/fa/ - Fashion

>>7599849

>>7423979
yeah that dude was pretty awkward too

>>7423952
>but when was the last time you saw him wearing four different tops of different lengths?

all day dude

i also disagree w/ ur earlier point. im not trying to say that rick is 'more punk' than bbs or something dumb like that but i'd argue that a piece shouldn't or doesn't need to be obviously, intentionally distressed off the rack for it to be dirty or grungy, or considered more 'punk' than something else. with rick the wearer develops and destroys his own clothing, which is appealing to me

that isnt to say rick doesn't do pre-distressed clothing, im just trying to make the point that a treated, preworn 'look' or feature that makes a piece look fragile or beaten ≠ grunge

you said you see punk as aesthetic and historic, but i think that attitude is too broad to only be applied to pre-distressed clothing

>>7423970
should i buy the flip flops

they're only £73

>>7349671
!!!!!

wtf, Rick.