Article: Why do People Hate Hipsters

[PrettySquareGal]

The point is, we never stop evolving. Some of us take longer to go through our stages. Most of us never stop. Thats how we grow.

I consider someone 18 or older a grown-up. That is not the same as having achieved one's highest level of emotional maturity and spiritual evolution.

 

[griffer]

It's the 70s thing where you are, then? Interesting... here it's the 80s predominantly.

Oh, not really, strictly speaking. Think late 70s early 80s. I would say 75-85, but it's really an impression of the period, not the actual period.

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

...I would just caution against stereotyping.

You seem to think that loungers are just as smug as hipsters. Isn't that why we are "kindred spirits?" Take your own advice.

"They've all evolved over time, and it's a false argument to pit suits as a single entity against one particular style of jeans to claim greater pedigree."

As I understand your argument and correct me if I am wrong, although suits and jeans are clothing they cannot be compared against each other. Neither is superior thus they are equal. So would an art deco building is the same as a plain cinderblock building? Peer Gynt's Solveig's Song the same as Billy Ray Cyrus' Ackey Breaky Heart? Shia Loboef is just as good an actor as James Stewart. No one can determine what is good or bad because everything is equal and nothing is comparable?

To you, there is no better or worse everything is equal?

Why is the word better such a dirty word especially when it comes to clothing? Would you want steak of prime rib? Let me guess, if I ate prime rib everyday I would grow tired of it.

 

[Pompidou]

I would grow tired of prime rib every day. Sometimes I'd like a porkchop. Sometimes I'd like some baby back ribs. Sometimes I'd like a pizza.

There's better and worse amongst things that are the same. Some suits are better or worse than others. Some jeans are better or worse than others. Some hammers are better or worse than others. Some screwdrivers are better or worse than others. Apples and oranges is my argument. Jeans are very good at what they're for. Suits are very good at what they're for. They're not interchangeable. I wouldn't wear one when I needed the other. One's not better than the other. I wouldn't use oranges in an apple pie. I wouldn't pound nails with a screwdriver. Jeans, t-shirts and suits are all equal, just different. I wear them when they're appropriate.

I don't think all of any group is anything. I only said you could browse the boards to see the exact same smugness being held against hipsters. Every group has it's good apples and bad apples. Since we're the ones casting the stones in this case, I just thought it prudent to remind people of our glass house.

EDIT: My actual argument in the "suits single entity...one style of jeans" was that both suits and jeans have been around a comparable amount of time, and that suits can't be presented as a single entity against one particular variation on the jeans style. Hipster jeans are just jeans worn by hipsters. It sounded like it was only this specific way of wearing them that was being held against the entire historical pedigree of suits. IE: That suits have been around for 200 years, but hipster jeans only maybe 10. I didn't think that was a fair comparison, and was why I went into dandy, golden age and modern variations of the thing we call a suit. Just like jeans have been worn a variety of different ways over its span in history. The apt comparison, if longevity is the measure of worth, would be hipster jeans vs the modern suit. Not sure what constitutes the modern suit - I just know they tend to change by the decade - like fashion in general.

 

[Absinthe_1900]

I always liked Harry The Hipster Gibson.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8Swpw9yZ5w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql-1_uolBF4&feature=related

 

[randooch]

"If you were truly 'doing your own thing', you wouldn't be here with the rest of us, talking about it....."

Akin to anarchists holding a meeting.

 

[Undertow]

There is a difference between subculture and trend; there's a difference between vintage enthusiasts (subculture) and "hipsters" (trend). To compare them is not to compare apples to oranges, its to compare a Mozart symphony to a teenage garage band - quite literally. Although both might be music, one requires reasonable effort, whereas the other does not; one is timeless and appreciated by many, the other is timely and appreciated by a few.

Benig a hipster is an image and nothing more; it will pass with age. Being an enthusiast is a lifestyle that hopefully continues to enrich a person's life. I don't think Loungers and hipsters are "kindred spirits" any more than I think socks and tanks are kindred just because their solid objects. [huh]

 

[Pompidou]

There is a difference between subculture and trend

Indeed there is. Hipsters are the subculture. Their current distinguishing features are the trend.

As far as the music comparison goes, that's not an apt one. Comparing classical and rock music would be better. That said, the point of music is to please your ears - to enjoy it. The only real measure of the value of music is how much you like it. Regarding effort, both require only as much effort as the musicians are willing to invest. There are simple classical pieces and elaborate rock pieces. I try not to put everything into hierarchies of superiority.

Being an enthusiast is as much a lifestyle as being a hipster, and neither are guaranteed to last. I've been an enthusiast of many things over my life. Who knows what I'll be an enthusiast of tomorrow. I don't know what category I'd place myself in. I like wearing all black, but I like wearing fedoras, and I like the cafe, craft beer and indie music, and am opening a steampunk cafe. Maybe some sort of vintage goth hipster steampunk enthusiast? Not that I really think it matters. Take everyone on an individual basis. Take everything on an individual basis.

I've got my own philosophy about things. I take everything on its own merits. Space shuttles cost more than socks, but I'd rather have a pair of socks, because I can't use a shuttle, but I do get cold feet. That's how I look at everything. A fine aged cognac costs more than any beer I can think of, but I don't think it's superior to beer, because when I'm in the mood for a beer, nothing tastes better, and a cognac won't do. That works both ways, of course. I just value everything by how well it does what it's supposed to. When I want a hamburger, offering me a more expensive filet mignon won't really satisfy. Might be a stupid philosophy, but it's my philosophy, and I stick to it.

 

[HarpPlayerGene]

This has been one of the most interesting threads I've ever read.

Like so many things, I find the subject fascinating.

The hipsters are displaying a style of dress that I wouldn't want to adopt, but again, I am intrigued by them from a distance.

I've never been much of a joiner because cliques and clubs so often become gossipy but I have to admit that if The Fedora Lounge were an actual place I could drive to and meet with those in vintage clothing each day, I would sure do it!! For me, though, it really is about the clothing, the shoes, hats, watches... It's not an 'attitude' or a 'statement'. I would love to show off what I have to those who would understand it and appreciate it. And I'd be wild about seeing and learning about others' collections in person. But I wouldn't be concerned with trying to contrast myself against others who do not share my interests in order to feel superior, as I suspect the motive may be for many of the hipsters. If it started going in that direction I'd be back in my study again admiring my vintage goodies in privacy and wearing them among the modern dressed masses purely for my own enjoyment.

 

[Pompidou]

This has been one of the most interesting threads I've ever read.

Like so many things, I find the subject fascinating.

The hipsters are displaying a style of dress that I wouldn't want to adopt, but again, I am intrigued by them from a distance.

I've never been much of a joiner because cliques and clubs so often become gossipy but I have to admit that if The Fedora Lounge were an actual place I could drive to and meet with those in vintage clothing each day, I would sure do it!! For me, though, it really is about the clothing, the shoes, hats, watches... It's not an 'attitude' or a 'statement'. I would love to show off what I have to those who would understand it and appreciate it. And I'd be wild about seeing and learning about others' collections in person. But I wouldn't be concerned with trying to contrast myself against others who do not share my interests in order to feel superior, as I suspect the motive may be for many of the hipsters. If it started going in that direction I'd be back in my study again admiring my vintage goodies in privacy and wearing them among the modern dressed masses purely for my own enjoyment.

Maybe the Fedora Lounge can arrange some sort of mass get-together. Hell, even a thread where people can arrange meetings on a more local basis. I've never even pondered the thought of compiling a list of members in the CT, MA, RI area. It'd be great to find a coffee shop or a bar sometime and chat.

I also agree it's one of the most interesting threads. TFL is full of good debaters.

EDIT: Actually, there's a whole forum for get-togethers. It's just one of the one's I've never entered yet. Maybe I'll use it.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

What fascinated me about the article I posted is that it grew out of a group of people acting like inconsiderate morons. Because they happened to be "hipsters" - that is young people with a certain sense of style - the hate is directed at "hipsters", not at the idiotic, selfish behaviour. Hence the Nathan Barley youtube I posted alongside it. It's as if the current whipping boy is the only group that act like idiots, which is clearly not true.

This kind of conscious (I believe it is so warped that it must be conscious) turning of an argument into another, in order to put down on one particular group, is what I find fascinating. And what I find most fascinating is trying to understand why people behave in the ways they do - either the inconsiderate morons, or those who take inconsiderate behaviour and rail against a subculture/trend.

This has been one of the most interesting threads I've ever read.

Like so many things, I find the subject fascinating.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

But vintage is awfully trendy right now. Where does trend and and subculture begin? Is "subculture" just a way for people to rationalise their behaviour/buying habits, to try to rise themselves above what they look down upon as "trends"? Stroking the Id, in other words.

There is a difference between subculture and trend; there's a difference between vintage enthusiasts (subculture) and "hipsters" (trend).

 

[Baron Kurtz]

BK: "...if people would go to the effort of trying to understand their motives."

i don't think the motives go much deeper than appearing 'cool'. the fashion industry thrives on creating the anxiety in consumers that they won't look 'on trend' (horrible phrase) and 'current'. the hipster look is just a more select, elitist strand of that same thinking. it's made up of the 'edgier' stuff that the 'normal' consumer would consider too daring, weird or geeky. the 'trashy' aesthetic that seems to dominate the hipster wardrobe is simply a reflection of the nihilistic too-cool-to-give-a-damn-about-anything world-view of the average hipster. why the nihilistic outlook among the cool 18-30-somethings ? that's a much bigger question.

Herring … As the politician said, please quote in full context. In this case I was referring to the motivations of those who would put down a particular group, not of the group that was being put down.

Quoth:
Narcissism more common, I would suggest. Hipsters are bad because they don't do what I do, and what I do must be "correct", or "proper" … m'Kay would be a more common attitude, I would suggest, if people would go to the effort of trying to understand their motives.

I should of course have ended that with their OWN motives.

bk

He has a point. Not much of a point, I think, but a point. Having an opinion on something doesn't always mean you're in denial … Typically on FLounge opinions on how others dress are quite badly informed of the psychology of motivations, but there are more motivations than simple self hate. Narcissism more common, I would suggest. Hipsters are bad because they don't do what I do, and what I do must be "correct", or "proper" … m'Kay
would be a more common attitude, I would suggest, if people would go to the effort of trying to understand their motives.

 

[Undertow]

...Comparing classical and rock music would be better. That said, the point of music is to please your ears - to enjoy it. The only real measure of the value of music is how much you like it. Regarding effort, both require only as much effort as the musicians are willing to invest. There are simple classical pieces and elaborate rock pieces. I try not to put everything into hierarchies of superiority...

I'm not sure where you gleaned "superiority" of one genre from the next. Moreover, your comparison of classical music to rock are irrelevant - I'm not discussing the qualities of music (or trends, or subcultures) based on a genre, nor am I discussing the inherent value of music (or trends, or subcultures) in general. My analogy was based on Mozart vs. a garage band and I specifically pointed out "one requires reasonable effort, whereas the other does not; one is timeless and appreciated by many, the other is timely and appreciated by a few."

In order to actually play Mozart, you can't just pick up an instrument and bang away. In order to fully appreciate Mozart, you can't just turn on the headphones and expect to know everything that's happening, its context, its history, its technique, etc. A garage band is the opposite: they live in the moment and take whatever nose-thumbing trend they can find and make it their own. Whereas a musician must first learn to read music, study Mozart specifically, plan a recital and practice tirelessly - a garage band buys some intruments from the pawn shop and BAM, they're making whatever noise they can no matter how wretched it sounds.

Perhaps we're arguing two separate issues, but you're not going to convince me that some obnoxious, arrogant hipster with a predilection for 1980's era style (or any future or past styles) is kindred to someone like our own Marc or BK or Matt D. or Lizzie who take time to research their subject, flesh out the finer points, practice what they preach and have created, quite literally, a lifestyle as opposed to just a passing fancy. It's like comparing a neurosurgeon to some drunk 20 year old playing Operation.

Again - one requires dedication, research, failures and triumphs, intellect, cleverness, a keen eye, and years (if not decades) of interest in order to fully appreciate it in its entirety. The other requires very little, if anything, besides a surface-level knowledge of popular culture that could be found in 5 minutes with Google. And before anyone points out the obvious, I'm not claiming one group is more intelligent or clever than the next. I'm not passing judgement on a human life - I'm separating Loungers from Hipsters. Yes, there are likely hipsters on this board, but let's not play devil's advocate ad nauseum and argue semantics for the sake of arguing.

Personally, I don't care what someone does. Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

 

[HoundstoothLuke]

For all of those here who hate hipsters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVmmYMwFj1I&has_verified=1

 

[Pompidou]

I'm not sure where you gleaned "superiority" of one genre from the next. Moreover, your comparison of classical music to rock are irrelevant - I'm not discussing the qualities of music (or trends, or subcultures) based on a genre, nor am I discussing the inherent value of music (or trends, or subcultures) in general. My analogy was based on Mozart vs. a garage band and I specifically pointed out "one requires reasonable effort, whereas the other does not; one is timeless and appreciated by many, the other is timely and appreciated by a few."

In order to actually play Mozart, you can't just pick up an instrument and bang away. In order to fully appreciate Mozart, you can't just turn on the headphones and expect to know everything that's happening, its context, its history, its technique, etc. A garage band is the opposite: they live in the moment and take whatever nose-thumbing trend they can find and make it their own. Whereas a musician must first learn to read music, study Mozart specifically, plan a recital and practice tirelessly - a garage band buys some intruments from the pawn shop and BAM, they're making whatever noise they can no matter how wretched it sounds.

Perhaps we're arguing two separate issues, but you're not going to convince me that some obnoxious, arrogant hipster with a predilection for 1980's era style (or any future or past styles) is kindred to someone like our own Marc or BK or Matt D. or Lizzie who take time to research their subject, flesh out the finer points, practice what they preach and have created, quite literally, a lifestyle as opposed to just a passing fancy. It's like comparing a neurosurgeon to some drunk 20 year old playing Operation.

Again - one requires dedication, research, failures and triumphs, intellect, cleverness, a keen eye, and years (if not decades) of interest in order to fully appreciate it in its entirety. The other requires very little, if anything, besides a surface-level knowledge of popular culture that could be found in 5 minutes with Google. And before anyone points out the obvious, I'm not claiming one group is more intelligent or clever than the next. I'm not passing judgement on a human life - I'm separating Loungers from Hipsters. Yes, there are likely hipsters on this board, but let's not play devil's advocate ad nauseum and argue semantics for the sake of arguing.

Personally, I don't care what someone does. Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

There's no way to even continue debating at this point. Your post is full of straw men. Not every hipster is obnoxious and arrogant. Drunk 20 year olds vs neurosurgeons? Playing Mozart well versus picking up some instruments at a pawn shop making noise? That's fairly ridiculous. A garage band isn't defined by a lack of talent. Garage band isn't the opposite of skilled musician. Not all hipsters are obnoxious and arrogant. This kind of vitriol from you and Atropos can't really be reasoned with. There's a foundation of contempt and there's nothing to discuss on that front.

 

[the snake's hips]

Age we are in a age where people are clinging to their youth i think we see some loss of the concept of dignity. It is lost on some maybe.

Most of the critiquing I have seen of hipsterdom has been based on the "clinging to youth" part. I am right there in the peak smarminess age for hipsterdom and some of my friends most certainly qualify, and honestly, the weird part is that they act *exactly like they did when we were all 22.* Only we're in our early 30's and late 20's. They're still renting, still in temp jobs, and still single.

I think people find it if not interesting, than at least oddly noteworthy, because it's something that went a way for a while. There wasn't a thirty something "youth culture" that I recall in the 80's or 90's. But, there *was* one in the 70's--my grandparents were TOTALLY members of that "Passages" disco-era second youth thing that happened 40 years ago.

And, I agree with Pompidou. There's a significant amount of vintage/indie/hipster overlap--that's basically all Etsy is. It's pretty weak to make fun of the 'kids' for playing dress up on a board that is all about playing dress up.

 

[Undertow]

There's no way to even continue debating at this point. Your post is full of straw men. Not every hipster is obnoxious and arrogant. Drunk 20 year olds vs neurosurgeons? Playing Mozart well versus picking up some instruments at a pawn shop making noise? That's fairly ridiculous. A garage band isn't defined by a lack of talent. Garage band isn't the opposite of skilled musician. Not all hipsters are obnoxious and arrogant. This kind of vitriol from you and Atropos can't really be reasoned with. There's a foundation of contempt and there's nothing to discuss on that front.

You're right and I concede. Honestly, if you're going to argue semantics and belly ache over hypotheticals, all while side stepping the issue, then there's certainly no discussion to be made.

Where I'm trying to provide a relatively simple music analogy which supports my point, you're debating the merits of music. Where I'm actually AGREEING with your earlier point that we can't argue apples to oranges, you're changing your tune and telling me it's fruit to fruit. [huh]

If I was trying to argue some forms of brutal torture render information that might save lives, thus, we should condone all forms of torture - you would argue that some people enjoy being tortured, therefore we can't assume being tortured is bad. :eusa_doh:

I guess your statement, "Might be a stupid philosophy, but it's my philosophy, and I stick to it." sums this attitude up pretty well.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

Perhaps we're arguing two separate issues, but you're not going to convince me that some obnoxious, arrogant hipster with a predilection for 1980's era style (or any future or past styles) is kindred to someone like our own Marc or BK or Matt D. or Lizzie who take time to research their subject, flesh out the finer points, practice what they preach and have created, quite literally, a lifestyle as opposed to just a passing fancy. It's like comparing a neurosurgeon to some drunk 20 year old playing Operation.

Love this. Very well put, especially "It's like comparing a neurosurgeon to some drunk 20 year old playing Operation."

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

There's no way to even continue debating at this point. Your post is full of straw men. Not every hipster is obnoxious and arrogant. Drunk 20 year olds vs neurosurgeons? Playing Mozart well versus picking up some instruments at a pawn shop making noise? That's fairly ridiculous. A garage band isn't defined by a lack of talent. Garage band isn't the opposite of skilled musician. Not all hipsters are obnoxious and arrogant. This kind of vitriol from you and Atropos can't really be reasoned with. There's a foundation of contempt and there's nothing to discuss on that front.

This is absurd. In the beginning you used circular logic describing why loungers are hipsters, (loungers and hipsters are kindred spirits because they are) (we should embrace hipsters because we should).

Then its well suits and jeans are incomparable because they are separate entities. Whatever that means. My argument was suits are superior because they have a stronger historical background, always have been considered the best clothing, still is. Suits take more skill to construct. Suits cost more. Suits generally are created through a skilled profession, jeans and t-shirts not so much. Suits are aesthetically more pleasing --probably a result from the historical context. Meaning they have always been considered fashionable. But hey, you can't compare suits to jeans because you can't.

How am I stereotyping hipsters as obnoxious and arrogant when the essence of hipsterdom is to be hip and ironic. Isn't that their phrase. As an example: "Hipsters wear wolf t-shirts because hipsters are so cool whatever they wear-- even if it is lame-- becomes cool because they are so cool. Or they wear flannel shirts not because they are working class people or like their values but because they think such clothing is lame but on them it is cool. Hipsters actually have great disdain for such people. How could anyone be wrong to associate a hipster as being arrogant and obnoxious (pride) when the very essence of hipsterdom is built on such vice?

Am I wrong?

I had no idea disagreeing with someone was "spewing vitriol." Way to engage in hyperbole.

What's next ad hominem attacks?