9 ms·

I'm saddened by the job losses, but the fashion industry (esp. the high end) seems nothing but a toxic drain on society and the environment. New "trends" dictat

by mthoms 6y ago

I'm saddened by the job losses, but the fashion industry (esp. the high end) seems nothing but a toxic drain on society and the environment. New "trends" dictated by celebrities and designers every year do nothing but sow personal insecurities and environmental destruction. Good riddance.

dominotw 6y ago
> Good riddance. Its just a manifestation of human need to be in a hierachy. Makes no sense to me to attack a particular symptom. I can think of a lots examples more destructive than fashion expensive cars single family homes with 5 bedrooms and 4 toilets yatches driving/flying vacations suburbs/ need for "space" overeating meat I think its a common kneejerk reaction against fashion in nerd circles because we never found it useful and something that played to our negatives. A complait that has very little to do with the environment, really.
- DoingIsLearning 6y ago
  That is an unnecessary ad hominem. There is nothing kneejerking about being against 'fast fashion'. The fashion industry is the second-largest consumer of the world's water supply. [0] The fashion industry produces 10% of all humanity’s carbon emissions. [0] For comparison it produces more carbon than international flights and maritime shipping combined. [0] The wastefulness of it all is even more dismaying. 85% of the world's textile production ends in a landfill every year.[0] I agree that all the things in your list are as non-essential as the fashion industry but none of them (except maybe for the meat industry) have the business volume and carbon impact of the fashion industry as it currently operates. None of this is sustainable. [0] https://www.businessinsider.nl/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissions-waste-water-2019-10 https://www.businessinsider.nl/fast-fashion-environmental-im...
sunstone 6y ago
A male has entered the chat.
- dang 6y ago
  Please don't do this here.
nickff 6y ago
Your comment applies equally to all luxury consumer goods. It also ignores the fact that many people derive pleasure from 'dressing up', or 'looking their best'.
- foobiekr 6y ago
  Fast fashion, which was the dominant trend, has nothing to do with dressing up or looking one’s best.
  - troughway 6y ago
    That’s exactly what it is though. It’s a status signal even if it doesn’t seem that way.
  - aries1980 6y ago
    High-end fashion is not fast fashion. I wear high-end shoes daily, some that have been resoled twice, having a 10-year lifespan each. I feel I stand out from the crowd when I appear in my don't remember-when-I-bought Hackett blazer and Liberty shirts. If you are a man, whatever looked good on Steve McQueen in the 70s would still give you the look today.
    - grawprog 6y ago
      >I feel I stand out from the crowd when I appear in my don't remember-when-I-bought Hackett blazer and Liberty shirts. Is that not an effect of marketing though? The only time i've ever felt like i've 'stood out in a crowd' is when I'm walking around in something utterly ridiculous, or filthy work clothes or something. To be honest, all the high end designer brands blend in to me and I can't be bothered to tell them apart from the lower end brands. When I do recognize one though, my thoughts tend to be something huh, look, someone spent $500 on a shirt/purse/other small singular item of clothing. Then i'll look at the person next to them wearing less than that over their entire outfit in budget clothes and i'll think, hmm that person doesn't like to waste their money. They have some sense. Some of the richest, most successful people i've ever met dressed in the same things other regular people do. I'd rather stand out for my accomplishments and things I do, than some crap made in china I buy at the store at overinflated prices. Because in the end, those designer clothes are pumped out in the same factories alongside Walmart crap. I'll agree with you about shoes though, a high quality pair of shoes is worth investing in. As long as their actually high quality and not just 'paying for the name' high quality.
seltzered_ 6y ago
Your friendly reminder from Alan Kay that 'computing is pop culture'. https://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/interview-with-alan-kay/240003442 https://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/interview-wi... (...off to scroll YouTube's infinite list of tech reviews..)
- kazen44 6y ago
  thank you for this link. That interview was actually rather interesting and gave off a different perspective then most.
colmvp 6y ago
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, I found a lot more people involved in the field to be incredibly snobby and superficial, as in literally judging people by their looks which shouldn't be surprising given that is what the industry is about.
- okamiueru 6y ago
  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 comparable value. In some cases 8 times. In what other industry are people willing to pay at least more than twice, for the same hardware?
  - ponker 6y ago
    But there are functional reasons to prefer Apple hardware as well. I use almost exclusively Apple hardware and I own one garment worth more than $30.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    > In what other industry are people willing to pay at least more than twice, for the same hardware? The whole premise is incorrect, so the conclusions are incorrect. The hardware is not the same, and even if it was, clearly the software makes a difference to the user. The whole Apple fashion status trope is tired and has never been true. The amortized cost of an Apple device in my 15 year + experience with them has always been less than the competitors. Especially if you add my troubleshooting time. Not to mention they’ve been selling iPad Minis for $400 for 7 or 8 years, and they now have an iPhone at $400. Their stuff works, they offer physical stores you can get technical support at, and they seem to be the best offering for privacy conscious users.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pembrook 6y ago
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 efficiency optimizing! Good riddance indeed.
- OpossumMinister 6y ago
  Authentic culture isn't created by a microscopically small group of rich people. If you think that criticising an exploitative industry is the the same as turning people into cultureless robots, then you're missing the entire point.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    What exactly makes a culture "authenic"? The funny thing is historically I can think of plenty of counter examples. Chokers caught on because of a high status woman wanting to cover up a neck scar. For better or worse that fundamentally is part of culture. Criticizing cultural practices is as well of course.
- chosenbreed37 6y ago
  Lol...this seems a bit tongue in cheek
- mthoms 6y ago
  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.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
  - deleted 6y ago
adrr 6y ago
It's the same thing. People aren't spending $150 on designer jeans but now spending $100 on designer sweatpants. Hollywood celebs have been replaced by instagram influencers.
jariel 6y ago
??? Every pound of vehicle mass that you've purchased beyond what was absolutely necessary to 'get from A to B' and every unnecessary bit of travel or vacation has produced considerably more 'waste' than anything a the 'high end' of fashion. Seriously - this moral concern coming from the 'land of a billion not-necessarily-even-useful plastic gadgets'? The 'high end' of fashion is mostly art and artisanal, paid for by the rich. Not essential, but not a big deal. Furthermore, the article is not about even 'high end fashion' - it's about basic attire. If people want to walk around in branded underwear then fine, but this is literally 'Idiocracy, 2008' coming to life. If there is possibly an issue with 'waste' it's definitely not towards the 'upper 1/2' of the industry wherein such pieces could be worn for a lifetime, rather, it's 'fast fashion' i.e. H&M and Zara. This is arguably wasteful.
- monktastic1 6y ago
  Source? As a counterpoint: www.businessinsider.com/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissions-waste-water-2019-10
  - jariel 6y ago
    Since when is 'fast fashion' 'high fashion'? 'Fast Fashion' is not even 'fashion' - it's literally just 'clothing'. So yes we wear 'cheap clothing' and it has pollution effects, which are greater than 'aircraft' but not nearly as big as other industries. And as to the premise of the article, making 'stretchy pants' is in no way more environmentally friendly than making 'more formal attire'.
    - mthoms 6y ago
      >Since when is 'fast fashion' 'high fashion'? 'Fast Fashion' is not even 'fashion' - it's literally just 'clothing'. I'm not clear why you would call fast fashion, "not even fashion". That sounds embarrassingly elitist. To be honest I'm not sure what point you're making that relies on their being a clear distinction between the two? I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're trying to say high fashion is not as culpable or "bad" as fast fashion is? Sure, not directly. The lower volume and having more money for better sourcing probably makes it slightly more sustainable. But, high fashion sets the dangerous expectation that you have to update your wardrobe regularly in order to fit in. That's the crux of the problem. They also directly profit off of fast fashion churn [0]. [0] https://www.thefashionlaw.com/just-how-successful-is-your-favorite-fashion-brand/ https://www.thefashionlaw.com/just-how-successful-is-your-fa...
mytailorisrich 6y ago
This is human nature and behaviour. It has always existed. When people can freely go out and socialize again sales of fashion items will roar back.

by mthoms 6y ago

dominotw 6y ago

> Good riddance. Its just a manifestation of human need to be in a hierachy. Makes no sense to me to attack a particular symptom. I can think of a lots examples more destructive than fashion expensive cars single family homes with 5 bedrooms and 4 toilets yatches driving/flying vacations suburbs/ need for "space" overeating meat I think its a common kneejerk reaction against fashion in nerd circles because we never found it useful and something that played to our negatives. A complait that has very little to do with the environment, really.

DoingIsLearning 6y ago
That is an unnecessary ad hominem. There is nothing kneejerking about being against 'fast fashion'. The fashion industry is the second-largest consumer of the world's water supply. [0] The fashion industry produces 10% of all humanity’s carbon emissions. [0] For comparison it produces more carbon than international flights and maritime shipping combined. [0] The wastefulness of it all is even more dismaying. 85% of the world's textile production ends in a landfill every year.[0] I agree that all the things in your list are as non-essential as the fashion industry but none of them (except maybe for the meat industry) have the business volume and carbon impact of the fashion industry as it currently operates. None of this is sustainable. [0] https://www.businessinsider.nl/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissions-waste-water-2019-10 https://www.businessinsider.nl/fast-fashion-environmental-im...

sunstone 6y ago

A male has entered the chat.

dang 6y ago
Please don't do this here.

nickff 6y ago

Your comment applies equally to all luxury consumer goods. It also ignores the fact that many people derive pleasure from 'dressing up', or 'looking their best'.

foobiekr 6y ago
Fast fashion, which was the dominant trend, has nothing to do with dressing up or looking one’s best.
- troughway 6y ago
  That’s exactly what it is though. It’s a status signal even if it doesn’t seem that way.
- aries1980 6y ago
  High-end fashion is not fast fashion. I wear high-end shoes daily, some that have been resoled twice, having a 10-year lifespan each. I feel I stand out from the crowd when I appear in my don't remember-when-I-bought Hackett blazer and Liberty shirts. If you are a man, whatever looked good on Steve McQueen in the 70s would still give you the look today.
  - grawprog 6y ago
    >I feel I stand out from the crowd when I appear in my don't remember-when-I-bought Hackett blazer and Liberty shirts. Is that not an effect of marketing though? The only time i've ever felt like i've 'stood out in a crowd' is when I'm walking around in something utterly ridiculous, or filthy work clothes or something. To be honest, all the high end designer brands blend in to me and I can't be bothered to tell them apart from the lower end brands. When I do recognize one though, my thoughts tend to be something huh, look, someone spent $500 on a shirt/purse/other small singular item of clothing. Then i'll look at the person next to them wearing less than that over their entire outfit in budget clothes and i'll think, hmm that person doesn't like to waste their money. They have some sense. Some of the richest, most successful people i've ever met dressed in the same things other regular people do. I'd rather stand out for my accomplishments and things I do, than some crap made in china I buy at the store at overinflated prices. Because in the end, those designer clothes are pumped out in the same factories alongside Walmart crap. I'll agree with you about shoes though, a high quality pair of shoes is worth investing in. As long as their actually high quality and not just 'paying for the name' high quality.

seltzered_ 6y ago

Your friendly reminder from Alan Kay that 'computing is pop culture'. https://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/interview-with-alan-kay/240003442 https://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/interview-wi... (...off to scroll YouTube's infinite list of tech reviews..)

kazen44 6y ago
thank you for this link. That interview was actually rather interesting and gave off a different perspective then most.

colmvp 6y ago

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, I found a lot more people involved in the field to be incredibly snobby and superficial, as in literally judging people by their looks which shouldn't be surprising given that is what the industry is about.

okamiueru 6y ago
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 comparable value. In some cases 8 times. In what other industry are people willing to pay at least more than twice, for the same hardware?
- ponker 6y ago
  But there are functional reasons to prefer Apple hardware as well. I use almost exclusively Apple hardware and I own one garment worth more than $30.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  > In what other industry are people willing to pay at least more than twice, for the same hardware? The whole premise is incorrect, so the conclusions are incorrect. The hardware is not the same, and even if it was, clearly the software makes a difference to the user. The whole Apple fashion status trope is tired and has never been true. The amortized cost of an Apple device in my 15 year + experience with them has always been less than the competitors. Especially if you add my troubleshooting time. Not to mention they’ve been selling iPad Minis for $400 for 7 or 8 years, and they now have an iPhone at $400. Their stuff works, they offer physical stores you can get technical support at, and they seem to be the best offering for privacy conscious users.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

pembrook 6y ago

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 efficiency optimizing! Good riddance indeed.

OpossumMinister 6y ago
Authentic culture isn't created by a microscopically small group of rich people. If you think that criticising an exploitative industry is the the same as turning people into cultureless robots, then you're missing the entire point.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  What exactly makes a culture "authenic"? The funny thing is historically I can think of plenty of counter examples. Chokers caught on because of a high status woman wanting to cover up a neck scar. For better or worse that fundamentally is part of culture. Criticizing cultural practices is as well of course.
chosenbreed37 6y ago
Lol...this seems a bit tongue in cheek
mthoms 6y ago
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.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
- deleted 6y ago

adrr 6y ago

It's the same thing. People aren't spending $150 on designer jeans but now spending $100 on designer sweatpants. Hollywood celebs have been replaced by instagram influencers.

jariel 6y ago

??? Every pound of vehicle mass that you've purchased beyond what was absolutely necessary to 'get from A to B' and every unnecessary bit of travel or vacation has produced considerably more 'waste' than anything a the 'high end' of fashion. Seriously - this moral concern coming from the 'land of a billion not-necessarily-even-useful plastic gadgets'? The 'high end' of fashion is mostly art and artisanal, paid for by the rich. Not essential, but not a big deal. Furthermore, the article is not about even 'high end fashion' - it's about basic attire. If people want to walk around in branded underwear then fine, but this is literally 'Idiocracy, 2008' coming to life. If there is possibly an issue with 'waste' it's definitely not towards the 'upper 1/2' of the industry wherein such pieces could be worn for a lifetime, rather, it's 'fast fashion' i.e. H&M and Zara. This is arguably wasteful.

monktastic1 6y ago
Source? As a counterpoint: www.businessinsider.com/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissions-waste-water-2019-10
- jariel 6y ago
  Since when is 'fast fashion' 'high fashion'? 'Fast Fashion' is not even 'fashion' - it's literally just 'clothing'. So yes we wear 'cheap clothing' and it has pollution effects, which are greater than 'aircraft' but not nearly as big as other industries. And as to the premise of the article, making 'stretchy pants' is in no way more environmentally friendly than making 'more formal attire'.
  - mthoms 6y ago
    >Since when is 'fast fashion' 'high fashion'? 'Fast Fashion' is not even 'fashion' - it's literally just 'clothing'. I'm not clear why you would call fast fashion, "not even fashion". That sounds embarrassingly elitist. To be honest I'm not sure what point you're making that relies on their being a clear distinction between the two? I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're trying to say high fashion is not as culpable or "bad" as fast fashion is? Sure, not directly. The lower volume and having more money for better sourcing probably makes it slightly more sustainable. But, high fashion sets the dangerous expectation that you have to update your wardrobe regularly in order to fit in. That's the crux of the problem. They also directly profit off of fast fashion churn [0]. [0] https://www.thefashionlaw.com/just-how-successful-is-your-favorite-fashion-brand/ https://www.thefashionlaw.com/just-how-successful-is-your-fa...

mytailorisrich 6y ago

This is human nature and behaviour. It has always existed. When people can freely go out and socialize again sales of fashion items will roar back.