Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 369 posts

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#221

Post by peanutz454 »

clusterfish wrote: post #214
dade_ wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but men’s fashion cycles run far longer than women, so we can buy higher quality clothing that lasts much longer. This also means custom clothing is very practical. I deal with a guy, his family has a factory in India. All the grades of fabric, styles, etc, all made custom based on my measurements. A few weeks later, it arrives. Most comfortable clothing available, and looks killer. He travels to me, or I go to…

You get custom made clothing cheaper than store clothing? That doesn't seem to be the norm pricing wise.

Hmm its possible. In India I bought stitched suit for ~350$, and store bought for ~100. The tailor was best in class (two extremely well dressed men who probably made more money than me took multiple measurements and I had to go to the store three times), the cloth was best in class too. But on the other hand I bough tailored work pants for ~7$, and store bought for ~15. This tailor while talented, ran a poor mans store, even his best cloth lacked a little in elegance. I am just telling you my experience, you can guess though that one could find someone in India who can tailor the perfect cloths for you at a price that beats "some" store cloths.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#222

Post by prostoalex »

coldtea wrote: post #158
taurath wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(All comments on culture US centric) - This thinking is why the men’s section is 1/4 as large as the women’s in most stores. Culturally for men clothing is supposed to be above all practical. There are 5 genres of men’s clothes - business (pressed shirts, suits), casual, workout, skater, and comfort (hoodie). Contrast this with the women’s section. Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality…

> Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality. Personality is expressed through choice of cut, material, and color of cloth?

Some companies work hard at convincing the customers that the best venue for expressing their individual personality traits are mass-produced designs of those specific companies (e.g. Hot Topic, Forever 21).

For what it's worth, they develop a loyal following.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#223

Post by triceratops »

coldtea wrote: post #178
magic_beans wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be dense. Whether you admit it or not, most people judge others based on appearance.

Don't be denser, judging others by their appereance is shallow. The fact that people still do it doesn't mean that when you change your clothes that's any kind of expression proper. It's just a cheap way to signal something that you might or might not be, and only superficially at that.

You use "cheap" as a pejorative, but it's actually a positive. By signaling that you are X, or believe yourself to be X, (where X can be anything - gender, hobbies, wealth, social class whatever) you gain the interest of everyone who is seeking X without needing to speak to them. And save the time of everyone who isn't interested in X. It's a cheap, efficient way to filter people. Is it perfect? Heck no. But humans are often happy to sacrifice accuracy for speed.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#224

Post by wyclif »

bgeeek wrote: post #182
wyclif wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One strap shoulder Man-bags are all the rage. They are pretty practical, especially when you can’t fit your checkbook-sized wallet in tiny pockets. But in the US it looks like you’re wearing a fanny pack. Especially true in SE Asia. I resisted the trend because it looks effeminate, like you're wearing a purse. Asian guys love them because they're super practical if you ride a motorbike or scooter tandem style. I thin…

Not effeminate at all. Look up reporter bags, smaller than a messenger bag. Classy, not effeminate. Mostly older men wear them in the UK (I’m on my third) whereas the younger men wear cross-body sports-type bags. Most majors make them. I can completely under the rise because of the increase in phone size. Phone + wallet + headphones + tissues, sanitizers, and a mini Fulton umbrella. Then I’m set :)

Well, I know what a reporter bag is but that's not what I'm talking about. I didn't describe it very well. Usually they're "fanny pack" size, but with a shoulder strap. Very popular in the Philippines, for instance. Not worn so much as a fashion statement, but more as an anti-theft contingency when travelling in crowded spaces or public transportation because they are small enough to swing around and wear the bag across your chest.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#225

Post by argonaut »

mthoms wrote: post #52
pembrook wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, human “culture” and it’s “trends” are such a waste. Why can’t everybody just spend their entire lives staring at screens while dressed in tshirts, like us software engineers do? Those thousands of years of human history spent on emotionally-driven aesthetic pursuits like art, fashion, music, culinary tradition and architecture...what a waste of time and resources. If only we could be more robot-like and efficien…

Besides being a reductio ad absurdum [0] argument that ads nothing to the discussion, I'll address your comment. Music, Art, Food, Literature and Architecture generally don't go out of style every 6 months (although companies are trying harder and harder to make it so). Nor do they have the same toxic effect on the environment (possible exception: food?) and personal self esteem as high fashion. [0] https://en.wikipe…

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that reductio ad absurdum is a fallacy. It isn't. It's a logical argument.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#226

Post by vladvasiliu »

okamiueru wrote: post #33
colmvp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't agree more. High end fashion is woefully overpriced items that predominantly largely priced on their brand rather their functionality and material. While yes, you could make the same argument with technology, I can at least get a lot of value out of premium I've paid for Apple products like my seven year old MacBook Pro or five year old iPhone. And after working briefly in the fashion industry as a developer…

To be fair, and you even bringing it up, apple products is to some degree the fashion equivalent in tech. I recently had to buy a MacOs compatible hardware for the first time in years, and I had really no idea how large the difference has become. Apple products truly are "way of life", more than anything tangible. And when choosing to upgrade components, I really couldn't believe it. It was more than twice the compar…

There's clearly an appeal of the Apple brand to people. But I think that the appeal comes much more as a form of "general belonging" rather than as a "fad".

Usually "fashionable" items (be it clothing or others) are quite noticeably different from year to year. To the untrained eye, my 7 year old mbp doesn't look all that different from a brand new 2020 one. If I open it up in public, I'll look like "a guy who uses apple". People won't know that I'm out of style because I rock an "ancient" laptop.

This seems true for iphones, too. The models before the X look somewhat different because of the button, but aside from the cameras being changed, I can't easily tell apart the newer models without a home button.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#227

Post by xeromal »

chrisseaton wrote: post #28
kazen44 wrote: post #5

The collapse of the fashion industry does not mean the clothing industry will collapse. People still need clothing obviously (cheap and of good quality preferably). Also, what do we consider the fashion industry exactly? Most long term clothing trends seem to be dictated by a couple of factors. Consisting of: - practicality. Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time. - c…

> Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time. Mainstream jeans brands seem astronomically expensive to me.

I guess it depends. I buy levis which are the some of the cheapest decently quality jeans you can find. I'm not big on raw or selvedge denim so I mean decently trendy and ready to wear jeans. I can find a pair for around 100 or less depending on sales and those pairs can last me about 3-5 years. I think 100$ is a fair price for something that will last me that long. I have squatter's legs so the inner thigh grinds to a pulp on most brands but levi's lasts the longest.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#228

Post by watwut »

taurath wrote: post #18
kazen44 wrote: post #5

The collapse of the fashion industry does not mean the clothing industry will collapse. People still need clothing obviously (cheap and of good quality preferably). Also, what do we consider the fashion industry exactly? Most long term clothing trends seem to be dictated by a couple of factors. Consisting of: - practicality. Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time. - c…

(All comments on culture US centric) - This thinking is why the men’s section is 1/4 as large as the women’s in most stores. Culturally for men clothing is supposed to be above all practical. There are 5 genres of men’s clothes - business (pressed shirts, suits), casual, workout, skater, and comfort (hoodie). Contrast this with the women’s section. Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality…

Then again, what woman section misses is the comfortable practical stuff.

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#229

Post by 082349872349872 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #98
082349872349872 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now that golfers no longer wear knickerbockers, I guess we're all pretty much sans-culottes. (How about 3/4 pants among the patagucci crowd?)

My thought was more of the dramatic shifts in fashion which can follow a sudden political and economic shock, as with the French Revolution. Fashion evolves toward ever greater complexity as a Veblen status-signalling good, then recapitulates. Often it is lower-class wear which emerges as the new standard, then progresses through the cycle again, often being elevated to the status of elite wear: dinner jackets, morni…

See Homage to Catalonia for fashion change to lower-class wear and back, changing with the fortunes of the republic.

Rule of thumb: the waitstaff in restaurants wear what the patrons had been dining in, before the last fashion shift. In the Coming Age of Formal Sweatpants, I'm guessing the front of the house will adopt button-downs and khakis.

(Browsing old pictures makes it clear the Iron Curtain was pervious to even minor changes in fashion. There may have been ideological opposition among the elites on both sides, but not only did We look, from the oh-so-distant viewpoint of the twenty-first century, silly in our wide lapels or legwarmers, They did too.)

Re: Sweatpants Forever: How the Fashion Industry Collapsed

#230

Post by watwut »

coldtea wrote: post #178
magic_beans wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be dense. Whether you admit it or not, most people judge others based on appearance.

Don't be denser, judging others by their appereance is shallow. The fact that people still do it doesn't mean that when you change your clothes that's any kind of expression proper. It's just a cheap way to signal something that you might or might not be, and only superficially at that.

People are shallow. And cheap signalling is best signalling, no reason to be wasteful.
Post reply on HN