/fa/ - Fashion

tips

>>14272704
Jews.

>>14272704

you do realize that the standards rose to that point to begin with and were only there for like 0.1% of human history probably due to the industrial revolution making it easier to mass produce high quality clothes or something like that right?
for the vast majority of human history the masses were not wearing fancy clothes in fact for plenty of time they were basically just wearing rags

>>14272704
>be yourself
>be comfortable in your own skin
>youre beautifu
all while this guy gets all the respect and the good little bitches end up working at mcdonalds. thats how.

>>14272971

At that time, every man wore a suit when he left the house. Then again, people only at 1-3 suits, one of which was spared for the effay sundays.

they havent.
understand that majority of people did not dress the way you think they did in the past and all remaining garments maintained through preservation, documentation or image are not every day clothes. Most stuff that was worth keeping around was expensive and was essentially everyone's fashion grails at the time. Majority of clothing was cheap, replaceable, and created to be functional and easy to maintain. Most of those clothes didnt survive nor had their image preserved because it was basically just the cheap t shirts of the past that nobody gave a shit about.

>>14272994
>replaceable
>easy to maintain
Pick one. Clothes used to be made for lasting wear.

>>14272964
this unironically, also gays
the people who make our clothes only care about profit, this is why today you have one strip of fabric that has been so bleached and heavily coloured that the process alone could kill an entire asian village and it's been sold as a shirt to stupid whores for 25$, it's sad

>>14273006
only some pieces the same as now
undergarments were just as disposable and cheap as t shirts are now. some pieces were very expensive and needed to last a long time and some were cheap and could be easily replaced if need be. understand how little fucking buying power people had and that most clothing was made by the people wearing it from whatever materials they could get a hold of. the cut, finishing, and materials of actual everyday clothes is much higher now than 100 years ago.

>>14273009
boomer

>>14273048
overstimulated porn addict who would be considered a sodomite if he was born in any other country or era of human kind

>>14273066
oh my bad you're not a boomer, you're a highschooler that overdosed on ironic reactionary ideology to the point where it completely consumed your life.

>>14273068
guess again because my guess was spot on looking at your poor cope

>>14273009
how would this look on a person? I am confused

>>14273075
kinda like this I figure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezs0VfMKQ5E

>>14273074
>>14273068

you're both gay for being on 4chan

shut the fuck up

>>14272704
It hasn't.

>>14273066
This has only become a thing whilst Abrahamic religions rose to prominence. Before that there were loads of gays and perverse behaviour.

>>14272704
because humans are social creatures and if enough people start walking around in their 'underwear' it stops becoming underwear.
see: swimsuits
for awhile we thought it looked nice and was the proper thing to do if you wanted to fit in to wear 3 piece suits and have a nice looking hat and shined shoes or whatever, then the next generation that grew up didn't like that because they never like whatever shit they see going on, and it happened to go towards jeans and t shirts or whatever
now we just have so many different materials and people trying to make themselves look unique its ridiculous

Marlon Brando is basically the reason that T-shirts are considered appropriate to wear in public.

>>14272704

If you think that guy was average 100 years ago boy do I have bad news for you

>>14273111
it's a wonder that people actually put thought into this.

Central heating

>>14272993
Do you think these early 20th century farmers had even one suit?
The era that people are thinking of was post-war. The economy was booming and suddenly it became affordable to own a suit for Sunday outside of major urban centers.

>>14273642
100 years ago buildings had central heating, at least in the northeast. The systems were even overpowered, to allow people to keep the windows cracked year round.

Source; live in 100 year old house with original heating.

>>14273310
Especially considering he's an actor playing a fictional gangster from a shithole in Birmingham who hid razors in his flat cap

They didn't, we just have more option now and suits are reserved only for very formal occasions. Also, like others have said, not everyone dressed like the guy in OP's pic.

BTW, three-piece suit and tie + coat + cap = essential Lenincore

>>14272964
spbp

>>14273966
>a fictional gangster from a shithole in Birmingham who hid razors in his flat cap

>>14273309
Or maybe it's because Soldiers returning from the European and Pacific fronts had grown accustomed to wearing White T-Shirts when not on uniform and it just stuck with them.
You know, the actual reason why.

>>14272704
Liberalism

>>14273009

This. The biggest profit margin lies in the tshirt, sneaker, jeans market (maybe sweatpants soon).

product for a few cents, sell for hundreds of dollars.

>>14274124
It's a weird combo of both, where art imitates life and then life imitates art. Like most fashion.

>>14272704
comfort > style would be my guess

>>14273925

Statistically speaking, they had 1 working suit, 1 sunday suit. Maybe these didn't have one, or maybe did have one. Even dressed like this, they are better dressed than the majority of people nowadays.

>>14274184
Most trends in life were accidentally started originally for pragmatic reasons and then evolve to take on a life of their own.
The idea of Bomber Jackets is a perfect example, they created a trend and people call all kinds of tiny jackets "bombers" these days. People also mislabeled Flight jackets like the A2 as Bombers as well, but those were only worn underneath a Bomber because crews would freeze at 30,000 feet wearing something that small.

>>14274061
That's exactly who he is though lad
Good show though

>>14272704
Actual people living back then had much worse fits. And besides, what others have said, we now associate that type of dress with formal and thus "high standard". We cannot accurately compare the two periods because of different frames of mind.

>>14272704
has it though?

>>14274622
wait, so children didn't wear suits, OP destroyed epic style with facts and logic

>>14274310
Okay, so a lot you are saying OP is wrong in his assessment because the lowest echelons of society didn't wear suits, and laborers and farmers wore work-clothes, at least for work. But nobody was claiming that laborers went to the fields in suits, or that children wore suits. But basically all classes that could, would - office workers, salesmen and shop assistants, students and teachers, basically all educated men like doctors and lawyers, public figures, officials etc. etc. wore suits as their day to day clothes. Today you'll at most see these classes wearing an odd jacket and trousers or jeans day to day, at least where I'm from.

>>14273309
>this guy was considered a chad in the 50's
Even I mog this droopy faced guido

>>14274310
>>14274622
really hope you retards aren't implying that 1900s work clothes aren't effay as fuck

>>14274622
thank fuck for contraception

>>14274834
Yeah, how dare people be alive.

>>14272704
>declined
Declined in what way?
The technology behind clothing has massively improved over the past century thanks to the industrial revolution bringing in scaling, and material science improving durability and bringing specialty materials.
For non-specialty purposes, the functional need of modern clothing has largely evaporated. There is no need to dress like op's pic because you aren't going to be driving around in an open top Model T on a dirt road or wading around the unkempt, muddy streets of 1700's Britain.

>>14274911
I actually think the durability has decreased somewhat in average clothing because people don't value durability when they don't have to do physical labor. Also, new clothes are cheap as shit and a lot of people find enjoyment in just the act of buying new stuff.

Of course there are genuine improvements as well. Stretchy chinos are awfully comfortable.

>>14272704
Being a fag became legal, so there was no real reason to play dressup

>>14273936
Still have this in some apartments. Buddy’s place in Manhattan is t shirt and shorts in December. I hate it, and it’s a waste of energy to boot.

>>14273111
As horrendously bad as those outfits are, like >>14273620 said, they did put thought into it. Most young people today just wear sweat pants, yoga pants, athletic shoes, etc. Girls have a handful of coats they'll wear for the winter (that tube coat with the hood, jean jackets, recently those fuzzy teddy bear jackets). They look like they all just rolled out of bed. Yesteryear's style may look comical by today's standards, but 2010 onwards will be remembered for everyone dressing like a total fucking slob.

As always, I blame the jews.

Yes

>>14272704
I think a lot of it is to do with the collapse of communities. People used to talk to their neighbours a lot more, convene in churches or in small local shops. Word travelled fast if you looked like shit. That sense of being scrutinised by people who knew you fostered a need to present yourself properly.

It’s the same story with pre-marital pregnancy and unemployment. General poor life performance is always tempered when your reputation and pride is at stake.

>>14273925
>Do you think these early 20th century farmers had even one suit?

YES. People had a Sunday Best for church. People were poorer and had fewer things of higher quality.
Now we are wealthier and have more things of lower quality.
It's not that difficult.

>>14274736
Thus the suit didn't have the same "high standard" association it has today. Everyone slightly above slave tier wore one.
Think of it like this: Perhaps in a 100 years t-shirts will only be worn in a business or formal setting. People will be looking back at today and be like: God people were so well dressed back then, look at them wearing these nice formal t-shirts in everyday wear! I just wish my generation could be as effay....

>>14275416
This teebeeaich

Polyester shit has bigger profit margins.

Chinese sweat shops

>>14275416
Man wearing your Sunday best so people don’t know your family is impoverished is so kino

>>14274892
>bringing 8-12 kids into brutal poverty
Are you a nigger?

>>14272704
not decline, but simple change
what if they had image boards in peaky blinders and people dressing like pic related posted the pic related and asked why do you think standards of dress for the average person has declined
there is little decline. more like change

>>14275701

Nice strawman. There is decline to be seen in every way judging by consistent menswear (suit) for 150 years.

>>14272704

Clothing used to be made by skilled craftsmen.Now it is mass produced by gooks in sweatshops. The standard of dressing has declined with that advent.

>>14275716
im not talking about your average dadcore. the stylish mans clothing today, has changed but has not declined

>>14275436
>>14275425
>>14275424
>>14275262
>>14274188
>>14274178
>>14273009
>>14272993
>>14272964
You're an idiot and probably wear Wal-Mart fedoras
>>14274736
He literally said average person
>>14274737
No you don't

>>14275727
Prove it

>>14275822

You are very bitter.

>>14275728

>Average dadcore
Stop speaking in made-up terms. Compare your picture to OP's.

>>14275425
But how do you get even more casual than a T-shirt or a hoodie? The average person isn't going shirtless, ever.

>>14275956

The thing you don't realize is that the 'real' peaky blinders were specifically known for all wearing high end tailored clothing

>>14272704
A breakdown of culture, standards, and everything becoming “casual”.

>>14273165
>implying pagans accepted gays and degenerates

>>14276608
prove it

>>14276912
Look outside, you fucking pleb. Go to your local station or city center and see the degenerates lingering. When's the last time you wore a suit and tipped your hat at someone respectable? Are you married? Do you have kids? Do you go to church on sunday? When's the last time you helped at a homeless shelter? Do you enjoy talking to your neighbours? Remember the last time you were an all-white neighbourhood and didn't have to deal with subhuman scum?

>>14275822
Why don't you think that average people owned and wore suits in the early 20th century?

When will face scars be IN again lads cmon

>>14276326
In the future there will be a more causal class of clothing: spray on polymers. You'll have a machine that sprays a coating of goo on to you which is firm yet pliable and sticks well to itself when needed.
eg. You feel a flap out when you take a piss and then kind of squish it back into place where it will re-seal.
At the end of the day you peel off your goo and dump it into the machine which sanitizes and recycles it for the next application.

>>14277859
They were never out. Just a matter of how you play your cards.

Claiming that they have 'declined' isn't correct. There has been a massive cultural boom which has vastly increased the scope of fashion. During the times you idealise people dressed basically the same as each other, is that really peak fashion? 1 uniform for everyone?

What you perceive as a decline is a rejection of aristocracy and tradition. Modern people don't want to be noble, they want to be rich. Fundamentally this shifts buying patterns away from upper class and towards expensive.

>>14272704
Your only interaction with the past is from photographs people considered worth taking and keeping and glamourized interpretations

Because of capitalistic reproduction of arbitrary cultural norms.

>>14277909

>Massive cultural boom
Elaborate, please.

>1 uniform for everyone?
Another strawman. Different fabrics, different styles, colours. The photos may be black and white, the people were not.

>you idealise people dressed basically the same as each other
I idealise people who dress >well enough< to not be an insult to humanity.

>Is that really peak fashion?
Is following the Jew couture? >>14272964

>>14277931
The massive "cultural boom" he's talking about is the dillution of a country's historic culture and turning into some tulmultuous, disparate, multicultural amalgamation. Postmodernism deconstructed the objective criteria by which we measured ourselves in the past which meant that nothing meaningful could be said in favor or against one culture over another.

>>14272964
Based

>>14278034
Stop watching JBP.

>Postmodernism deconstructed the objective criteria by which we measured ourselves in the past which meant that nothing meaningful could be said in favor or against one culture over another.
Completely wrong.

>>14276617
You're either a jew or you're a pagan

>>14278110
>completely wrong
Nope.
Deconstruction and reconstruction(reframing if you want) is central to postmodern ethos.
You deconstruct an idea in order to render it's implicit meaning null and then frame it in whatever context you would like, commonly Marxist class struggle.
Perhaps Postmodernism's relativism would be a better starting point, which began with the deconstruction of Aristotlean reason, by Kant who in defence of tradition suggested Humans cannot speak meaningfully about reality through the senses, and noncontradiction(by Hegel). Fast forward through several other major German Counter enlightenment philosophers, and you have the foundations for Heidegger's work.
It's meaningless to speak about whether one article of clothing in a culture is superior to another within a different culture, utility isn't a meaningful measure because there is only the subjective and not everyone will have a use for it, we can't speak objectively anyway so why try?
Allow the nihilism to destroy your spirit and culture. It means nothing.


Of course we know which ethnic group pushes this philosophy and the Marxism laced within, we also know why they do it because ethnocentrism is the most effective evolutionary strategy ever. If your suggestion was that it was completely wrong because evolution is what is underneath the facades of philosophy, maybe you have a case.

I also don't care about JBP, I think he's a kook and people are better served just reading Stephen Hicks' book.

>>14272704
Modern people can shower daily and wear deodorant so now we don't need bigass wool coats to block the stink

>>14278034
>>14278165

Absolutely based.

>>14278165
>You deconstruct an idea in order to render it's implicit meaning null and then frame it in whatever context you would like
Stop forcing your shitty /pol/-memes on the word deconstruction.
tl:dr

>Allow the nihilism to destroy your spirit and culture. It means nothing.
Yeah, I didn't know we lived in the 1800s faggot

>>14278422

You got rekt. And now allow us to dress in modest ways to enforce ethnocentrism.

>>14274834
>thank fuck for low white birthrates
Shoo shoo

>>14276912
literally talk to people, no one gets married anymore and on top of that no one actually dates anymore theyre always fwb or its "complicated" even in the work place or in uni all the professors or bosses always pretend like they're some cool hip relatable guy. society has lost all sense of formality

>>14278468
>Not realizing postmodernism is anti-identity abolishing

>>14272704
God can you fucking idiots fuck off back too /pol/

>>14279333
Somewhat.
An important distinction to make is the difference between Postmodernism as it pertains to art and Postmodernism as it pertains to philosophy.
The destruction of identity, through the philosophical version, comes from the dillution of meaningful, heirloom, partly biological-informed identities through the creation of an infinite number of atomized, meaningless, socially-constructed identities.

What is the real reason beards (short beards, not hipster ones) are frowned upon in the fashion world?

>>14279510
They're not.

>>14279510
runway models almost never have them.

>>14272964
I like the take from this two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqp5zI4Ng_s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL0O8UC72O4

reminder that if you are christian or catholic the jews tell you "hey we are pals!!! totally! we are one and the same!!!" ... but if you go to israel and want to live there (have citizenship) you have to convert to judaism as an obligation or have jewish DNA (literally)

>>14279783
Nevermind that, they use evangelicals as tax cattle to fund their wars in the Middle East while sending Christian Sons to die on their behalf.
It's time people reassessed our relationship with Israel, but some people take Revelations far too literally, rather than allegorical or symbolic, and believe the mere existence of this particular iteration of Israel will bring about the end. This of course contradicts the Old Testament and their own faith(God didn't allow Israel to exist during periods of unbelief and Christ was an institution of a new covenant, Jews rejected Christ outright; it stands to reason this Israel shouldn't exist).

>>14272964
Based and redpilled

>>14273075
it's not even /that/ crazy. most guys don't realize that every girl from age 12 up at the beach has to shave her vagina to wear average bathing suits from target or walmart. pic related is a slightly more risque cut, but it's still american eagle which is a tween/teen shop

>>14273068
>ironic
you're in for a big surprise when the coin falls on the pavement ;)
(if you know what I mean)

>>14272704
Oh boy, one of THESE threads again. Listen OP. The picture you uploaded is of a modern day Hollywood actor. It's easy to mythologize some undefined points in the past as some lost golden ages or something but most people were probably not so well dressed or nice looking. When you genuinely compare the past to today the real golden age of fashion is RIGHT NOW. If you want to wear some old-fashioned suit you can probably find a much better one than whatever the better dressed people back in that day were wearing, or you can dress in streetwear, or enjoy something avant-garde, or whatever. You have options now. Back then even if you were wealthy social norms would be pretty limiting with what you could wear. So stop dreaming of a bygone era that never existed and enjoy what the world offers you today.

>>14280331

What if we simply enjoy suits and social norms and not the shitty abomination you posted? Suits convey a standard that's long been forgotten in our society.

>>14275262
I think this will only happen if and when we have a huge economic upturn in the West. I think the pervasion of casual streetwear and athleisure is in no small part because of the past economic crisis in the West. As for the experimental element of it like in that pic of Billie Eilish, I'm not sure. It reminds me of some stuff I remember seeing in the early 2000's, with all that plastic clothing and Fith Element almost sci-fi looking designs. It's possibly due to the normalization and acceptance of LGBT culture and people just want to be free and themselves now.

>>14275416
There is probably some truth to this but I can't say I miss neurotic, uptight community gossip queens.

>>14277859
Facial scars are ALWAYS in. There is little cooler.

>>14277867
That's pretty wild.

>>14280371

>hitting each others faces for fun

Scars from real events are okay. Self-inflicted is maymay tier.

i don't think they have, it's just they've changed as par the culture and society. if an 16th century noble saw a 19th century man and the way he dressed, he'd have considered it poor, ugly, and a degeneration from what he considered 'good fashion'. you think this because you have some misplaced nostalgia for a time you didn't live in because of it's glorification in hollywood, or television, or books. times change, clothes change, eventually you'll change. that's the nature of life.

>>14280433
It's not "for fun" although I'm sure a degree of fun is involved. It's a rite of passage and a test of bravery.

what is the point of such discussions?

>>14279510
>>14279629
This is the reason.

>>14272964
winner, gagnant !

>>14277859
Why scar p-rn hasn't been popularized yet ? :(

>>14280450
>No actual danger involved
>Treating the wounds specifically to cause scars
It's intentional scarification with extra steps.

>>14277848
literally based and redpilled

>>14272704
At least it makes it easy for you to dress chad level of effay

>>14272704
advertising, everyone walks around likea bunch of shitty billboards now, before clothes werent branded so heavily with graphics and w/e

>>14272704
Corporate profits. Seriously American society has declined because we worship the almighty dollar and corporations need more money every year. Look at that outfit for example
>relatively time consuming and costly to make
costs to much shit out some t shirts for pennies
>durable and able to be repaired at home or at a store
Compared to people who go through clothing within a year
>by shifting what is fashionable they force plebs to buy new shit every year
If people by a suit and wear it for years where is the profit?
It’s plain greed

>>14281593
Also, literally based and redpilled.

>>14280285
If there is a Fourth Reich you'll be the first to go when it comes buddy. Promise.

Thought you posted Lenin. Should have posted Lenin.

>>14282732
haha xD