PDA

View Full Version : Disturbing fashion trends among college students



Miss Anthropic
27 Apr 2005, 09:25 AM
I live very near a university. I can barely drive down the main thoroughfare without running over a pedestrian, bicyclist or skateboarder. The other day a skateboarder ran a red light in front of me...not so shocking as his outfit. I realize lowriders and boxer shorts are old news. This guy was wearing a pair of enormous basketball short ala Michael Jorden and they were pulled (I am totally serious about this) 2/3 the way down his ass (we're talking the dark side of the moon) and instead of wearing boxers he was wearing tighty-whities that you could totally see his crack through (yeah, I looked in----utter astonishment.) Of course the crotch was at least at knee level. I've seen guys wearing jeans halfway down their asses, and I'm not sure how they keep them on, but usually its boxer shorts covering their cracks--not white undies! The other thing I've noticed is hair length on guys is starting a time warp. I'm seeing some big afros (on white guys, we're a little short of diversity around here) and that general longish Peter Brady look. But wait, there's more. I saw a highschool kid in a local lunch place the other day. He was wearing the same Gigantic Micheal Jordan basketball shorts, that were so damned long they nearly hit his ankles, a Micheal Jordan basketball jersey and a pair of Michael Jordan basketball shoes. All in black and red. Then I considered how much it all must have cost. Probably as much as the clothes I would wear during the week cost when added all together. The outfit was so bizarre looking to me, in my mind it would be like a highschool girl going to school dressed up like a princess or something--it looked like a costume, not street clothes. Am I just getting old or what! Can someone explain why this supposedly looks "good?"

Another one is chubby girls who wear short shirts and lowriders that expose their big chubby tummies with pierced bellybuttons. I'm all for belly button piercing, but a nice flat tummy should be a requirement. And for god's sake if you have a gut, keep it covered!

iponjs
27 Apr 2005, 09:34 AM
Yes. You are getting older. When you start wearing polyester pants over your depends, then you are old.

But, while we're bitching about the gangster fashion...

When I moved from L.A. (ie - where rap videos are shot) to CT I stopped in Kansas - middle of nowhere. Two kids drag in dressed as you describe and "gang sign" thier bud at the fast food counter and greet him w/ "sup dawg". This is the middle of freakin' KANSAS! Aren't tehy supposed to be wearing overalls and driving pickumup trucks? Isn't Cletus the slack-jawed yokel their role model?

Combat
27 Apr 2005, 09:44 AM
I find it rather fascinating that many people make such an effort to make themselves look uglier.

philonightmare
27 Apr 2005, 09:51 AM
It's supposed to be sexy. I go more for the "I actually wear pants around my waist"... but, I'm positive a lot of girls go for the gangsta-look because they secretly want to stuff their hands down the guys' pants... think about it. It's all about sexual appeal and fantasy (think rap videos --all the girls have their hands all over the man and beyond what the screen is showing...) of the guy's pants falling down and the girls getting a great glimpse of his assets. It just makes it easier to pull/make his pants fall down when it's barely hanging on as is! (trust me, I'm not one of those pant-pullers)

In the 40's if a woman showed her ankles that was a rather grave matter. I dunno how the fashion's going to turn out 10 years from now, but I think loin cloths might just come back into fashion....

you never know. :)

Lee
27 Apr 2005, 09:53 AM
"Fasion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months" - Oscar Wilde

Helios
27 Apr 2005, 09:55 AM
Well I can't add much, I dress like a bum most days, and like Euro-trash if I wanna give any effort, and yeah I have grown my hair out too.

I really miss the faux-hawk that was the greatest merger of trendy and lazy ever!

Miss Anthropic
27 Apr 2005, 09:57 AM
Yes. You are getting older. When you start wearing polyester pants over your depends, then you are old.

But, while we're bitching about the gangster fashion...

When I moved from L.A. (ie - where rap videos are shot) to CT I stopped in Kansas - middle of nowhere. Two kids drag in dressed as you describe and "gang sign" thier bud at the fast food counter and greet him w/ "sup dawg". This is the middle of freakin' KANSAS! Aren't tehy supposed to be wearing overalls and driving pickumup trucks? Isn't Cletus the slack-jawed yokel their role model?

In 1992 I was travelling through rural New Mexico and stopped at a fast food place. There was this group of teenage Hispanic kids all wearing baggy khaki shorts, white knee length athletic socks and those leather scuff slippers....that was weird. A special kind of weird. I'm glad I didn't laugh out loud at them.
No, in order to wear polyester pants, one would have had to wear them at an earlier time in life (that's a being stuck in a time warp issue) It was rather disturbing to me also to see black polyester pants appear along with polyester shirts in the junior depts. a couple years back. They honestly looked like something MY grandma would have bought at a garage sale in 1975. If I were time-warped I'd be wearing stuff with giant shoulder pads and over-sized jackets with short ruffled skirts.

I still want to know what is cool about wearing a wasteband around the middle of your butt? Its still not OK if the fat old man does it, but when did "plumber's butt" become good for the "gangsta?" I can't wait for 20 years to go by and some of those poor suckers will still be wearing the fashion of their youth, and it will look ridiculous to the current youth of 2025! Their kids will say "Daaaaad, oh-my-gawd! Will you pull your pants up, you look like such an old man"
The only thing that might date me is my doc martens. And I'm not into Depends yet....I'll be sure and post about it though.

Miss Anthropic
27 Apr 2005, 09:59 AM
In the 40's if a woman showed her ankles that was a rather grave matter. I dunno how the fashion's going to turn out 10 years from now, but I think loin cloths might just come back into fashion....

you never know. :)
I hope you mean 1840's......you might be right about the loincloths!

Miss Anthropic
27 Apr 2005, 10:05 AM
Well I can't add much, I dress like a bum most days, and like Euro-trash if I wanna give any effort, and yeah I have grown my hair out too.

I really miss the faux-hawk that was the greatest merger of trendy and lazy ever!
I think with fashion and hair, as you age, you need to keep current. Not necessarily trendy, but ever-changing. The guys' hairstyles are what are interesting me the most right now because some guys, who have lived their teens into early adulthood with the short hair styles that have been current for so long probably feel comfortable with it and won't be growing it longer. Thus they have set themselves up to be "dated" (hair dating, much like carbon dating---you look at the style and can tell how old the person is and the years of his/her prime)

philonightmare
27 Apr 2005, 10:07 AM
I hope you mean 1840's......you might be right about the loincloths!

No. 1940's. It really wasn't considered "proper" to show ankles back then. Eh, maybe in some circles it was, but for the majority of Americans the style was long skirts down to the ankle and some even wore petticoats that late into the 20th century! They were pretty modest... I've looked at tons of photos of people from that time and the women look conservative as hell.

Edit: my history is off here...

Helios
27 Apr 2005, 10:10 AM
I personally feel zero connection with my exterior. So most of the time it is whatever is it is, by default. When some reason comes for me to attend to it, there is no issue morphing into whatever my Ne findings interesting ,as it has no bearing on anything in my reality.



edit-I'll add I hate hip hop and that whole "look", but it is no doubt a person taste thing

Miss Anthropic
27 Apr 2005, 10:23 AM
No. 1940's. It really wasn't considered "proper" to show ankles back then. Eh, maybe in some circles it was, but for the majority of Americans the style was long skirts down to the ankle and some even wore petticoats that late into the 20th century! They were pretty modest... I've looked at tons of photos of people from that time and the women look conservative as hell.
I think you are thinking of the wrong era. Or by today's standards you don't recognize it for what it was. Toward the 20's the dresses went from Gibson Girl, (post victorian where you were covered from ankles to neck) to short sleeveless flapper dresses they wore with rolled-down silk hose, in the 30's the hemlines went down some. In the 40s it was probably mid-calf. When world war II started there were a lot of changes in lifestyle, fashion reflects it, things were far more serious than in the 20's and people had been experiencing the depression of the 30's. Lots of straight skirts, suit tops with wider shoulders, shirtwaist style dresses, dark colors. No big pettycoats. In the 50's big crinoline pettycoats came back into style because they had those bias cut skirts that flaired out so nicely. You could say fashion back then was conservative as hell comparatively, considering what is normal for my daughter to wear to school today is what I would have worn out clubbing in the 80's....but they weren't prudish like they were in the 1800s by any means. The styles were very business looking. The longer length of dresses was style, not necesarily modesty. Take a look at the party girls of the 20's--that was a good time for the U.S. prosperity, more freedom for women, prohibition was in effect so it was all the more fun for people to go out to clubs because they had to drink in private, secret clubs. Fashion represented what was going on at the time. Of course, what that says about society today....?

Just looked it up and actually hemlines went up in the 40's because manufacturers couldn't allow as much fabric to be manufactured for that purpose during the war. Lines got straighter and the mix and match look was in (suit jackets, skirts, blouses etc have an expanded wardrobe)

philonightmare
27 Apr 2005, 10:31 AM
I think you are thinking of the wrong era. Or by today's standards you don't recognize it for what it was. Toward the 20's the dresses went from Gibson Girl, (post victorian where you were covered from ankles to neck) to short sleeveless flapper dresses they wore with rolled-down silk hose, in the 30's the hemlines went down some. In the 40s it was probably mid-calf. When world war II started there were a lot of changes in lifestyle, fashion reflects it, things were far more serious than in the 20's and people had been experiencing the depression of the 30's. Lots of straight skirts, suit tops with wider shoulders, shirtwaist style dresses, dark colors. No big pettycoats. In the 50's big crinoline pettycoats came back into style because they had those bias cut skirts that flaired out so nicely. You could say fashion back then was conservative as hell comparatively, considering what is normal for my daughter to wear to school today is what I would have worn out clubbing in the 80's....but they weren't prudish like they were in the 1800s by any means. The styles were very business looking. The longer length of dresses was style, not necesarily modesty. Take a look at the party girls of the 20's--that was a good time for the U.S. prosperity, more freedom for women, prohibition was in effect so it was all the more fun for people to go out to clubs because they had to drink in private, secret clubs. Fashion represented what was going on at the time. Of course, what that says about society today....?

Ah, looks like I'm getting confused today then... Makes sense what you said about it reflecting the times for our society. I think people are becoming more individualistic about it all --they don't want someone to dictate what is proper or good form anymore; if they want to wear fishnets, they will wear them and protest for freedom of expression if denied that right. The younger generations are always going to break the rules as far as they can go and get away with --that's nothing new...every decade had its rebels.

Serotonin
27 Apr 2005, 11:54 AM
It's all about Se. Something that is totally foreign to INTPs.

"If u got tha gear, then u give tha fear. M'shizzle. Don be a hat'r jus cos I'm way nayter. Foo".

^Guess that's the sort of thing low-slung pants wearers would say if you challenged them on it.

tragula
27 Apr 2005, 04:16 PM
Another one is chubby girls who wear short shirts and lowriders that expose their big chubby tummies


Me Like! Yum Yum Yum.


;P

crule81
27 Apr 2005, 04:30 PM
The "fashion" trend I do not like is tattoos. I had a thread about this long ago that I do not feel like digging up. However, I certainly like the trend in shorter skirts. I will not argue with a girl wearing a short skirt if she has the body to do so. This is not sexist because I don't think guys should wear "muscle shirts" if they don't have muscles.

cjs55
27 Apr 2005, 04:38 PM
I don't mind some tatoos, but tramp stamps are ridiculously funny.

My amazing college-going fashion is jeans and a t-shirt every day. Why would I consider anything else? I've reached the best point of A] not looking terrible, B] not having to spend any time at it

MacGuffin
27 Apr 2005, 04:42 PM
When I moved from L.A. (ie - where rap videos are shot) to CT I stopped in Kansas - middle of nowhere. Two kids drag in dressed as you describe and "gang sign" thier bud at the fast food counter and greet him w/ "sup dawg". This is the middle of freakin' KANSAS! Aren't tehy supposed to be wearing overalls and driving pickumup trucks? Isn't Cletus the slack-jawed yokel their role model?
As a born and raised Kansas Citian I take offense at your depiction of midwesterners.

[dips some chaw, hitches up Wranglers]

Claverhouse
27 Apr 2005, 06:54 PM
1940s clothes for women look ideal...

From Costume (http://www.100megspop3.com/adira/) > 1940s 1 (http://www.100megspop3.com/adira/1940s.htm) and 2 (http://www.100megspop3.com/adira/1940s2.htm)

and Patterns (http://www.sensibility.com/vintageimages/1940s/index.htm)

More glamorous anyway. But 1950s are too fussy; 1960s dullish; 1970s fine in romantic Laura Ashley stuff; 1980s seem just weird; 1990s to now, most women just wear business suits, black trousers or jeans in the streets. Which would indicate that now is the new age of puritanism when even ankles are frowned upon...

Of course, out clubbing some girls wear pussy pelmets thank God. The human expression of freedom and individuality can never be entirely quenched by drab conformity.



Claverhouse :ph34r:


1940s, although they don't look like 43" hips...

http://www.intpcentral.com/uploads/hollywoodswing.jpg

Dunno who Martha O'Driscoll was, either.

ohnoaninfp
27 Apr 2005, 06:55 PM
It's supposed to be sexy. I go more for the "I actually wear pants around my waist"... but, I'm positive a lot of girls go for the gangsta-look because they secretly want to stuff their hands down the guys' pants... think about it. It's all about sexual appeal and fantasy (think rap videos --all the girls have their hands all over the man and beyond what the screen is showing...) of the guy's pants falling down and the girls getting a great glimpse of his assets. It just makes it easier to pull/make his pants fall down when it's barely hanging on as is! (trust me, I'm not one of those pant-pullers)

In the 40's if a woman showed her ankles that was a rather grave matter. I dunno how the fashion's going to turn out 10 years from now, but I think loin cloths might just come back into fashion....

you never know. :)

Not really. The whole wearing jeans halfway down the ass doesan't look to good. It just looks sloppy.

"InsertNameHere"
27 Apr 2005, 07:01 PM
I kinda like the white boy "afro" thing. I think it's cute. Everything else gets on my nerves. It seems that fat belly chicks in small shirts is the new trend. I see it EVERYWHERE. I find it very disgusting...

iponjs
27 Apr 2005, 08:45 PM
Form follows function. If you are full of crap, having your pants half off is quite functional...

HeyBooU
27 Apr 2005, 08:47 PM
Ha, I'm white and if I could, I would grow an afro.

kuranes
27 Apr 2005, 09:02 PM
[QUOTE=Claverhouse]..

Of course, out clubbing some girls wear pussy pelmets thank God. The human expression of freedom and individuality can never be entirely quenched by drab conformity.



Claverhouse :ph34r:


Not sure what a "pussy pelmet" is but I'll be on the look-out for those Clave! K :devil:

MaroonBells
27 Apr 2005, 09:06 PM
It seems that fat belly chicks in small shirts is the new trend.

I love it! It's great to see that they are consciously fashionable without fitting the skinny beauty ideal. Totally sexy to see a little belly that is not fat-and-muscle depleted!

philonightmare
27 Apr 2005, 09:10 PM
Not really. The whole wearing jeans halfway down the ass doesan't look to good. It just looks sloppy.

Then you're not a lot of girls ;P :)

It's mostly XSFPs that go for that look anyway.

Here's one more trend: Girls wearing low-riders to purposefully show off their latest thongs.

Do guys even like it when a girl shows off her thong like that? It isn't very classy in my opinion, but I guess some would like it for obvious reasons.

philonightmare
27 Apr 2005, 09:11 PM
I love it! It's great to see that they are consciously fashionable without fitting the skinny beauty ideal. Totally sexy to see a little belly that is not fat-and-muscle depleted!

I think society is going back to the "Venus of Willendorf" standard...

Crazy
27 Apr 2005, 09:23 PM
I agree that this fashion trend is stupid, but aren't all fashions idiotic, especially the teenage ones?

I personally go with a pair of jeans that fit and wear them pulled up to my waist, and a T-shirt
Jeans: Blue or Black
T-Shirt: Black usually, but various other colors occasionally.

2ds
27 Apr 2005, 09:46 PM
I have two current pet hates in the fashion world.

The current fashion trend (at least where i live) is the patterned shirt. All the shirts you can buy over here now have these "urban" patterns on them, basically it'll be be a cream shirt with a bunch of brown scribble on it. I prefer to work with whole colours and vary the cut, etc.

ANDShirts I hate (http://www.rogerdavid.com.au/lifestyle.asp?lifeStyleID=2&categoryID=74)

The one on the mid left is the best example i think.

The second one is the current male hair fashion. Basically the current "look" is to
appear as if your hair is unwashed and sticking out all over the place.

I'm not talking about geling or anthing like that. this hair specifically
looks as if the person who own's it doesn't really care about head
hygene much.

hair i hate (http://www.rogerdavid.com.au/articleZone.asp?articleZoneID=14&lifeStyleID=13)

while not as good an example as the t-shirts we can see the man
looks suspiciously like he has just been to the gym and has been
sweating profusely from his cranium.

-2ds

Claverhouse
27 Apr 2005, 10:02 PM
Not sure what a "pussy pelmet" is but I'll be on the look-out for those Clave! K :devil:

Um, sorry to get your hopes up: it's just a slang ( British only I guess now ) expression for the type of skirts that thoughtless mothers would have objected to up to 10 years ago...

http://www.intpcentral.com/uploads/20040525.jpg


I hate intolerance.


Claverhouse :ph34r:


A pelmet is a sort of short top curtain or board to hide the fixings of curtains, or what Americans call drapes at windows.

meshou
27 Apr 2005, 10:17 PM
Belts with glandular conditions. They're like mini skirts, but something went horribly wrong, and made them frill at the end. At that length, it just looks silly (http://www.yrb.us/images/thumb/yrblu975.jpg).

I hate that the color pallette is either radioactive ugly or some shade of beige or brown. If it's radioactive ugly, offset it with white, if it's brown, put a graphic design student's C- final project printed shittly on it, then make sure you're wearing yet another shade of brown that doesn't offset the brown you're wearing. Contrast in anything but the art project is your enemy.

Your skin color this season: orange. Not tan, honest-to-god orange. The sun should have nothing to do with this color.

Wear only your jeans look like you've been dragged behind a pckyup truck for a few hundred yards on your ass and belly.

While I like some of the brown stuff, I wish it wasn't the only fsking stuff out there in cuts I like.

kuranes
27 Apr 2005, 11:29 PM
Newest fashion... . No pants at all. Only the hippest of the hip know about it yet. Since it's not street legal, tickets are given out to special "raves", where people shed their pants in a dressing room before joining in. People tip the towel room attendants very well to watch their pants, even though special "fanny pack"-type wallets are now available to be worn like an ammo bandolier across the shoulder/chest. It's considered rude to stare at anyone's privates, but everyone knows that some of that is going on while they're looking the other way. Mirrors are back in style too. . . .

Serotonin
28 Apr 2005, 12:04 AM
ANDShirts I hate (http://www.rogerdavid.com.au/lifestyle.asp?lifeStyleID=2&categoryID=74)

The one on the mid left is the best example i think.

-2ds

Two words: fuck yes. I hate that sort of print, and every second guy you see walking down the street in Sydney is wearing one. Just random grainy images scattered all over the shirt like it means something, but in fact it doesn't.

ps. rogerdavid.com.au. Are you Australian 2ds?

Miss Anthropic
28 Apr 2005, 12:55 AM
Belts with glandular conditions. They're like mini skirts, but something went horribly wrong, and made them frill at the end. At that length, it just looks silly (http://www.yrb.us/images/thumb/yrblu975.jpg).
My daughter calls those fat-girl skirts because even if your aren't fat you tend to look chubby in them. They seem to be a slightly shorter adaptation of some reminant of the 80's.....



And who said form follows function? (it usually does) What's the deal with all the skimpy clothes at a time when Americans are fatter than they have ever been? I guess its good to be accepting of your body even if your belly hangs out....but can't there be some sort of inoffensive compromise?

And the thong thing....at first thongs were created to eliminate the panty-line with tight pants. Now they are the object of display. They have evolved from a steath item into a "made to be exposed" item...is that weird or what! The disturbing thing about the clothes for girls today is little girls' clothes look just like teenagers' clothes. You end up with 5th grade girls wearing thongs with their low-riders and showing them to the boys at school.

philonightmare
28 Apr 2005, 12:57 AM
Newest fashion... . No pants at all. Only the hippest of the hip know about it yet. Since it's not street legal, tickets are given out to special "raves", where people shed their pants in a dressing room before joining in. People tip the towel room attendants very well to watch their pants, even though special "fanny pack"-type wallets are now available to be worn like an ammo bandolier across the shoulder/chest. It's considered rude to stare at anyone's privates, but everyone knows that some of that is going on while they're looking the other way. Mirrors are back in style too. . . .

What a club that would be... :ph34r:

I like the ammo bandolier idea.

philonightmare
28 Apr 2005, 12:59 AM
And the thong thing....at first thongs were created to eliminate the panty-line with tight pants. Now they are the object of display. They have evolved from a steath item into a "made to be exposed" item...is that weird or what! The disturbing thing about the clothes for girls today is little girls' clothes look just like teenagers' clothes. You end up with 5th grade girls wearing thongs with their low-riders and showing them to the boys at school.

That's just weird... I remember first wearing them for stealth, not to show them off or anything like that. I wonder why that's become a fashion statement. Go to Abercrombie and Fitch for Kids...now there's some trashy stuff for kids who should still be wearing nappies!

Helios
28 Apr 2005, 08:31 AM
That's just weird... I remember first wearing them for stealth, not to show them off or anything like that. I wonder why that's become a fashion statement. Go to Abercrombie and Fitch for Kids...now there's some trashy stuff for kids who should still be wearing nappies!


Naw, I stopped shopping at A&F 'casue the cloths are crap, very boring and mundane, it is only the ads and posters that are hot. Besides the bastards don't make size 33 jeans, so none of their demin fits me................dumbs asses! Diesel kicks their ass anyway.

philonightmare
28 Apr 2005, 01:31 PM
Naw, I stopped shopping at A&F 'casue the cloths are crap, very boring and mundane, it is only the ads and posters that are hot. Besides the bastards don't make size 33 jeans, so none of their demin fits me................dumbs asses! Diesel kicks their ass anyway.

I find their material to be a bit on the cheaper side nowadays for what one pays (used to be great, I don't know why the quality deteriorated). Diesel is much better. Have you tried Express jeans? I know that A LOT of men wear women's jeans from there... the flare and the fit=perfect for them especially a size 33.

Sally
28 Apr 2005, 02:59 PM
The skimpy clothes - pudgy belly trend was huge in England a year before it hit the states. You don't even have to be fat, just anything but stick-skinny for tight hip-huggers to find that little roll of fat and... elevate it. Ugh.

One of the saddest things in the world to me is seeing someone wear something that's not flattering to them, just because it's in-style. I suppose it happens everywhere, but I had never seen such a concentration of a single style as I did in the soul-sucking Midlands. It made me want to gouge my eyes out.

miff
28 Apr 2005, 03:06 PM
I find their material to be a bit on the cheaper side nowadays for what one pays (used to be great, I don't know why the quality deteriorated). Diesel is much better. Have you tried Express jeans? I know that A LOT of men wear women's jeans from there... the flare and the fit=perfect for them especially a size 33.

i can never find nice-fitting jeans at express. they are cut very angular, much better for men than women. i've never heard of men wearing them, not a bad idea.

diesel is much much better. i also like dkny a lot. the only thing i like about the abercrombie-gap-banana republic coalition is their weird sizing system. at these places i am an entire pants size smaller than i would be at other stores. i'm not a 4, but it does give me a nice warm fuzzy feeling to have banana republic think i am.

Lee
28 Apr 2005, 03:17 PM
The skimpy clothes - pudgy belly trend was huge in England a year before it hit the states. You don't even have to be fat, just anything but stick-skinny for tight hip-huggers to find that little roll of fat and... elevate it. Ugh.

One of the saddest things in the world to me is seeing someone wear something that's not flattering to them, just because it's in-style. I suppose it happens everywhere, but I had never seen such a concentration of a single style as I did in the soul-sucking Midlands. It made me want to gouge my eyes out.
I know... *shudder*

Sometimes I think that burqas should be standard for some people, as a punishment for subjecting me to thier rolls of blubber.

MaroonBells
28 Apr 2005, 03:17 PM
Have you tried Express jeans?

My wife got a pair yesterday and she looks HOT, HOT, HOT!

Lee
28 Apr 2005, 03:18 PM
The skimpy clothes - pudgy belly trend was huge in England a year before it hit the states. You don't even have to be fat, just anything but stick-skinny for tight hip-huggers to find that little roll of fat and... elevate it. Ugh.

One of the saddest things in the world to me is seeing someone wear something that's not flattering to them, just because it's in-style. I suppose it happens everywhere, but I had never seen such a concentration of a single style as I did in the soul-sucking Midlands. It made me want to gouge my eyes out.
I know... *shudder*

Sometimes I think burqas should be worn as a punishment for people who subject my eyes to thier rolls of blubber unecassarily.

2ds
28 Apr 2005, 07:27 PM
Two words: fuck yes. I hate that sort of print, and every second guy you see walking down the street in Sydney is wearing one. Just random grainy images scattered all over the shirt like it means something, but in fact it doesn't.

ps. rogerdavid.com.au. Are you Australian 2ds?

I sure am, looking at other people on the forum i get the feeling that this particular breed of horribleness is limited to australia...

-2ds

ohnoaninfp
28 Apr 2005, 09:15 PM
Then you're not a lot of girls ;P :)

It's mostly XSFPs that go for that look anyway.

Here's one more trend: Girls wearing low-riders to purposefully show off their latest thongs.

Do guys even like it when a girl shows off her thong like that? It isn't very classy in my opinion, but I guess some would like it for obvious reasons.
Uh Yeah guys like it! I don't wear my pants like that. Only one guy will ever get to see my undies, and no thats not you sir isaac. Sorry.

ohnoaninfp
28 Apr 2005, 09:17 PM
I don't mind some tatoos, but tramp stamps are ridiculously funny.

My amazing college-going fashion is jeans and a t-shirt every day. Why would I consider anything else? I've reached the best point of A] not looking terrible, B] not having to spend any time at it
Whats a tramp stamp?

Sir Isaac Lime
28 Apr 2005, 09:23 PM
I raped artie

ohnoaninfp
28 Apr 2005, 09:26 PM
The disturbing thing about the clothes for girls today is little girls' clothes look just like teenagers' clothes. You end up with 5th grade girls wearing thongs with their low-riders and showing them to the boys at school.

That's just sick! They are little girls. They shouldn't be wearing that kind of crap. What the fuck is wrong with society. Kids should be allowed to be kids and not forced into wearin that sort of things. I won't even let my girls, that's if I have children, wear those kind of clothes until they are eightteen. It's retarded, the fashion designers are making little girls into more of a target for creepy perverts. :rant:

ohnoaninfp
28 Apr 2005, 09:34 PM
dude you are not even funny. I mostly get my cloths from the deb and I like the stuff at Hot Topic. I wear mostly black. I just like how the color looks on me. I don't wear black lipstick thouh (unless it is for shock value ;) ) It doesan't look to good on me. I like the deb because the have bigger sizes, which means I can buy clothes that are loose. I like clothes that are not skin tight and that don't show off my belly. Most of the stuff in department stores are skin tight. I like loose feeling stuff, that still show my shape. The Deb is awesome!

cjs55
28 Apr 2005, 10:33 PM
Whats a tramp stamp?

the tattoo right above the ass crack.

ohnoaninfp
28 Apr 2005, 10:41 PM
thats sick. I want to get a tatoo though but not there.

MaroonBells
28 Apr 2005, 10:53 PM
the tattoo right above the ass crack.

And it is sooooo popular..... you see them everywhere with the sun coming out again!

iponjs
28 Apr 2005, 11:26 PM
Some call them "coasters"

s
29 Apr 2005, 12:22 AM
After reading Claver's post, I came away with "pussy curtains."

[laughter continues]

I am sick of velour sweat suits with stuff written on the bum, these http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00006TY86/ref=pd_sim_a_4/103-3255126-5041441?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance, and mass marketed ironic tshirts that are neither ironic nor creative. See Abercrombie and Old Navy for plenty of examples.

Miss Anthropic
29 Apr 2005, 12:40 AM
That's just sick! They are little girls. They shouldn't be wearing that kind of crap. What the fuck is wrong with society. Kids should be allowed to be kids and not forced into wearin that sort of things. I won't even let my girls, that's if I have children, wear those kind of clothes until they are eightteen. It's retarded, the fashion designers are making little girls into more of a target for creepy perverts. :rant:

Count on sewing a lot of clothes then, unless the trends change. My daughter is 13 now, but when she was seven it was tough to find shirts that were long enough not to have her tummy showing with the lowrider pants. Then suddenly a couple years later the sizes all got bigger, a small became what would have been labelled medium etc.l I think the manufacturers realized that too many frenchfries had been consumed and the sizing was off because of all the pudgy kids---4 years olds were needing size 7s! These days I pretty much let her wear what she wants as long as her underwear isn't hanging over the top and stomach isn't showing out the middle. Its a sort of "pick-your-battles" kind of issue.

Mariel
30 Apr 2005, 10:34 PM
Whats a tramp stamp?
I'm assuming a tramp stamp is a silly little ankle tattoo, like a butterfly or something they picked off the tattoo parlor wall when on spring break.

cjs55
30 Apr 2005, 11:19 PM
No... it's what I said it was a few posts ago:

the tattoo right above the ass crack.

Might be just local terminology. Hell, might just be my circle of friends terminology. I have no clue.

booyalab
1 May 2005, 12:58 AM
This is the middle of freakin' KANSAS! Aren't tehy supposed to be wearing overalls and driving pickumup trucks? Isn't Cletus the slack-jawed yokel their role model?

overalls= farmers or southern hicks
farmers= never named Cletus unless they're tobacky farmin'
slack-jawed and cletus= south, not midwest

if you're going to indulge in blatant stereotyping at least be precise.

coffeezombie
1 May 2005, 01:10 AM
overalls= farmers or southern hicks
farmers= never named Cletus unless they're tobacky farmin'
slack-jawed and cletus= south, not midwest


Guys in overalls suck, but I always liked it when girls wore them. I remember this one time in poetry class in college this girl wore a pair of overalls to class with no shirt on underneath it. I couldn't pay attention to the professor for the entire damn class because of that.

Johannes de Silencio
1 May 2005, 02:14 AM
And it is sooooo popular..... you see them everywhere with the sun coming out again!

I agree. These things make any girl look trampy. The sad thing is, things will only get worse once they get married and/or have kids and/or gain a few pounds. I can't imagine what these girls will say to their grandchildren in a few years time...

Claverhouse
1 May 2005, 03:19 AM
I agree. These things make any girl look trampy. The sad thing is, things will only get worse once they get married and/or have kids and/or gain a few pounds. I can't imagine what these girls will say to their grandchildren in a few years time...
It seems a hopefully remote contingency that grandmothers will uncover themselves there for their grandchildren... but these things are revolting anyway.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

booyalab
1 May 2005, 03:33 AM
Guys in overalls suck, but I always liked it when girls wore them. I remember this one time in poetry class in college this girl wore a pair of overalls to class with no shirt on underneath it. I couldn't pay attention to the professor for the entire damn class because of that.
lol i dont think i'd be able to pay attention either. Hopefully she at least had a bra.

iponjs
5 May 2005, 10:53 PM
overalls= farmers or southern hicks
farmers= never named Cletus unless they're tobacky farmin'
slack-jawed and cletus= south, not midwest

if you're going to indulge in blatant stereotyping at least be precise.

I forgot that Kansas isn't the south... Seems to me anything south of NJ is the south unless it's west of the rockies but then again I never memorized the state capitols either...

coffeezombie
5 May 2005, 10:59 PM
lol i dont think i'd be able to pay attention either. Hopefully she at least had a bra.

No bra. Just skin. She was one of those girls who tries to be unique but secretly seeks attention too.

s
6 May 2005, 12:38 AM
coffeezombie: I miss your avatar.

I HATE doc marten thick soled sandals. HATE them. I wish they would go away.

coffeezombie
6 May 2005, 12:40 AM
coffeezombie: I miss your avatar.

It's back. s0523 decided to borrow it for a bit so I went with an alternate in order to avoid confusion.

Serotonin
25 May 2005, 05:56 PM
I'm assuming a tramp stamp is a silly little ankle tattoo, like a butterfly or something they picked off the tattoo parlor wall when on spring break.

Ankle tats are a complete mystery to me. No aesthetic appeal whatsoever! None!

Star Cannon
26 May 2005, 04:05 AM
Ugh. Fashion can die. Lets just design 16 unisex uniforms for the world to wear and let that be the norm.

I swear, the guys in my highschool wear their pants at knee level. It's disgusting. Not all of them do it, but the ones that do... Please, oh mighty creator, let fashion take a turn towards science-fiction like decency!

Star Cannon

coffeezombie
26 May 2005, 04:08 AM
Ankle tats are a complete mystery to me. No aesthetic appeal whatsoever! None!

Where do tats have aesthetic appeal for you then, and why not the ankle?

Serotonin
26 May 2005, 09:55 AM
Where do tats have aesthetic appeal for you then, and why not the ankle?

On the eyeball.

The ankle just looks as bad as any other place.... like you've mutilated your skin. Which you have.

Shai Gar
26 May 2005, 10:05 AM
"Fasion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months" - Oscar Wilde
every 3 months, fashion changes with the seasons these days

philonightmare
26 May 2005, 10:13 AM
I was just thinking about a majority of my shirts --they are exactly the same style, just different colors. Talk about utilitarian... :rolleyes:

Tats on ankles are just fugly. It also hurts more to get it there.

ohnoaninfp
26 May 2005, 08:00 PM
I don't really care about ankle tatoos. They can be pretty. But it seems now people get tatoos just because they can. Aren't tatoos supposed to be an expression? I don't know. I still want one though.

Dman
26 May 2005, 10:39 PM
I heard a funny on Bill Mahar the other night. He said a message to all the women with the Chinese symbols on their lower back - it does NOT mean you are enlightened! It’s means you’re easy.

I guess I’m old-fashioned, but I think tattoos on women are tacky, even on the ankle. To me it says either you’re a biker-chick, low class, or you’re a poser wanna-be.

Claverhouse
26 May 2005, 10:54 PM
I guess I’m old-fashioned, but I think tattoos on women are tacky, even on the ankle. To me it says either you’re a biker-chick, low class, or you’re a poser wanna-be.

Tattoos are equally revolting on men, you sexist pig. And what's wrong with biker-chicks ? They aren't low class at all, even if you adhere to classism; but expressing their independance from imposed bourgeois standards and are radical freethinkers in their own right.

In Hunter S. Thompson's book on Hells' Angels he meditates on what it must feel like to be auctioned off in a bar before hundreds of bikers and have the winning bid to be a few dollars, but it's better than conforming to the system.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

coffeezombie
27 May 2005, 12:25 AM
I don't think there is anything wrong with tattoos. They have a long anthropological history. On the other hand, I'd never get one.

ohnoaninfp
29 May 2005, 09:24 AM
I want to get one, but it isn't going to e on my ankle or anything. The tatoo is for me, its not to look cool, its a statment.

Dman
31 May 2005, 09:37 PM
Tattoos are equally revolting on men, you sexist pig. And what's wrong with biker-chicks ? They aren't low class at all, even if you adhere to classism; but expressing their independance from imposed bourgeois standards and are radical freethinkers in their own right.

In Hunter S. Thompson's book on Hells' Angels he meditates on what it must feel like to be auctioned off in a bar before hundreds of bikers and have the winning bid to be a few dollars, but it's better than conforming to the system.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

lol

I don't tend to judge the attractiveness or appeal of men.

I also didn't say biker-chicks were low class, I said IMO it signified EITHER they were biker-chicks or low class

both of which I personally find generally unattractive

Edit - I knew I'd piss someone off, but you were a surprise!

Claverhouse
31 May 2005, 10:14 PM
lol

I don't tend to judge the attractiveness or appeal of men.
Well no. but 97% of men are unattractive, even if I was inclined that way. Tattoos make them even less desirable.


I also didn't say biker-chicks were low class, I said IMO it signified EITHER they were biker-chicks or low class

both of which I personally find generally unattractive
You're cutting it rather nicely here. The girls will be around with bike-chains no matter how you put it.


Edit - I knew I'd piss someone off, but you were a surprise!
[wistfully]

I wouldn't mind a biker-chick. Providing she wasn't clingy; and had long hair; and looked like Heidi Klum; and was insatiable; and kept the house clean and tidy.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

abathur
3 Jul 2005, 08:37 AM
Around here what we've deemed "eskimo boots" are hugely popular among the girls (the mid-calf woolly boots). http://i08.thefacebook.com/gpic/168/n1335.29.jpg


Do guys even like it when a girl shows off her thong like that? It isn't very classy in my opinion, but I guess some would like it for obvious reasons.

Personally? No. I don't even like thongs much at all. I find a panty line intensely attractive. I guess I might find it attractive if I really liked thongs, but I'd much rather see regular panties peeking out than a thong. Perhaps it's even deeper and I just find myself more generally interested in and attracted to the girls who wear panties than thongs.

Miss Anthropic
3 Jul 2005, 09:26 AM
It was rather prophetic when whoever designed the UG boots called them UGs or is that UGG? I can't believe girls wear them with short skirts! In San Diego (its weird anywhere, but in Southern CA it's worse) it is the strangest thing to see girls walking around at the mall in their UG boots and shorts, or mini-skirt. Hot weather/furry boots!? I don't get it.

moni
3 Jul 2005, 10:42 AM
It was rather prophetic when whoever designed the UG boots called them UGs or is that UGG? I can't believe girls wear them with short skirts! In San Diego (its weird anywhere, but in Southern CA it's worse) it is the strangest thing to see girls walking around at the mall in their UG boots and shorts, or mini-skirt. Hot weather/furry boots!? I don't get it.

ah, i totally agree here... i don't get how they can wear shorts/skirts and those boots! i wonder if they get sweaty boot rash.

kikthinking
3 Jul 2005, 03:31 PM
actually, around my school, these guys are starting to form clicks:
http://www.factualmaterial.com/douchebag.htm

sbw
3 Jul 2005, 04:53 PM
I heard a funny on Bill Mahar the other night. He said a message to all the women with the Chinese symbols on their lower back - it does NOT mean you are enlightened! It’s means you’re easy.

I guess I’m old-fashioned, but I think tattoos on women are tacky, even on the ankle. To me it says either you’re a biker-chick, low class, or you’re a poser wanna-be.

I don't think I've ever seen a stripper that didn't have such a tattoo. bill maher is a genius. and "tacky" is exactly the right word, Dman.

Scott

sbw
3 Jul 2005, 05:04 PM
And who said form follows function? (it usually does) What's the deal with all the skimpy clothes at a time when Americans are fatter than they have ever been? I guess its good to be accepting of your body even if your belly hangs out....but can't there be some sort of inoffensive compromise?

fat people should definitely have more shame as pertains to clothing these days. you'd think they would have figured this out from the merciless hail of jeers throughout middle school.

Scott

sbw
3 Jul 2005, 05:13 PM
That's just sick! They are little girls. They shouldn't be wearing that kind of crap. What the fuck is wrong with society. Kids should be allowed to be kids and not forced into wearin that sort of things. I won't even let my girls, that's if I have children, wear those kind of clothes until they are eightteen. It's retarded, the fashion designers are making little girls into more of a target for creepy perverts. :rant:

bovine growth hormone is "making little girls into more of a target for creepy perverts." but it's true that fashion designers are not helping matters.

Scott

Miss Anthropic
4 Jul 2005, 01:43 AM
bovine growth hormone is "making little girls into more of a target for creepy perverts." but it's true that fashion designers are not helping matters.

Scott
I thought pedophiles liked their victims to look like little girls. Besides it's the fast food industry that is making little girls fat which is what makes them mature earlier. Fat cells produce estrogen, and being fat speeds the maturation process along, just like being incredibly thin slows it. I doubt even if bovine growth hormone had any effect second hand through the digestive tract of a human that little kids drink enough milk these days to make a difference. Besides, why wouldn't little boys be maturing earlier because of this growth hormone as well?

Eh, I think I just hijacked my own thread.

Claverhouse
4 Jul 2005, 03:05 AM
Besides, why wouldn't little boys be maturing earlier because of this growth hormone as well?
I think little boys mature in other ways when given extra hormones plus phalates in their drinking water. Into little girls, actually.



Claverhouse :ph34r:


I wouldn't mind so much if I'd turned out like Diane Heidkruger/Kruger.

Serotonin
4 Jul 2005, 09:11 AM
ah, i totally agree here... i don't get how they can wear shorts/skirts and those boots! i wonder if they get sweaty boot rash.

You don't understand. It's an Se thang.

meshou
4 Jul 2005, 10:08 AM
II guess I’m old-fashioned, but I think tattoos on women are tacky, even on the ankle. To me it says either you’re a biker-chick, low class, or you’re a poser wanna-be.If I went under the needle, I actually went under it, so I wouldn't be a poser. I'd probably have drawn the damn thing myself.

I'm a biker chick. It's not up to you to determine my class. If I had one on my lower back (heaven forbid!) it doesn't mean I'd fuck you or Bill Mahr. In fact, it'd probably conclusively rule both ya'll out.

And if I did have sex with who I wanted when I wanted, why the fuck do you or he care? So he can go to some strip club and oggle tits, and they're sluts? They're being paid for something they're bored through to deal with stupid people. He's just there 'cause he needs to pay to see tits.

To sum up: Bite me, white boy.

abathur
4 Jul 2005, 10:20 AM
If I went under the needle, I actually went under it, so I wouldn't be a poser. I'd probably have drawn the damn thing myself.

I'm a biker chick. It's not up to you to determine my class. If I had one on my lower back (heaven forbid!) it doesn't mean I'd fuck you or Bill Mahr. In fact, it'd probably conclusively rule both ya'll out.

And if I did have sex with who I wanted when I wanted, why the fuck do you or he care? So he can go to some strip club and oggle tits, and they're sluts? They're being paid for something they're bored through to deal with stupid people. He's just there 'cause he needs to pay to see tits.

To sum up: Bite me, white boy.

Zing!
It's all about taste. Piercings can be hot or tasteless. Tatoos can be hot or tasteless. Clothes, hair, colored contacts, sunglasses, jewelry. It can all look stupid in it's own way if done wrong. That said, I think a lot of the people getting inked don't put enough thought into it to make sure it's going to be tasteful, and unlike the others, it's permanent.

cathmc
4 Jul 2005, 11:54 AM
fat people should definitely have more shame as pertains to clothing these days. you'd think they would have figured this out from the merciless hail of jeers throughout middle school.
Scott
Well, a lot of people are overweight adults who may not have been in middle school. Their self-image (and clothing choices) may not have caught up with reality.

Shai Gar
4 Jul 2005, 01:23 PM
i blame it on positive reinforcement

ohnoaninfp
5 Jul 2005, 12:05 AM
What about people who wear winter hats in the summer? I swear fashion can be incredibly stupid. The new trend now is ripped jeans. They charge around 60 to 80 bucks for jeans that looked like they have been worn down. Seriously people would pay money to buy jeans like that? I guess my jeans are in style because they got ink on them from printing and some of them have rips in them from wearing them so much. I didn't have to pay a cent to be in this new trend.

Dman
5 Jul 2005, 09:33 PM
If I went under the needle, I actually went under it, so I wouldn't be a poser. I'd probably have drawn the damn thing myself.

Not what I meant by poser. I meant a middle-upper class chick who thought they were “badass” by getting a tattoo, or enlightened, or whatever. IMO only biker chicks and strippers can legitimately get a tattoo and not appear poser-ish. I guess a gypsy chick like a fortune teller would work too. Anyways, lighten up.


I'm a biker chick. It's not up to you to determine my class. If I had one on my lower back (heaven forbid!) it doesn't mean I'd fuck you or Bill Mahr. In fact, it'd probably conclusively rule both ya'll out.

Kinda defensive, aren’t ya? I never said biker chick = low class. Read it again hotshot. See the “either” in the statement? I also pointed this out to Claverhouse in post 77, so you missed it TWICE. Well, what can you expect from a biker chick ;)


And if I did have sex with who I wanted when I wanted, why the fuck do you or he care? So he can go to some strip club and oggle tits, and they're sluts? They're being paid for something they're bored through to deal with stupid people. He's just there 'cause he needs to pay to see tits.

To sum up: Bite me, white boy.


Where in the world did you get the idea I cared anything about who you would or would not have sex with, based upon a joke I heard on Bill Mahar? Are you OK? Sounds like you have some issues, girl. I sympathize with any current/future partners you have!

Claverhouse
20 Jul 2005, 09:29 PM
PLACE-HOLDER FOR CLASSIC STATUS