ChatterBank5 mins ago
Attire Today
52 Answers
Around the middle of the last century, children dressed like their parents. Nowadays, parents dress like their children. Has infantilism become epidemic?
Answers
I'm surprised at your description "attire". The way lots of people dress today, they look as though they're going to maintain a boiler somewhere. I believe that most people couldn't care less about how they look. And they look like they couldn't care less.
08:33 Fri 13th Sep 2019
//was it an article in the Mail today??//
No, I don't (apart from AOG's links) read the Mail.
Reading some of the posts above, I can see how conformist many people are. When I worked in the US in the 70's so many, - nearly all- my male students grew their hair long to 'rebel', but they didn't seem to realise that they were part of an exclusive group of millions, in fact they were the norm.
No, I don't (apart from AOG's links) read the Mail.
Reading some of the posts above, I can see how conformist many people are. When I worked in the US in the 70's so many, - nearly all- my male students grew their hair long to 'rebel', but they didn't seem to realise that they were part of an exclusive group of millions, in fact they were the norm.
Tilly; //Conforming is not the same as being infantile.//
Conforming to the infants is infantile!
What could look more infantile than a middle-aged man (& older) in blue jeans, or a shell suit bottom & dirty trainers, or a middle-aged woman with tattoos, bared cleavage and judiciously placed holes in her jeans?
The conformism is has become so ubiquitous that the only way left for these pathetics to show their individuality, is to put ever increasingly rude words on their T-shirts!
Conforming to the infants is infantile!
What could look more infantile than a middle-aged man (& older) in blue jeans, or a shell suit bottom & dirty trainers, or a middle-aged woman with tattoos, bared cleavage and judiciously placed holes in her jeans?
The conformism is has become so ubiquitous that the only way left for these pathetics to show their individuality, is to put ever increasingly rude words on their T-shirts!
Khandro - // So walking around town - or even entering a church to gawp, wearing a T-shirt bearing the single word f*** is OK is it? //
And the 'So Rule' puts in an appearance!
For the record Khandro, I don't think it is OK, and I don't subscribe to Mozz's position that // … a word can't hurt you. //
A word would not hurt me, or Mozz, clearly, but part of living in a society is not making your own individuality apparent at the expense of the feelings of others, that is disrespectful anywhere in public, and especially in a church, where people of faith are likely to feel upset at what they see as ignorance and unfeeling and unnecessary offence.
And the 'So Rule' puts in an appearance!
For the record Khandro, I don't think it is OK, and I don't subscribe to Mozz's position that // … a word can't hurt you. //
A word would not hurt me, or Mozz, clearly, but part of living in a society is not making your own individuality apparent at the expense of the feelings of others, that is disrespectful anywhere in public, and especially in a church, where people of faith are likely to feel upset at what they see as ignorance and unfeeling and unnecessary offence.
Khandro - // What could look more infantile than a middle-aged man (& older) in blue jeans, or a shell suit bottom & dirty trainers, or a middle-aged woman with tattoos, bared cleavage and judiciously placed holes in her jeans? //
One of the many wonderful freedoms we enjoy in our country is the freedom to dress as we please, even if it is not always suitable for us, or to the taste of others.
Within legal limits limits, I don't think it is reasonable of you to get het up about what others see as 'fashionable', or simply the way they choose to present themselves.
If you don't like it, look the other way.
One of the many wonderful freedoms we enjoy in our country is the freedom to dress as we please, even if it is not always suitable for us, or to the taste of others.
Within legal limits limits, I don't think it is reasonable of you to get het up about what others see as 'fashionable', or simply the way they choose to present themselves.
If you don't like it, look the other way.
//It's about kicking off the first half of the 20th Century's ridiculous social constraints and dressing as you want when you want//
...while at the same time endorsing and even celebrating the ridiculous (and worse) social constraints and dress codes of late 7th century Arabia which are now "part and parcel" of living in a European city.
PS: codes under which the "as you want" and the "when you want" have been denied to women. But, heigh-ho, who cares about that?
...while at the same time endorsing and even celebrating the ridiculous (and worse) social constraints and dress codes of late 7th century Arabia which are now "part and parcel" of living in a European city.
PS: codes under which the "as you want" and the "when you want" have been denied to women. But, heigh-ho, who cares about that?
vetuste - // … ...while at the same time endorsing and even celebrating the ridiculous (and worse) social constraints and dress codes of late 7th century Arabia which are now "part and parcel" of living in a European city. //
It is a popular belief in western culture, pumped up with monotonous regularity by a gleeful media that all Arab women who appear in public in varying degrees of modesty confirmed by the way they dress, are subjected to such decisions by husbands who rule them and the way they behave.
I do not doubt for a moment that in some cases that is the case, but I think it underestimates other cultures to make blanket (sorry!) assumptions about they way they behave based on ignorance and a misplaced sense of moral superiority.
I am quite sure that a large number of Muslim women, potentially even the majority, are perfectly happy to appear in public with varying levels of cover, because it is their culture, and they feel more comfortable that way.
Maybe we should not be judging them for their appearance, because blind unfounded fear and hatred of a culture not understood is the very bedrock of terrorism.
It is a popular belief in western culture, pumped up with monotonous regularity by a gleeful media that all Arab women who appear in public in varying degrees of modesty confirmed by the way they dress, are subjected to such decisions by husbands who rule them and the way they behave.
I do not doubt for a moment that in some cases that is the case, but I think it underestimates other cultures to make blanket (sorry!) assumptions about they way they behave based on ignorance and a misplaced sense of moral superiority.
I am quite sure that a large number of Muslim women, potentially even the majority, are perfectly happy to appear in public with varying levels of cover, because it is their culture, and they feel more comfortable that way.
Maybe we should not be judging them for their appearance, because blind unfounded fear and hatred of a culture not understood is the very bedrock of terrorism.
hereIam - // I would never, ever wear a tee with a rude word (spelt the correct way or not) on it and definitely never enter a church with such a garment on. //
I agree with both actions.
I wonder about the thinking of people who do wear tee-shirts with offensive words or slogans on them.
Obviously they intend that strangers read their message and make a judgement about the wearer - and maybe they think that the message is that the wearer is feeling confident enough to exercise their freedom to wear such a garment.
Personally, the message I receive is that the wearer is arrogant enough not to care about the varying negative effects his or her message may have on fellow citizens, and that's the reason I would not wear something similar.
The entering a church so dressed is simply an issue of the absence of respect, which comes from the same mind-set.
I agree with both actions.
I wonder about the thinking of people who do wear tee-shirts with offensive words or slogans on them.
Obviously they intend that strangers read their message and make a judgement about the wearer - and maybe they think that the message is that the wearer is feeling confident enough to exercise their freedom to wear such a garment.
Personally, the message I receive is that the wearer is arrogant enough not to care about the varying negative effects his or her message may have on fellow citizens, and that's the reason I would not wear something similar.
The entering a church so dressed is simply an issue of the absence of respect, which comes from the same mind-set.
Zacs - // That's just your opinion tho AH. And given my position on your status on this site....... //
My, and other opinions are what the OP asked for, so of course it is just my opinion.
As for your 'position' on my status on this site, that is obviously something you understand, but I have no idea what you are talking about.
Just to save you the time and trouble, I'm not interested in an explanation of what you said either, because experience tells me it will lead to a thread-diverting terminally boring argument, so let's save the trouble shall we.
My, and other opinions are what the OP asked for, so of course it is just my opinion.
As for your 'position' on my status on this site, that is obviously something you understand, but I have no idea what you are talking about.
Just to save you the time and trouble, I'm not interested in an explanation of what you said either, because experience tells me it will lead to a thread-diverting terminally boring argument, so let's save the trouble shall we.
