism at its finest."

_As in-pragmatic as a fickle wardrobe change is, the pragmatic solution is to play the game despite how dumb it may seem. The results are worth it. The end justifies the means.

---------------

What view do you all take towards the relevancy of fashion? It is worth it to update your wardrobe depending on the style of the time? Does keeping up with fashion offer other benefits when it comes to plans of world domination or the wooing of women/men, or is it at it's core a sign of submission?


----------



## I_am_the_NiTe (Nov 29, 2013)

For those of you that do end up approaching this silly thread, this is essentially a copy and paste of the conversation I had with the OP about fashion on facebook. (Yes, we know each other IRL)

I stand by everything I said. 

Bottom line is that fashion is fickle, within the sense that it changes often and in relatively unpredictable ways. While there are gains to be had in following the latest 2-year curve, from an economic standpoint it is highly inefficient- especially when one considers how jacked the prices are for "designer clothing."

Your $200+ attraction upgrade is going to be obsolete in a few years anyway. One isn't going to suffer a horrendous attraction debuff for sticking with the 5-6 year curve instead of the topsy-turvy winding road that you're calling absolutely essential. 

Since we're both male and also heterosexual, it's worthy of acknowledgement that females' primary mode of attraction is personality, not appearance. As long as you're well groomed/well kept, and have good hygiene, you're not going to be at a significant disadvantage. Said females can tell me I'm wrong if I am indeed that.

But yes, buying the clothes everyone decided looks cool will also make you be perceived as being more cool. I choose to spend my money on clothes less often, trail a little further behind but not a decade far, and start looking at ways to quintuple my money's worth and buy a $10,000 suit for my professional existence. Those have been the formal style for the better part of this century. (Not fickle)


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Of course it is fickle @The Real McCoy, but it still doesn't change the fact that its relevant. 

Example when I am conducting an interview at work one aspect in self presentation is clothing. 
If it all means nothing then we would have people come in off the street in their cave furs.

Some of it is about evolving in society in terms of sophistication as becoming domesticated beings that take pride in out ability to reason and present. Rather then just run around like animals. 

Now I will say that fashion obsession or fashion industries are ridiculous as far as standards and images and all that jazz. I am certainly not into a zoolander mentality.

But I just don't think you can dismiss that it does demonstrate self representation and self identity. No soley, but it does say something when we choose what we wear.

I am not saying it has to mean everything, but it does mean something.


----------



## I_am_the_NiTe (Nov 29, 2013)

Cinnamon83 said:


> Of course it is fickle @The Real McCoy, but it still doesn't change the fact that its relevant.
> 
> Example when I am conducting an interview at work one aspect in self presentation is clothing.
> If it all means nothing then we would have people come in off the street in their cave furs.
> ...


Certainly, fashion means something
Impressions mean more, especially in professional settings. That's why I'll show up in a suit with a dress shirt and slacks. Plain, non-dorky-fathers' tie. 

What I'm arguing is that you can keep up without being at the very front of the pack.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

The Real McCoy said:


> What I'm arguing is that you can keep up without being at the very front of the pack.


I agree! I myself prefer timeless and plain colors. I might mix a trend in but I don't believe in keeping up with the jones.


----------



## PurpleLemon (Apr 15, 2013)

The Real McCoy said:


> For those of you that do end up approaching this silly thread, this is essentially a copy and paste of the conversation I had with the OP about fashion on facebook. (Yes, we know each other IRL)


Woah, easy there with the name-dropping. At least try to be subtle about it. 



The Real McCoy said:


> I stand by everything I said.
> 
> Bottom line is that fashion is fickle, within the sense that it changes often and in relatively unpredictable ways. While there are gains to be had in following the latest 2-year curve, from an economic standpoint it is highly inefficient- especially when one considers how jacked the prices are for "designer clothing."


This presupposes that you aren't already buying new clothes when your old clothes become insufficient. When you discover your pants have a hole in them, instead of replacing the exact style of two years ago, replace them with a current style or cut. When you go through your wardrobe and see you're a couple shirts short, buy a couple new shirts of the current style. You're argument can be used as "While there are gains to be had in replacing shirts that don't fit or are stained, from an economic standpoint it is highly inefficient."

In response to


The Real McCoy said:


> "designer clothing"


, there are numerous alternatives to high-end clothes that are stylish. For those I refer you to the subreddit /r/frugalmalefashion.



The Real McCoy said:


> Your $200+ attraction upgrade is going to be obsolete in a few years anyway. One isn't going to suffer a horrendous attraction debuff for sticking with the 5-6 year curve instead of the topsy-turvy winding road that you're calling absolutely essential.


Why upgrade anything if it's just going to become obsolete? My RAM and processor from 2007 are outdated, but I might as well just stick it out because my performance upgrade is just going to be outdated in another 5 years...pooey. I probably shouldn't have spent the money on my 2007 upgrade in the first place, stuck with my 2003 rig, and saved the money. It's just not worth the price.



The Real McCoy said:


> Since we're both male and also heterosexual, it's worthy of acknowledgement that females' primary mode of attraction is personality, not appearance. As long as you're well groomed/well kept, and have good hygiene, you're not going to be at a significant disadvantage. Said females can tell me I'm wrong if I am indeed that.


For the sake of the argument, let's agree that females' primary mode of attraction is personality and not appearance. It follows that appearance is somewhere on that line and that it does influence attraction, be it secondary, tertiary, or quaternary. Even if it is low overall, it is inefficient to try to gauge one's personality within 5 seconds of meeting. For this reason, appearance is the most common way judgement occurs, as while you see everybody around you, you only intimately know a fraction. Appearance might even turn women off from getting to know your personality.



The Real McCoy said:


> But yes, buying the clothes everyone decided looks cool will also make you be perceived as being more cool.
> I choose to spend my money on clothes less often, trail a little further behind but not a decade far, and start looking at ways to quintuple my money's worth and buy a $10,000 suit for my professional existence. Those have been the formal style for the better part of this century.


This is more or less agreeable, but spending $400 a year for 20 years is only $8,000, while spending $10,000 on a suit for 20 years is $10,000. The maths is debatable, but that is how much the maintenance of my wardrobe has cost me for the past year or so.


----------



## jeremiahpuppybeast (Oct 6, 2011)

The Real McCoy said:


> Certainly, fashion means something
> Impressions mean more, especially in professional settings. That's why I'll show up in a suit with a dress shirt and slacks. Plain, non-dorky-fathers' tie.
> 
> What I'm arguing is that you can keep up without being at the very front of the pack.


OMG, my head is going to explode from this conversation. I recently had a heated debate about fashion with an INTJ guy I was dating. His manner of dressing like more of a geriatric than my -almost 60 yo father turned me off considerably-seriously. Instant sexual attraction killer. Also, I don't know who went & told men that being attractive doesn't matter, b/c it certainly does. You need to make the best of what you have. Take pride in your appearance, as it were. It's likely that you expect as much from your female counterparts, or at the very least, have an appreciation for it. I'm not a shallow and superficial human being in general, and it's true that personality is the primary factor in attractiveness, but, it's not the only thing. I suspect that many people who say it doesn't matter are not being entirely truthful.

However, it sounds like you have a much more resonable approach to this. Don't get me wrong, when it comes to male fashion, I'm a fan of classic styles, which means you can wear the same things for a long time if you invest in quality. I don't want a metrosexual who spends more on clothing than I do, but I do expect grown ass men to know how to dress in an event appropriate fashion that will not draw unwelcomed attention to us when we go out together. If you buy your clothing at Academy Sporting Goods, you had better plan on wearing that shit to go hunting and fishing, for which it was intended, and not plan to wear it on a date with me to a swanky new restaurant. Don't take this to mean that I think you should spend a fortune or buy designer labels, b/c come on, that shit is foolish. Hell, I buy clothing at thrift stores quite often, myself. But I buy stuff that is timelessly fashionable and impeccably-fitting. 

I'm sorry, this turned out to be a bit of a derailing rant. Clearly I'm still bothered by what I thought was a very foolish perspective for that person to have.


----------



## Tzara (Dec 21, 2013)

I didnt read the whole thread, but I will start with this:


The Real McCoy said:


> Your $200+ attraction upgrade is going to be obsolete in *a few years* anyway.


You have no idea how fashion works, do you  "A few years"  lets make that 4 months.

Ok, going on..




PurpleLemon;5719098[B said:


> ]A particularly hard-headed INTJ friend of mine[/B] is of the opinion that fashion is pointless, as it would have him alter his appearance to other people's standards. He is content wearing dad-jeans with purely utilitarian running shoes.


So thinking fashion is stupid is really fine. I mean, you dont need fashion, or you dont need to alter your appearance to other peoples standards. But not dressing well, is something else. Why would you look bad on purpose? You can just choose your own style which happens to look good too.



> _"It just seems so arbitrary to me, what's wrong with [fashion] staying, I don't know, constant for like 5 years? Who's going to suffer?"_


I think it can, but the economy will suffer greatly. I mean seriously, clothing is one of the biggest markets, because its ever-changing. If you stabilize it, the economy will collapse, (or will take a huge hit). I'm sure you can agree with this "MCoy"



> Nobody is sitting on a switch that reads 'Change Fashion,' it's not a conscious decision.


Actually they are. So you are kinda right on this one, for the wrong reasons.



> _
> "I've never been wearing basketball shorts, sneakers, and high socks everyday, but updating your wardrobe every 2-3 years because everyone else is doing it seems @Superfluous."
> _


Sorry, flu.. just had to do it.
Anyhow, again 2-3 years is a really long time.

I accept that it is a bad system, but it is better than a system without change. Everyone wearing what they want, will cause alienation. Also, you are forgetting that we live in a world where people like to follow others, so regardless of fashion's current existence, there will be a "norm" for dressing up.



> _"If I had infinite money and time I would have less of an issue with it."
> _


Hmm, Class of clothing is different than fashion. So you dont like that clothes are expensive? (Are clothes expensive?, I thought everyone could afford them?) The range of price is a good way to see class differences, I would like to differentiate between a person with a high-end job and a person with a low-end job.




> _
> "I know it's more attractive to keep up with fashion, that's why it's dumb. People shouldn't base attractiveness on how I present myself. It's dumb that doing what everybody else does to the latest swivel and turn of trend buys you attractive points."_


You are capable of understanding, or thinking of this. While a normal/average person cant. Why not take advantage of it? Its certainly more easier than proving your capabilities.




> "It's dumb that to have an attractive figure you have to workout and eat healthily."


Not really, Being healthy is actually a physical bonus. It does increase your capabilities, while clothing doesnt.



> _"Being attractive isn't dumb. The fact that needing to buy new things all the time to continue being attractive is a borderline hyper-capitalist societal degradation complex. Consumerism at its finest."_


Exactly.
But why is that bad?




> the pragmatic solution is to play the game despite how dumb it may seem. The results are worth it. The end justifies the means.


First time I agree with you completely


----------



## PurpleLemon (Apr 15, 2013)

Tzara said:


> I didnt read the whole thread, but I will start with this:
> 
> 
> You have no idea how fashion works, do you  "A few years"  lets make that 4 months.


You're telling me my 6 month old, tan, chinos are out of style? Gah, it appears the fashion police never sleeps! For realsies, I don't know if the '4 months' is a joke or you actually think that my camp moccasins that I've had for two years have suddenly, as of yesterday, gone out of style. Either way, one of us is in the wrong.



Tzara said:


> Ok, going on..
> 
> 
> 
> So thinking fashion is stupid is really fine. I mean, you dont need fashion, or you dont need to alter your appearance to other peoples standards. But not dressing well, is something else. Why would you look bad on purpose? You can just choose your own style which happens to look good too.


What do you think dressing well is if not following fashion? I double dare you to dress well using an outfit that isn't fashionable. That dressing well is dressing fashionably is a conceptual truth. The two are together by definition. Choosing your own style is dressing well as long as the style is fashionable.




Tzara said:


> Actually they are. So you are kinda right on this one, for the wrong reasons.


Wait! There are fashion switches?! Show them to me at once, my camp moccasins will never go out of style again!



Tzara said:


> Hmm, Class of clothing is different than fashion. So you dont like that clothes are expensive? (Are clothes expensive?, I thought everyone could afford them?) The range of price is a good way to see class differences, I would like to differentiate between a person with a high-end job and a person with a low-end job.


Your justification of the price difference lies in you being able to tell people's classes apart.As if there aren't other ways of telling. Just thought I should point that out. 

The amount of food a person receives is a good way to see class differences, I would like to differentiate between a person with access to food and a starving person with little to no access to food. That makes it ok.



Tzara said:


> Not really, Being healthy is actually a physical bonus. It does increase your capabilities, while clothing doesnt.


I don't actually think that, I was just showing "MCoy" what his argument sounds like rephrased. Either way, clothing does increase certain capabilities, just not physical ones. One's capability to attain women and influence others is changed by how we dress.


----------



## I_am_the_NiTe (Nov 29, 2013)

I failed to read that part of your argument the first time. No. 

Eating healthily and working out can not and should not be equated to being ultra-fashionable. 

Eating healthily and working out maintains your health (like I'm pretty sure you actually get healthier and live longer as a result.)
There are interpersonal-independent benefits to taking care of your health.
Cognitive function has been shown to improve and in general you have more energy. 

Fashion is entirely perception based. While working out and eating healthy improve your appearance, that's not the only reason (or necessarily the most important reason) that people do them. They do them to have a high standard of living on a chemical/biological level. 


----

Evidence fashion is very arbitrary like Tzara said:

People Who Decide What's Cool In America - Business Insider
What determines what fashion is in style? | Youth Voices

----

Why would I buy anything if it needs to be replaced?

There's a very mathematical way to determine what's worth buying even when eventually replaced.
I bought my macbook with the intention of keeping it for 5+ years.
People buy houses with the intention of keeping them for decades or even a lifetime.

The more dramatic the turnover rate/necessity ratio, the less I'm inclined to partake in the dispersion of capital.


----------



## Gruvian (Feb 6, 2014)

I'm going to copy you something I found.



> *Appearance
> *The literature is mixed as regards the personal appearance of ENTPs. Keirsey (1998) has suggested that the NTPs as a group care little for what people think of their personal appearance and will wear things that decidedly don't fit in with what society expects them to wear; he also notes that Rationals as a whole are rather disinterested in clothes. Tieger and Barron-Tieger (1998), however, argue that ENTPs are the Rational type most likely to wear the hottest clothes, drive the latest cars and generally lead a lavish, high-rolling lifestyle with matching physical possessions.
> Looking through our list of fictional characters, Keirsey's description seems to fit better, though of course a list of fictional characters is a poor substitute for decades of clinical experience. Ms. Frizzle's bizarre themed outfits, the Doctor's peculiar, messy get up, Spider-man's lack of designer clothing (granted, he was poor)--this matches "Don't care what people think. I'll dress how I like" better than "I want to impress people." One thing that does stand out when we look at our fictional ENTPs is that they seem to choose flashy/noticeable--if not expensive or popular--clothing. For example, Starscream (a robot jet) had a paint job that was garish and bright, distinctive amidst a cast of characters that favored cool colors and shades of grey. Other characters chose giant scarves, outfits covered with starfish, conspicuous costumes and other eye-catching accontrements.
> One fact that seems relevant here is that a study found that Extraverted Sensors comprised the top four types that most valued "prestige" (Myers et al., 1998). So where are the highly paid ENTPs and ENTJs? Shouldn't those who dress to impress value prestige?


----------



## Random Person (Apr 30, 2013)

One simple thing to remember is that fashion has very little to do with looking nice. Basically, it happens like this: some relatively popular dude sees something they think is kinda cool. But they can't just say that it's, y'know, kinda cool and stuff because that would amount to a socially awkward situation. It's not that easy to make anything worth attention out of something kinda cool and stuff. So the popular dude says that this thing is DA BEST EVUR!1! And then everyone else goes "YAAA!!!" because saying something like "This thing? I'm not so sure what you mean, it's nothing special." would also cause a socially awkward situation. And so the thing becomes popular, even if it only seems appealing long enough for the wide crowd to yell "YAAA!!!". If 5 minutes later people figure out that it's not really worth much attention they're not going to question it because... Yep, you guessed it, socially awkward situation.

While fashion does produce some good-looking trends every now and then, most of it is mediocre-to-okay with occasional flashes of ridiculous if not plain butt-ugly. Armadillo heels, for example, or skinny jeans on guys who have thighs the size of my biceps. To dress with style does not mean to dress fashionably, and in some cases it means the exact opposite. I know people who keep telling me that I need more fashionable clothes. They all look like shit on me while my own pick always looks good, even though I hardly ever see my peers dressing the way I do. I dress with _style_, the way I like to dress. I'm doing it for myself. Other people's opinion is irrelevant. They may make any judgments they wish, but I could care less about it. One has to earn my respect before I begin to give a damn about what they think, and most people fail miserably at that.

It's a matter of priorities, really. It's far beyond reason for one to dress in a way that people would deem fashionable unless they have a goal to be perceived in a certain way. Seeking approval from people whose approval you don't want to have is... Beyond stupidity. It's more like madness. Likewise, dressing nicely makes no sense if one doesn't care how they look.

Bottom line being, fashion has it's uses, but only to people who care for it. To some, it means nothing and there's not a damn thing you can do about that. Also, watch out for shitty trends.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

I fucking love fashion. I'm a fashion blogger, a columnist and journalist for an international art, fashion & culture magazine. Fashion is awesome. Intellectuals who hate fashion just don't know good fashion; Real fashion isn't the stupid bullshit you see in magazines for bimbos, but wearable art.

*Yes, I judge people on both their intellect and their fashion. I will follow up a catty remark about your clothes with making fun of you for not understanding astrophysics or epistemological principles. I am truly unbearable.*


----------



## Yorisen (Nov 15, 2013)

It depends on how much the way people perceive you affects your life. If meeting new people all the time is a big part of your life, keeping up with current fashion is important. But if I'm a writer or I go to the same job with the same people everyday, and don't have to deal with customers, I'm not going to put much effort into looking nice. They already know me. I grow on people.

The reason I find fashion fickle isn't simply because it changes- I find it irritating because the main cause of it's evolution is people (celebrities mainly) who want to look awesome and modern, yet different than everyone else, and then everyone follows them. Fashion as an art or a hobby is one thing- it can be incredibly interesting and I don't think everyone who's really into fashion is fickle, for a lot of people it's a cool system to figure out. But when people put significantly more effort into giving off a certain "image" than actually living up to that image, it irritates me.

Anyway, I'm not saying that fashion isn't important for some people, I'm saying it's not important for everybody. Sometimes I like dressing up but on any given day I look like a hygienic, pretty hobo. And I have lots of friends. Has it affected my life? Probably. Has it affected my happiness or anything important in my life? Probably not.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

There is no such thing as "Current fashion" - trends are not real fashion. That's just bullshit. Fashion = wearable art. Timeless. I pity those who "keep up with" fashion. Fashion is a personal thing. If you need to get your fashion advice fed to you from a magazine (You may read the naked but safe, but otherwise, *NO.*) you have no business being into fashion anyway. Put on some jeans, a top, and go do something useful.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

Celebrities look like shit. I'd rather amputate my ears than look like one of the Kardashians. Gross.

Alright, it's time for a fashion lesson! *This is fashion*:

http://ninakobalia.webs.com/gareth-pugh.jpg

http://37.media.tumblr.com/073312e1595834bd96b02c4b6fed0467/tumblr_n1jcr7aQ9R1se2w4do1_500.jpg

http://37.media.tumblr.com/47acb023141af615431e21c4492bdb72/tumblr_mp62o2pSLu1qk7c9co1_r2_500.gif

http://37.media.tumblr.com/7e608c7f303dcc30de6824fdf792c6b3/tumblr_n1v7jbTExM1qam77jo1_1280.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9fo968tU91rzg8p5o1_1280.jpg



And this is *Bullshit*:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SoYjot3C3Hs/T8ev7wL1QpI/AAAAAAAAF9Q/e7LSsVEEkZk/s1600/Mary-Kate+Olsen.jpg

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1037427/thumbs/o-MICHELLE-OBAMA-VOGUE-COVER-570.jpg

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Paris-paris-hilton-214395_1024_768.jpg

http://assets-s3.usmagazine.com/upl...nts/photos/1383930930_kim-kardashian-zoom.jpg


----------



## blood roots (Oct 29, 2013)

I appreciate quality craftsmanship. If I want to save up x amount of dollars for Yohji Yamamoto, Raf Simons, Hussein Chalayan, etc then I'll do it because it's something that I've enjoyed since I was about 10 years old. Looking attractive isn't the goal. I'm not trying to fit anyone else's standards but my own. I don't really care if it's considered "submission", arbitrary consumerism or whatever... I can see how other people consider the idea of keeping up with fashion and the entire fashion industry as a joke, and while I agree much of it is superficial, it's a matter of perspective. There are some parts of the industry that aren't entirely infected with the way fashion is (negatively) perceived.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

Oh I am going to disregard everything above written because I did not read

I have my own fashion perception and I am going to spend whatever amount of money to look as fabulous as I want


----------



## Tzara (Dec 21, 2013)

Oscuras said:


> *This is fashion*:


Love it!
Gareth Pugh  
I actually love dystopian fashion. Too bad it wont be up for a few more years.

And Kardashians are hobbits. Proof:


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

Yes, Gareth Pugh is awesome. I think his fashion is utopian, but then again, my vision of utopia and that of others is vastly different (mostly because most people tend to be wrong.)


----------



## Nilo (Apr 25, 2014)

PurpleLemon said:


> A particularly hard-headed INTJ friend of mine is of the opinion that fashion is pointless, as it would have him alter his appearance to other people's standards. He is content wearing dad-jeans with purely utilitarian running shoes.
> 
> I'm of the contrary opinion that fashion, even when viewed as a type of submission, is a social necessity that would render anyone who doesn't engage in its use either categorically obstinate or lacking in intellectual faculties.
> 
> ...


And this, my friend, is what we call a rationalization.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

Purplelemon clearly doesn't understand real fashion and instead thinks commercial textile design counts as fashion. As a writer for an international fashion, culture and art magazine, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "Current" fashion; That's bullshit, a lie. Fashion doesn't go "Out of style" - it becomes classic. Bullshit goes "Out of style" and things that are "In style" are not fashion. They're bullshit. Nothing else.

The clothes worn by 1800's aristocracy are still beautiful. Alexander Mcqueens creations are still beautiful. Anouk Wipprechts techno-fashion will still be art in 100 years. Everything you read in trashy bimbo magazines as being hip and trendy is bullshit. Enjoy wearing it while the fashion world laughs it's ass off at you being so gullible for buying said trash to fund our art projects.

xoxo~


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

I thought that said "facism" I'll be going now.


----------



## PurpleLemon (Apr 15, 2013)

Nilo said:


> And this, my friend, is what we call a rationalization.


Haha do you think I want to be fashionable for its own end and am trying to justify it? If I had my druthers I would wear sweats, sandals, and T-shirts every day.



Oscuras said:


> Purplelemon clearly doesn't understand real fashion and instead thinks commercial textile design counts as fashion. As a writer for an international fashion, culture and art magazine, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "Current" fashion; That's bullshit, a lie. Fashion doesn't go "Out of style" - it becomes classic. Bullshit goes "Out of style" and things that are "In style" are not fashion. They're bullshit. Nothing else.
> 
> The clothes worn by 1800's aristocracy are still beautiful. Alexander Mcqueens creations are still beautiful. Anouk Wipprechts techno-fashion will still be art in 100 years. Everything you read in trashy bimbo magazines as being hip and trendy is bullshit. Enjoy wearing it while the fashion world laughs it's ass off at you being so gullible for buying said trash to fund our art projects.
> 
> xoxo~


Sorry about any ambiguity in regards to the definition of fashion. I thought it would suffice to go for a dictionary definition that makes it seem like it is "a popular way of dressing during a particular time or among a particular group of people," but it appears Merriam-Webster have gotten it wrong again. That's the last time I'm trusting a dictionary. My apologies.

For those reading the OP and who are hung up on definitions, please replace 'fashion' with 'hip and trendy bullshit' for better comprehension.


----------



## Nilo (Apr 25, 2014)

PurpleLemon said:


> Haha do you think I want to be fashionable for its own end and am trying to justify it? If I had my druthers I would wear sweats, sandals, and T-shirts every day.


We all are trying to justify things that are important to us. That's the silly beauty of the human being. And with all due respect, you have all the "druthers" to wear sweats, sandals and t-shirts everyday. You don't do it because you either like to look good, feel an internal obligation or any other reason on the world there may be that you prefer to look fashionable. If you wouldn't think of fashion as an important thing, you wouldn't try to justify it.

And do refrain from the "...but I have to.." speech, because all we "have" to do is breathe and some of us also have to eat/empty one's bowels. Everything else is optional


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

Well, I'm a fashion blogger, I used to be an alternative model and I write for a magazine (next to my artificial intelligence studies) - so you can imagine I'm a bit anal when it comes to fashion. Comes with the job, I guess. In that case, I agree with the INTJ; You don't need 'hip and trendy bullshit' - you probably do need fashion, though. :wink:


----------



## PurpleLemon (Apr 15, 2013)

Nilo said:


> We all are trying to justify things that are important to us. That's the silly beauty of the human being. And with all due respect, you have all the "druthers" to wear sweats, sandals and t-shirts everyday. You don't do it because you either like to look good, feel an internal obligation or any other reason on the world there may be that you prefer to look fashionable. If you wouldn't think of fashion as an important thing, you wouldn't try to justify it.
> 
> And do refrain from the "...but I have to.." speech, because all we "have" to do is breathe and some of us also have to eat/empty one's bowels. Everything else is optional


Your idea of the situation is this:
My conclusion (I value fashion. It is important to me) ---> Logic (My 'rationalization'. Fashion has its value)

In other words, I have molded logic to fit my original opinion. 

This is faulty, for it is circular reasoning. Your conclusion lies hidden in the assumptions. According to you, I value fashion because I attempted to justify it.


Nilo said:


> If you wouldn't think of fashion as an important thing, you wouldn't try to justify it.


I also attempted to justify it because I value it.


Nilo said:


> And this, my friend, is what we call a rationalization.


X is true because of Y
Y is true because of X

The Bible is the word of God because God tell us in the Bible.

Fashion isn't important to me for its own sake. It's important to me for an end it produces. If it didn't produce the end, I wouldn't use it. A rationalization of fashion would occur if I illogically enjoyed it for its own end and attempted to illogically justify it. I don't enjoy it for its own sake. Rationalization can't occur.


----------



## Nilo (Apr 25, 2014)

@PurpleLemon thank you for pointing out the inconsistency in my reasoning. Good to have somebody to correct the mistakes  though I probably should of checked the meaning of "rationalization" instead of trying to understand it intuitively. What I meant in the first place was that we try to justify the things we like for whatever end. _In my opinion, _there's inherent reason to live besides the reasons we create for ourselves. So we go around the world labeling stuff we 'like' and 'dislike' and find 'reasons' for our labels.

There's also another loophole we both fell into: fashion isn't a 'thing'. It's an abstract to convey certain behavior (looks?). So by definition fashion doesn't exist. (e.g like gravitation doesn't exist. We can see the apple falling from the tree, but we can't touch/see/hear/taste/smell gravitation). In the end, you enjoy dressing the way you do. And that's great ^_^


----------



## Belladonne (Mar 22, 2014)

I dress in a very "classic" way, and people have said I look fashionable, but I think following fashion trends is a total racket, TBH. People can do what they want to do, ofc, and I've got better things to do than judge them based on that, but even a lot of the rich girls/guys I know who love clothes don't try to keep up with trends. It often ends up with people wearing styles that are totally inappropriate for the occasion, don't flatter their body shape and they need to get rid of at the end of the season. But, as I said, each to their own - how you dress is none of my business (srs - your clothes, your rules roud


----------



## Tzara (Dec 21, 2013)

Prismira Vex said:


> Well, I'm a fashion blogger


Where can I find this blog?


----------



## 682 (May 13, 2014)

Do you know that appearances will get you an interview while personality will get you the job?

How is one to get the job if one can't even reel them in on appearance alone? 

'Tis true, many a people would fail to drown me due to their lack of depth, but it is the world we live in unfortunately (or perhaps not so unfortunate as the smart individual would use this to their advantage). 

That being said, I do love black.


----------



## Belladonne (Mar 22, 2014)

682 said:


> Do you know that *appearances will get you an interview *while personality will get you the job?
> 
> How is one to get the job if one can't even reel them in on appearance alone?
> 
> ...


wat

Having said that, for both genders, it's often true that being good-looking catches someone's interest and personality keeps them around in the long run.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

Art,Fashion & Neuroscience


----------



## starscream430 (Jan 14, 2014)

I do believe in the importance of dressing well. There is nothing more clean and fashionable than either a polo / jeans combination or a nice suit


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

Just identify certain things that hardly ever go out of style:
- Suits 
- Certain types of leather jackets. 
- A "normal" cut pair of good jeans. 

and work around them. I hate fashion as much as the next guy, but from a pragmatic perspective you have everything to gain by controlling people's perception of you.


----------



## Prismira Vex (Dec 26, 2013)

People who "follow" fashion don't know anything about fashion. They know something about bullshit.


----------



## Tzara (Dec 21, 2013)

@Prismira Vex
You know.. you can actually quote people so that they will know when you answer their questions..


----------



## Dr. J (May 11, 2014)

I wear black so I can fix the chemical stains with sharpie.


----------

