The Yoga Pants trend

[Touchofevil]

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."

:lol:

 

[Touchofevil]

"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.)

:eusa_clap
Very well put!

 

[DanielJones]

And I suppose that if it is something that becomes too much of a "distraction" in your school, your school will lean towards banning the wearing of said yoga pants. I agree that folks should wear what they want, if that is what floats their boat, and they feel that comfortable in their own skin to show that kind of self expression. But, I think some folks just don't get a good look at themselves in the mirror before leaving the house. Otherwise they would most likely change what they are wearing. Now, the wearing of leggings as outer wear has been around for quite a while now. I recall back in the 80's they were ever so popular amongst the girls. Along with the buffalo plaid shirt and huge bangle earrings. So the leggings are nothing new and is a recurring fashion trend.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Jim Brown]

I think it all boils down to, "Wear what you want... as long as it looks like what I wear."

 

[Dated Guy]

That's exactly my thought as well. What other people wear is really non of my business.

I love watching people striving to look good and, important to their own ideology, sometimes it makes me laugh out loud even, and that isn't a bad thing, it's plain humour..!!

 

[Deafjeff]

And I suppose that if it is something that becomes too much of a "distraction" in your school, your school will lean towards banning the wearing of said yoga pants

It doesn't distract me at all, it just makes me wonder what ever happened to knowing what was appropriate in certain environments thats all. And the school has been working on banning them in the dress code for awhile now actually so clearly those in charge share my opinion to some degree.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Hence the expression, "Yeasty Buns."

:eeek:

I was gonna say! Lizzie, Lizzie, Lizzie! tut tut shakeshead

(honestly, I got a good laugh out of that one)

bk

 

[Undertow]

Careful we don't tread into Crowley territory...

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."

 

[scottyrocks]

But, I think some folks just don't get a good look at themselves in the mirror before leaving the house. Otherwise they would most likely change what they are wearing.

I have often thought this, myself. I've seen, in the examples I am thinking of, women strutting around in clothing that some people might say they 'shouldn't' be wearing (i.e. - size 16 phosphorescent pink and orange spandex), and durn proud of the way they look. But THEY LIKE IT! And I guess that's good enough for them in their world. It's not my place to pass judgment.

 

[Noirblack]

No, no, no. The real argument isn't "Who would dare question my opinion." Where did you get that?

The real argument is presenting baseless arguments/conclusions. People can wear whatever they want because freedom is good. Ok. Why? How do you support your conclusion? Can you support your conclusion? (This was what Baron Kurtz argued, not you, Pompidou.)

"Saying one thing is relative doesn't imply everything is relative." So. People can wear whatever they want; there is no such thing as good clothing or bad clothing. Ok. But where do you draw the line? So there is no such thing as a good movie or a bad movie? There is no such thing as good art or bad art. There is no such thing as good music or bad music? There is no such thing as good people or bad people? Why does clothing operate in this special no judgment area? Because you say it does?

So people cannot draw any conclusions from their observations? What facts do you want? Polling data? A scientific experiment? Experts?

Baron Kurtz, you attack my argument but fail to present any basis for your counter-argument. You begrudgingly agree with part of the argument. But conclude that 1. I merely presented an opinion because I don't have any facts and 2. all opinions are the same. So why did you bring up the straw men?

You seem to think that aesthetic categories are equivalent to moral categories. Clothing, movies, and morality - you expect that they are all judged the same way. Even you can't believe that. Let's get real. People can wear whatever the hell they want to wear. That's aesthetics. No more; no less. "Good" in terms of clothing or appearance is one thing. "Good" in terms of morality has an entirely different meaning. You know that - otherwise you are conflating the meanings of this term. I.E. guilty of fallacious reasoning.

 

[Feraud]

You seem to think that aesthetic categories are equivalent to moral categories. Clothing, movies, and morality - you expect that they are all judged the same way. Even you can't believe that. Let's get real. People can wear whatever the hell they want to wear. That's aesthetics. No more; no less. "Good" in terms of clothing or appearance is one thing. "Good" in terms of morality has an entirely different meaning. You know that - otherwise you are conflating the meanings of this term. I.E. guilty of fallacious reasoning.

I am glad someone else is picking out the flawed connection between aesthetics and morality! :eusa_clap

 

[reetpleat]

Well, Hemingway said, "So far, about morals, I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after and judged by these moral standards, which I do not defend, the bullfight is very moral to me because I feel very fine while it is going on and have a feeling of life and death and morality and immorality, and after it is over I feel very sad but fine."

If you wear yoga pants to do yoga in, you should feel very good and calm and peaceful afterwards, ergo, yoga pants are morally good.

 

[scottyrocks]

If you wear yoga pants to do yoga in, you should feel very good and calm and peaceful afterwards, ergo, yoga pants are morally good.

What about yoga pants to church?

 

[reetpleat]

What about yoga pants to church?

Hard to say. The person in the yoga pants must b comfortable, As well as feeling spiritually renewed. On the other hand, others might get a chance to feel smug and superior to them, so that has to be a good feeling.

 

[Edward]

I love watching people striving to look good and, important to their own ideology, sometimes it makes me laugh out loud even, and that isn't a bad thing, it's plain humour..!!

I learned to be less judgmental when I started getting compliments from hip hop kids. I can identify to some degree with anyone who makes an effort to construct a look, whether I care for that look or not - it's the people who genuinely do not care what they wear one way or the other, the utterly utilitarian approach to clothing, that I can't understand.

Careful we don't tread into Crowley territory...

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."

Most folks on here seem to tread closer the Wiccans = 'do what you will, and harm no-one'.

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

You seem to think that aesthetic categories are equivalent to moral categories.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Clothing, movies, and morality - you expect that they are all judged the same way. Even you can't believe that. Let's get real. People can wear whatever the hell they want to wear. That's aesthetics. No more; no less. "Good" in terms of clothing or appearance is one thing. "Good" in terms of morality has an entirely different meaning. You know that - otherwise you are conflating the meanings of this term. I.E. guilty of fallacious reasoning.

I think you missed my point. Obviously things are judged certain ways based on the nature of the object. In the beginning of this thread, I disagreed with the belief that clothing cannot be judged by anyone. Clothing doesn't operate in some sort of no judge black hole.

Why can't it be judged? You want to embrace the idea that clothing is purely subjective. Under it there is no such thing as a bad movie, as bad clothing, bad art, bad literature, bad play, bad theater, bad plays, bad presentations, etc.

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

I am glad someone else is picking out the flawed connection between aesthetics and morality! :eusa_clap

Do you believe that I am arguing that a person wearing good clothing makes them a good person? If so, what post gave you that idea? If not, explain your comment because I don't understand it.

 

[Noirblack]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Um...just going by what you said.


I think you missed my point. Obviously things are judged certain ways based on the nature of the object. In the beginning of this thread, I disagreed with the belief that clothing cannot be judged by anyone. Clothing doesn't operate in some sort of no judge black hole.

Why can't it be judged? You want to embrace the idea that clothing is purely subjective. Under it there is no such thing as a bad movie, as bad clothing, bad art, bad literature, bad play, bad theater, bad plays, bad presentations, etc.

Clothing can be judged, but when you string clothing, movies, art, and people all together as you construct point, I just think that we need a reminder that the term "good" when applied to something as trivial as clothing doesn't mean the same as when it is applied to a person.

 

[Pompidou]

Can something be good if nobody thinks it is? If a thing is considered bad for a century and then is discovered as good, what then? What if something that everyone thought was great suddenly becomes silly? I think good and bad regarding clothes, art and the like are purely subjective. Things become good when the right people, or enough people, say they are. In many cases, it's impossible to come up with a hard and fast criteria of what good is, especially when aesthetics are concerned. Is abstract art inferior to Impressionism? Impressionism to realism? Is classical superior to jazz? I think things can be different but equal.

I don't want to paint myself into a corner, but the best definition of good in this case is if something does what it's supposed to, and in the case of clothing, this is probably most universally, "look good". We wear clothes, at least to some extent, to look good. When people wear saggy pants, oversized shirts and brand new sneakers, they do it to look good, and they wouldn't do it if there wasn't a good chunk of people who thought it did. Even morally, we have a hard time defining good and bad in black and white terms. It's even harder with matters of taste and opinion like clothes. If a suit is superior to jeans and a t-shirt by virtue of the skill required to make it, the time, and the materials, than it'd only take a handmade jeans and t-shirt taking more of such to throw the idea out the window. At the end of the day, aesthetic good and bad is solely in the eye of the beholder.

 

[scottyrocks]

Which brings me to the difference between saying something is 'good' or 'bad,' and saying you like or dislike something.

Yes, some things are universally good and bad. Murder is an example. But clothing? Take two of the same pair of yoga pants, properly sized. Put one on someone like Sofia Vergara (Modern Family). Put the other on someone like Melissa McCarthy (Mike and Molly). Is one universally good and the other bad? I think not. It all depends on what you think looks good, as well as what body type you think looks good, as well. Then it becomes your preference which is not a universal good or bad. 'I like that,' as opposed to, 'That is good.' 'I don't like that,' as opposed to, 'That is bad.'

When you're making a value judgment such as the one above, it can't be expressed as a universal truth. It's just a personal opinion, regardless of how many people think the same way.