Hacker News Reader

Comment by kazen44 | Hacker News Reader

The collapse of the fashion industry does not mean the clothing industry will collapse.

People still need clothing obviously (cheap and of good quality preferably).

Also, what do we consider the fashion industry exactly? Most long term clothing trends seem to be dictated by a couple of factors. Consisting of:

- practicality. Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time.

- cultural "requirement": clothing that is required to fit into social circles. The shirt would be a good example of this, aswell as the tie.

- Enviromental requirements: This one should be obvious ofcourse, No one wears a wool jacket in abu dabi.

Fast fashion and the fashion industry as a whole seems incredibly wasteful to me. Buying new clothing because of yearly trends is way to damaging to the enviroment for what it's worth.

View on HN

(All comments on culture US centric) - This thinking is why the men’s section is 1/4 as large as the women’s in most stores. Culturally for men clothing is supposed to be above all practical. There are 5 genres of men’s clothes - business (pressed shirts, suits), casual, workout, skater, and comfort (hoodie).

Contrast this with the women’s section. Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality. There are all sorts of “impractical” cuts, flairs, colors, layers to choose from. There’s a shoe for every occasion. You can get dramatically different fabrics, feels, and touches. Not even going into accessories.

There is certainly a sea change happening in fashion retail, but it’s more that like everything else it’s accelerating things that are already going on. People were trending less formal almost everywhere in the workplace, except NYC, SF and LA (or in high touch industries like real estate or law). Your H&Ms are best positioned to survive, where everyone already knows that Macy’s is on its last legs.

> There are 5 genres of men’s clothes - business (pressed shirts, suits), casual, workout, skater, and comfort (hoodie).

There’s quite a bit of variation within those. Where I live, “casual” these days is usually something like Columbia PFG - the epitome of “dad clothes”, as my wife tells me. I tend to wear that pretty much exclusively. I substitute jeans for the shorts in winter and buy a new leather jacket about every 3-5 years. I pass my old one on to someone else.

Your point stands, though. As a man, my clothes are 100% based on practicality, and I often only discard them when they’re too worn to be presentable.

Here are some examples of women’s clothing where I cannot think of the equivalent thing in a men’s clothing department:

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1AawYy29TBuNjy0Fcq6zeiFXaW/Off...

https://patternshub.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Tube-top-...

http://images.asos-media.com/products/asos-cut-out-sleeve-on...

https://cdn.tobi.com/product_images/lg/1/teal-kayla-ombre-ma...

(That last one is a bit of a cheat because manufacturers are starting to produce rompers for men).

sure you can. its never that hard.

https://a.suitsupplycdn.com/image/upload/b_rgb:efefef,bo_100...

To me all of these are the same: clothing to show off. I think the make equivalent would be a suit. Or alternatively, an incredibly toned body, but I don't think they sell that.

What do you mean by "equivalent"? That last sentence makes it sounds like you mean clothes in the same pattern but cut to fit male bodies.

Men's fashion currently has no mainstream style that shows off athleticism. Sleeveless crop-tops, with abs and shoulders on display! Shorts with flare for muscular thighs, allowing them to be shorter! Semi-sheer panels, allowing for pecs to bulge! Mesh sections in pants! What's wrong with men showing a little skin for once?

Not exactly the same thing, but at least where I live, going shirtless is a pretty common way for athletic men to show that off. Obviously not in the office, but it's very socially acceptable to jog, play basketball, sit on a park bench, or grill shirtless. People then build the rest of an outfit/look around that as a core component. There's a certain amount of explicit catering to that in a section of men's fashion too, judging by their model shoots.

What men are you seeing? Buff shirtless men in 3” inseam shorts and a bulging groin are a staple of every American city in the summer. I see more and more mesh clothing in this heat, although I do live by west hollywood.

You can sort of get there with tank tops and running shorts. But you do tend to look like you just got back from or are going to a workout.

The male equivalent of those styles can be found in the realm of gay fashion.

Not really. Are you thinking this through, or just making some kind of lazy "women's clothes = gay" connection? Most revealing/sexy clothes for men are much more casual than these styles.

I will tell you my thinking, and you can decide whether to call it 'lazy'. The styles are 'revealing/sexy'. There exist clothes for men that fit that description, but they are less popular. Because they send out a message most men don't want to be sending out. (I guess most women don't either, at least not all the time.)

Nah, mate, the equivalent is found in the realm of high male fashion [0][1]. High fashion != gay.

[0] https://www.rickowens.eu/ as an example

[1] https://theshopyohjiyamamoto.com/shop/r/r10/?h1_text_prm=Yoh...

Really? It's not clear if you mean equivalent in the sense of showing as much skin or for wearing in similar circumstances.

But here are some things I think are equivalentish..

https://www.asos.com/au/asos-design/asos-design-regular-fit-...

https://www.asos.com/au/one-above-another/one-above-another-...

https://www.asos.com/au/asos-design/asos-design-t-shirt-in-b...

Between business and casual, there's definitely "business casual" which is pretty standard uniform for many business people these days--think khakis + button down for men and either boating shoes or loafers of some sort. Which is very closely related to a lot of "preppy" outfits going back to the 80s. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Official_Preppy_Handbook

This kind of thinking is why I tend to buy as close to a full years worth of clothing whenever I make a trip out to Tokyo. Even in Chicago relatively fashionable men's clothing shops are few and far between

What do you find so interesting and where do you shop? I like Uniqlo and Muji but now that Uniqlo is available (in-store) in Chicago theres no need to buy it in Japan. I’m not particularly into fashion but I like mainstream but trendy clothes.

I think Japanese fashion is less about the clothes themselves than the acceptance to let people wear what they want and and not judging. I think it’s more acceptable to match different colors and styles.

One strap shoulder Man-bags are all the rage. They are pretty practical, especially when you can’t fit your checkbook-sized wallet in tiny pockets. But in the US it looks like you’re wearing a fanny pack.

If you saw someone wearing an all yellow track suit it would look OK, partly because someone wearing an all green version is 20 feet away.

Or business slacks tapered and cropped above the ankle — in the US they’d ask, “is there a flood?”

While the clothes themselves don’t seem much different, I prefer slimmer cuts. The US is too baggy and loose.

not op but brands like visvim are way more affordable if you are in Japan. Less expensive brands like OrSlow or TCB are also more affordable in Japan (there is a wealth of fashion brands in that country).

>I think Japanese fashion is less about the clothes themselves than the acceptance to let people wear what they want and and not judging.

In my experience this mostly applies if you are young. At a certain age you are more or less expected to start fitting in the mold.

I actually rarely shop at Uniqlo unless I'm getting something like underwear or socks. The style is better than Old Navy but I wouldn't say that much better.

Usually I go through Harajuku (excluding Takeshita-dori), Shibuya, Omotesando, and Shinjuku and go through the various stores. Especially in Harajuku stores tend to close constantly and are replaced, but theres always something good to find.

Especially true in SE Asia. I resisted the trend because it looks effeminate, like you're wearing a purse. Asian guys love them because they're super practical if you ride a motorbike or scooter tandem style. I think it works better for more masculine types to go for a bigger bag. I have a black Crumpler bicycle messenger bag (not super big, just a normal-sized bike messenger bag) and it works great for me down here.

Not effeminate at all. Look up reporter bags, smaller than a messenger bag. Classy, not effeminate. Mostly older men wear them in the UK (I’m on my third) whereas the younger men wear cross-body sports-type bags. Most majors make them. I can completely under the rise because of the increase in phone size. Phone + wallet + headphones + tissues, sanitizers, and a mini Fulton umbrella. Then I’m set :)

Well, I know what a reporter bag is but that's not what I'm talking about. I didn't describe it very well. Usually they're "fanny pack" size, but with a shoulder strap. Very popular in the Philippines, for instance. Not worn so much as a fashion statement, but more as an anti-theft contingency when travelling in crowded spaces or public transportation because they are small enough to swing around and wear the bag across your chest.

I think I know what you mean - the cross-body bags. Do they run diagonal with the bag somewhere across the chest? They're popular among teenage males in the UK these days.

as an expat living in SE Asia (KL) I think it is because masculinity is not defined by ones clothing here. I mean, you are a masculine he-man if you have a good business, if you have big family, but the clothes you wear are no more about your masculinity than your phone wallpaper is.

This is probably also because so many clothes are made here, its demystified.

A bit late to the party and almost apropos a separate topic, but Hong Kong billionaire Jimmy Lai rocks Addidas trackies with a shirt and sports jacket: https://www.abc.net.au/cm/rimage/12541694-3x2-xlarge.jpg (via https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-10/why-chinas-arrest-of-...)

I think the one strap shoulder bag also is more comfortable when it is extremely hot and humid: a backpack would make your entire back soaked in sweat.

Yes! I'm in the Philippines and I can't bear to wear a backpack down here at sea level, in the tropics...maybe in the mountains, but not for everyday use.

> I resisted the trend because it looks effeminate

To be honest, it seems that in the most of US, merely being stylish is perceived as "effeminate" (for a man).

Not only in the US, that is pretty typical for the whole American continent, even worse in Latin America as it's seen as a "gay" trait to be into fashion.

As a straight man who is into fashion for quite a few years now and who moved out of Brazil to Sweden: that culture is pretty stupid, I feel so much better and more myself when I'm able to express my personality with my clothes without the fear of being judged by someone's else prejudice... Even better that it's a common thing in Western Europe for people to be more fashionable.

I've bought some pieces that are pretty bold, I love some avant-garde male fashion pieces and being able to wear that without people batting an eye (and even getting random compliments) makes me feel pretty good, hope the Americas can get to this point because it's a very toxic masculinity trait for a whole continent to have and perpetuate.

Is it very different in Sweden than the Americas?

I'm a Norwegian guy, and I love how tolerant we turned weirdly quickly. Even the anti-abortion Christian™ Party walks in the Pride parade now.

Frankly I think most people here would still think of the random guy in a dress as non-straight, but since "nobody" cares about that here anymore, nobody cares about clothing in a negative way either.

A guy in a dress seems like a strange example. Outside of drag, it's not common to see guys wearing dresses (gay or straight).

Highwaters are in in the US, too, at least judging by what basketball players wear to the NBA draft

> One strap shoulder Man-bags are all the rage.

Tote-bags also work, I've started using one for the last two summers.

In Romania we used to call them "sacoșă" back in communist times, and almost everyone used to have one in hand while going around town, you never knew what store could you stumble upon which might have brought in fresh supplies, in which case of course that you needed a "sacoșă" to carry back home the stuff that you purchased from there. I think that was a common sight in other communist countries too, that's why the Tiananmen guy actually had not one but two "sacoșe" in his hands while confronting those tanks (I'm curious what the term for "sacoșă" is in Chinese).

Unfortunately the late 1990s-early-2000s saw that phenomenon disappear, as the new middle classes used their newly purchased cars to bring stuff home from the super-market while "sacoșe" were "relegated" to old pensioners, but fortunately they made a comeback re-baptised as hipsterish and trendy tote-bags.

On the Europe side of the map, I find the same practicality in clothes when I shop from Finland. They too have all the brands one expects to see, but Finnish people (please any Finn comment/suggest) are super practical when it comes to clothing. Finns and Danes are my idols on simplicity, practicality and a hint of elegance.

> Finns and Danes are my idols on simplicity, practicality and a hint of elegance.

Jesus... I never thought I'd ever read that Finns could be someone's idols when it comes to elegance. But if you fancy wearing sports overwear [0] fitted in your rubber boots, after all...

----

[0] don't forget to buy the exact same model for your partner, and wear it at the same time, if you want to pass as a true Finnish couple.

Not sure why this is being downvoted: Finns themselves joke about having no fashion sense, and the stereotypes is guys in sweatpants with a flask of vodka in the back pocket and women with no makeup. Things have improved over the last 20 years, but the contrast to Russia in particular is very noticeable.

These both seem to be stereotypes from decades ago when USSR was still a threat.

If you keep up with current events you might have noticed that Finland has become a prominent country in the worldside design and fashion world.

I for example have never heard of this kind of joke being said or written anywhere.

What, you've never heard of the "tuulipuku?" That piece of clothing defined the 90's in Finland.

Check my other comment, I do recognize tuulipuku as exactly the style of 90s Finland. The 90s was 30 years ago.

As much as I like Finns I will say that in the Nordics the stylish scale for me goes: Sweden - Denmark - Norway - Finland. Not sure where I would put Icelandic fashion sense in there as I had very little contact with Icelandics living here in Sweden.

Yes, most likely your scale is based on the pieces of media that you received when you grew up, and not what is actually happening.

For example the Aalto University in Finland is currently one of the best ranked universities for art, design and fashion. None of the other nordic countries are even in the top ten. Sweden is not even in the top 25.

I'm not talking about fashion production and designers but how people in general dress in their day-to-day in the big cities.

That is a pretty different picture than the academics side of fashion...

Okay, well then you can just open up HEL LOOKS (Helsinki looks) and get a glimpse of the huge amount of different styles, designer clothing and use of vintage garments that is going on in the streets of Helsinki right now. -->https://www.hel-looks.com/20200603_10/

Like I said, there is a lot of objective evidence to point to the contrary of what you are purporting. But hey, up to you if you want to beleive it or not.

I usually work for mega-large corporations and I have been for the past 15-20 years. How can I phrase it... I HATE wearing suite & tie. I work from home in any chance I get, I dislike the 'uniform', and I prefer casual/sport/comfortable clothing. This is why I like Finns.. they don't give a crap about 'norms'. The go for comfort, whatever feels good, and rock on!

Im not sure what you mean here.

I think you would do well to seperate the clothing/availability of the capital Helsinki, vs. rest of Finland.

Yes, outside of Helsinki and with the older population clothing is very utilitarian and wind-resistant sportsy clothing worn all round the year is common. The biggest seller of clothing items in Finland nationally is a supermarket chain.

Also, out in the countryside, many, many people simply wear workwear most of the day, even after work. It's much higher quality than the cheap garments available in stores like Prisma or Tokmanni.

Depends what you’re looking for, but there are some pretty good boutique shops like notre and gallery aesthete. those cater to pretty particular styles though.

there are tons more than 5 styles for guys (workwear, techwear, superfuture, dark, etc) but strongly agree that there are enormous differences in male vs female clothing trends.

Male fashion is on something like a 10 years cycle and you can find tons of brands focusing on quality or durability.

Female fashion seems to obsess about the latest trend and change dramatically every 3-months to a year.

Probably lots of cultural bias there, not sure how much this applies in all countries.

I kinda hope that fast fashion is not what's going to survive, between ecology and employment practices, they are not really my favorite.

I've always believed that the pants are almost meaningless, it's the shirts that need to be different daily.

So I used to have 8 pairs of pants, 2 colours total. Black and beige. Then, once a year, I'd go buy 2 more pairs of each colour. On a 'bad' year, I'd buy 4 pairs. EG, I'd rotate the worn out, always only having 8 pairs.

This persisted until, 20 years later, the company that sold them went bankrupt. As my gut and ass had literally grown to into the form / shape of these pants, drooping and expanding to perfectly fill these specific pants, no other pants I tried seemed even remotely comfortable. Or to even fit well!

So I tried to find the company that made them... note, this was very early internet, and I had to go old-school. Finally called the trustees handling the bankruptcy, eventually found out where the pants were made, called them, and?

It was in Mexico, and they made custom for a variety of retailers. And none were left, no matter how I begged.

Two things:

1) Don't wear the same pants for 20-30 years, while you gain your middle-age gut and ass. Just don't.

2) Always have a pants fallback plan.

You can probably change #1 in about a year. Maybe 1 hour a day of work.

As one data point, I am pretty tall, relatively slim but do exercise. Good fitting shirts in casual chic styles are extremely easy to find, but pants are very hard (and it seems to be the same for most people).

> As my gut and ass had literally grown to into the form / shape of these pants

It sounds a lot like you are wearing clothes that are too small for you :)

Regardless, I would be very surprised if there were no equivalent. There are even many brands dedicated to reproduce old garments (off the top of my head, TCB denim does that for jeans)

> Don't wear the same pants for 20-30 years, while you gain your middle-age gut and ass. Just don't.

I'm 60 and absolutely fine with the same sizes and basically the same cuts that I've worn for more than 40 years. If something starts squeezing, it's a timely reminder that I need to adjust some behaviour, not a signal to give in and upscale my wardrobe.

I've been out of high school for 35 years, and I still wear the same W/L jeans size I did then.

You can always get custom-tailored clothing. If it's that big a deal, it's not that expensive. Especially in Asia but, again, if it's a big deal...

Weird reading this in a country where pants = underwear.

> while you gain your middle-age gut and ass

The problem isn't the pants, its your lack of fitness. You act like becoming overweight in middle-age is an acceptable thing.

> Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality

This is not where I expected to see the "personality" euphemism today.

Now I’m feeling stupid. What is personality a euphemism for?

The implication is that women are expressing their looks as much as their personality.

However, the two are connected; how one's personality is perceived is dependent on one's looks. If you want people to value your personality, best to exercise regularly, dress well, and keep up with proper grooming.

>Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality.

Personality is expressed through choice of cut, material, and color of cloth?

People definitely attempt to do so, and sometimes do so subconsciously. Some people dress for how they want to be seen or aspire to be, others dress as a reflection of their environment, including those they associate with, and that sometimes reflects the prevailing attitude and beliefs of that group (and sometimes not).

A simple example of this might be a haircut. Whether accurate or not, a mohawk often signals something to other people (and sometimes signals something the person that wears it, like "I may be ties down with more responsibilities, but I won't let that define me").

I like to think most my clothing choices are made because of practical matters such as comfort and fit, but even within my normal range of jeans to shorts and t-shirts to polo shirts (and maybe the less formal button-up shirt), there's definitely things that fit that criteria that don't feel like they fit how I think of myself. And that's as a man, where I think expectations to do with style and clothing are much simpler.

Don't be dense. Whether you admit it or not, most people judge others based on appearance.

Don't be denser, judging others by their appereance is shallow. The fact that people still do it doesn't mean that when you change your clothes that's any kind of expression proper.

It's just a cheap way to signal something that you might or might not be, and only superficially at that.

You use "cheap" as a pejorative, but it's actually a positive. By signaling that you are X, or believe yourself to be X, (where X can be anything - gender, hobbies, wealth, social class whatever) you gain the interest of everyone who is seeking X without needing to speak to them. And save the time of everyone who isn't interested in X. It's a cheap, efficient way to filter people. Is it perfect? Heck no. But humans are often happy to sacrifice accuracy for speed.

People are shallow. And cheap signalling is best signalling, no reason to be wasteful.

Yes, don't treat people badly (mostly) because of the way they look.

But be realistic. Someone that wears all black has made a choice just like the person that is always fashionable with lots of clothing. Some beard and hairstyles take more work than others. These are lifestyle choices people make. Someone knowing how to do 20 hairstyles to get their hair off of their neck decided to learn that instead of something else. A man with a complicated beard style probably spends some time daily on it to keep it up. A person with nails half the length of the fingers they are attached to probably eshews some practical things simply because the nails are in the way. A person that wears traditional clothing due to religion probably isn't a good candidate to date me.

I understand that being poor might make it so you don't have a lot of choices in these things. I've been there: My look was basically whatever I was forced to wear to work and whatever I could find at thrift stores. At the end of the day, though, I still had choice -and to discount what these choices tell others about you is, in itself, dense - as is discounting that humanity often makes snap judgements based entirely on how things look.

What's a good way to judge people?

I don't get how it works either, but yes, 100%.

Some companies work hard at convincing the customers that the best venue for expressing their individual personality traits are mass-produced designs of those specific companies (e.g. Hot Topic, Forever 21).

For what it's worth, they develop a loyal following.

Yes, it is. Just like you have a taste in music, doesn't music express your personality somehow? It's all a matter of notes, timing and timbre.

The same with clothes: the choice of textures say something about you, the choice of cuts say something, the choice of colour the same. The thing is: the clothes you wear need to resonate with you to become part of your expression.

It's not that your clothes = your personality, but the choices you've done consciously will tell someone else about you, the same as looking around your book shelves at home. The thing is: you need to care about you are wearing for it to become something expressive.

With my clothes I can signal a lot of stuff to others that are into the same things I am, I can signal hobbies, I can signal that I care about a particular type of material or cut, and so on.

If not then you are just being practical and wearing what is expected from you, nothing wrong with that but don't judge and put others down because they take this more into consideration than you do.

What is the correct way to express personality in your view?

> This thinking is why the men’s section is 1/4 as large as the women’s in most stores.

This is so true, and it annoys me for reasons I'll mention later.

> Contrast this with the women’s section. Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality.

I'm a young man, but I also like to express myself by dressing a certain way, which is why I'm especially disappointed when literally three whole floors of a relatively mid-high-end department store are dedicated to women's fashion, while half a floor is dedicated to men's.

I enjoy shopping for clothes in person - this way I can feel the clothing I'm actually going to put on, I can try different sizes on, see how it looks with my jacket, etc. So it also annoys me when a greater variety of men's fashion is found online, where I can't observe the physical quality of the clothes I'm about to buy, making it a hit-or-miss in most cases.

As someone who doesn't want to pour resources into a fruitless arms race, I'm glad that a supergovernmental system has unilaterally enacted arms control. ;)

There is serious value to being perceived as you want to be though! It’s not really fruitless, nor an arms race.

The problem is that the perception is relative, not absolute. As soon as more than a few people on the fringe start chasing it, the average will move up, causing a Red Queen scenario. Victorian court dress is a ready example of what happens when economics and social norms fail to restrain appearance arms races.

Yes, but men’s fashion cycles run far longer than women, so we can buy higher quality clothing that lasts much longer. This also means custom clothing is very practical. I deal with a guy, his family has a factory in India. All the grades of fabric, styles, etc, all made custom based on my measurements. A few weeks later, it arrives. Most comfortable clothing available, and looks killer. He travels to me, or I go to his shop. Far better experience than retail and prices are less than off the rack and better quality.

Women’s fashions are much shorter cycle, so they are often made with terrible quality fabrics that are quite uncomfortable. Worse, custom clothing is very expensive and by time it arrives, the season is changing.

You get custom made clothing cheaper than store clothing? That doesn't seem to be the norm pricing wise.

Hmm its possible. In India I bought stitched suit for ~350$, and store bought for ~100. The tailor was best in class (two extremely well dressed men who probably made more money than me took multiple measurements and I had to go to the store three times), the cloth was best in class too. But on the other hand I bough tailored work pants for ~7$, and store bought for ~15. This tailor while talented, ran a poor mans store, even his best cloth lacked a little in elegance. I am just telling you my experience, you can guess though that one could find someone in India who can tailor the perfect cloths for you at a price that beats "some" store cloths.

> You get custom made clothing cheaper than store clothing?

If you get it made in India or Asia this is the norm.

Long sleeved shirts from a good tailor in Saigon or Bangkok are 15-25 EUR p.P. for the tailoring. Then add 3-20 EUR for fabric – depending on what material you choose.

Once the tailor has your measurements on file you can either send your fabric of choice there and have the shirts be in your mail three weeks later or they send you pictures of fabrics they stock and you choose.

20% of my shirts are off-the-shelf (but all of them have been adjusted to fit me bette). The rest are tailor made.

100% of my trousers are tailor made. I never understood why any sane man would pay for pants that are pants (pun intended). Too tight, too low waist and too short at the ankles. It makes you look like you are the younger sibling from a poor family who inherited the clothes from the elder, taller brother. And you even paid for that eye-cancer-inducing disaster. ;)

I have a tailor in Berlin who charges 70 EUR for tailoring a pair of trousers. With fabric that means I pay less than 100 EUR usually. Which is totally competitive with off the shelf pricing. He charges 40 EUR for a new cut. Aka: if I show him a picture of a cut or photo he will make it for my measurements. This is a one-time cost though.

As an added plus I have extra pockets for change/coins and invisible pockets under the belt line which are great to stash anything pointy that will distort the shape of your leg if put into the normal pants (I e.g. put my keychain there when I go dancing tango).

And the craftsmanship (seam look/quality/longevity) is superior to anything I can buy off the shelf. Even expensive brands are commonly produced with lower quality nowadays. You pay for the better material and the brand but the seams and button stitching are still sub par.

Where can i find such a good tailor? PM please, both the indian and the berlin one if possible.

If you get the PM please share

My Berlin tailor is Vianko Mode[1]. Don't be fooled by the chaotic look of the place. :)

The owner is a bit all over the place but the work he does is outstanding. Also for ladies. If you need a tailored evening dress or costume: this is the guy.

Make sure he writes down any instructions and after agreeing for some pieces, you confirm them again yourself with him, written, by WhatsApp.

My Bangkok tailor is Dino Suits[2].

Dino is one of the few real tailors in Bangkok. Most 'tailors' there are just fronts for tourists that sell fabric with a suit pattern that gets adjusted to your body. That's a pattern of /their/ choice "made to measure" which is not the same as a pattern of /your/ choice "tailored".

Usually it's a sweatshop in the countryside doing the labor. In that place you have a 1-2 dozen half-trained people doing the grunt work and 1-2 real tailors checking on them/doing the occasional difficult section. That's why they can only do the one pattern.

Dino is known in Bangkok because if one of these other 'tailors' fucks up the last resort to fixing/saving a piece is often Dino. ;)

This is always a good litmus test for a new 'tailor'. Ask if you can bring your own fabric and ask if you can bring your own pattern. If either is a no look for another, real tailor.

In Asia/India in general: if you want a jacket w/o padding in the shoulders (Napoletanean style/pagoda shoulders) be sure to bring a well fitting (better: fitted/tailored) sample jacket from home for them to copy from.

[1] https://goo.gl/maps/cGaepP3FWYGdMWE37

[2] https://goo.gl/maps/oSuJi8KhtNM5snU36

It is, if you choose average fabrics like the department store. You can choose the highest end fabrics and you can easily spend thousands on a suit. Retail margins on clothing are outrageously high and obviously use average quality fabrics. However, after their costs of running the store, discounting/liquidating rack items haven’t moved, their operating profit isn’t very high. Custom menswear operations don’t have this waste hitting their bottom line.

What about Men's work clothes? Heavy-duty stuff. Like a lot of Duluth Trading Co. clothing. I'm not sure these fit into your categories. I also feel your skater/comfort don't seem different enough. At least, I can imagine skaters wearing hoodies commonly.

To me those fall more into a "uniform". I admit I didn't really think of that in terms of "fashion", but its true that many wear a ton of carhardt and not much else. But it does tend to be hoodies and the like.

Then again, what woman section misses is the comfortable practical stuff.

You are mostly correct.

I'm female, and want to wear simple clothing. Black pants, black shirt. Short sleeve in summer, long sleeve in winter plus or minus a basic sweater or two. Sometimes, these aren't available or aren't available in black, so I often wind up wearing simply jeans and a t-shirt.

I'd rather not have frills, though I can occasionally tolerate zippers.

I'd really like pockets that have space for things: I used to wear men's pants when I was younger and I gotta say, I've considered switching back. I wish they fit better because the pockets are glorious. (Men's shirts don't fit well at all since they aren't made for breasts).

I can usually find non-athletic shoes in black, but it gets much more difficult to find black or mostly black athletic-style shoes.

I think there will always be a discrepancy. Same with the beauty industry that failed to attract men proportionally. It grows for men, but not to a degree some articles would suggest year after year. Doesn't work anyway, look at people above 60 and the men don't look worse than women.

Nobody wants to look bad, but there are different degrees of effort people put into it.

That aside, I think retail will still suffer greatly compared to online sales since most have a service to send back clothing for free.

> People were trending less formal almost everywhere in the workplace, except NYC, SF and LA (or in high touch industries like real estate or law).

Sorry if this comes across as nitpicking but I'm curious what makes you think SF remains formal outside of high touch industries? AFAIK tech is the biggest industry in SF and formal clothes are far from expected there, you would not look out of place in a hoodie and shorts in an SF tech office (or even in some reasonably nice restaurants). In most tech offices you'd look like a bit of a weirdo dressed any more formal than business casual.

You're so confident about this.

> There are 5 genres of men’s clothes - business (pressed shirts, suits), casual, workout, skater, and comfort (hoodie).

Only 5 of them and one of them includes "skater"? I mention confidence because you name them off with some authority when it looks like it should be "There are 5 categories of men's clothing for me".

You leave off streetwear [1] which is a gigantic category in men's clothing and reinforces the personal / arbitrary nature of the list.

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetwear

Not only is streetwear missing, but so are preppy styles. I really can't think of many women's "genres" which lack a male counterpart.

Not speaking for the parent commenter, but I imagine "casual" as roughly the same range as "preppy" - not formal, but not sweats or tshirts.

Also, while they used the term "skater" (which I also find oddly specific) I think "streetwear" would be a better label. This would cover more specific styles like "skater" as well as other types of streetwear.

As a disclaimer, I know next to nothing about fashion and am just going on my own limited perception of broad categories.

Agree, streetwear would be a better term. Its more of my upbringing where kids who didn't dress in one of the other ways tended to go to stores like pacsun, zumiez, vans etc which prominently featured skating as a lifestyle.

The list also missed formalware which, I assume, is still a thing.

Intent is business/formalware is under same umbrella (you're wearing a suit of some type)

I suppose it depends on what exactly you mean by "preppy" - but if it's stuff like cargo pants, I would argue that it should fall into the comfort segment.

About half of my daily wardrobe is stuff that's advertised as "tactical", but the reason why I actually wear it is because it's comfortable (relaxed fit, stretchy fabric where needed etc), and because it has plenty of large pockets to carry all the gadgets and random items.

It is arbitrary, and not fully accurate, but was trying to get the point across that there's relatively few cuts and overall styles to choose from in most major department stores. I claim no authority, I'm just a person on the internet making an observation.

I still hold that men's clothing is more like the menu at taco bell, whereas womens clothing covers both much more nuance and opportunity for expressiveness. Mens styles are broadly muted in contrast. More than happy to argue that point!

Nah, dude. The only reason you think there’s “no nuance” is because you haven’t invested the time to learn and research male fashion. And that’s OK! Fashion and being stylish is a hobby like that requires time, energy and money. Not everyone has those or wants to spend them on fashion.

> Women have an expectation to express themselves and their personality.

I think that men have the same expectation. What's different is: Men are working with a relatively stable means of expression. They're working with clothes that are naturally more multi-season (both in terms of utility and in terms of aesthetic norms.) And it's more socially acceptable - even required in some contexts - for them to wear basically the same thing every day.

Whereas women are expected to take part in a sartorial red queen's race where everything is changing so rapidly that the statement you make by wearing a particular piece of clothing in summer 2018 might be markedly different from the statement you make by wearing it in winter 2019 or summer 2020, so it only serves to express your personality in the way you intend for a desperately short span of time. Worse, even within summer 2018 it might make one statement on June 18, and a completely different statement if you dare to wear it on June 25, because, even if nobody at your office actually will notice and judge you for wearing the same outfit on two consecutive Mondays, you've likely been conditioned to expect it to happen.

Also: Men have a narrower range of acceptable expressions

So very true. My only excuse for failing to even think of that point is that I'm so accustomed - inured, really - to men having a narrower range of acceptable personalities.

Just wear a hat in 2020.

The amount of online discussions I have seen for a single item in male fashion makes me think nothing is ever simple.

I mean I'm not disagreeing with your overall premise but I think you are ignoring other categories: street wear, club wear, and just plain uniforms for service workers.

> Buying new clothing because of yearly trends is way to damaging to the environment for what it's worth.

I read this as I rock along on my Thinkpad x200 and read it on a forum where people regularly defend the use of electron apps and gush over the latest sumptuous macbooks with gobs of memory.

"But, but, I need those for my work"

And so might these people who buy clothes because of yearly trends.

"But that's different!"

No, it's not.

It's not up to me to say anyone shouldn't enjoy your latest laptop, but I think it's good to realise that the large majority of people who work in software are in a precarious position to be handing out edicts about what should and shouldn't be considered "incredibly wasteful" and what is "damaging the environment".

Maybe there are lots of different people on the site who have different opinions and what you’re seeing is not a majority agreeing on an inconsistent opinion but rather many people with different internally consistent (or even internally inconsistent) ideas.

Yes, but Jeans are part of the collapse now and considered formal for creatives with Levi's down 62% and doing layoffs. I thought "formality" was bizarre as well, but apparently their target demo don't consider the older skinny-jeans, and the new high-waisted mom-jeans to be as comfortable as Lulus... who'd have thunk it?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/28/jeans-sal...

I suspect that it's a long term trend to reduce cost and quality/durability to maintain sales volumes. Fast fashion was a part of this, but now that people aren't going out to be seen, it doesn't matter what you're wearing (if it looks good on zoom). I suspect this will trend back once we're going out more, but with LA/NY/SF/MIA mostly shut down it won't be this year. What is happening for the Oscars, Emmys, Grammys, but home video?

Maybe leisure suits will come back?

After buying mostly levi's jeans for 30 years I started noticing huge differences in quality / durability.. upon inspecting the waist seams I noticed the 'made in pakistan / mexico' and other labels of origin. The same style/numbers from different years had different fabric thicknesses and were made in various places, and they did not last as long. So I started to question this "American brand".

Then they started going all anti-gun / SJW / spending money to reduce gun rights.

I have not bought a pair in a long time, won't buy any of that brand for anyone else, and anytime someone I know is shopping for or discussing jeans I mention my distaste for the brand and those who would support them.

Seeing them go down sparks joy. I'd rather wear a leisure suit made by snuggies than hand them cash. Seems I'm not the only one.

*edit to manual correct seems to seams

I had a very similar experience with Adidas shoes. For a long time (~15 years maybe) I was pretty much exclusively buying Adidas shell-toes for my daily footwear. They were the most comfortable well fitting shoes and fit my wide feet well. It was nice not having to spend much time looking or trying on shoes - every 2 or even 3 years when they wore out I'd buy a new pair and they fit just like the last one.

The last pair I bought fell apart in 3 months, the ball of my foot eating through the interior material in that short span. I kept wondering "what changed" and then I looked at the label in the tongue. Different country of manufacture than the last 2 pairs I bought (I'd usually keep my old pair as a backup since they typically still had some life left in them, despite the sole wearing down)

I always found adidas really bad for wide feet / same as nike. Reebok or Vans are wider.

They fit my feet pretty well vs. other brands I've tried. YMMV.

Interesting - the past 5 years or so I noticed a similar issue with skechers I had been buying (frequently for more than a decade) - used to be, I could get a couple years out of a pair and retire them to lawn mowing duty from being dingy or worn out.. but the past few years I had a couple pairs bust the seams near the toes in about only 6 months.

As much as I liked the styles, I started to try other brands... then went back when some skechers were on sale and bought the 'wide' versions to see if there was a difference. I have really been enjoying the new balance I've been wearing more than any the past couple years.

Sad to see that the nuts think requiring background checks is now "reducing gun rights". Reasonable limits on rights has always been constitutional. Perhaps you should give that document a read.

I guess fox news is winning that battle.

Didn't you get the memo? The left is all about the guns now too.

Levi's donated a million dollars to billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who not surprisingly supports the most heavy-handed and disenfranchising form of background checks imaginable. It's sadly predictable how the wealthiest folks tend to be the ones who support the "reasonable limit" of charging someone hundreds of dollars to practice a constitutional right.

> Reasonable limits on rights has always been constitutional.

Citation needed. I don't know how more unambiguous the framers could get than "shall not be infringed".

Setting aside my personal feelings on the matter, this just seems to be a bad argument which is not in evidence. I've read the Constitution thoroughly on more than one occasion, I don't see anything within that makes it seems as if the framers thought ignoring what was written in plain English and skirting its intent was a-okay.

It always strikes me as odd that so many Americans look at the constitution as if it was a holy text from the founding fathers that must be followed and left unchanged, even though they are usually discussing amendments...

Nobody’s discussing an amendment here, at no point did they suggest it should remain unchanged, and concerns over interpretation apply to any future amendments anyways.

Picking up a gun you’ve found from the larger cultural war and shooting random commenters with it is fun, but quite inappropriate for HN from what I’ve seen of it.

> Nobody’s discussing an amendment here

Yes they are, the comment above me has this:

> I don't know how more unambiguous the framers could get than "shall not be infringed".

That's the second amendment, is it not?

Based on the kinds of things I see people posting on social media, I think the attitude regarding amendment #2 stems from fear. Guns make them feel safe. Including feeling safe from the government who they fear will come to try to do things like silence them and destroy their ways of thinking or even cause physical harm. So it causes real conflict for them when the government wants to put limits on guns.

On top of that, the 2nd amendment itself is about defending against the government. It says that armed citizens are necessary to be able to form a well-regulated militia. The founding fathers had just broken free of an oppressive government, so they wanted to be sure it was possible for states to break free again if necessary.

The Bill of Rights is meant to be a declaration of immutable rights of human beings. It always strikes me as odd that people view these as permissions given from some higher authority that can be changed. The reason they are so viciously argued for is because it is the only thing we can point to that enshrines the idea that we have individual rights that cannot be legislated away.

Citation? 40 years of Supreme Court rulings. You right to free speech has its limits. As does every other right.

When researching the levis funding and the partnership with 'everytown' - they use words like 'common sense', and 'ending violence' - in the headings.. but when you look at the agenda and what they actually advocate for - it's not background checks - they are actively trying to ban a long list of weapons and putting up other barriers to make it harder for people to bear arms. (see what they tried to push through in VA recently) It is not just 'background checks'.

I will happily re-read this doc any day.

Funny you mention fox news winning the battle, I read an article in the last few hours that says they are. They are crushing every other news group - all of the primetime news - even though they are cable only in most markets and the others have further ota reach.

However I don't celebrate that. They are not my primary news source. I put them about 9th or 10th in my reads.

They shouldn’t be in your news source all. If they are you aren’t worth debating as you clearly don’t understand facts. Embarrassing.

Nobody cares about your precious guns. We care about mentally ill getting assault rifles. It’s really not that hard to understand.

I am friends with an exec that does textile manufacturing and clothes are manufactured against a "#washes" lifetime. Interestingly, brands like Polo Ralph Lauren have straight to outlet products and their #washes will be a lower number than their high-street equivalent.

I barely buy jeans now because it's hard to find a pair that isn't 10% spandex

Even Levi's is doing it. I was amazed to discover while shopping that they have an entire line of skinny jeans that are part spandex.

Whatever happened to practical, well-wearing clothes for gold miners?

> Whatever happened to practical, well-wearing clothes for gold miners?

They went the same way as the gold miners.

They're still around. Two MIUSA brands are L.C. King and Round House (I prefer King's styling), and there are probably many more made overseas.

I love L.C. King but when I checked just now, they don't have a single style of jeans in my size, all they seem to have in stock is larger sizes.

What are you talking about? There are tons of brands that sell 100% cotton denim jeans.

> Buying new clothing because of yearly trends is way to damaging to the enviroment for what it's worth.

You can say this about virtually any hobby/interest that you don’t personally find enjoyable.

Buying any new stuff yearly isn’t great for the environment — with exceedingly rare exceptions. But in the grand scheme of things: owning/driving a car, living in too big a home, eating meat, and having kids are so so so much more destructive that buying a few new shirts and pants every year becomes a rounding error.

From the practicality standpoint it seems that we should all be wearing togas (or robes, at most). They're basically unisex (with opportunities for expression for those who value it), flexible on size (or at least very forgiving if your exact size is unavailable), and can be made pretty cheap (assuming mass production).

Everything more complicated than that is fashion.

not convinced togas are that great for sports...?

It has been long known that robes are not suitable for exercise and sport. That's why we work out at the "gymnasium".

gymnos = naked

Except they are basically a primitive dress. And I don't find such things comfortable at all. Please just give me basic pants and find a way to adjust the size slightly so they fit well.

Pants are warmer and I don't have to worry about how I sit (am female, and do not enjoy this bit about dresses). Biking is not an issue, nor is extra fabric going to get stuck in a conveyor belt.

I'm also pretty sure the togas would require a decent learning curve if you are wanting sleeves. I certainly want sleeves and a shirt that isn't in the way: Things like ponchos aren't good to cook in - they get in the food.

Togas would be outright dangerous when swimming and I can't imagine them being great for working on a car. They might be slightly cooler in the summer if you aren't using too much fabric.

And I'd argue that no matter what, you still have fashion. You'll see it in the way folks drape the toga fabric and their use of belts and things to hold it together. You'll see fashion in the color and/or print of fabric and whether or not you can keep a white one clean. Like with uniforms, you'll find more emphasis on body shape, hair, and other such things.

But I suppose we could all just let our hair grow out: women and men both should just stop shaving as well. It is, after all, fashion. And not do phsyical fitness more than what is required to be healthy and do your job - excess muscles are fashion, after all.

Togas are very complex and impractical.

Seems like an expansion opportunity for Soylent

(Since that's a name I hadn't heard in a while, I had to check to see that they still existed)

That's true. But, even allowing for specialty clothing that they don't wear all that much and clothing that doesn't fit quite right, etc. but they haven't gotten rid of, most people have way more clothing than they really need. Even for generous values of need.

> Fast fashion and the fashion industry as a whole seems incredibly wasteful to me. Buying new clothing because of yearly trends is way to damaging to the enviroment for what it's worth.

I don't disagree per se, but I think you could say this about just about any hobby/habit/interest. Is it really necessary? Probably not, but it makes some people happy for whatever reason.

How do you draw the line?

Some people complain that travel is too hard on the environment..but I love travel and will continue to do so (post-covid)

Does it make people inherently happy, or does it simply satisfy needs that first had to be awoken by a constant onslaught of ads?

> How do you draw the line?

By representing the environmental externalities of fashion, travel, etc through CO2 taxation.

I would add environmental friendliness - more creativity in supply chains so more local materials used. Fashion will always exist and by itself shouldnt be considered wasteful - think deeply about other cultures relationship to it.

Google around for Adam Minters book secondhand on how the rag industry is one of the largest.

I see an obsession with local but would they actually be more environmentally friendly? Specialized higher yield locales are more efficenct for land usage. Efficencies of scale and more optimal environments and container ships of scale as well.

Aside from that more stringent local environmental regulations are the only advantage I can see mattering.

Transportation costs.

I assume local food is more well-studied than local fashion, and may have similar environmental cost profiles. This study: http://www.iufn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Making-local-... found that transportation is actually less important than other factors.

On the other hand, local food has other important advantages: resiliency (perhaps less important for clothing), and supporting the local economy.

> cultural "requirement": clothing that is required to fit into social circles. The shirt would be a good example of this, aswell as the tie.

So... fashion?

yes, it is fashion. But it has a far slower pace of change then the fashion industry. Formal attire for males got out of style a couple of decades ago, but besides the suit (and tie) mostly dying, most people still wear shirts to work.

> - practicality. Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time.

Yeah but that skinny/tight jeans trend really did made some jeans less practical.

> Jeans are good example of this. It's cheap and practical clothing that lasts a long time.

Mainstream jeans brands seem astronomically expensive to me.

Yeah, You can get some OK ones between 30-50 but the more stylish ones are easily >100 or way more.

I worked a good number of years doing tech in fashion.

Figure that there is a 100-1000% markup for a garment at retail. The jeans that cost $3 to make versus the ones that cost $13 will sometimes be durable, but you are basically buying the quality of the seamstress beyond materials at the higher price point.

The prices rise to fit the market. People will pay for the "fashion" and brand name so the retailers sell them. You also have layers of outlets, overstock, discount retailers, thrift stores and more that take up the overflow. a

I guess it depends. I buy levis which are the some of the cheapest decently quality jeans you can find. I'm not big on raw or selvedge denim so I mean decently trendy and ready to wear jeans. I can find a pair for around 100 or less depending on sales and those pairs can last me about 3-5 years. I think 100$ is a fair price for something that will last me that long. I have squatter's legs so the inner thigh grinds to a pulp on most brands but levi's lasts the longest.

> I have squatter's legs so the inner thigh grinds to a pulp on most brands but levi's lasts the longest.

My quads aren't even that big and yet I seem to have this problem. It only started after lifting for a few years and it drives me crazy. I seem to go through jeans every 3 years whereas before it felt like they would last a life time.

This is the thing I wish I knew before lifting - most of my wardrobe had to be changed within months, from underwear to winter coat.

But compared to other types of clothes I find that they last a long time. I buy a new pair every year from Nudie Jeans for $140 and they last around four years (with the included free repairs). And when they are worn out you get 20% discount on new ones if you hand in your old pair.

That's very dismissive of the art and self-expression that goes into this. It's a strange, but pervasive human behavior, to make things not only practical, but beautiful. To put in different ideas into easthetics of things, to express yourself through them.

Of course, may be most shoppers simply go after current trends, but that's just true for any art form, from music to movies to books; almost all of these things are just as impractical. Investing your resources into something just because it looks nice is a very human thing to do.

Well said. Aside from formalwear and tattered outdoor work outfits my clothing may as well all be identical. Every morning I reach into my closet and grab a shirt and pair of jeans without looking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com