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

Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

digest.bps.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 287 posts

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#221

Post by unmole »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #214
unmole wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, does that make JLR low status?

The association with the "cheap" brand is just a flimsy justification to be used by a bunch of Americans who drive 4Runners and Pilots (mostly, there's probably the odd Explorer in there) and have a desire to feel superior over people who "flaunt" their wealth or use it "irresponsibly". All these vehicles cost in the same ballpark (or at least have large overlapping ranges) so roughly all the same people have access…

A cursory search points to a Range Rover being almost thrice as expensive as a 4Runner or a Pilot.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#222

Post by moralestapia »

todfox wrote: post #141

I refuse to wear or display any corporate logo, even if I generally like the company or its products. I buy unbranded clothing. When I can't get something unbranded (like a decent parka), I remove or obliterate the logo. I covered the apple on my phone and computer with electrical tape, even though I've been a Mac user for nearly 30 years. I am not a billboard. I reject status and status seeking behavior. I refuse to…

>I am not a billboard.

X2

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#223

Post by projectazorian »

deebosong wrote: post #190
nonrandomstring wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And fashion has supplanted function. Anecdata from just last week... My partner wanted some new running trainers. She went to a popular high-street store here in the UK called JD Sports and said to the assistant "I'm looking for some new running shoes". In a bizarre fit of honesty the lady said: "Sorry we don't really do running gear here, we sell more fashion items." I'm sure her manager would have been appalled to…

there was some article from New Yorker or NYTimes – with a quick google search I can't seem to find it at the moment. but the thesis was basically: sports wear has often influenced mainstream fashion since even like 100 years ago. but in each generation, people find it initially shocking to see so many people wearing what is marketed and made for sportswear for leisure, or even seeing it spill into the workplace. i t…

> i personally didn't think it looked at all aesthetically pleasing, but because they were relatively expensive for running shoes, i'm guessing that the man decided to pair them with his high fashion look.

I'll sometimes do this sort of thing when I travel. Lot easier to travel light when you don't need a separate pair of running shoes.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#224

Post by dewey »

petre wrote: post #185
dewey wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get that comparison. The current day Land Rover / Range Rovers are very different from "very rugged and easy to repair" ones of the past as they are basically SUVs now. This might have been true for the Defender but not any more.

They're owned by Tata Motors now, the manufacturer of the Tata Nano, the world's cheapest car.

Porsche, Lamborghini, Bentley and Bugatti are also owned by Volkswagen. That doesn't make them any less expensive.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#225

Post by 1-6 »

avgDev wrote: post #206
Aeolun wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m of the opinion that truly good clothes do not need to sport a logo at all. Unless you can see/feel the quality, why pay a premium just to show people you spent 500% more on your shirt?

I do like sporting t-shirts and hoodies with the 'Kirkland' logo because I like a good deal.

Wearing an unbranded Kirkland Pima Cotton T-shirt right now thinking how much value it has to me. It feels comfortable, looks a little more formal with thicker cotton, and costs less than a branded one.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#227

Post by throwaway0a5e »

unmole wrote: post #221
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The association with the "cheap" brand is just a flimsy justification to be used by a bunch of Americans who drive 4Runners and Pilots (mostly, there's probably the odd Explorer in there) and have a desire to feel superior over people who "flaunt" their wealth or use it "irresponsibly". All these vehicles cost in the same ballpark (or at least have large overlapping ranges) so roughly all the same people have access…

A cursory search points to a Range Rover being almost thrice as expensive as a 4Runner or a Pilot.

Sorry, I didn't give enough shits to realize we were comparing to the Range Rover and not Landrover SUVs generally. In that case the 4Runner was the wrong comparison point since the Range Rover more directly competes with the LX600 (86k MSRP). I'm not going to dig through the options lists to figure out where the discrepancy is.

My point still stands. Expensive Toyota SUV buying people like to shit on expensive European SUV buying people not because they are of substantially different means but because they are of substantially different tribes.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#228

Post by corrral »

deebosong wrote: post #190
nonrandomstring wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And fashion has supplanted function. Anecdata from just last week... My partner wanted some new running trainers. She went to a popular high-street store here in the UK called JD Sports and said to the assistant "I'm looking for some new running shoes". In a bizarre fit of honesty the lady said: "Sorry we don't really do running gear here, we sell more fashion items." I'm sure her manager would have been appalled to…

there was some article from New Yorker or NYTimes – with a quick google search I can't seem to find it at the moment. but the thesis was basically: sports wear has often influenced mainstream fashion since even like 100 years ago. but in each generation, people find it initially shocking to see so many people wearing what is marketed and made for sportswear for leisure, or even seeing it spill into the workplace. i t…

> but in each generation, people find it initially shocking to see so many people wearing what is marketed and made for sportswear for leisure, or even seeing it spill into the workplace. i think the article was focusing on leggings when they started creeping into non-sports-related settings.

A lot of modern casual and even business-casual fashion is (or was) sports wear.

Polo shirts? Explicitly designed for tennis—it's the reason the design exists. Pure sportswear.

Oxford-cloth button-downs? Sports wear. That's why it's got the buttons to keep the collar down, and why the cloth is so heavy-weight and rugged.

Rugby shirts? Jerseys? Of course.

Sneakers, of course. Also, many other shoe designs, from equestrian and hunting sports.

What's not sports wear is often former underwear. T-shirts and A-shirts (thought the latter remain very informal, at least) were/are underwear. Arguably leggings are underwear that (somehow—this trend remains baffling to me, but on the other hand, I mean, thank god for it, obviously) became sports wear and then became everyday casual wear.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#229

Post by mywittyname »

3y350n1y wrote: post #204
mywittyname wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, they absolutely "get it." People quickly learn to dress for the occasion. When you go to a nephew's birthday party or something, you don't want to clue strangers in, so you take the Toyota and wear plain clothing. It's like a shibboleth, people who know what a $250 plain shirt looks like will get it, while everyone else is clueless.

Mmm, I'm not convinced. Generally speaking I think wealthy, business and even "custom-savvy" people - if you want to go that far - have enough business sense to realise paying $250 for a plain white shirt doesn't make any sense...

The shirt is expensive because A) they make them for a variety of body types, not just the generic S,M,L you'd find in most clothing stores and B) they are often sold at stores where a person is going to help you pick out something that looks good on your body and goes with your personal style. You're mostly paying for someone to do the thinking and work for you.

It makes plenty of sense to spend money to look good when aesthetics aren't your strong suit, but are important to you. People hire landscapers to make their houses look nice and appealing. This is the same thing, but for your body.

Re: Wearing flashy/status clothes makes people less likely to cooperate with you

#230

Post by gopher_space »

dhosek wrote: post #174
marssaxman wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make a point of either removing or covering logos on my clothing and accessories when I can't find unbranded options. A seam ripper is useful for removing sewn-on patch style logos. For embroidered or embossed logos, I often sew on a Cascadian flag patch - all of my backpacks and utility bags have them!

I thought you said Canadian flag patch and I remembered back in the 80s hearing about friends traveling in Europe who would sew Canadian flag patches on their backpacks to hide the fact that they were from the US.

My dad talks about backpacking through Europe in the early 60's as an American and it's all open doors and family dinners in every little town.

My experience more recently is that people seem to be aware that an American traveling abroad probably agrees with most of their criticisms and they're just curious about what it's really like here.

Post reply on HN