Menswear: Whats every chief wearing about you aka What we wore 6 months ago and now dislike


Show original post
Homer
Homer avatar

23926 posts since 8/5/03

19 Dec 2007 21:03
no but you would look like one Eye-wink
EVERS
EVERS avatar

8580 posts since 2/7/06

19 Dec 2007 21:10
Homer wrote: Should we therefore appreciate trackie wearing chavs if they feel comfortable and feel good in them ?


why would this be any less valid than their opinion of someone head to toe in haute couture?
foulstyle
foulstyle avatar

428 posts since 8/4/07

19 Dec 2007 21:13
'back in the day when i was a nipper' if you forgive the excuse, wearing stuff which costs "a lot" and has a big label (think G-star or a chav logo/make/brand) say when you are perhaps 13-16 years old and a twat, or so you got 'respect' in school did you not? (granted chavs) IMO some people dont pass the phase that they think you must buy a top or whatever cos its expensive and has a huge fuckoff logo on it so everyone knows what you payed etc.. I hope that makes sense. (regardless of style of item , if it looks good or not)

I just cant stand clothes that have massive logos on them such as g-star and the rest of them is shit. I admit like I said 'back in the day' I used to like some of the gear like that. A lot of people on here wear Supreme gear which I think is the same really, [SUPREME] stamped right across everything, doesnt really appeal to me. Although some of the print tees from 06 where indeed nice Smiling
Rising Sun
Rising Sun avatar

862 posts since 8/11/07

19 Dec 2007 21:14
Because we are all (by definition of posting on a fashion forum) all snobby cunts when it comes to our clobber. If one of us wears Visvim, Neighborhood, and Supreme and another of us wears Dior it makes no difference, both looks are about being a fashion snob.

Trackie wearing chavs probably also believe that they look good, but the trackie/ nike hoodie look is also a uniform of intimidation for many of the youth of this country, and not so much about fashion.
foulstyle
foulstyle avatar

428 posts since 8/4/07

19 Dec 2007 21:19
It really depends tho dunnit lad.

You don't have to be any kind of person to wear any kind of clothes, a bit like doodle said last page.

If a person is a cunt, it makes no difference what clothes they like (which is the impression I'm getting from your comment there) just like not all people who have clobber like you said have to be snobs.

Some of the most 'well dressed' on here are really nice chaps, Cool
EVERS
EVERS avatar

8580 posts since 2/7/06

19 Dec 2007 21:23
I think the debate should centre around anyone who takes a great deal of interest in apparel.

What the apparel is, is surely immaterial.

You can be a 'fashion snob' and look either a complete penis, or a total don.

Analogue
Analogue avatar

371 posts since 3/11/07

19 Dec 2007 21:28
I'm on the fence, you've both got valid points though.

I mean, you're sitting on the bus and you see a chav step on, walks past you wearing trackie, music playing from his phone, slouched walk, thinks he is the fucking whizz, & sits a few seats behind you.

I always, always think to myself 'christ, what a dick'.

But you actually get some decent lads, well brought up smart lads who like to have a joke and a laugh like the rest of us, I suppose it's just being brought up in the whole crowd and such.

I know a few pill heads, weed smokers, who are pretty much grade A students,
and they dress like shit, don't give a toss what people think of them.

But that's the lower end of the scale.

'Don't judge a book by it's cover'

Heck, I'd love to wear Dior, Raf etc, because it looks so smart and well turned out.
You'd get respect for dressing in that attire, but I wouldn't act like I'm everything because I'm wearing expensive brands.
Rising Sun
Rising Sun avatar

862 posts since 8/11/07

19 Dec 2007 21:33
foulstyle wrote: It really depends tho dunnit lad.

You don't have to be any kind of person to wear any kind of clothes, a bit like doodle said last page.

If a person is a cunt, it makes no difference what clothes they like (which is the impression I'm getting from your comment there) just like not all people who have clobber like you said have to be snobs.

Some of the most 'well dressed' on here are really nice chaps, Cool

I see that you've zeroed in on the word "snob" and taken it for a run Roll Eyes

In fact I said "fashion snob", the implication is that we all post here because we like (what we consider to be) nice clothing…..and nothing more.

Whether you hold an interest in fashion or not has no baring on your personallity, political views….or education apparently Evil

And dont call me lad, I'm probably old enough to be your dad.
foulstyle
foulstyle avatar

428 posts since 8/4/07

19 Dec 2007 21:34
It isnt about price. It is about quality. Take jeans for example.. the G-star Jeans may to some look good. But in fact, the wash they are done in is bad chemicals and the quality of the denim isnt that great. (at least not for 80-150 quid a pop). Then you take APC, or Edwins, the s'vage denim is a gazillion times the quality for alot less of the price USUALLY, sometimes its equal in price but you know you are paying for the quality, ya dig? Smiling
RETRO KID
RETRO KID avatar

498 posts since 19/9/05

19 Dec 2007 21:34
Why do people tuck there trackys in to there socks i dont get it?
Rising Sun
Rising Sun avatar

862 posts since 8/11/07

19 Dec 2007 21:35
RETRO KID wrote: Why do people tuck there trackys in to there socks i dont get it?

They're going fishing Laughing out loud
Homer
Homer avatar

23926 posts since 8/5/03

19 Dec 2007 21:41
Its so when they nick a bike they have a quick getaway and dont have to waste time doing it
Rirawin
Rirawin avatar

9220 posts since 17/7/05

19 Dec 2007 21:41
Hollister, American Eagle, A&F and hideous all over print hoodies. However on the flipside, fixies, messenger bags and skinny fit jeans.
Goldie
Goldie avatar

4599 posts since 17/10/07

19 Dec 2007 21:48
Valid points made, and yeah i can see what you're saying. Some of the stuff my mates where wouldn't be my personal choice, but fair play to 'em, they feel good wearing it and when we're out on the town we're all getting the birds so it ain't doing anybody any harm.
EVERS
EVERS avatar

8580 posts since 2/7/06

19 Dec 2007 21:54
I think what's interesting is that there are a whole strata of people who think just as much about their look who we don't get to see on here and their viewpoint is as valid, cos they're clothes junkies all.

MerciBeau
MerciBeau avatar

4324 posts since 7/7/06

19 Dec 2007 21:59
like robii said, i dont believe humans can ever be properly objective so why acknowledge every statement with IMO?

of course you are gonna judge people on what they wear, and the connatative extrapolations you make are gonna be based on you're personal experiances.

despite meaning being intrinsicly plural there is always some degree of similarity between the way different people understand any given signifying unit (clothes, words, pictures or whatever) cos otherwise it would be impossible to communicate.

so everyone in a cultures' understanding of what an item of clothing 'means' should be to a large extent similar to what other people within that culture understands as to be that item's 'meaning'.


foulstyle
foulstyle avatar

428 posts since 8/4/07

19 Dec 2007 21:59
I tend to post pics of my sneaks every now and then, have posted in the WAYWT a few times but stopped really for the simple reason I wear the same shit every other day. Guess people would just get tired of seeing dark dry denim, nikes + a tee over and over Sticking out tongue
MerciBeau
MerciBeau avatar

4324 posts since 7/7/06

19 Dec 2007 22:05
i spose i should also say that the meaning of items of clothing is less heavily 'policed' than words for example as nobody will ever argue with you that you're wrong if you think that a certain hat has 'christmassey' connotations, whereas if you start calling chairs appls people will probably call you up on it.

because of this increased plurality and looser codes of meaning it allows for a greater variation in how we understand clothing.

i guess FUK.co.uk is interesting because it is shaped by and shapes the views of its members to a certain extent, whereas some chavvy scally contributes to and takes their ideas of what things mean from different sources.
Analogue
Analogue avatar

371 posts since 3/11/07

19 Dec 2007 22:10
.
joe151
joe151 avatar

6230 posts since 21/2/07

19 Dec 2007 22:11
This pretty much clarifies, people of each individual 'style tribe'(no middle age observer columnist) dress that way because in their eyes its the best way to dress (unless they are too poor to do so)
Since reading/posting here i have deffo found out what suits me, ehat doesnt, and how important the fit of clothing is.
Round here, the guys who get the girls are mainly the ones dressed in topmans newest item as it is deemed cool over other stuff