This is some sort of sick joke, right?
 

Late Friday, we took a stroll the WOD. Zapppop and I spotted an interesting shirt for sale. It was a plain white t-shirt, with a photograph of the Main Street Electrical Parade (yes, Main Street, not "Disney's") silk screened on the front, and a Disney script "D" in rhinestones in the corner. Literally, something I could have made at home with an iron and a Bedazzler. Literally.

Then Zappp spotted the price tag. And then we spotted the price tage of a few similar items around it. How much would you pay for the shirt described above?

What about this one?



This?



Go on, take a wild, crazy guess as to the price. I'll even let you know that the Bambi one is of slighly better material than the t-shirt material of the MSEP one I described and the Donald one.

$25? $30? $50??

Well, you can own the MSEP shirt for the low, low price of....$70. Yes, $70.

But wait. Here's a photographs of the Bambi tag.



Okay, when you're done laughing/crying/screaming, check out the Donald tag.



It's a freaking t-shirt! And those rhinestones ain't cutting glass any time soon! I'm still in a little bit of shock.

And the rhinestones are *glued* on?

Didn't check whether they were glued or sewn.

I hadn't realised tacky could be so profitable.

We should have taken more pictures - each shirt was worse than the last.

I'm speechless...

But you didnt take a picture of the Alice one! Or the Tinkerbell one... those... are the kickers.

Good lord. I thought the sticker shock would have worn off by now.

The Bambi shirt (and a few others) are made of a thin thermal (Think $5-%10 range) material. I didn't think to look at the necklace. Maybe that was gold or platinum? Only way I can think of to justify the cost.

Hey guys, I'm sorry to be laughing - but you really ought to see the prices of couture stuff. This is nothing -- nothing compared to the prices for some stuff you'll see upstairs at Fred Segal. Seriously. I've seen some Dolce & Gabbana Disney t-shirts that go for $300. I saw a Beagle Boys one I really liked...

If I saw these shirts in Fred Segal or D&G for $300 I wouldn't be shocked. I expect exorbant prices at those stores. And while I expect overpriced merchandice at DL this was a bit over the top. If these shirts were $40-$60 at DL I wouldn't be suprised. But starting at $70 for a theme park shirt... zoinks.

I saw some of those shirts in January. They had a really cool one with Animal from the Muppets. I think that one was around $150.

Bedazzler anyone?

Well, yep, I saw these back in December myself {unless it was earlier}. So, they must be selling if they still have them out at those prices.

I agree, at other stores with similar prices, not a surprise.

But, while the family we browsing through the WOD and saw those, at first we were shocked and then we laughed our a$$es off. Who-T-F would pay that much for those cheaply made shirts?

Really, and this is my 'starving kids in China' upbringing shining through...It is wasteful to pay that much for a shirt. I think the money would be better spent even just to invite a couple of kids who never get to go and pay their way.

But that's me.

ABSOLUTELY. Mrs. Pod and I were all over these shirts at WOD. I would've love them more if I had seen them in a store in Tokyo. But, at least the cool factor is higher.

Yep! That's Disney Merchandising for ya! They gave us the heads up on this particular line of merchandise last month. They call it the "Vintage" line. From the looks of them, I'm still trying to figure out who's garage sale the shirts came from.:rolleyes: I really can't believe they expect to have a market for them. I suspect I'll be seeing these shirts in the Company D store at the end of the year.:p

On a strange tangent, I saw a Bedazzler commercial on late night cable just a couple of days ago. I guess they figure that it will make a comeback into fashion again. I'm sure somewhere in Ally's closet her Bedazzler is calling her name... "Aaaaaally... AAAAAAlly!";)

I saw that a month or so ago. The best part was when they were showing side-by-side comparisons between designer items and the "same" item made with the Bedazzler...and the Bedazzler version was clearly crappier. At least they were being honest.

I'd gladly pay about $20 for the Bambi or MSEP shirts ;)

I totally hear it calling her name.

Hey! I've got a Bedazzler!

Thats more then the cost of addmission to Disneyland.

Don't I remember something about Fred Segal shirts being sold IN Disneyland/WOD? When I saw those shirts and those pricetags last week, I just assumed they WERE the FS shirts.

Crap, didn't get a pic of my favorite - a shirt covered in gold puffy paint splotches with a badly drawn Kermit on the back. It looked like it was made by a child - a messy, untalented child.

No matter how rich I'll ever be, I'd never purchase most of those shirts, because they are UGLY. There was maybe one that I partially liked but I'd still be hard pressed to spend $10 on it, due to shoddy construction and borderline taste. Most are completely hideous junk.

going back to the title of this thread.............


yes...I think it really must be. Ponine had mentioned those to me before, but until I saw them for myself.....I thought that there must be something else to them.

Nope. simple craptacular t-shirt with some glitter and iron-ons...and a 3 digit price tag.

something is seriously warped about that :eek:

That would be cool. I'd buy the Bambi shirt then. Let me know if you see them. There is one other cool collage shirt I like as well. But, I don't "need" t-shirts.

Now, I love Donald shirts but I hate this one. Yuck! It doesn't even make any sense. A mad Donald shirt should say something like 'Fowl Mood' or something like that. Having a mad Donald shirt with a title like 'Good' makes zero sense.

There's another shirt that apparently goes with it, which has a devil Donald and says Evil. I believe that one was green.

As you well know, GC, I too search out Donald, but both shirts were awful.

Yikes. Well, we both probably have too many bedazzled Donald shirts in our wardrobes anyway... :D

But this is fashion. It has nothing to do with utility, or value - it is rather about image. To wear it is to express an aesthetic of the wearer. And just as there is no universal truth, there is no universal beauty.

That these items get such strong reactions probably means they are a success to those who would dare to wear them, becasue it sets them appart - just as Gap, or Banana Republic, or Pants that say Juicy across their ass - part of their appeal, is that certain people would never wear them

Aren't the Good/Evil Donalds from one of his cartoons?

Ahhh, you are a wise man my love.

Yup, sets them apart alright....:p
Yes, they are. Great cartoon, bad shirts...

Well, yes this is true. I am just a bit disappointed that it has come to this extreme.

I guess for me personally because before I could say 'If I really wanted that $40. t-shirt I could get it.' And that meant I wasn't seperated from any other Disney afficianado. But now it is more of the have and have nots. :(

Being a 'have not' isn't such a fun place to be. :(

And if you ever, EVER see me in a pair of pants that say 'Juicy' across my bum, you have my permission to shoot me. Dead on the spot. {wait, make sure it doesn't say 'Joycie', k?}

As a footnote~a creative friend of mine told me she could make me a shirt if I want. :D I'd love a Tinkerbell...any pictures of those around here?

But why shouldn't Disney create a line that appeals to the fashion conscience? Why shouldn't the "haves" in the world have Disney "couture" to choose from as well as the boring stuff we all wear? I mean, there is LOTS of high end Disney stuff in the marketplace at the moment. D&G, FS, one of my local botiques has an entire line of $90 Disney shirts of similar style and quality. It's fashion for the moment and it's no different than any of the other fashion trends that happen at any given time.

We Disney geeks did not invent liking and wearing Disney clothing. The powers that be at Disney just created a line that appealed to a higher-end market. Good for them. If it doesn't appeal to you, stay with the middle of the road stuff and don't buy couture if you don't understand the appeal. There are reasons The Gap and Kohls make tons of money selling safe clothing. It is appealing to the mases and people like to blend in. At least Disney is doing SOMETHING different and surprisingly almost hip for once. I may not buy one of these shirts but I sure found it refreshing to look at.

Regardless of what anything looks like or says, I have never understood why anyone considers an article of clothing to be worth what those cost. Or some designer handbag. A dress by some big name designer. Or just a t-shirt. Whether Disney or Gucci or Versace makes it.

Now, I spend my life in jeans shorts and t-shirts. I am not fashion conscious in the least. I guess I just don't "get it".

I can recall such things being important to me when I was in jr. high school. I did have a "members only" jacket. Wore it with pride and it was admittedly something of a status symbol. It was cool. But I was in jr. high school. Shouldn't this be something people outgrow?

I'm not trying to be insulting. I realize that an article of clothing is more than covering up nakedness. To many, it is all about how it "makes them feel". But don't you have problems mentally if you need a $130 t-shirt to feel "set apart" from the crowd?

Oh no, I understand the appeal of it. I just don't have such desires.

I think they are cool to look at, sure. Quite creative, very pretty, I love the glitter. Sure. I do like pretty things. :)

I guess why I don't like it is just for the exact reason you say people wear Gap/Kohls clothes. Those who will wear it will be fitting into a certain group, some will have to have those shirts to feel 'complete'. You don't seem to and I certainly don't.

For the record, I don't shop at any of the aforementioned places. I piece my wardrobe together all on my own. I'm a rebel, Dotty. A rebel. :D

LOL! yes, and I do love me a rebel.

I guess I just admire anything that seems to push the edges of the "norm" and, while many of these shirts don't appeal to me personally, I sure do appreciate the fact that Disney decided to push the envelope a bit. I get really tired of the same old same old as much as I get tired of fashion trends - because it really is the same thing.

Disney has tried something different here in an attempt to broaden their audience. I think that is really a step forward for a company that has tended on the safe side lately and I applaud them for it.

Go Cretive People and Marketing Whores!!!

I would love to buy the Bambi shirt. If the MSEP one didn't have the bedazzling all over it I'd buy that one too. But not for what they cost. Even if I had $140 to drop on a shirt right now the quality isn't worth it.

You can pay $20 for a pair of jeans at ON, or $120 for a pair of Sevens for All Mankind. But you expect better than ON quality at the Sevens price.

For me it's all about the quality. I don't expect something I pay $60+ for to last me a season. And yes, I have clothing that I have paid $100+ for, and it's still in great shape 5 years later. Does anyone really think that those shirts will last more than a season?

Well, yes, from that point of view, I am glad they livened things up a bit with those. Just look at the reactions it has brought to this thread? :D

And honestly, I was getting pukey sick with all of the same styles and the kiddie stuff. I don't have any kids anymore {although they say I do:evil: } and too much pink is beginning to turn my stomach. Aside from stopping and our group commenting and scoffing at the prices, there wasn't much in the store that caught our eye. So from that perspective, yes, push the envelope. :snap: But, the cost, aye, does it have to follow? Is that a given these days?

And, yep, BTD, I agree with the quality/cost issue. I vaguely recall handling those shirts :p and they were pretty thin. I have a QOTSA shirt of the same material and I have to take special care of it. A 't-shirt'. :rolleyes: While the glitter wearing off will have a cool appeal it will be a pi$$er if you aren't in to that sort of thing.

Fashion is all about transience - the piece of clothing most women spend the most money on, they only wear once.

Not to knock quality, there are time honored fashion classics, but some things are meant just for one season or occasion.

And we all make decsions as to what we value, and for how much. Many people would look at a DL AP as an extravagence - but most of us that have them here find them to be a bargain.

For me, it wasn't so much about the quality of materials, but rather the fact that they were for the most part literally something I could make at home. The Bambi one and the Pirates one were the only ones that seemed to have any sort of inspired design elements to them. The others looked like close relatives of our Mouse Adventure shirts.

I equate these more to people who pay $100+ for a plain t-shirt that says "DKNY" on the front than someone who pays $100+ for an ugly, whacky design that I may not like but at least took some thought to come up with. The latter I can sort of dig, the former...not so much.

Ya know, AP's did come to mind. But you really can USE those!!!!

And yeah, so freaking true. How many womens closets are full of dresses they searched for and paid a fortune for, wear once and then zip up in a plastic bag to be brought out for their kids at Halloween?

Maybe I am just not a typical female?

Quality is only one of the factors I look at with clothing. I could find the best made t-shirt in the universe but I wouldn't be caught dead wearing it if it wasn't exciting in some way. Most of my clothing never wears out from a functional standpoint anyways. I usually get bored with it before it bites the dust. I honestly can't remember the last piece of clothing I wore out.

I guess my values when it comes to clothing are different. I look for fit and style first then, perhaps, quality and maybe price. But, I'd rather have a $75 shirt that I get a lot of wear out of for one or two seasons than a closet full of $20 boring shirts that will last me 6 years. I tend to like change more than that.


And, as for the argument that I could make that at home.....well, then do it if that's how you want to spend your time. I am in the process of knitting a scarf at the moment. I still will pay a decent amount of money for a great scarf at the drop pf a hat.

There's much more to quality and design than just technique. That principle can be applies to most creative endeavors. Personally, while I admire good technique, it is the creativity that really thrills me.

Maybe they were counting on a generation unaware of craftshops or the Bedazzler? ;)

Maybe I should get me a pair of pants with the word "Juicy" across the butt.

I thought you has lost some weight, Kevy? :evil:

Yeah, but I am still up around 235.

(And since you brought it up, I did lose 35 lbs.)

I suppose I could change my own oil too, but I'm lazy when it comes to things like that. Not sure I want to own a bedazzler either...

No, no bedazzler here either. But, I like to buy and wear clothes out and about, not stay at home and make them and not go anywhere. Its just a matter of my own prioroties.

I'd expect to pay those kind of prices at NICE stores like Marshall Field's or Neiman Marcus for NICE clothes.

Those clothes look like the hideous things my sister has to glue together for her dance costumes every year.

heh heh - Nice might be one fashion statement - but Naughty often seems to win out ;)

I don't think the clothes are Neiman's are particularly nice actually. They're sort of boring.

See, but that's just it, there was no creativity, from my perspective. It was "photograph ironed onto t-shirt". Like I said, I can appreciate a design that took some creative power to make, even if I don't like it. But not only could I have reproduced most of these shirts at home, I could have thought of them (witness our MA shirts). And if I can think of it, it can't be all that creative.

Eh, I guess I've heard the "my 5 year old could paint that" excuse when looking at art one too many times.

Believe me, I don't see these shirts as the pinacle of creativity, I just think it is terribly refreshing for Disney to go out on at least SOME sort of ledge for once.

Ah - but Marcel Duchamp exhibts a urinal in an art show calling it the "Everalting Fountain" and it is art. You or I do the same thing and it's not ;)

Even if they are boring their quality is higher than these shirts.

And I don't see Disney as going out on a ledge here at all. They have authorized retailers to sell *fun* shirts for a few years now. They're just now bringing this stuff to the parks; at a much higher price and no increase in quality.

I suppose it won't surprise you that I quickly grow bored with dada.

They do it with food, why not do it with fashion?

Like I said earlier, quality is not much of a concern with me in this day of fashon moving at light speed.

To me, it is a departure from what they regularly carry at WOD, therefore it is a bit of a ledge - for them. For the rest of the world, no so much.

And, the price is comperable - or even less - than what is in boutique stores.

Heh - and that is where you and I differ. But that's cool, for otherwise the world would be a rather dull place - despite a universal appreciation for Dada ;)

Whatever works for you. Personally if I am going to buy something that fun I want to wear/wash it more than once before it falls apart.

You originaly said Disney, which is what I was replying to. I see it as WoD finally catching up to the retailers selling Disney products. More of behind the times then ahead of them.

I can't make an educated comment to what is in botique stores. I prefer to create my own style then follow the fast and furious fashion world ;)

Uh huh.

I have a wardrobe rule at my house: if it's not something that I might wear to an interview or a formal occasion, it has to be able to survive the washing machine.

I'm not a fan of shoddy construction, no matter how fleetingly fashionable it is. That being said, I don't have a problem with Disney selling such things, since people apparently want to buy them. I think said people are a little silly, but I'm sure they would find facets of my life to be silly.

I agree. :snap:

I do understand your point, too, BTD, about the quality. You can buy a suit at Neimans' and it will last forever. I actually have a Saks Fifth Avenue coat that must be from the 60's and it is damn cool and in excelent shape. No seam tears, no missing buttons.

But, oh my, the clothes they sell at some of those stores are so dull!!! I always ask my friends to let me know if I am wearing something too out there because I do not shop in the mom department. Not that I am flashy but I can't stand mom clothes.

I love the off the wall stores even though compared to most of their things I dress conservatively.

And I have to comment, most women I see wearing the Juicy pants have rather, um, er, juicy rears. What do thin bummed women wear? Hmm???

I thought I should come back and state this~ clothes from those dull stores have their place in the world. If you are a professional and that is the look you need to have, well, that is that. And, they will be worn and washed a lot so yes, good to invest in a quality wardrobe.

carry on.....

Amazingly, they don't have to put words on their asses to make people look at them. ;)

I don't follow fashion - fashion is people telling me what to do. I easily admit to limiting my spending on clothing to certain rules, such as how much wear it can get, how many places it will be appropriate at, and whether I could get something similar elsewhere.

I have to admit, I'd laugh in someone's face if they said they paid $130 for a piece of clothing to show that they were "rebelling". Who are you rebelling against - the employer that hands you your very large paycheck, or perhaps Visa/Mastercard? Third option - maybe you're rebelling against your very wealthy parents who bought it for you.

Shirts that are priced exorbitantly, whether it be a $100 white collared shirt for conservative meetings or a $100 "couture" shirt that looks like someone spilled something on it, I will not purchase. Not even if I had money coming out of my ears. The reasons for not purchasing them are different, but there's still a price threshold. I may buy the nice one for $30, but the gaudy/torn/faded/ugly thing wouldn't get $1 out of me, because I'd never wear it.

I've bought my share of "worn" or "torn" jenas, but in this specific case, YUCK.

The above is just my opinion...

Well, there's nothing worth looking at there! ;)

Listen, edgy or not ... these clothes are poorly made, of shoddy construction, and look to fall apart upon the first washing. I find most of them ugly, but some of them not (the Bambi comes to mind), but they are all cheap pieces crap that made me laugh outfreaking loud when I saw the price tags.

It's not the price alone. I could have walked 10 feet further at WoD and found more expensive items. It's value. $150 for a piece of (reproduced) art, or $150 for the crappiest tshirt I've ever seen stitched together by limbless Indonesian eunichs? Which will you choose?

Brav-freekin-o!!!!!!!!!!!!! :snap: :snap: :snap:

And, there is the matter of preference. Personally, I would prefer to wear a somewhat edgy Bambi shirt, cheap or not, than the light grey sweat shorts with the word GRUMPY on the ass that were on the next rack over. But, I think the GRUMPY ass shorts wouldlook cute on you, ISM. ;)

Nonsense - we all follow fashion - everytime we put something on or buy something we're making decissions that are at least in part aesthetic. Fashion is not an absolute - we all have it, and thankfully we're all different in expressing it (except I guess during certain teen years when Brand identity becomes for some reason very important).

You may not be Haut Cotour (sp?), or Goth, or Preppy - but you have a style, an aesthetic - and yes a "fashion" and it is dictated at least in part by other's unless your sewing your own clothes from fabric you wove and dyed yourself. Rejecting materialism is also a fashion statement.

Would you pay $150 for a limbless Indonesian eunich? :D

Don't you do that everytime you shop at Walmart?

Oh, and so would I (even though the shorts might look cuter on me). It's just that neither of them are likely to go home with me. The shorts 'cause they're ugly (ok, and my legs are too skinny), and the Bambi thermal 'cause it's out of my wildest price range.

Since almost all of the other items in the "vintage" aka "crap" line are - imo - ugly as well as outrageously expensive, I don't even have to consider making a purchase. But I'm glad they are stocked at WoD for my amusement. I will laugh every time I walk by.




edited to add: $150 is too much for a limbless Indonesian eunich, though I might consider one without arms for that price.

"Under Construction"?

Ya know, that is really it; what I will pay for anything. I have prices in my mind what I will pay for every single thing I buy. If something is over that I pass. Regardless if I have money coming out of my ears, to quote CP. ;)

As far as the different fashion styles, I used to love doing all of the different trends! That was my fashion. I even had a lumberjack look. Unfortunately in my 'hood it was mistaken for a chola. :rolleyes:

I love the different opinons and while I refuse to pay for things like that, I do respect that some people do.

Uh-oh! This isn't THAT thread again is it? ;)

I bought an Olszewski for $300 and when I tried to wash it, it didn't make it once through the spin cycle.

I wish that the Disney gallery still sold collectibles and not "collectibles". Sericels? SHAG? Please.

I'm sure that some people who collect WDCC "sculptures" think that folks who buy these shirts are suckers. Let he who is without sin etc etc.

As would I, but if I were being forced to buy one, I'd buy the Grumpy shorts and wear them to the gym. Fortunatly we can all choose how we spend our money, and what something is worth to us.

Everyone can go round and round on this topic and in the end we'll have to agree to disagree.

So I'm going to focus on something a bit more fun.

iSm would look totally hot in those shorts ;) ;p

I would wear the Grumpy shorts, but more as a warning to others than a fashion statement.

Hey, I'm still pretty much without sin. I bought the shag prints because I wanted to hang it on my walls, not because it's "rebellious", "fashionable", "brand name" or "collectible". In fact, I don't collect anything. I may drool over various stupidly expensive things but I'd never buy them for myself.

I still feel that my biggest spending "sin" is spending money on overpriced DL food....but that's not for the food, it's for the company and ambiance, and worth every penny. :)

I didn't read the whole thing so I don't know if this was said, but everything I'm hearing is that the replacement store for Hoypoloi will be a Disney-run store to house these high-end clothing lines.

Also, a similar Donald short was worn by one of the red carpet arrivals at the Downtown Disney premiere of Princess Diaries 2 so it really is vintage, just with rhinestones. At least 18 months old. Maybe putting Donald below the text adds $90 in value. Here's my picture (I have no idea who the woman is and neither did any of the other photographers):

"Princess".

The very sight of "princess" shirts make me cringe.

You are right! I think it goes great on little babies and kitties.....

Is "high-end" determined solely by the retail price, or does quality of design and manufacture fit into that definition anywhere?

Is that like being almost pregnant?

I'm curious about your term "sin: here - and while I know you are just throwing some hyperbole around, even before this I get the impression that your reaction to this line of clothes is more than they are ugly or expensive, but rather they are somehow immorale - that to purchase or wear them is simply "wrong" and that a "good/just/smart/sensible" person would never do that. In a sense that "Fashion" may well be a sin to you, in that it means conformity, foolishness, or some subjegation to an ill-thinking elite.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that's an impression I get.

I know nothing about fashion. I added that amendment to my gay Constitution long ago: is gay but knows nothing about fashion nor would spend heaps of money on it in the name of keeping up.

What alarms me about Disney pricing in general is that they seem to be hiking things up just to see how much they can get away with. If people pay this much for a t-shirt, then they'll keep hiking up the prices. And people do buy this stuff. Bleh.

And as far as quality goes, I never expect Disney stuff to be high quality. Ever.

My 2 cents.
:)

I think what CP meant was being guilty of buying Disney stuff. I didn't read it as her making a comment about the shirt itself...
:shrug:

I believe CP was replying to MousePods comment, not about the morality of the shirts.

I got that but the use of the term "sin" got me to think about some of the reaction - or my impressions I'm getting from them - that have been expressed here.

I think I see "fashion" as having far less baggage than others do. To me it's a matter of aesthetics, others see it as a commandment to wear legwarmers - or so it seems.

Perhaps, but her earlier posts - and maybe even yours, seem to contain a moral judgement in them beyond the aesthetic or economic valuations. I'm just checking my assumptions.

Thanks for the fact check - as BTD noticed, I used the word "sin" because Mousepod did. I don't think of this in sin terms. I barely ever think of anything in sin terms.

I blame Mousepod :p

No moral judgement from me. I think most of them are cute; and the ones that aren't cute to me certainly aren't immoral. Just a bit of shock that such shoddy workmanship can warrent these prices.

Well - I've mousepod to thank my research expedition about Sumptuary Laws (So far I've linke this link best) which sought to curb the extravagence of fashion which was seen as "wicked" if not "sinfull."

Personally, I'm fascinated by the subject of fashion becasue I think it has a far greater influence than we let on and tend to react to fashion as to what is "trendy" or "fashionable" at a given time.

I tend to see fashion as one of our primary forms of communications - telling others about our position, beliefs, occupation, or alliances all without speaking a word. So to me, it's not a stretch to see how someone might want to judge, criticize, or condemn for fashion's sake since we do it all the time with people's words. But perhaps that's still in the subtext.

"We are the goon squad and we're coming to town - beep beep"

Heh - that was going through my mind all evening long yesterday

The person in the picture looks like songwriter Diane Warren, who wrote the song "I Decide," performed by Lindsay Lohan, for the "Princess Diaries 2" soundtrack.

Diane Warren has written a long list of hit songs from the 1980s through today in pop, rock, country and R&B. Some of the massively-successful songs she has written include:
Aerosmith - "I Don't Want To Miss A Thing"
Celine Dion - "Because You Loved Me"
Toni Braxton - "Unbreak My Heart"
LeAnn Rimes and Trisha Yearwood - "How Do I Live"
Cher - "If I Could Turn Back Time"
Expose' - "I'll Never Get Over You Getting Over Me"
Expose' - "Your Baby Never Looked Good in Blue"
Belinda Carlisle - "I Get Weak"
Laura Branigan - "Solitaire"
Taylor Dayne - "Love Will Lead You Back"
Starship - "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now"

So, is it a hit shirt if hit-songwriter Diane Warren wears it?

iSm:

Based on my mom's years as a seamstress and duplicating designer clothes brought in by customers and listening to her comments, the correlation between price and quality is weak. Generally you'll get more expensive materials but unless it was sewn specifically for you (unless it is a very small line) it'll have still been sewn by the same textile places where everybody gets paid more for sewing faster, not better. Essentially the same treatment as the equivelant clothes at Target. Though if the line owner really cares you may see it slowed down and better stitching used, there really isn't much you can do to improve the quality of a t-shirt to justify a 500% increase in price on quality alone.

However, if people are willing to pay more for the label, more power to them. My method of fashion shopping is this:

1. Decide I need, for example, three new shirts for just casual wearing.
2. Decide which department store is closest that would sell shirts appropriate for casual wearing (only Target and Wal-Mart are, a priori, disqualified).
3. Go to store and enter.
4. The first three shirts, closest to the door, that I do not find repulsive will be tried on and purchased.
5. Go home.

No comparison shopping, no second store unless it turns out the first store doesn't have the kind of clothes I'm looking for. Little consideration for price. Ideally, no clothes shopping expedition will last more than 15 minutes total time in store.

Fashion is almost totally irrelevant to me personally, it is all about avoiding the actual pain of shopping. Thus I've been wearing the same model of Saucony sneakers, Rockport casual shoes, and Florsheim dress shoes for about a decade. No shopping necessary when new pairs are needed.

There's no sin in fashion (except for the ugg boot/mini skirt combination) unless you view it as an actual presentation of a person rather than possibly a representation. The clothes a person wears can tell you something about a person but you have to remain aware that the clothes frequently lie.

What about Tattoos?

I don't consider them fashion (it is only incidental that one of my is somewhat visible to others). Each of mine is a statement to myself, not to the external observer. Similarly, my toenails are almost always painted, but nobody ever sees my toes but me and Lani (I am rarely without shoes outside of the house). But if you consider them fashion then I wouldn't really be able to argue the point.

For a certain type of tattoo getter they are most definitely fashion and that, in my opinion, is the type of tattoo getter most likely to have regrets down the road.

I'm not sure that fashion needs to be public - while public displays of lingerie have become more comonplace, I think I number of people still limit that viewing to their intimates.

In agreement with you (I presume), I think people are happier when the dress "for themselves" and not for the external observer - AKA Posseur.

But again, I appear to use the term "Fashion" a bit broader than most, who seem to use it a synonymous with "trendy." I think many people come to think of "fashion" as having a negative connotation as a result of that, which unfortunately prevents or limits the discussion of what our own "fashion" might be.

I don't think "fashion" needs to be intended for a larger audience but I do think it really does involve some type of presentment to an audience, even if it is very small.

Now, whether this audience can be so small as "yourself" I don't know.

Painting my toenails has little to do with presentation (to a group or myself) but rather I just enjoy the 20 minutes of quiet together time with Lani while she paints them. And yet I won't let her use "feminine" colors like pink or red but instead generally stick to greens and blues. So while the decision to have painted toenails is fashionless, does the color preference introduce fashion even though it is purely for myself? I don't know, and that's why I said I couldn't really argue.

In the same vein as "everything is political" is any statement of preference a statement of fashion? I can certainly see it argued convincingly either way. Personally I have put the line as any decision of preference where what another (whether one or many) will think of the it is an influence in making the decision is a decision of fashion.

So for me, personal style can exist outside considerations of fashion but I'm being arbitrary and am not married to the idea.

Thats a good question I view fashion as being in it's essence a form of communication - which requires a sender and reciever, so traditionally an other, but there are whole schools of intrapersonal communication, so communicating with yourself is not out of the question.

I also tend to lean towards the absolute that views all "aesthetic" decission to be fashion - so selecting a paint color in a sense is making a fashion decission.

But I slaso think politics and economics enter into most decissions as well - they all tend to limit the overall pool we select from. I mihgt prefer the aesthetics of the Jag, but the Honda suits my economics better, but I'll get the green one - that being my aesthetic and thus fashion choice.

I would be way bigger on fashion if I were bigger in the wallet and bigger in the size.

For reals, it is sooooo damned difficult to find clothes in America that fit a guy of my slight build that it is most times too depressing an activity to partake of. Add to that my limited clothing budget, and you have a recipe for me wearing things to the disintegration point, and being "retro" both for the stylistic and practicality reasons.

About half my reason for wanting to go to Japan is so that I can buy snazzy clothes that will fit a dude my size.


Frankly, it's not too bad a thing that nothing fits me. I'd like to be even more fashionable than I am, but I'm a notorious over spender. Well, rather, I'm a firm believer in you-get-what-you-pay-for. I apply a heavy dose of caveat-emptor to that, especially for clothing (where the Disney Vintage Crap Line is Exhibit A).




Oh, and by fashionable, I do not mean trendy. I simply mean that which appeals to my personal aesthetic, which I consider highly developed and objectively excellent. :iSm:

Alex's shopping agenda reminds me that sometimes I wish I were a guy. I dressed like one for many years...

I just wonder why there isn't more nudism - economic, durable, no shopping required, what's with this need for clothes thing?

There's a need for clothing because all forms of pesonal expression are fun and rewarding. Well, maybe that's a bit braod, but I certainly feel that to be the case. I love fashion. I love the exciting things that come out of the creative minds of exciting, top-notch designers. I find them inspiring my own fashon aesthetic which is limited only by availability of clothes that I truely want to wear and can find that actually fit. But, everyone knows that I like "dressing up" whenever I have the opportunity.

Conversly, I am not a fan of many trends. Actually, I really hate most trends becaue they only look good on a rare number of people but the majority of people think they can wear them and then we all have to look at them. But, fashion and trendy are not exactly the same thing.

Personally,I have been dressing in the same basic style for years. I alter certain basic shapes and textures or add splashes here or there or modify things just a bit to account for age appropriateness, but I stick with mostly what works with a range I know works. Or, rather, what I feel comfortable working. Weather my particular style works for me or not in your opinion is, well, up to you. My own comfort level self-assurdness is what I care most about.

But, fashion, I adore it much in the same way I adore art, music and other aesthetic pursuits. My own forray into fashion is my own little espression of creativity and I wouldn't give it up for anything.

I agree on these points.

It doesn't have to be expensive, either, any of it. Clothing, art, music. The price doesn't 'make it'.

I should touch on this 'sin' that was brought up. I think perhaps some of what I said may have leaned that way.

I didn't mean that I think people who buy expensive clothing are sinful. But, me, I can't do it. To me, it is wrong. And, I don't see a need for it. I can find something to wear to any occassion within a decent budget. The search is half the fun.

And, I think it is powerful to accept yourself in your wardrobe. Screw opinion and *ahem* the PTA.

I think a certain amount of wastefulness is quasi-sinful.

It's up to each of us to determine what that amount is, where that balance point tips.

It's all relative. One person's extravagance is another's skimpthriftiness. And there's nothing inherently "wrong" with extravagance. It's up to our own individual value systems to determine where pleasureable extravagance ends and wasteful destructiveness begins.


For me personally, something is wasteful if it costs enough to provide a poor person with a significant, survivalist financial boost while also being out of a decent price-to-value ratio on the common market (which is to say, the market of common sense). If I were deleriously rich, I'd like to pick out a $10,000 suit or a $250,000 car and - just before plunking down the cash - cancel the deal and instead give the money to the first homeless family I could find.



I find the Disney Vintage Crap line to be out of the common sense market. Some folks may have no qualms about paying $130 for a thermal T at World of Disney, but I'd much rather take a visiting Boise family out to lunch.

I love how the "real" price for these T's has almost doubled in the proces of this conversation. Me thinks the protests are getting a bit low of fuel.

It appears the conversation morphed a lil while ago from the DL tees to the cost of "fashionable" clothing in general.

However, if we're going to get into symantics of which shirt costs what then the Donald shirt is $130 and the Bambi shirt is $90. I don't see any *doubling* of the cost of the T's.

Both dollar amounts would enable iSm to buy lunch for that family from Boise. And I must leave more mojo before I can mojo iSm again.

*edited to correct in Boise to from Boise.

Have a good time in Boise, ISM. You're a better person than I am.


Or, just different.

Just different, Lisa. We all are.

But, we all give in our way. I think you give to a lot of people of yourself. That is priceless.

Of course. We are also fairly charitable for a one-income family. But, that'a a personal choice and not one that is put on display for the moral judgement of others. Especially when that moral code is so undeniably foreign.

Respected.

See, I have no idea what you do {aside from giving of yourself} but I do not question your charity at all.

And, we don't have to wear our badges on our lapels for everyone to see what we do for whom and when.

I'd like to go back and explore something Alex mentioned in that fashion can be deceptive - i.e. what it attempts to represent about a person may not be true.

I think this is one of the fascinating powers of fashion - it is in fact a place that is almost acceptable to lie - fashion lets you wear cloths that enhance your best features and hide your worst. Fashion can make you seem taller, thinner, wealthier, edgier, or more sophisticated than you really are - sort of cart blanch role playing. Heck manny of you in other posts talked about judgements made about other people based more on how they were dressed rather than race.

There is power in image - and I just love how that all works. Look at this site and the people who turn away believing they aren't "swank" enough - that is both crazy and compelling.

At what point do people become the roles they play? Can the cloths we wear actually make us sexier, more sophiticated, cooler? At least in some cases it appears it can.

Art is Magic.

Very good points there.

No kidding. Girdles? {men and women} Push up bras, water bras. Umm...I don't know what guys use but......

As far as 'fashion' making us feel sexier...let's just say Maroon 5's video 'This Love'....sure made shopping for chonies more interesting for me. :D

I have never understood people who think they can't wear something. Fear? I don't know. I'll try anything on. BUT if I don't think it looks good I won't wear it. Pure and simple. Like NA said, not every look looks good on every body.

Please don't take offense. First of all, I haven't yet bought lunch for anyone from Boise. In fact, I will confess that - for a person of my income bracket - my charitable giving is atrocious (though for a person of my debt level, it's probably on target).

I certainly don't put any moral value on someone buying a $90 shirt or a $1,000 jacket. I'd like my moral alarm to stay silent at all price levels ... but it does go off for those $10K suits and those $250K cars. (Let me know when you're ready to spend that kind of cash, NA ... and we'll be talking more than lunch.)

Still, there's nothing wrong with someone plunking down $10K on a suit of clothes. It's just not what I would like to do.

* * * *

Very interesting stuff. It is a sort of role play (and, for many of us, note how often clothing veers decidedly into costume).

But I think it's limited to "play." For image projection, it only works till you open your mouth. Unless you are putting on a complete act, the look only works as a facade for people who don't actually interact with you. Very limited effectiveness, I'm afraid.

Fun? yes. Pulling the wool over anyone's eyes? Sorry, not with wool alone.

* * * * *

Well, I can't speak for anyone else ... but for this guy - - it's what I don't use that adds, umm, umph.

(If I don't wear underwear, my package is simply .... alarming. Ask anyone who's seen me in jeans on a commando day - - or, better yet, seen me in my red long johns of death!) :decap:

In cases of art imitating life, here are a few examples, off the top of my head:
--Cinderella, with the help of the Fairy Godmother, gets magically dressed for the ball.
--Aladdin, with the help of Genie, becomes the wealthy suitor Prince Ali.
--The former NBC series "The Pretender" was about a character who pretended to be a different person by changed his clothing/appearance each episode.
--Jennifer Garner's character in the ABC TV-show "Alias" changes her outfits for different situations as a spy to suit the purpose.

Yes, one could say those are only fictional accounts, but these TV/movie/pop-culture examples send subcontext message that it's sometimes OK to be deceiving, based on how someone is dressed, if it fits someone's needs or objectives.

^ Exactly! Why is it that ... dressing in "black" or monochrome colors, or wearing "vertically stripped" clothes is suppose to make one look thinner or taller. Wearing a scarf, accessories, or jewelry can hide or enhance some features, etc.

Going back to the topic of Disney clothes, how many people specifically wear Disney-related clothes when they're going to a Disney park? A lot of people. Whether it's for reasons of style, pride, self image, or simply "dressing up" for a day at Disney, many people consciously wear Disney clothing to the parks like it's a routine. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, and it's probably a little fun to do so.

As for the original post about the high-priced--but lack-of-quality--Bambi and Donald shirts, I say it's the consumer's choice. Is the price outrageous for the product? I think so, as do many here. But if someone believes those shirts are worth the price, then they can just go ahead and buy them.

Well, we are talking deception and not transforamtion here (though I think fashion can sometimes do the latter). You can do a lot with first impressions, and sometimes it's our clothes that open doors to opportunities we might not have were we otherwise dressed.

A push up bra might attract someone with a bias for breasts that starts the conversation the creates the realtionship where breast size doesn't matter. Yes the clothes don't change the truth, but the enable (and sometimes prevent) things to happen.

I think clothes can do a lot of both harm and good to a person - especially initially. I can get so distraced by appealing - or moe often unappealing - visuals that I cannot concentrate on what the person is really saying. Maybe it is because I am primarially a visual person, but when clothing seems out of balance, distracting or just plain ugly, I have to make an extra effort to get past the visuals.

The effect of certain styles of dress has been used for shock value for ages. Punk clothing is a great example of in-your-face,look at me style that sends a message right away. But, that is an extreme example of what we all communicate to others right off the bat. But, I also think it has to do more than just with clothing. The entire presentation is important and can be very distracting. Fashion more than just clothing.

Oh, I agree with the communication aspect. I love the communication inherent in clothing ... but with the proviso not to put too much stock in it. After all, you never know who didn't bother to think what they were saying when they got dressed that morning (though there are many who are obviously trying to tell you something with their fashion de jeur).

I also get it about visuals, but I don't get too distracted by clothing (unless you've got Charlize Theron's Oscar bow about to eat your head from its perch on your shoulder). The biggest visual will always be someone's actual looks, their physical self, their facely visage. No degree of fashion can overcome that for the influence it has on others.

Fashion can accentuate, it can sometimes even compensate ... but it will never do as much -or say as much- as a pretty face, a warm smile, a perky pair, or some packed long johns. :iSm:

TMI...TMI...TMI...:blush:

I am cracking up at the image of red long johns. Nothing personal, I just crack up at long johns and Dr. Dentons. {mine: pink without feet}

No kidding about the punk clothes, NA. How about my chickies car~it looked wicked. When I drove it, I really felt some people looked at me a bit afraid. One lady cut me off and took my parking space. Then I waited to get the spot next to her and she did not get out of her car until I had parked and exited mine!

I dig what you guys are saying about clothing and perceptions.

I'm going up for a higher position at the library, so I'm dressing a bit more professional lately. The job would be supervisorial, with meetings to attend, so I went and bought myself a women's suit of sorts. It's in a young style, so I'm not going fuddyduddy or anything. I'm slowly pushing my less mature fashions towards the weekend side of the closet. I've found that what I wear greatly affects my attitude, and I'm sure, how others perceive me.

A few years back I finally realized that I dressed poorly...that my clothes were baggy and ugly and unflattering....and the subsequent wardrobe change turned around my entire self-image. Now I feel comfortable in my skin, as well as my clothes.

I fully dig the power of wardrobe. :)

On the other hand, €, I'd be a nudist, if I wasn't so damn cold all the time. Seriously!

Seriously. I don't normally say out loud my feelings about clothes, moreso I just walk around looking at what is on the racks and either checking it out or not. I don't normally judge people so when I hear people I am with judge others it trips me out. So it is interesting to hear people openly and honestly share their opinions.:snap:

The professional clothes~Ah, I normally dress totally casual. For comfort, practicality and taste. But, the Hubster was attending city council meetings, very important stuff, and I was going with him. It was a lot of fun to shop for 'city council' outfits. Even he would point out an outfit and say 'Next meeting?'

And, some people surely treated me differently when I dressed that way than when I went in my Levi's and 'Made In Ireland' t-shirt{to his job}. But I still felt empowered because it helped me to realize how people were like. Sort of like going undercover. Like hanging around in a room full of other moms who don't realize I do understand Spanish...:evil:

Oh, and what you said about changing your wardrobe~mine was due to weightloss. But, the article of clothing I really yearned to wear? Jeans. For me there is not better feeling than pulling on a pair of Levis.

I feel more confident at work when I'm in heeled shoes that click-clack on the tile. Dunno why.

On the other hand, I'd rather skinny-dip than wear a swimsuit. For some reason, I'm way less self-concious when everyone's naked than when people are in swimsuits.

Would it be inappropriate for me to discuss all the clothes I bought in New Zealand now? How about the shirt I got at NYC WOD? :p

Go for it Steph :)

I have photos of some more shirts from DL DTD WoD but Photobucket isn't shrinking them to a post friendly size.

Steph was wearing one of Disney Couture shirts from NYC's WoD on Sunday and MAN was it adorable! And the designs from NZ are so fabulous! I am in in jealous lust for one of the shirts and so love the skirt and jewelry. Kudo's for good taste all around!

Photobucket is behaving.



You can find a better quality *unique* Disney shirt at Hot Topic, Kohls or Target for 1/4 of the price.




This one needs to be layered. Cute but not $65 (I think it was) cute.

This one is typical Disney price but takes "Princess" to a whole new level


And this one is for someone who knows who they are ;)

Mustn't.......say.......anything.......

BLAST! :p

</stewie>

:p

Umm Photobucket made my photos huge again. They were a board friendly size before. If someone wants to go in and make them links that'd be fine by me.

Eh, tall's not a big deal. As long as they're not so wide that they screw with the board layout it doesn't bother me.

oooooooook?

One shirt disappeared, one is tiny now. I know it's Photobucket. That's bizarre.

I shall retry this tonight when I have my pics.

I forget what movie this was from, but a fashionable character in it said that wearing sweats meant that you were giving up on everything in life. I don't know about that, but I have a favorite sweatshirt at home that I wear almost every day.
:D

Chris and I were and B&N buying books about fashion history (mainly for the photos) and I came across a book of the 10 best dressed people by decade. Not something I am prone to buy but, damn, there were some GREAT quotes about fashion, style, and taste in this book. I may have to go back and co-opt some of them.

Mean girls says something similar.

How about workout clothes? I wear whatever. They don't look so great, although, I make sure that I match. :D I haven't upgraded my work out clothes in a couple of years. Just keep washing and wearing. While I do have actual running shorts, sometimes I just wear shorts. And tops, I normally wear t-shirts.

What does that say about me?

Ooo, Mean Girls.

I'm with you MW. Workout clothes = yoga pants, sports bra, t-shirt and tennies. Sometimes a sweatshirt if it's cold out.

I laugh (inside) at the women who come in to the gym in full make-up and designer clothes. I'm sorry (not really) but when I work out I don't want to worry about having racoon eyes and foundation smudges. I'm glad I'm confident in my looks and my self-image so I don't need to wear make-up to feel better about myself or to present a more pleasent image to the other people at the gym.

Ah, a kindred spirit as far as working out, BTD. :cool:

Oh yeah, I can't worry about if my clothes get dirty or if I look like pooh. I try and stay away from mirrors so that I don't realize what I look like, I have to admit. :D

I don't get the make up either. If I am going walking with my pals, I might put on some lipgloss because all of that yappin' makes my lips chapped but otherwise sunscreen and a baseball cap and I'm outta here.

Actually, am I a nut but I actually feel 'incognito' wearing my cap and glasses. :cool:

Maybe some people go to the gym straight from work? Do they go get changed before working out and perhaps wash off the makeup?

When I work out, I wear what is comfortable - usually yoga pants and a T, usually black. I wear make-up if I'm already wearing it which is about 30% of the time, but I always wear liplgoss of some sort. I don't like dry lips. I enjoy looking at women who wear desiner work out clothes as much as I like lookin at women who look simply awful. Personally, I care too much about myself to ever go someplace with at least feeling decently put toether, but that's just my preference. I like lookin good for me.

CP~ I never thought of it that way. That is possible.

And, that is true, also, NA. I do make sure my clothes are not horrid. I usually head off for my walk or run directly after dropping off my son at school. I do try and keep up my appearances there. I make sure that everything is put together and looks 'neat'. But, I just don't worry about wearing fashionable workout clothes. As long as it is comfortable. I have to say, the Hubster loves his workout clothes to be 'nice'. He buys them as much as I buy music.

I do like to look good for me. I hate to look in the mirror because I hate to see myself 'grrr grrr'. The mirrors are to motivate? I dunno.

How sad that feel the need to laugh snarkily at what others obviously enjoy. Tres un-Swank IMHO. But, whatever floats your boat. :(

Eh, I laugh snarkily at people obviously overdressed for the occasion, even if it's merely a matter of my own opinion.


Before Tokyo Disneyland was built, I poked plenty of fun at the hoards of Japanese businessman who would descend upon Anaheim's Magic Kingdom at the height of summer in black business suits.






(then again, if I'm immature now, imagine how green I was in the prehistoric days before Tokyo Disneyland was built)

Yeah, and no one's perfect, but the difference with you, ISM, is that you can laugh at yourself and do so while laughing at others. But, like I said, everyone's a different comfort levels with themselves. We're old, aren't we? Old and immature. :evil:

Oh, but Ally, I DO think of you when I see a flo-bee!



And, I have bad taste too. I think we need to support our own support group. ;)

I'm sure people go straight from work, but at that hour most peoples make-up doesn't look freshly applied. I should have added that I go first thing in the morning.

I had a friend who would take a shower, do her hair and full make-up before going to the gym. I never understood why.

Regardless I don't spend more than a passing glance looking at the people around me in my quest to see what machines are open and where I want to go. To notice what someone is wearing it has to catch my eye and dispite my very short attention span something has to stick out to make me do a double take.

In the grand scheme of things it's nothing more than a moment of internal laughter [at people who are overdressed for the occassion (thanks for the verbage iSm)]

I want to see you 'grrr grrr'.

Who said I was laughing snarkily? I find it funny that people get all dolled up to go to the gym. I can find it funny. I'm sure people find fault with and laugh at much of my clothing and fashion choices. ;) Is that sad or un-swank? Or just a matter of personal opnion.

Fashion'sMostTastelessOverspendingTackyAssOfTheDol ls

Fashion'sMostTastelessOverspendingTackyAssBell.

Their too long :(

You do? No! :p

I have to agree. While I might see someone that might make me laugh on the inside, it is just a fleeting moment followed by the 'whatever floats their boat' thought.

I can't help myself. Like iSm said, immature? Maybe. But some things just tickle me. Like the priest wearing white sneaker type shoes. I almost fell off the pew.

But, things that are beautiful, like the clouds at the end of the day, colorful from the sunset. That I can't take my eyes off of.

:D I am laughing so hard at this. Glad that you got it. ;)


And, in thinking more, if I were to workout with people I know, I MIGHT use a powder and eye liner, to give me a finished look. We normally hit up Starbucks after and hello I don't want to be seen there too crappy. I go there a lot. :blush: But, my clothes would still be no name and worn in.

I laugh snarkily at just about everyone, including myself, for just about any reason. The fact that I'm an immature poo-poo head also makes me laugh.


My dad's wife used to clean her house the day before the weekly maid service was scheduled to, uh, come clean her house.

You, too?! I never take myself too seriously. Or try not to.

But, I consider myself a 'knucklehead' and little kids are 'squirrely'.

I aspire to be a knucklehead, MW. It's been a dream of mine ever since I realized I was a poo-poo head. But, alas, knuckleheads are on a higher plane and I'll probably never get there.

You too! I thought I was the only one laughing at fact that you're an immature poo-poo head. ;) :p

My mom did does this. And I laugh at her too (and tease her). I guess I'm just a mean horriable snarky person. ;)

Perhaps you set your aspirations too high. I hear it is quite easy to become a dittohead. You just have to suspend the rational thought process.

I'll pass, MbC. Prescription pain killers ain't my thang.


Any right-wing blowhards out there with a taste for fat spliffs? I'd be on board for some of that action.

Well, I think we're all poopooheads(or whatever phrase you want to use at times. I know I sure can be. But, I've been geting REALLY irritated lately by a particular tone and attitude. Yeah, I'm fully aware that this is MY problem, I still feel the need to be a bitch about it. Oh well, I'll get over it. I guess I've come to expect more "openmindedness" on LoT than in other places and I should probably drop expectations. They usually are a set-up for disaster.

So, please feel free to draw and quarter me for being a bitch. I won't mind and I probably deserve it.

Is this where we insert "You're not a bitch, you're just drawn (and quartered) that way"???


Openmindedness has its place. It's all over the LoT, where it's appropriate and important. But this group has a long history of making fun of fashion (at the core, fashion faux pas at Disneyland - - but branching out from there) ... and I think we must allow a certain amount of fun and silliness and, yes, smallmindedness, in areas that are of little importance in the grand scheme of things.


I can find many threads right now that demonstrate the enlightenment, compassion, thoughtfulness and wisdom of LoT swankers. That this isn't one of them is not, I think, a reason to despair of the quality of people who post here.


(Heheh, I seem to remember a certain Disneyland Costume Change thread that brought out the worst in everyone, but was - at the same time - one of the most fun threads we've ever had.) :iSm:

Ahh, the good ol' 'fat' thread.

DIdn't I get equally pissed off then too?


No, I'm fully admitting my bitchiness, no need to disagree. But, that was clever none the less. :)

Haven't you said numerous times that you laugh at teens that wear shirts for old punk bands?

"He who goes against the fashion is himself its slave."
Logan Pearsall Smith

whatever happened to the quote of the day thread?

"I think the lady doth protest too much"
Shakespere

Damnit - I know that quote - I saw it recently and laughed out loud - it was said about a friend I think

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment - perhaps we've taken a few dives into the dark places here - but I think we're had some great discussion on clothing, fashion, what it means to society at large, what it means to us personally.

Frankly, I've gotten more out of this one than the President is Stupid Again threads - But I'd pick fashion over politics any day - that is my fashion statement for the night ;)

^ quite correct. This is a long-running thread that indeed had some great philosophical discussion going. It's also been a snarky bitch-fest. It's LoT in a pot!

Heheh, the Fat thread also had some great, serious material amongst the flying insults and general mania. We are a fun bunch. A multi-faceted bunch. A very human bunch. But still heads above the proverbial rest. (imho)

You know, I like to think so, but there are times when I have my douts, and boy does it make me mad. Both because I dislike snarky bitch fests and because I am such a well-trained snarky bitch and I don't LIKE the fact that I am good at it. Plus, this is my oasis. If I wanted something different, I'd know where to go.

Heh - I wear that elitist brand like a badge of honor :cool:

Cheers ISM

:cheers:

Being completely fashion-impaired, I've stayed (mostly) away from this thread. It is fun watching threads morph from one subject to another; often, the most benign subject can generate the most heat. Who knew fashion could be so dangerous?;)

Heehee! Is that your final answer to the part where I showed you also "feel the need to laugh snarkily at what others obviously enjoy"? We're all human, in the end.

Cheers to both iSm and € :cheers:

Hey, where' my drink?

:cheers: < Some fuzzy water for ya. :)

See, and I go after work. Sometimes not till 9pm. I reapply the makeup, and redo my hair, and whatever else I need to do in order to look presentable.


I do doll up to go to the gym.
I am a woman of size, and i know this. I cant wear the average gym clothes. they make me look really heavy, and though I know I am, I dont want to show it off.
So I make sure my gym clothes match, are washed, and are flattering. I dont want someone to stare at me and say, why are you in those grubbies?
I'd rather someone thought I was affluent, and spent time on my appearance and wanted to get thinner.
It is rather disconcerting to think that it could be found amusing, but, you know, I guess I can deal with that.
So many of the people there at that time of night, are thin, and beautiful, and its a big challange for me, at my size, and the other flaws I see, to go be around those people.

I guess for me, and I would like to think others, thats what makes us feel like we deserve to go hang out at the gym. My belated two cents.

For me, it is the disdain for the creative that gets to me. It is so easy to justify being uncreative - and some are just not appreciative of creative expression. That is sad to me, but a reality. Again, I think I come to expect that in other environments, boards, etc. But, here, I expect more. Just as we can have decent political discussions from a wide variety of views, I expect the same thing to happen when discussing social and creative issues. This thread started out in a bad way, IMHO. If a thread about a political topic was started with the same tone, I think we would all consider it baiting and probably not participate. I held off on participating in this thread for quite a while and then I just had to say something. Unfortunately, by that time I was in a general state of disgust and it showed.

I simply don't see the creativity in this line of merchandise. It's mass produced shlock, no more creative or rebelious than a jacket with a Misfits patch sold by the thousands at Hot Topic. If I saw someone in the park wearing a home made shirt with an iron-on of a family phot of them at Disneyland 40 years ago, that'd be awesome. But sold by Disney at $90+? Bah, just another chapter in the never-ending cycle of true rebelious creativity being coopted and mass marketed by corporate America. It'll make them some good bucks, but to me it's the sign that it's time to move into new areas of creativity.

Some people have shown quite a bit of disdain towards Shag for the very same reasons. And even though we obviously like the stuff since we bought it, I certainly understand it. Of course, they weren't charging $130 for cheap prints. They were charging $15. Had they been $130, I probably would have had the same reaction as I did to these shirts.

I just don't get that this thread started off in a bad way, or that it's initial subject had anything to do with stifling creativity.

It's aim was to stifle consumer rip-offs. Like it or not, clothing is a consumer item. So are films. So are many other creative forms ... when they become FOR SALE.

Some opined that the overpriced stuff was ugly. Personally, to narrow the point - I focusted on the one item I found pleasing - the Bambi thermal - to illustrate the point that it was astonishingly overpriced for such a poorly manufactured item.

Then there was the great bit of discussion about the sociological implications of fashion and apparel (cheers right back at ya, € ), and then the time-honored general criticism of this or that fashion style which Joe or Jill doesn't care for.


NA, maybe you took things a bit personally because there seemed to be some criticism of people who spent lots of money on clothing. Darling, if the stuff you wear were either ugly or cheap-looking, maybe there'd be an issue. That's not the case. Not that I've ever seen. But I don't think anyone was criticing the purchase of expensive clothing that's stylish and well-made. It wasn't extravagance that came under fire, but blind consumerism.

I guess it's none of anyone's business if someone wants to spend roughly a hundred bucks on a thermal that looks to last 2 washings at best. But we all have opinions, and this is where we express them. Some of those opinions are overly judgmental, and this is where we can hopefully learn a little about ourselves as we discuss things with others.

I'm confident that most people here, most of the time, use that insight to better themselves and the world around them.




But not everyone will do that every time. Sometimes, we just wanna be snarky.

I wouldn't say that this thread started out with a nice tone. I mean no offense to STC or anyone else, because I am fine with people having strong opinions and stating them clearly, no matter what the topic.

If I think something is overpriced, overblown, ugly, and lame, I'll say so, and I hope you do too. :) And if people disagree with me I hope that they'll say so as well. Anything else would be self-censoring.

Here's another drink for you NA :cheers: because I love trading opinions with you.

ETA - what :iSm: said, again.

Matching clean clothes that are flattering to ones self and neat hair aren't getting dolled up, at least in my opnion.

The women in my gym look like they are going to a white-tie affair sans the gown. When I say dolled up I mean dolled up. Not just neat hair and flattering clean clothes. I'm talking Fresh up-dos, the works.

If you look like you're ready to go to a white-tie affair then ya, I find that funny. I don't find you funny, I don't think less of you for it, I just find the fact that you look like you're going to a white-tie affair instead of the gym funny (but somehow I don't think that is what you look like when you go to the gym). Just like I find it funny when people go to Disneyland in 4 inch heals. But whatever floats whoevers boat.

I'm really sorry that you feel like you have to get dressed up to "deserve" to hang out the gym with all the *beautiful people*. I do know how you feel, I did feel that way years ago but I didn't care enough about myself to spend time making my self look better so I felt like I deserved to hang out with the *beautiful people* and who knows, maybe that had something to do with my failure to lose weight back then.

Kudos to you for doing what you need to do to go to the gym and improve yourself for you (I hope you're improving yourself for you!). But if anyone looks like they are about to go have dinner at the White House instead of spending time at the gym I am going to have a fleeting moment of internal laughter.

I will concede that going to Gym can be intimidating. If you're going there to lose weight or to buff up, it's kinda off-putting to be around all these people who are already thin or hunky.

If looking as good as you can helps to deal with that, no problem there. It's where it crosses the line that it becomes comical (diamond tiaras at the gym, four-inch heels at the Magic Kingdom).


(hehe, no amount of dolling up is gonna do it for me; though I work out a fair bit, you won't ever find me at the gym.)

I saw this thread starting out as an outrage of shoddy merchandise calling for a $100+ pricetag.

The tiara I dont have... I need one.
The four inch heels at the Magic Kingdom? Been there, done that.

I guess I found the OP a little flame-baity too (sorry, GD).

Back when I was a single guy, the idea of spending any kind of money (insert your own dollar amount here, based on whatever scale applies today) on clothing was silly to me. The concept of spending $100 on a piece of cloth that you tie in a knot around your neck was retarded (actually, I still don't own that many ties). Once I met and fell in love with someone who owned as many dresses as I did LPs (we're talking in the thousands, here), I started to understand the concepts of fashion a little bit better.

If a beloved Mickey hat that was once $6 was now $50, I'd understand the disgust - but you are talking apples and oranges. These are not souvenir t-shirts. These are not even "nice clothing". They are a Disney version of a fashion item that is even more pricey when sold in other places in the world.

I am sure that everyone to a person I have ever met at a DL meet owns at least one item of clothing that someone else considers extravagant. How much do you think the Disney Hawaiian shirts are marked up?

The clothing in question takes up one small section in THE LARGEST DISNEY GIFT SHOP IN THE WORLD (oops. guess my caps lock got stuck).

If the thread was about the bizarre spherical character pillows (ugly, yes. but I bought one anyway), the $5 map, the overpriced jewelry, the Shag stuff (it ain't all $15), then it might make sense. But it would be boring, because we all know that gift items and souvenirs are all famously overpriced.

If a visitor Disney fan who normally spends $200 on t-shirts at Fred Segal visits the WoD and sees a similary constructed shirt with a favorite character on it and plunks down her cash and leaves happy, I don't see how a frugal APer is part of the equation. It wasn't made for you.

And that's why I found the OP to be a little snide. If it said "Why does Disney feel the need to pursue a high-fashion audience?" or "High fashion is stupid," I think it would be more honest.

Nope, not buying that. It wasn't the price tag. It was the price tag on shoddy merchandise. (Ok, most of it ugly to boot, but that was not really the point).

If the overpriced Shag shirts I've purchased were poorly-made, I wouldn't have bought them.


And it's precisely because of the general nature of overpriced goods, foods, and services at the Resort that these items caught our eye and raised our ire. They seemed, to us, to have crossed a line. A line very hard to cross. That WE, jaded APers who've seen it all, were amazed and flabergasted and astounded made this topic worthy of a thread.

That is has morphed into several discussions, some on the disagreeable side, has little to do with the intent of the O.P.

(And I find it highly amusing that the most contentious threads on the LoT are found in the politics forum .... and the Disneyland forum :iSm: )

But iSm, I went to Disneyland and got a free map.
Then I went to a shop on Main Street and paid $5 for a different map.
Then I saw a Shag map for $400.

Let's say the free map cost a penny so we can do some math.
What makes the map at the Emporium 500 times better than the one at the gate?
What makes the Shag map 80 times better than the one in the Emporium?

It's surely not just the paper quality.

I disagree with ya mousepod.

I don't think a white tshirt with a picture iron-on or globs of gold glitter glued onto it is worth $100, nor do I see how that qualifies has 'high fashion'. I sorta get what you mean about fans that drop that kind of money on clothes reguarly but I just don't see those type of spending habits at DL (at least not for clothing). So far I haven't seen anyone wearing one of those shirts but who knows. If the clothes continue to be sold for that price & new ones are being released, then I guess there really is a market for these at the resort.

What do I think personally ?:

If this is 'high fasion' then Ghoulish Delight & Cadaverous Pallor are the Beckhams of our fashion world come every MouseAdventure.

Picture iron-ons made on your computer & clued on rhinestones from Club Libby Lu on plain $2 cotton tshirts bought at Target are not high fashion.

I don't care if it's made by Fred Segal or Fred Flintstone.

It's a rip off.

mousepod, your point about the Shag map is well taken. Of course, the $400 one is a wall map. But let's assume the same map, sold in small size, is $80. Its value is clearly greater than that of the free turnstile-crossing map because it is designed by a famed artist, whose style is appreciated by the buyer.

zapppop is right about the rhinestone-encrusted $2 Target T. That's not art (in our opinion), while Shag's map is.


By all means, let's have different opinions about what is art, what is not, what is stylish, and what is foolish. We may all be cool folks, but when our opinions do not differ about anything ... discussion gets pretty boring.

Zapppop,

I think we're arguing semantics here.

If you bought it thinking it was one thing and it turned out to be something different, it's a rip off.

I'm fairly certain that the people who spend this kind of money on clothing know enough to understand what they're paying for.

If the thread was about how ugly the new shirts were, I would understand. I think that lots of things are ugly and I'm not shy about sharing my opinion.

I think I bristle at the comparison of a "fashion" shirt to a "souvenir" shirt or even a "Target" shirt in the terms of construction or utility. When someone uses those terms, it's a cheap argument (forgive the pun), as was my post above which questions the value of a $400 piece of paper with a reproduction of a drawing that's readily viewable for free on the internet.

I see it as reverse-snobbism in the guise of consumer advocacy. But that's me.

I'm far more likely to snarkily laugh at someone wearing the hottest trends (especially if I know that person wears every trendy article of clothing that comes down the pike) than I am at someone who has their own style and occasionally looks like an overdressed peacock. I admire the whack looking individual's creativity and sense of style, no matter how far-out they might appear to me.

Mousepod:

I definitely think the shirts are ugly. Even if these particular shirts were sold for a fraction of their asking price (ex: $10), I still wouldn't buy them or recommend them. The actual designs are not too appealing to me. On a creative level, the look of the shirts are so mediocre and uninspired. It's as if all the designer had in mind was to plop a photo & rhinestones on a tshirt. I've always perceived 'high fashion' to be more creative. So when I saw the pricetag that only further turned me away from those clothes. I don't know everything about clothes but to me an uninspired shirt is not high fashion and not worth my money.

Hey Zapp -

I agree with you. Personally, I think that much of the stuff is ugly, too.

and iSm,
for the record, I don't get Shag as a "famed artist" any more than I "got" LeRoy Neiman, Pat Nagel or Peter Max. If I think that slapping a reproduction of a popular graphic artist on a piece of paper or apparel is a ridiculous justification for asking a premium, I might ask those who appreciate it why they enjoy it, rather than calling it a "sick joke". And don't even get me started on serigraphs and sericels...

["Limited edition 500 serigraph. Retail value: $7500. Your price: only $4400!"]

On one of the side topics, I too used to be intimidated about going to the gym because I assumed that everybody was laughing at me (on the inside at least).

Then when I really started to get fat I started paying for a private trainer and was at the gym all the time with my trainer (in the Lou Ferrigno body type, not the Bruce Jenner type). So this bought me honorary membership into the muscle-bound portion of the membership (though I never got as thin as I wanted I did get a lot stronger). Anyway, it was interesting to see how they interacted with the gym:

Namely they give not a fvck what other people are wearing (and the true gym rats wear some of the most appaling stuff in the world). If they bitch about you it will be because you're hogging machines or weights. If they laugh at you it will be because they know you're putting a lot of effort into a pointless (or harmful) exercise (though more often they'll offer suggestions if you seem remotely open to it).

So, if you dress up for the gym don't do it because you're afraid of what all the muscly men will think. I have no idea if the other women are paying more attention.

I remember one time years ago I was driving somewhere and a very large woman was running (or rather, waddling) around Lake Merritt in Oakland. She was bouncing in 150 directions at once. I'll admit to an initial impulse to point and laugh a little but then I thought "hey, at least she's out there running. You're driving 10 blocks to the grocery store to buy milk." I've never had an urge to condescend in this way again.

Honestly, among the fittest members of the gym I found this to be the almost universal attitude. "At least s/he's here and I hope she sticks with it. Good for him/her."

Here's why I cringed whenever a woman in full make-up came in. Not because she was made-up but because I knew there was a 50% chance she wouldn't use towels and I'd be wiping face make-up off various machines before I could use them.

Everyone has their opinions as to what is "worth" the price from varying angles.

IMHO, these are not "worth" the price, or any price, for that matter. Same goes for a lot of overpriced fashionable crap.

I also think that $400 for the shag map isn't "worth" it, either. But that's just my opinion. If I disliked the map and wouldn't pay a dime for it, I'd personally think it was weird that anyone would purchase it. Again, IMHO.

Don't tell me you don't look askance at people that pay extravagant prices for what you consider lame concerts, Mousepod ;)

I dare to have an opinion and I stick to it...

Gag! :rolleyes:

That's one thing I'd never buy! I prefer classic Mickey (of the 20's & 30's) to contemporary Mickey, but even if the drawings were more retro I'd still hold onto my money.

I do. I laugh and laugh and laugh. On the inside. Then I share it with a friend or two who has the same point of reference and possibly taste that I have. That's not what I took umbrage at. It's the "sick joke" aspect of the OP. It's snobby.

The only reason I brought up Shag or Olszweski in this thread is to share that I think that in many cases the pot is indeed black.

When an "us vs. them" thread gets started and we're not all "us", there's a good chance that someone might take the bait. That's all.

What do you mean, we're not all us?


Who let the riff-raff into the room???

For me hearing criticisms about price and workmanship made me come to the conclusion that people didn't really understand fashion - which lead me down my particular path of responses. But I've heard similar things applied to art, so I did also take the OP to be baiting.

I think the emphasis early on on the "outrageous" price and "low" quality made this appear to be a crtique on extravagence - hence my reference to sumpuary laws and the morality and ethics of fashion. And while everyone soundly denies there being judgement in their opinions, I think the passion at which this topic is addressed betrays otherwise.

My own knee-jerk reaction is to view this as another line in the sand in the culture wars - and since I do place a high value on things like art and fashion, I also tend to take those topics more personally as it seeks to undermine my own value system.

Bu, at the end of the day I like the Bambi shirt and I don't like the grumpyass pants - regardless of price, quality, or creativity.

The "sick joke" in my title came much from the setting. I mean, these items, before one catches sight of the price tags, are indistinguishible from any of the other items around them in the store in terms of level of fashion. Steps away from the charcoal line-drawing line of character merchandise, which is a style that was just as "edgy" and "a-typical of Disney" when it debuted, selling for "reasonable" prices (i.e., under $30 for a t-shirt). The ONLY thing that distinguished these as "couture" was the price. So yeah, I did view it as a sick joke. Not as an indictment of anyone who might pay triple digits for clothing, but aimed toward Disney (or whomever dictated the pricing), 'cause to me it's lke they were saying "Let's see what these suckers will think if we jack up the prices and put them right next to items of equal or better quailty/fashion-value. I bet they'll call it 'High Fashion' and shell out!"

I have no problem with high fashion fetching exhorbitant prices, even if I dislike the taste. But I think the jokes on the consumer when high fashion is defined merely by the price, not by the content.

And yes, I cringed and scoffed when I saw the price of the Shag map. Of course in partial defense of it, they only printed 300 of them, so the ridiculous price is partially driven by scarcity. But still over the top.

Well, currently the Bambi shirt is sold out, so I guess there is a market for it - at least the attractive ones. There are several other shirts that were not available in the store as well. Sadly, they are all of the ones I found attractive. I'm so damned main stream! ;)

As far as quality is concerned, ther fabric is thin and made to look used. It is a VINTAGE line. That's the pint. If these shirts were made in a thick thermal fabric, it would be "in style" and probably wouldn't sell as well to the market they are going for. It's fashion - and everyone cares about it one way or another admit it or not. Why else would someone wear clothes in styles that look so awful on them? Because they want to fit in and be fashionable.

I've got a couple of things to respond to so I may be double posting. My apologies in advance.

Here's my question...had they priced these at the standard Disney t-shirt price level, would anyone look at them and think, "OMG, these are only $22? I don't believe they're not charging $100 for this!!"?

My question is - why the instense focus on the price of these shirts?

Here's my question...had they priced Radko's "collectibles" at the standard ornament price level, would anyone look at them and think, "OMG, these are only $10? I don't believe they're not charging $100 for this!!"?

I wanted to go back and address this issue specifically before I got too far off in another direction..

Whether I am dissing a young kid for wearing a band shirt of a punk rocker who died before he was born or if BTD is laughing at other people because of how they choose to appear at the gym, the same thing is happening. We're using other people's choices to help us "feel" superior and to prop up our own egos at the espense of others. Everyone does it. I do it. But, I don't like it when I resort to what I see is childish behaviour. It us really not attractive and, sadly, says more about the insecurities of the person saying it than it does to dis another person. But, I see the transparency in myself and, sometimes, in others. But, I still do it when I I need a little ego boost. Maybe one day I will be perfect. ;)

Going back to the "active" conversation.

I look at my house and say "this is half a million dollars!?" But, it would be if we decided to sell right now.

Disney is responding to the market and what it will bear and to what the diverse audience will buy. Fred Segal is making tons of money off of Disney characters at the moment, why should they make all of the money when the demand is there within their own fan base? I think it is a pretty smart business decision.

Because it's their only distinguishing feature from anything else around it.

Here's my question...had they priced those Reyn Spooner shirts at the standard 'Aloha shirt' price level, would anyone look at them and think, "OMG, these are only $39? I don't believe they're not charging $80 for this!!"?

Certainly there is a market for overpriced goods and Disney is never one to let a dollar slip bye.

Some people like to pay top dollar for stuff. It shows a "Hey I can afford this and you cannot" type of vibe. Paris Hilton is the poster child for this.

To an extent, it does not matter what the item is just that's it's more than most people are willing to pay. You could take the price tag off the shirt and move it to another one with the same result. As long as there were not too many available. Part of what you would be paying for is having less copies on the market.

I have to admit, I don't always get why one item of clothing costs more for another. When buying swimsuits for example, I am really annoyed at the price. I mean, there's hardly any material there, what's all the money for? It was explained to me that it's because swimsuits are a pain in the ass to make, and take more effort than your average pair of pants.

I would rather have 2 pricy but beautiful shirts that fit well than 10 cheap and ugly ones that fit like crap. (And it usually happens that way) It's when I want too many pricy ones that I get into trouble. ;)

Hmm, you've asked the wrong Jew on that one.

I just want enough shirts that don't make me look even worse than I already do so that I can make it through my work week without having to do laundry midway.

And, I'm not Jewish.

And, I'm an educated art snob to boot.

And if these were limited edition, I'd have been far less shocked.

Well, I think that just betrays your ignorance of current fashion trends. So either, this is an honest attempt to find out about the fashions - or it's a cheeky insult to those, who could distinguish the difference - whose wanton extravagence by implication are morally inferior to your discerning frugality.

I think you've pretty much established the fact that you do not value the shirts at their sticker price.

I have to agree with this. I've gotten some crap from my more "natural" friends about not wanting to go out without makeup. It isn't that I'm not ok with myself, or less confident or whatever. I just feel better when I feel put together.

This is new I have posted before in another thread that I am too lazy to locate, but Disney's been on to the high fashion train for a while now, and it's been very successful.


It's chic and they'd be stupid not to cash in on the trend. God knows it will be gone soon enough.

Oh dear. I may have to visit the resort again real soon.


For me, one of the reasons is the lack of identity to the shirt. If you wear it as you go out to the gym or whatever, most people would never know it's supposed to be high fashion/'vintage disney' shirt. It just looks like another casual disney shirt that could have been purchased at Sears or made at home by your daughter. Unless you plan to wear the label inside out who'd know it's 'vintage disney' ? $100 seems like a rather large investment for something so ugly, dull, and anonymous.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not opposed to buying $100 shirts. I HAVE spent $100 on a shirt before. It was the one I wore last year for Valentine's Day weekend (the first 'swankers' meet). I felt THAT shirt was worth the price cause I thought it looked great! I remember Not Afraid kept trying to take it off me to see the label ;)






( yeah it needs ironing ;) )

I like buying & wearing clothes like this rather than anything in the 'vintage disney' line.

It's an honest belief the the pricing dictated the classification of these as "fashion", not the other way around.

If the Bambi thermal in question was a "standard" DL price I would have probably purchased it. I would not have gone "omg it's only $36" or "why isn't this $110?". $36 is about what I would expect to pay for that type of shirt at that local. If I saw a similar shirt in Kohls I'd probably go "That's cute but not $36 cute" and wait for it to go on sale. It's all about where you are and your internal spending values.

I just paid $26 for the Jack Skellington messenger bag from the Villians Shop. At DL it's worth it to me but I doubt I would pay $26 for that bag at Hot Topic. It's all about where you are. Or where I am.

Do you have to "dress up" to wear great clothes? If that were the case, I'd never get to wear great clothes!

For me, I don't care if "people" know I'm wearing designer clothes or not - although to the discerning eye, you can usually tell the difference.


It did look great and I was looking at the label- to confirm what I already knew - what the label said. Spending money on that wonderful shirt was a GREAT investment on your part. It looks great on you, is stylish, and - even better - has a character that fits you.

well even grumpyass pants are fashion - does anyone know how much these cost?

Personally, I don't think economic models don't work for art an fashion

Maybe, but I still know Folger's Crystals coffee when I taste it.

You can always wait for stuff to go on sale, but it might not be around if you wait. I got the shirt I bought in NYC for about $35.

But do you drink it? I get a lot of grief from people in my workplace because I pay more than $2 for my morning coffee. They say that they can't taste the difference. I sure can.

I'll bet they think that espresso prices are a "sick joke".

But I get really really bored hearing them rib me.

I know my taste is better than theirs. ;)

Yeah, but what difference does that make when you won't spring for Peets anyway?
;)

You know, I'm not going to be taking my money with me when I die. I may as well enjoy the finer thngs in life while I'm here to enjoy them. Good coffee is one of those things I find, not only worth the money but absolutely necessary.

And I kept trying to take it off you to see something else.


Hmmm, why is it that when my bf wears stuff that makes him look great, I just feel like I want him to remove it??
:evil:

THAT is the power of fashion

I think thats just the way it works with the object of one's desire.

Ahhhh, but that is the power of great fashion! It takes a real need for me to want to rip the ugly sweats off of a man. And, we're talking need as in YEARS.

But would you pay $5 for a cup of coffee that tastes bad, or doesn't taste any better than a decent $1.50 cup of coffee?

:cool:

Yeah, there's a reason why we're married. ;)

This is my current fashion philosophy as well.

I'm sorry for dragging this up again but Alex hit on exactly what I meant.

This is what I wanted to know. If my wearing black whatever pants with t's or tank tops puts out that I don't care about my workout. Comparing it to dressing appropriately for 'work'.

And, I do try to look my best always, but, not to the point where I get 'dolled up' to work out. I think you can look good without being 'done'.

Also, I give everyone good mojo for being out there and doing it.

And, sweat on the equipment is gross.

Back to the topic, I don't judge people by what they spend on anything, be it a little or a lot. That is their business. Mine is mine. My opinion was that I wouldn't spend that much for a t-shirt. I didn't dig on the location of their display but I understand they wanted them out there to catch everyones attention. Again, I am thinking from a parents point of view. People here are thinking from their own standards, probably not in having a whiney teenager wanting one. I wouldn't get them one either. But, my kids ask for electronics, not clothing.

LOL Well, while that is cute about wanting to remove the clothing off of your hot one, back to Lisa saying 'I dress for myself' I would definitely expect someone to have patience while I enjoyed it on me for a while first...

Was that post all over?

More on the "Jew" front.....seems this ends up a big difference between us and some of the more spendy people in our lives....

The only time I have EVER purchased a shirt that cost over $50 was at DL - and not a t-shirt, but one of those high quality silk HMH button-down shirts with the special Jack buttons. It was a gift for GD, and not only that, the only way I could let myself buy it was to split the cost with his sister. I would never, ever purchase a shirt that cost over $50 for myself, unless forced to for some odd reason...I can't think of any....

I spent more than $100 on one article of clothing precisely twice in my life. One was my wedding dress, and the other was a bridesmaid dress for someone else's wedding.

If we wanted something purely for our own sillyness that cost over $50, we'd probably do a combo birthday or Hanukkah gift to ourselves on that. We did that before for purchases like the Dodger seats and our digital camera.

We're not poor, but we're not spenders either. In fact, I'll be the first to say that we're tight-fisted-penny-pinching-Jews (ok, maybe the second after GD already posted it). I guess this leaves us ill-equipped to deal with a t-shirt that costs that much yet doesn't also perform sexual favors.

Even so, I dig zapp's sense of style and his clothing choices are always fab....as are those of everyone else here as well, as iSm mentioned earlier.

NA is right - we all aspire to be "better people" and not snicker at each other for choices - but I admit to being human and having my opinions on stuff. I am always of the mind that my opinions are my own and that no one else needs to run their lives by my rules.....say it with me now....."it's a free country."

Love y'all, back to work with me :cheers:

Hmm...all I meant is that I don't know from Christmas ornaments. But okay.

CP, do you feel your practical thriftiness has anything to do with your jewishness?


In my experience, jews are amongst the most extravagant spenders in America. Though, I'll admit to knowing many who have an eye for a bargain.

Do you think it does? I think black whatever pants and a t or tank puts out "I don't care if I get sweaty working out because these are my workout clothes". Where as most of the outfits I see the women wearing say "eww I don't want to get sweaty, just look good".

But, yet, they're wearing them to the gym to work out. Maybe they only "perspire" in them. ;)

Hmm, this may be a difference between LA Jews and NY Jews. Or it may be a matter of perception. In my experience, it's not so much that the Jews with money I know are tightwads. They are willing to spend money when they perceive value. I just think a as a generalization, "value" is defined on a more "practical" basis than the general population. So it's not uncommon to see a well off Jew driving a mid-size or luxury vehicle (since in the car market, more money spent generally translates into substantive quality increase) while stocking their homes with store-brand food items and non-designer clothes. Anecdotal genarlities, of course, but that's been my observation.

I wasn't sure what it put out. I was actually branching off of the comment about the sweats and something about giving up on life? Or something like that. It was funny but I wondered how that applied to how I dress when I work out.

I hope that what it shows is that I am gonna kick my own a$$ and don't even think I can't kick yours. :evil: {at least that is what I am trying to put out when I am out alone walking the streets. While not the gym, you should see how many people there are out there walking in all different types of attire. I have a gym in my garage so the only other gym I go to is while traveling. And those people are normally guys who are dressed like me, casually.}

I try sooo hard not to sweat. If I start to feel as if I am going to perspire, I get in front of a fan. I do not wait until I am already stinky and sweaty so that the person behind me gets all of my stink. :D

Was that TMI? Sorry. But, know if you ever do work out with me, you won't have to smell me. :)

You sooooo crack me up MW. :snap:

: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...

Hmm. I saw this line of shirts a few months ago. The Bambi one wasn't there at the time, what I remember is some shirts with some very cool vintage designs and very high price tags. The material was flimsy and thin and nothing I would wear but I knew they weren't made with me in mind anyway. They were interesting to look at so I did and moved on.

On a later visit I saw the Bambi shirt and noticed they had made more of a little vintage display area with a chandelier and other accessories and it looked pretty cool. The shirts were still way overpriced but I liked seeing something different. I consider shopping to be entertainment and I'm entertained by seeing something different or creative or just weird even it's nothing I'd ever want.

No one's being forced to spend money on these shirts. If someone wants to, fine. If they don't sell they'll be gone in no time, retail floor space is much too valuable.


However, if Paris Hilton shows up anywhere wearing one I think they should torch the entire collection.:eek:

To those commenting on my quest for opinions:

LOL No, I don't think someone who goes to work out in sweats has given up on life. But, the quote made me want to ask, in this thread of fashion, what were peoples' opinions on sportswear and what people think of people in different types of it. I probably was vague but I have been noticing other people a lot more {walking alone gives me too much time to notice too many things} and wonder what others think.

Not that it matters but a lot of times you can look at someone and sort of gauge what they are thinking. But, in this, I really didn't.

I get the point that what is worth a certain amount may not be worth that to someone else. I like to go to concerts, Disneyland and Yosemite. People think I spend too much by going too often. They don't see the value of spending time in those places so often. Or seeing the bands I want. But I do.

Oh, and BTD, I imagine you working out hard and I doubt if you care if anyone doesn't like what you wear!! :snap:

GD had a fantastic response to this.

Personally, my parents were cheap, but terrible with money, and always broke. The only reason I used "Jew" in my post was because I thought GD was making a Jewish joke about being thrifty....didn't realize it was because it was a Xmas ornament. :blush: That's what I get for trying to power through the thread during my break...

Becasue sometime you are paying for a name, a connection to the actual artist, hence all the business with "certificates of authenticity." Sometime we only accept art or fashion if it is made by a specific artist/designer.

This is kind of what I was getting at earlier with my reference to Marcel Duchamp - but I'm betting you don't appreciate dada either. As an artist, he has the power of making something art simply by assertion. You or I generally lack that power (though many of us on these boards have considerable power of decalring "swank").

A forgery may be nice, but sometimes we want the connection to the artist designer maikng it authentic. There may be no basis in logic, it may be delusional having no basis in reality (assuming there is some objective "beauty" to which to measure things by). Yet the distinction is real if we believe it so - and so we do make a big deal about lables, signatures, and scholarly assessments that assert authentic art or fashion.

To go on a bit about fashion, often the big designers are taking their inspiration from the street. The pull out what resonates with them and repackage it for their public. Your bedazzler design may not command much on the open market, but Fred Segal stealling your idea and churning out designer versions will - becasue after all he is "authentic."

Google is making me think it came from a Seinfeld episode

Jerry to George:
"You know the message you're sending out to the world with these sweat pants? You're telling the world: 'I give up. I can't compete in normal society. I'm miserable, so I might as well be comfortable.'"

Seinfeld "The Pilot"

But, that's not it.

I'm not saying that this isn't or shouldn't be the case, just that it is the point where I get left behind. The person behind the art, or clothes, or architecture, or novels is almost completely irrelevant to me. When I make recommendations or suggestions on such things I almost never recommend a person but rather specific pieces.

I'm sure this also feeds into why I don't collect anything since I don't get a feeling of connection with a person through possession of objects.

If name alone makes something more valuable to you then I certainly have no problem with it, I just don't understand it. Especially with factory "artists" where the limit of their involvement was likely signing off on sketches.

But me not understanding why someone would pay $100 for a t-shirt is not the same as me condemning it. Even if in less serious moments I mock it (as I do people who watch Joey; even though I mock I don't really care).

This ia one step removed from label-worship ... but I have two Disneyland attraction posters. One is a Haunted Mansion reproduction, and the other is an Adventure thru Inner Space original (complete with, ahem, certificate of authenticity). They both look really good. But they are not the same animal.

The one that really hung somewhere in Disneyland at some point in time is precious to me. It has an imaginary connection that (with it being an inanimate object and all) exists only in my head, but I cannot "pretend" the same thing about the fake one.


I would have said the same thing about labels as Alex, when it comes to apparel. But I seem to have something going on when it comes to memorabilia. It was worth more money to me to have something with an actual connection that I could wrap my imagination around.

For some it's watches, for others it's art, still others it's clothes. Most of us probably have some area in which we place value on an intangible.

Absolutely. But I don't want to leave my debt behind for the people who outlive me. So I try to hit a balance between managing debt and enjoying some comforts; we just don't have the resources to enjoy all creature comforts. A $60 dress from Torrid now and then, maybe. Designer? Not on your life, not if it means that I have to use a credit card.

{Quoting:Alex Stroup}
But me not understanding why someone would pay $100 for a t-shirt is not the same as me condemning it. Even if in less serious moments I mock it (as I do people who watch Joey; even though I mock I don't really care).{end quote}

I've been mocked before for watching this show!!! Are you a curmudgeon???

Back to topic, sort of:

Knockoffs, copies. If it doesn't effect the performance, I go for it. But, we do the swapmeet a lot and I never buy their 'copies' of anything. Even little things. Mostly because I know they are not made to the same standards and will not last as long as I'd like and also I am concerned about what it is made of, normally also not to standards.

A lot of things the copy just won't do. If it is clothes, I do understand that a more well made dress will more often be made to fit better, lay better on the body, and move better when you walk. They often show in the fashion mags 'knock off's' and an outfit for up to a grand and here you can buy it for under $200. But, is the material the same? Will it really fit the same? And, you have to ask, does that matter?

For me, {back to topic} that t-shirt wouldn't work for me. I have other shirts the same material and I have found the lesser expensive thicker shirts look better on me. So, that is even more of a factor than the price. I have a $200 pair of jeans in my closet. If I don't eat for a while I can fit them. I think I'll eat and wear my $20 Levi's. :D

Thanks Lisa for the quote from Seinfield, I can hear him say it. And, I can hear Joey saying about the mocking 'Aw, come on!!!' then 'Hey, how YOU doin'?

Happy Friday!

I was just talking to my friend about this last night... When it comes to fashion, one of my biggest gripes is with Lane Bryant. One of my bestest friends, Mimi, is big, and she goes to LB to get her clothes. But they do not have enough styles out there. I see the same clothes on all these women. They need more options at their stores.

I can't recall the name of the store, sorry, but there is a store in our mall, I don't know if it is nationwide, that is sort of like a 'Hot Topic' in plus sizes. So cool. The clothes and accessories are all plus sized and they are cool.

Does anyone know of this? In San Diego it is at Plaza Bonita or Bonita Plaza, whatever you want to call it.

It's Torrid, the place LSPoorEeyorick mentioned in her above post. :)

I feel the need to reiterate that my reaction wasn't aimed at those who might purchase the items. It was a reaction to the setting and surrounding like-items, aimed at those that made the decission to sell them.

I'm sorry if I offended.

You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to Ghoulish Delight again.

Yes, it is all about balance. Saving is important, but so is living. We try to do both and make choices accordingly. I think one of our biggest financial pluses is that we live in a modest house and don't have an outrageous mortgage to tie us down. It's been, in retrospect, one of the best choices we have made. The thought of selling and moving into a bigger house/nicer neighborhood is great until we look at the house payments and what that would mean for our lives.

But, many deaths in my family and my own health issues have taught me a lot about how to live and what is really important in life.....friends, love and great experiences.

But sweating is one of the main points of working out. It's how your body gets rid of toxins. Fat is partially made of toxins, so the more you get rid of the better. I think it feels really awesome to work up a good sweat.

well, yes and no.
Lane Bryant cant decide who they are catering too.
THey used to be carrer minded. Within the last five years, they started aiming younger. So now, there's less out there for us career gals.
Lots of great clothes, but a little too low cut for the office.
Torrid, is cute, and great for clubbing, but again, not career. I think that as an industry, they dont think the plus sized women make up enough of a market.

Maybe. so off topic, but there you go.

Oh, thanks! I saw her post but I didn't make the connection.

GD~ I hear you, and, personally, no offense. {hee hee, of course, I wouldn't be one that would be, right?} But, it did create quite the conversation, right?

LSPE & NA~ I feel the same way about debt, on both of your accounts!!! I do want to live and enjoy myself. Life is too short. I do things on a smaller scale and I don't have such grand desires, that for which my family is grateful. :D

So, I keep the debt as low as I can while kicking up my heels. And, to touch on those funeral commercials about leaving your family in debt to cover one, I have told them that cemetaries are too crowded, cremate me. Don't come visit me but rather remember the good times we had.

I think I'll make a map of the country of places I want them to go and spread some of me. I saw this in a movie and it was an interesting road trip.

I know people who own a handful of houses and quite a bit of stock. But, how many of them are happy? The ones who go out and enjoy life.

So, while GD might feel he has offended people by his topic, I think, in this one moment, I again remember what it is all about. Not what shirts you have or how much $$ you have to spend on those shirts but rather, are you happy in your skin today? Have you told the one you love, who DIDN'T buy you the freakin' $40. shirt that you still love him and he rocks your world?

*argh* I need more coffee.....

Hmm, not really. Sweat is produced by your sweat glands just below your skin. It's water and saline. The sweat in the smellier areas has a little bit of protein and fatty acids. But all the ingredients come from the glands and from capilaries. You lose sodium through sweat (but the more you exercise, the less sodium you loose as your body adjusts to be more efficient), and it can keep your skin flushed pretty well, but that's about it.

I have heard this. I don't know how but maybe the fan dries it up before it gathers? I don't know. But, I lost a heck of a lot of weight without dripping in sweat. A little moist around the ponytail but that is about it.

Oh, but I do sweat while working in the yard. For some reason, that does feel good. Maybe because I can visually see what I have just accomplished where when I work out it took me a while to see it?

And, Torrid, it's true, doesn't have work clothes. But, it is nice that they have clothes that someone can where out. That will fit them. The cut is important and if it isn't made for plus sized it just doesn't look right.

Hmmm...I'm going to have to find a source, but I might disagree.

The idea of "sweating out toxins" is a very common one in the fringes of altnernative health and New Age healing but it is not an idea looked kindly upon in mainstream medical circles, mostly for the reason that GD mentions: there is no physical connection between your sweat glands and the organs your body uses to process toxins.

One of the more organized proponents of sweat detoxification through exercise and saunas is Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard was a big proponent of the idea and it plays a big role in the purifications programs at Scientology drug rehab centers where it is used to "detoxify" the body of the drugs faster. I don't care about the religious beliefs of Scientologists but in my view they don't get much actual science correct.

In the New Agier side of things "Infrared Saunas" are very popular but also have no evidence in support of their claims. The Broadcast Advertising Authority in the UK cited the Veraform Sauna Belt in 2005 for making unsupported claims of weight loss and detoxification through sweating. It specifically mentions that all medical evidence indicates sweat-related weight loss is temporary and is simply dehydration that is eventually replaced with water consumption.

Horses Sweat

Men Perspire

Women Glow :D

hehehehe. Thanks for getting my reference and upping the ante. ;)

Googling gave me articles to support both sides, with no actual evidence for either side. I did find this quote:

Most of those things can be found in the air. I don't think it's too far of a leap, however, to assume that since blood circulates through your entire body, that the blood could pick up toxins in the organs and leave them behind in the skin. Is it? I think I'll just leave it at, I like to sweat. When working out that is. When doing everyday tasks or just being outdoors it really annoys me.

Oddly enough, I also don't mind the smell of sweat, provided that it is standard sweat, and not super foul sweat. Too many years of sports medicine and dance, I suppose. Sort of like how manure smells good to people that live on a farm.

No work clothes?

No work clothes?

I wear this dress to work all the time. Of course, not with the hat or the wig or the obscenely false eyelashes, but I wear it nonetheless.



I am pretty well-dressed. I've been told this by many people, most notably in one of my co-worker's oh-so-enjoyable backhanded compliments. "You're such a snappy dresser! Most fat people aren't so good with clothes." Oh, THANK YOU for your GENEROUS and MAGANAMOUS compliment!

Larger women who aren't well-dressed? Well, they're not looking hard enough. Lane Bryant is not the only store available. There are several other stores and department stores that offer plus-sizes that are very well-cut. Macy's among them. And Torrid... most of what I buy anymore comes from Torrid, and they're popping up everywhere now. (They ought to be, with the percentage of people in the country who are overweight.) You just have to look beyond the wall-o-punk to find the cute work-appropriate attire.

I'm going to disagree with you on the LB front anyway, GC. Their attire moves in and out at a quick rate and I feel like there's plenty to choose from. I could say the same thing about frat boys. Those frat boys and their Abercrombie shirts. Can't they buy shirts with a little variety now and then?