Mens and Womens Perception of Style

[zamb]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



[quote user="Servo2000"]Do you think there's any truth in mine / Faust's comments? It seems to me undeniable that the context of fashion has changed in many ways in modern times, is this one of them? I'd be interested in your views as our resident female poster before I continue with the semi-baseless observations.
[/quote]

[:D]

that should be her official title!

[Johnny]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



I still think that women are more interested in "just looking good" than fashion for fashion's sake, but i don't mean this as a critisizm. Quite the contrary - it's just honest (I've kind of mentioned this before inmy views on fashion in that other thread). Actually, on reflection,I don't know about this - look at how many women have heaps more shoes than they will even need, lots of which look the same. There's something purely materialistic about that - almost fetishistically just wanting to posses the object rather than for having any functional or aesthetic value as such.

That said I don't know of many fashion forums populated mainly by females that are so, ahem, "focused" as ones like this or style forum of sufu. I think it's a bit geeky to be into fashion like that (I obviously inbclude myself in this!) - it's somehow very male to be so obsessed about say "jeans" or "CCP" or "Dior" - it's like having a train collection or a toy car collection. It's about having the things and looking at them proudly before you go to bed at night....[:D]

[PrinceOfCats]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

I think the slightly judgmental attitude towards what people wear is very male and geeky... It's like looking through someone's record collection to see if they have Liquid Liquid on CD or on vinyl then basing your estimation of them on it.

[Faust]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

[quote user="Johnny"]

I still think that women are more interested in "just looking good" than fashion for fashion's sake, but i don't mean this as a critisizm. Quite the contrary - it's just honest (I've kind of mentioned this before inmy views on fashion in that other thread). Actually, on reflection,I don't know about this - look at how many women have heaps more shoes than they will even need, lots of which look the same. There's something purely materialistic about that - almost fetishistically just wanting to posses the object rather than for having any functional or aesthetic value as such.

That said I don't know of many fashion forums populated mainly by females that are so, ahem, "focused" as ones like this or style forum of sufu. I think it's a bit geeky to be into fashion like that (I obviously inbclude myself in this!) - it's somehow very male to be so obsessed about say "jeans" or "CCP" or "Dior" - it's like having a train collection or a toy car collection. It's about having the things and looking at them proudly before you go to bed at night....[:D]

[/quote]

Hahahaha, the last part is hilarious.

[droogist]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

Johnny, I don't quite follow. Are you suggesting that a woman with a gazillion pairs of shoes is a materialistic fetishist, whereas a man with a gazillion pairs of jeans is a dedicated collector...? [^o)]

[zamb]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



[quote user="droogist"]Johnny, I don't quite follow. Are you suggesting that a woman with a gazillion pairs of shoes is a materialistic fetishist, whereas a man with a gazillion pairs of jeans is a dedicated collector...? [^o)]
[/quote]

Good question, I am a man with over 70 pairs of shoes (so how do i fit in here) and probably would have over 100 if i never gave away so much of them.Of course i dont need them all, but i dont think im materialistic, niether do i view them in the same way as a dedicated collector.........

[Johnny]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



[quote user="droogist"]Johnny, I don't quite follow. Are you suggesting that a woman with a gazillion pairs of shoes is a materialistic fetishist, [YES] whereas a man with a gazillion pairs of jeans is a dedicated collector...? [No - he's a materialistic fetishistAND a geek][^o)]
[/quote]

[Johnny]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



To put slightly more flesh on the bones of this since it seems to be getting misunderstood. The comment was directed more as critisizm of men than of women for sure. The phrase "dedicated collector" was not mine. All I'm saying is that there are probably different motives for some similar phenomena ([:$]), as between the sexes. I'm not any kind of sociologist but it just seemed to me thatthere is some kind of loosely empirical, in the sense of objective, evidence of this by virtue of the fact that there are so few females on this board (and on sufu and sf) and there is a sort of "geeky collectorism" in evidence on those sites.It was meant to be mainly self-depricating.....

Two other points: (1)anyone, of any sex, is materialistic if they have 70 pairs or shoes. It's rather self evident that they're not all needed!(2) I'm generalising of course; there will always be exceptions

[zamb]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

[quote user="Johnny"]

To put slightly more flesh on the bones of this since it seems to be getting misunderstood. The comment was directed more as critisizm of men than of women for sure. The phrase "dedicated collector" was not mine. All I'm saying is that there are probably different motives for some similar phenomenons, as between the sexes. I'm not any kind of sociologist but it just seemed to me thatthere is some kind of looseing empirical, in the sems of objective, evidence of this by virtue of the fact that there are so few females on this board (and on sufu and sf) and there is a sort of "geeky collectorism" in evidence on those sites.It was meant to be mainly self-depricating.....

Two other points: (1)anyone, of any sex, is materialistic if they have 70 pairs or shoes. It's rather self evident that they're not all needed!(2) I'm generalising of course; there will always be exceptions

[/quote]

[:D] in order to validate whether this is true or not, we have to define what is meant by materialistic.

if i have a refrigerator full of food, (more than i need to eat) am i materialistic.

If my house has more bedrooms than residents, am i materialistic?

Is there diferrent levels of materialism, and how does this relate to having more money, assets etc. than one needs?

[Johnny]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

zam there's a line drawing exercise that could be done....but, here's another way of looking at it....ask any "normal" person (which, for the avoidance of doubt, does not includeanyone working in the fashion industry, or who posts on fashion internet forums) the question and see what the answer is [;)]

[Faust]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



Johnny, but tFS is mostly women, and SF x 2 are not really concerned with fashion per se, but with clothes... [*-)]

I think tFS USED to be the place for both sexes to discuss fashion as a discipline in itself (meaning as a sphere where artistry, thoughtfulness, quality, and craftmanship collide), but I don't think it's the case any more.

Your point is a good one though, there are people who are concerned more with fashion, and people who are concerned with just how they look, or both.

[zamb]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



well, i understand your prespective, my intent is to try to understand (or at least have you share) your perspective of materialism, that led you to come to this conclusion.

Also for me, when i came to the US seven years ago, i had only one pair of shoes, it was always the one thing clothing-wise that i had an appreciation for but never really owned much.

clothing was never a problem because I always had a business and made clothing.

subconciously it could be linked to me liking shoes but couldnt affort the quality ones i wanted, now i can.

its also interesting because i could wear a white 99cents T-shirt and a pair of ripped jeans eveyday and it wouldnt matter. but I NEED to change my shoes regularly.

aside from that i wouldnt consider myself much materialistic, as there are few things materially that i desire in this life.

I dont own a car, only because i dont think i need one, I need a house only because it gives me studio space to work. and personally i only need a television (for basketball, soccer, documentaries, the news and religious programs), my bed, a computer, a bookstand and my closet, so that to me is not really much.

Basically i am trying to understand different views on materialism and how does one measure it...........

ZB

[Faust]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

[quote user="zamb"][quote user="Johnny"]

To put slightly more flesh on the bones of this since it seems to be getting misunderstood. The comment was directed more as critisizm of men than of women for sure. The phrase "dedicated collector" was not mine. All I'm saying is that there are probably different motives for some similar phenomenons, as between the sexes. I'm not any kind of sociologist but it just seemed to me thatthere is some kind of looseing empirical, in the sems of objective, evidence of this by virtue of the fact that there are so few females on this board (and on sufu and sf) and there is a sort of "geeky collectorism" in evidence on those sites.It was meant to be mainly self-depricating.....

Two other points: (1)anyone, of any sex, is materialistic if they have 70 pairs or shoes. It's rather self evident that they're not all needed!(2) I'm generalising of course; there will always be exceptions

[/quote]

[:D] in order to validate whether this is true or not, we have to define what is meant by materialistic.

if i have a refrigerator full of food, (more than i need to eat) am i materialistic.

If my house has more bedrooms than residents, am i materialistic?

Is there diferrent levels of materialism, and how does this relate to having more money, assets etc. than one needs?

[/quote]

I doubt you'll get a clear line, or even a very approximate one. I am reading Veblen now - he thinks that anything we consume above the necessities is being materialistic - go figure.

[Fuuma]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris



My take on Johnny's comment is that if someone is absolutely obsessive about an object and will learn about the most minute details of its construction, history, etc. while actively looking for other people to discuss those notions with then he's a "geek" while a person that mostly hoards a huge collection of the items than it's a more intuitive approach. I wouldn't go as far as calling it fetichism as it definitely involve a transposition of the item in the realm of sexuality or even a merging of the item and Sexuality. My criticism of this would be that we're entering the area of gender cliches, with the typical men: childish&analytical / women superficial&intuitive.

[Johnny]

Re: Veronique Branquinho Womens FW07/08 - Paris

Fumma, they are clichés I agree, but don?t you think that it is interesting that they appear to be borne out by the example that I?m using? I?m not saying that these observations get us anywhere, I?m just making them, and just find it mildly interesting. You?re right to pick me up about the fetishistic comment though ? I wasn?t intending to imply a form of necessarily sexual connection.

Faust your re-iteration of the point I was making isn?t accurate ? not ?some people? ? I was definitely drawing a gender distinction. Is your view that there is nothing more to what I was saying than just ?some people like one thing and others like another and some like both?? I?m not sure that is a good point, put like that. Your observation about tFS is interesting too in this context. The reason you, and others I think, went off tFS is that it was becoming all about star style and not enough about designers and collections. And, as you say, it?s mostly women. So is there something to the distinction or not?

Zam I wasn?t meaning at all to be terse by giving a short response. Materialism to me would be the interest in material objects, or things, which is materially disproportionate to the functional need for them. There?s obviously some kind of buffer, or some kind of sensible tolerance, around this, so that if you have food in your fridge that is more than you need to survive, that in itself would not make you materialistic. But if you have a car when you don?t need one, then that would be materialistic because you?d have it without any[/I] functional requirement for it. That?s not to say that it couldn?t have a functional requirement, since you might use it once a year. So by extension, if you have 70 pairs of shoes, it seems materialistic to me since there?s no approximate functional requirement for that number of shoes at one time. You might wear all of them but you don?t need to. So I?d say that you?re not materialistic about cars but are about shoes.