The Yoga Pants trend

[Pompidou]

What if your conclusion is that the person doesn't know how to dress? Is that bad?

Depends on circumstances. Odds are, the person knows perfectly well how to dress. When in Rome, as they say. The rules of decades past are just that. Someone who wears a modern outfit like most modern people do knows how to dress. Overdressing is just as much a sign of not knowing how to dress as underdressing. I know. I used to overdress for work just to get a reaction. Suit in a warehouse. Make every visitor think I ran the place. If you've got a good suit or two, there's little skill in dressing. You're certainly not keeping up with trends or anything. I could throw a suit on every day, and take all the knowing out of how to dress. I'd look like a fish out of water. I think knowing how to dress means knowing how to dress like most others do in a situation, and I imagine to many here, that's not desirable.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

This is the problem around here. I disagree that that is a fact. This i your opinion, not fact. To begin from this premise infects all your future conclusions.

It's a fact that the person wearing the suit is better dressed than the t-shirt and jeans. I don't see how it is negative.

 

[Deafjeff]

Your all making some fine points! And I do agree with the fish out of water statement made by Pompidou. Wearing a sportcoat, slacks and dress shirt every day has made me stand out from my peers who dress more like ordinary teens are expected to. I almost always get compliments so I don't consider it a bad thing but perhaps some see me as rediculous or pompous for dressing in such a way. If they do that is their judgement and I will say that I respect their right to form that judgement without knowing me as I like all other humans am guilty of doing the same thing. The girl that wears yoga pants with "kiss it" across her backside and the guy with his boxers hanging out are (unfortunatly in my opinion but it is just that....my opinion) dressed normally for todays society. I will say that I wish people dressed better but they are likely going to form conclusions about me based on my unusual dress and I feel free to form conclusions about them from how they dress right back. I would never insult them about it but when all I know is what they are conveying through their clothing, then thats all I have to go on about who they are

 

[nihil]

Depends on circumstances. Odds are, the person knows perfectly well how to dress. When in Rome, as they say. The rules of decades past are just that. Someone who wears a modern outfit like most modern people do knows how to dress. Overdressing is just as much a sign of not knowing how to dress as underdressing. I know. I used to overdress for work just to get a reaction. Suit in a warehouse. Make every visitor think I ran the place. If you've got a good suit or two, there's little skill in dressing. You're certainly not keeping up with trends or anything. I could throw a suit on every day, and take all the knowing out of how to dress. I'd look like a fish out of water. I think knowing how to dress means knowing how to dress like most others do in a situation, and I imagine to many here, that's not desirable.

You hit the nail on the head here. Dressing well is indeed about context. What is considered good dressing manners change all the time. Despite what seem to be a prevalent conception around here, fashion in the golden era wasn't the end of a static period that had lasted for hundreds of years. It was simply the current expression of a ever changing fashion.
Think about it. In the golden era, you would also be considered bit of an eccentric if you wandered around wearing a frock coat suit. Despite it being a more 'proper' form of dress than the lounge suit. Why? Because fashion had changed in the last 30-ish years, and the proper style of yesteryear was very much out of place those years later.

 

[HodgePodge]

When in Rome, as they say. The rules of decades past are just that. Someone who wears a modern outfit like most modern people do knows how to dress.Overdressing is just as much a sign of not knowing how to dress as underdressing. I know. I used to overdress for work just to get a reaction. Suit in a warehouse. Make every visitor think I ran the place. If you've got a good suit or two, there's little skill in dressing. You're certainly not keeping up with trends or anything. I could throw a suit on every day, and take all the knowing out of how to dress. I'd look like a fish out of water.
I've been accused of being "overdressed" merely by wearing a collared shirt and plain black casual shoes with my jeans, instead of some gawdy graphic T and some neon monstrosities on my feet. I think knowing how to dress means knowing how to dress like most others do in a situation, and I imagine to many here, that's not desirable.

Sooo, at the outset of the thread you argue for "live and let live," but now we should wear what everyone else wears? We should follow trends, follow the pack like all the other trend-whores that just wear what Abercrombie, GAP, Tommy, etc. tell us to wear season to season, because otherwise we are just engaging in affected little vanity projects where we "overdress" solely to make people notice us?

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Be an individual, just like everybody else."

Worth remembering too is that the Lounge is made up of a broad cross section of people of many different ages, in many different locations, and in many different walks of life -- something that might be considered mainstream and acceptable for one age group or in one part of the world may be quite the opposite for another. None of my contemporaries are mall dollies, and none seem especially interested in dressing like teenagers: any fifty-year-old woman around here who went out in public in tight yoga pants would not escape criticism. Men who work in offices dealing with the public, from postal clerks to insurance salesmen to lawyers are still expected to wear ties. Even what's acceptable for twentysomethings on the streets of, say, Copenhagen, would likely raise a great many eyebrows on the coast of Maine. (Which would probably trouble them greatly, since as we all know, young people never, ever dress outrageously to call attention to themselves.)

 

[Flicka]

"Be an individual, just like everybody else."

Reminds me of Life of Brian - the scene when Brian's: "We're all different" is met with a murmur of consent and nodding from crowd, until one man raises his hand and says: "I'm not."

 

[Noirblack]

Sooo, at the outset of the thread you argue for "live and let live," but now we should wear what everyone else wears? We should follow trends, follow the pack like all the other trend-whores that just wear what Abercrombie, GAP, Tommy, etc. tell us to wear season to season, because otherwise we are just engaging in affected little vanity projects where we "overdress" solely to make people notice us?

Ouch! That's unfairly harsh on people who dress in current fashion. People don't have much choice as to whether or not they follow current trends. For example, if you walk into a store today to buy some clothing, the store will be carrying whatever is current for the season. They won't be carrying the styles from three years ago, will they? So how can you blame the consumer if they buy up-to-date clothing?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't blame them for that. I'd blame them for buying into a false paradigm of consumerist-driven aspiration, and for supporting industrial globalization which has destroyed our domestic manufacturing base. Trendiness is simply the stink that hangs in the air surrounding the dead skunk.

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

Looking at the change of fashion from the 20s to the 40s the trends seemed to be more binding than in the modern world though. Look at the waistline on womens dresses mid 20s and mid 30s. Don't matter this mouch today

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

Ouch! That's unfairly harsh on people who dress in current fashion. People don't have much choice as to whether or not they follow current trends. For example, if you walk into a store today to buy some clothing, the store will be carrying whatever is current for the season. They won't be carrying the styles from three years ago, will they? So how can you blame the consumer if they buy up-to-date clothing?

Reminds me of a scene in the movie Easy Money where Rodney Dangerfield and Joe Pesci are in a department store. Seeing nothing that he likes, Pesci asks a snarky sales clerk where he can find some real men's clothes and the sales clerk huffily replies, "try an Army Navy store."

 

[LizzieMaine]

Looking at the change of fashion from the 20s to the 40s the trends seemed to be more binding than in the modern world though. Look at the waistline on womens dresses mid 20s and mid 30s. Don't matter this mouch today

Trends seemed to be more powerful in periods of rush prosperity -- people had money and were throwing it around freely. The Depression put an end to that, though. You saw the same thing in the 1980's.

That said, you'd still see women walking around in 1929 with dresses at the natural waistline, usually things they'd made themselves -- the dropped waist really only looked good if you were tall and thin, and not everyone cared to wear it. The further you were from the cities, the less interest there was in keeping up with the latest fashion. If you went into farm country, you'd find people dressed little different from the way they'd looked in 1900.

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

Yes. I can imagine not everyone followed the trends. Also they made new dresses from the "outdated" old dresses. Something you don't see anymore these days.

 

[scottyrocks]

What if your conclusion is that the person doesn't know how to dress? Is that bad?

No, that's pretty innocent. But if 'my' conclusion is such, who am I to make that determination? That person 'doesn't know how to dress' according to whom? Me? Who am I to make such a determination? As I have said, my opinion is just my opinion. It's not right or wrong. I'm sure people look at me when I have a waistcoat and jacket on and think, who does he think he is? I don't think there's a right and wrong here. It's just opinion.

How we react to those opinions is what counts, though. As Lizzie said, would I hire a girl dressed in, say, goth, or hooker clothing, to babysit my kids? If the answer is no, then that's the situation the wearer of said clothing has put (her)self in, not the person making a judgment on them in any given situation. Dress to impress means impress correctly for a the right situation.

 

[Pompidou]

Sooo, at the outset of the thread you argue for "live and let live," but now we should wear what everyone else wears? We should follow trends, follow the pack like all the other trend-whores that just wear what Abercrombie, GAP, Tommy, etc. tell us to wear season to season, because otherwise we are just engaging in affected little vanity projects where we "overdress" solely to make people notice us?

Live and let live. My last post wasn't telling anyone to do anything. I never said we should do anything. I only said if you're going to talk about knowing how to dress, don't define it by overdressing for every occasion. Overdress if you want. I said in the same post you quoted that I did. I liked the reaction at work. Do what you want. Just lose the arrogance when doing it. In a thread so concerned about how people judge looks, you'd think there'd be concern for the judging of attitudes, and if half the I'm so better than these people attitudes got carried into the real world, the result would be just as bad. Wear a suit if you like - they're great. I have a few. I'll be changing my avatar to one shortly.

 

[Noirblack]

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't blame them for that. I'd blame them for buying into a false paradigm of consumerist-driven aspiration, and for supporting industrial globalization which has destroyed our domestic manufacturing base. Trendiness is simply the stink that hangs in the air surrounding the dead skunk.

Aren't trends in clothing just another part of human culture? The drive to creativity and innovation? "The stink that hangs in the air surrounding the dead skunk" also sounds very harsh to my ears. Should we all parade around naked to ensure that we aren't following any trends?

 

[sheeplady]

Sooo, at the outset of the thread you argue for "live and let live," but now we should wear what everyone else wears? We should follow trends, follow the pack like all the other trend-whores that just wear what Abercrombie, GAP, Tommy, etc. tell us to wear season to season, because otherwise we are just engaging in affected little vanity projects where we "overdress" solely to make people notice us?

Technically I don't think these people would be "trend-whores" as most prostitutes get paid for their services, and people who follow the latest trends are paying the companies who create these clothes, not the other way around. Also, "whore" is not a nice word to call other people, even prostitutes.

Ouch! That's unfairly harsh on people who dress in current fashion. People don't have much choice as to whether or not they follow current trends. For example, if you walk into a store today to buy some clothing, the store will be carrying whatever is current for the season. They won't be carrying the styles from three years ago, will they? So how can you blame the consumer if they buy up-to-date clothing?

I'd agree. A lot of people don't wear current fashion because they are fashion experts but precisely because they aren't fashion experts.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Aren't trends in clothing just another part of human culture? The drive to creativity and innovation? "The stink that hangs in the air surrounding the dead skunk" also sounds very harsh to my ears. Should we all parade around naked to ensure that we aren't following any trends?

Believe what you like. I think for the most part "creativity" and "innovation" were co-opted long ago by the Boys From Marketing and turned into tools for brainwashing the public into buying more and more things they don't need, anything to feed the ever-gaping maw of postwar consumer culture. Putting yet another "ironic" slogan on yet another cheap Chinese-made T-shirt is hardly creative or innovative. Coming up with yet another overpriced permutation of the common rubber-soled sneaker is just cutting the same old dough into a new loaf. Introducing a new label and a different stitching pattern to the pockets on a pair of cheap dungarees is not too far removed from swindling the natives out of their land for a bucket full of shiny rocks.

If you want to play their game, you're certainly free to do so, but don't be surprised if you wake up one day and realize you've been had.

As far as harsh goes, I don't think it's half harsh enough. But I'm trying to be nice.

 

[nihil]

The ever changing fashion is not something new, not at all. Various aspects change slower of faster than each other, but the rate of change today is not something that magically happened during the 60s.

In the words of Oscar Wilde

Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.

Look very closely at fashion history, and you'll see that constant change have always been there. Even in Roman times, fashion changed constantly.

 

[Gingerella72]

Exactly right. The main problem I have with modern styles is that they simply make no aesthetic sense. You mean you actually *wanted* to accentuate your belly, your thighs, and your backside like that, in such a way that your entire body is thrown out of proportion? Is the Papuan Fertility Idol look really in vogue this season?

The image uploader won't let me insert an image, but click on the link.

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hpho...4866431295_501016294_9482203_1359763660_n.jpg