I think feeling constrained by what other people think of your fashion is very much a factor of your self-perception and the community around you.

I don't think people ridiculing others for their fashion choices is all that common past teenage years, but I may be wrong.

Looking at the subjects of this article, I don't get the feeling that they are dressing unfashionably - on the contrary, they are making extremely specific and thoughtful fashion choices, probably spending more time and thought on it than people that just go and grab whatever the latest thing is on Zara racks.

You may be surprised, but even grandma-old-style can be very fashionable. Fashion is very much about who is wearing it, why, and how. It may not matter as much "what" you're wearing, as "why" - like modern art in some ways.

Fashion is basically another non-verbal communication channel we humans use to signal a large number of clues to fellow members of the species.

> I don't think people ridiculing others for their fashion choices is all that common past teenage years, but I may be wrong.

Try walking around as a man in a dress in 95% of the US.

I feel like cross-dressing is different in kind than wearing yesteryear's trends.

That would probably be quite unfashionable. Or largely ignored, I don't know.

But the parent comment did provide further context:

> Fashion is very much about who is wearing it, why, and how.

In my experience some of the most toxic criticism short of physical violence comes from not acknowledging what someone believes are logical conclusions.

So wearing a dress is fine if the person wearing it is willing to concede at every moment that they're being socially deviant. The moment that you just wear a dress and make no attempt to justify yourself in terms of larger culture is when things get bad. Wearing a dress and acting like it's no big deal is an affront to the logic of someone who knows for a fact what you're doing is deviant..and they're convinced that you deep down know it too. You're more or less saying they think wrong in a very fundamental way. That gets people very upset.

Dunno, if I saw a guy wearing a dress I won't see it as "deviant" at all. I might glance for a second, acknowledge, and continue about my business. I don't care what people wear. That said, many people _do_ care, which I don't really understand. Unless it has racist/sexist/prejudiced text on it, wear whatever you want.

It's deviant in the literal sense - that is, it's not normal. I don't the he was trying to pass moral judgement or suggest that the dress wearer is some sort of pervert.

If you saw a guy in otherwise ordinary circumstances wearing a dress and didn't think it was unusual, well, you lack situational awareness.

And yet... make it plaid and put a belt and sporran on it... you've got a kilt, which is very masculine and likely more accepted (esp at formal events).

There's also the utilikilt...

Today I learned elsewhere that the US ranks high on the masculine.

As ranked in Hofstede

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede's_cultural_dimensions...

https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/the-usa...

I think the distiction you may be missing is between fashion and style. Anyone can be fashionable by buying what's in season or mimicking a celeb. Being stylish is what's beautiful and admirable.

You don't even have to be a mod, rocker, or any of these subcultures. You can be an old bloke on a Segway rocking a Fubu shirt and cargo pants and completely transcend the streetscape.

My favourite stylish people integrate a sense of fun and playfulness to what they wear, but I think the most defining element of style is risk. Having the balls to say you're different.

> Having the balls to say you're different.

While still conforming.

An overweight guy walking around in a loincloth is not going to 'work' for ya even if it may have been in fashion at one point.

Well, many forms of art are more interesting precisely because they have to work within constraints. In this case, the constraints, things like "your clothing has to cover your buttocks and your chest," are not particularly limiting anyway.

Sounds pretty cool to me if he's owning it. All subjective either way.

Agreed. I think the effects are seen more in whom a person associates with. People who wear and are particular about a certain subset of clothing tend to appreciate other people who do the same.

> Generally it's such a shame that society is made to ridicule anyone who is wearing or behaving in a way that is out of fashion.

These subcultures would probably have much less interest and much higher turnover rates if they weren't considered different and ridiculed for it.

That's part of the appeal. The pressure applied from the outside makes the members of the "we-dress-this-way" club feel closer to each other.

To some extent though can you blame people for this form of cultural trolling? Some people will get violent with anger over what someone is wearing. Having the power to expose such a ridiculous reaction is probably very satisfying.

> Generally it's such a shame that society is made to ridicule anyone who is wearing or behaving in a way that is out of fashion

I mostly agree. However, there are biological and economical reasons for this that are deeply anchored, such as for example that it allows us to more easily distinguish friend from foe, and almost instantly skip forward a few leaps in trust levels when communicating.

Generally speaking, of course.

Sadly this also allows a sharply dressed conman easier access.

But it also helps avoid the used car salesman wearing the leisure suit kind of people...

> leisure suit kind of people

Exactly - the clothes make the man

Manners maketh man.

When was the last time you saw a car salesman wearing a suit, let alone a leisure suit?

When you're doing the financial paperwork --your implication is right though. At that point they are not technically "salespeople" but closers who are trying to get you to buy additional things.

Yeah, the "finance office" is a little different and, in my experience, usually not that pushy about upselling you.

There are layers to subcultures, they're not only about fashion.

> Generally it's such a shame that society is made to ridicule anyone who is wearing or behaving in a way that is out of fashion.

Fashion is a way to signal that you are high(er) status. It's almost definitional that unfashionable things will be looked down on.

Fashion can be used to signal many things: group membership, hobbies, political/philosophical views. Additionally, like other forms of art, it can also be used for intrinsic aesthetic expression.

The fashion industry like the luxury automobile industry or the art industry is based around selling status. Unfashionableness an industry release cycle designed around planned obsolesce.

Don't forget occupation. Doctors, police, prisoners, etc. all wear distinctive clothing.

Certain elements of the tech industry is heading that way as well...

Are you just referencing the iPhone? Or are there more examples?

Well there have been some straight up expensive "luxury" phones over the years. Apple in that regard is perhaps more in the BMW or Porsche end of the scale.

Perfunctory citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_the_Leisure_Clas...

Come to San Francisco.

On a semi-regular basis I see people unironically dressed as cowboys, Merlin-style wizards, lumberjacks, semi-mythical shamans with skull-topped staffs, wearing nothing but a speedo and work boots, barefoot flower-power hippies, in kilts, with vest and shoes covered in gold sequins/glitter, in Victorian coats and top hats and monocles, men in dresses and heels, women in tuxedos, old men dressed like teenage goths with purple nails, etc. etc.

Pretty much anything goes.

I haven't been to San Francisco in a very long time. And that's one of the most beautiful things I've read in a long time.

I struggle every day with the mask I put on for others+. Embarrassment or shame over my own hobbies or interests, even when there's nothing to be embarrassed or shamed by. To witness those people living their lives on their terms like that...it makes me tear up just thinking about it. No, seriously. I'm close to crying right now. How great it would be to be in such an environment where people felt completely free to be themselves. Maybe I could take it in by osmosis.

+ And I have it easy -- I'm straight, white, cis.

Where are you living now?

Hudson Valley, New York.

The northeastern USA is wonderful in its own way, and I found it more livable than the Bay, but the wonderful weirdness of San Francisco can't help but make me feel wistful.

"The world is strange, let's keep it that way." I like that.

Then you should check out Planetary some time (origin of the quote). It's a wonderful comic series about investigators who uncover and document the hidden history of the world, which happens to consist of clever remixes of pop fiction tropes from across cultures, genres and eras.

Nice. I'm actually working out of a library today with the Planetary Omnibus, and I keep intending to set aside time while I'm here to start from the beginning and take notes. Such a rich world and I generally can't take enough time to read very far into it, I keep losing track of what happens along the way.

My favorite piece of advice to teenagers, who seem to keenly feel that unrelenting pressure to fit in: Everyone is weird. If you choose to try to hide your weirdness, and you'll feel shame. If you own your weirdness instead, and you'll feel pride.

"All the freaky people are the beauty of the world"

Spearhead

Oh. it is. With everybody in their bubble, the strange are free to be, as long as we're not loud about it.

Conversely, as someone who has spent a majority of their life as a non-conformist, the exercise of feeling comfortable in your own skin can be quite empowering.

Not that it's an inflation of ego, but knowing you can convince others of your intelligence regardless of your physical appearance is a healthy challenge.

To be honest though I think this is where a lot of the resentment of non-conformists comes from.

A conformist feels on a gut level that you're doing something "for attention" and resents you for that.

Of course even if that were true such resentment is ridiculous. But to me I think there is always an element of "cultural challenge" in non-conformity (even if say 99% of a man wearing a dress is deeply personal choice).

Come to Berlin! ;) These people are doing the opposite of what you say, though, they dress and behave in a way that makes them even more omologated than Joe and Jane. The way they look and present themselves takes over their life. Dressing in a way that society easily accepts might sound like omologation, but in the end it frees up your time and let you focus your attention on more important things. You might look like the plainest midwestern dad, but maybe in your spare time you learn sanscrit and make mandalas in your basement. Maybe you’ve traveled to the remotest Amazon region and met the last member of some indigenous tribe. If you dress like these people, well, there’s a good chance that your entire life revolves around the costume you’re so painstakingly crafting.

Why is learning Sanskrit and making mandalas somehow “more important” than spending time crafting a specific fashion?

Because Sanskrit knowledge remains and mandalas still “mean” something when you undress. The line separating all three is thin though.

For me personally, and sorry for my view if it displeases someone, people of fashion look like they’re selling something in more way than others. This is because I met maybe too many people of fashion and/or subculture who really didn’t found their way yet and too many generic-looking men who are invaluable in their experience and deeds. I’m aware that this view is just a false negative that sometimes happens true or positive.

Just random examples

My point is, who are you to judge other peoples' hobbies/lifestyle?

"Omologation" must be a German word, because the closest one I can turn up, "homologation," is apparently car jargon. Perhaps you mean "homogenization."

Yep, sorry, it's actually my Italian kicking in here. The false friend is "homologation", which in Italian means what you found, but can also describe a cultural process that brings to homogenization, indeed. Thanks for the correction.

> grandma-old-style

FWIW I see lots of people in their 20s dressed as grandmas (at least in major US cities).

Ah, but assuming you're at least a decade older than that, are they dressed like your grandma's generation, or like theirs?

If they dressed like theirs, they'd be unfashionably outdated. If they dressed like yours, they're rediscovering new old fashion trends.

The most fashionable thing anyone can possibly wear is the least fashionable thing. It's an incredibly potent counter-signal. Haute couture is deliberately, wilfully hideous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersignaling https://www.balenciaga.com/us/men/ready-to-wear

Not anyone, only those lucky enough to have sufficient inherent attractiveness to outshine anything they could put on. When those have established a new aesthetic (either top-down/haute, or bottom-up/street), the industry comes in and skillfully polishes away the rough edges so that the basic idea can also work on the less fortunate, who will then for a brief period be able to enjoy a "pretty by association" halo effect.

Sceptics sometimes consider the fashion lifecycle to be some kind of artificial conspiracy made up by the industry to create demand, but I think it is more an emergent phenomenon of human interaction that could only ever be subdued by extreme scarcity or by draconian regulation (e.g. rules applying to lower classes in many feudal society).

Are those prices in USD? Surely if you're deliberately trying to look shit you don't spend $1,000 on each piece of clothing to do so...

When/where/by whom are those meant to be worn, who receives the signal, and what is the intended effect?

Late 20s here. I'm talking Golden Girls-esque 1980s old people clothes.

Old people look old not because of their outdated fashion style but because of their age. Kind of obvious, but we really like to forget that, over and over again (maybe to distract us from our own aging). When isolated from the aging payload and put on fresh bodies (sorry for the cynical wording), time-tested styles work remarkably well. On top of that is a short window where the last generation using a given style has just disappeared from the streets enough to to avoid confusion, but memory of wrinkled faces is still fresh enough to make youthfulness stand out by contrast.

I've seen a few young adult females wearing some 90s style retro sportswear alongside with modern clothes (e.g. a Nike retro windbreaker) and I remember I found them (the persons) quite pretty.

I’ve seen lots of Japanese girls dressed as grandmas last time I’ve visited the country. The style is actually pretty cute on young girls.

Given how cyclical fashion trends are those people wearing bell bottoms today might be seen as especially fashion forward in a couple of years. Who knows?

"Styles may change, but style doesn't."

It happens all the time. But usually they give them a slightly different spin so you can't just reuse 20 year old clothes.

It happened in the 90s. It will happen again.

I'm waiting for cargo pants to come back in style

On the flip side of that, the human brain seems to be willing to jump through serious hoops to both be shamed and leverage shame against others who fail to conform. We've got such a strong biological urge to fit in precisely because those who don't perish.