:D

But, I am totally serious!!! Fans, shade, ice water, I'll do what I must. :D

Well I dunno if that's what it puts out to others. But I find it funny that sweats at the gym mean someone is giving up on life (back to that comment).

I suppose by that logic I'm giving up on life while not caring about how I look or how others see me, I'm probably burning their corneas with my un-trendy clothing.

YAY!

It's good to know I'm not alone! I've always been fashion impaired. If I have to go somewhere important, usually my mother consults on attire - in some cases this extends to outright buying things for me because I have Nothing Suitable.

Here's my take on the initial argument:

The shirts were described as being poorly made. I haven't seen them, so I really have no idea if this is true or not.

Poorly made goods are my bugaboo. I have so many silly hobbies that I can't possible begrudge anyone their very expensive shirt. UNLESS the shirt is poorly made - seems ripping out, patterns don't match where they should, pieces that should be cut on grain or bias not cut that way, etc... Not a design issue, but an assembly issue.

I can accept that this is not an issue for some people. And for all I know it's the height of fashion to have a blown seam or dragging hem.

But it still causes me to channel my grandmother and make disapproving noises because I'll never understand the attraction.

And then I remind myself that my family saves Pringles cans to store various bits of things and thus is likely not a good source of fashion advice.

Well I wish me or GC could remember the movie that came from. I recall the context being that the normally "fashionable" person was siting at home in sweats - indicating he(or was it a she?) had given up on life. It wasn't a situation where the other person was in sweats working out - But damn I still can't remember it, though it got a laugh out of me. Maybe Not Afraid knows?

Arrested Development perhaps?

I'm pretty sure it's from Mean Girls.

No, I never saw that

It is Arrested Development. I can't find the episode though, but it is in Season One./ I believe it was said about Lindsay by Michael, but it really could've been said by Lucille or by Lindsay.

GC......Do you remember the episode?

For me, the only part of fashion that I find truly perplexing is when people are only paying for a name attached and not the product.

For example, I can understand absolutely loving a Thomas Kinkade painting (even though I think his stuff is just atrocious) and being willing to pay $1,500 for a piece. But I don't understand why the exact same painting would no longer be worth $1,500 to you if the factory person who actually painted it had his name put on it.

The exact same painting in both cases. $1,500 if it says "by Thomas Kinkade" on the card next to it; $150 if it says "by Joe Schmoe." And it is the same with clothing fashions. If the only way you know it is worth $100 for a particular t-shirt for you is if you first look at the tag and see Fred Segal instead of Kathy Lee on the label then I'm lost.

However, if you just look at the price tag and say, sure this is worth that amount to me then I can understand that. I don't have many vices but watches are one of them and I'll pay much extra for watches that most people wouldn't find much distinguishable from a $50 Timex.

Alex,

That's exactly my point. If someone who only pays $30 for a watch sees one that seems ridiculously expensive, then they could either announce their disgust and say that everyone who buys that expensive watch is being ripped off OR they could ask an expert like you to explain why you know that the watch is worth it. And then go from there. They might not get it, but you don't feel like you're being made fun of for your taste.

Anyway...