/fa/ - Fashion

cultural appropriation is whack

>>6588373
Not when it feels this swiggity.

God damn look at this snow monkey's swagger.

To the window
To the wall
To the sweatdorp
Down my balls
Skeet skeet motherfucker
Skeet skeet god damn

>>6588365
They look cool as a novelty but I wouldn't actually wear them.

handsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsomehandsome

>>6588365
don't appropriate garms u shits

>>6588416
It's hot today
It was hot yesterday
It'll be hot tomorrow
It's hot everyday.

>>6588416
why not

>>6588365
Lol'ing hard at this thread

Where I live snow is a myth.
What are those googles for?

sruli needs to make a pair
i'm actually going to email him about it

>>6589023
Snow blindness, the reflection of the sunlight on the snow can cause it.

Not going full Char

the inuit have mostly switched over to sunglasses as they are far more practical, but you'll still look like a huge shitgoblin walking around with native gear.

>>6588373
So wearing MA-1 bombers outside of America is wrong? Good to know, fuck all those tyrannical Limeys.

>>6589134
the difference is native people to this day still get shit on for wearing their traditional garments.
recently two highschool students were denied their diplomas and were fined $1000 for wearing feathers to their graduations.

>>6589167
>recently two highschool students were denied their diplomas and were fined $1000 for wearing feathers to their graduations.
why?

>>6589167
She was refused because she asked if she could wear something other than the uniform before the graduation, they said no. She then ignored them and wore it anyways. If someone had worn a bomber or a peacoat they wouldn't have been able to graduate either.

>>6589174
because they are native.

>>6589174
There was a rule against wearing accessories or anything over the robe and cap to graduation. She broke that rule and refused to take off the feather.

>>6589183
if someone had worn a mr t necklace they would merely have been told to take it off, not fined.

>>6589216
She had been told to take it off, she refused. They had warned her the previous day when she asked if it was ok and she didn't listen.

>>6588373
It's not quite that simple, but yeah, I don't think there's any way to pull these off straight. Pic related is doing it, well, wrong, but right. The motif could easily be adapted into a mask, but wearing actual native goggles is almost certainly out for a ton of reasons.

>>6589183
>If someone had worn a bomber or a peacoat they wouldn't have been able to graduate either.

Which, the racism involved makes it worse, but this sort of shit - imposed arbitrariness - is close to the only thing that actually make me feel legitimate rage. Because there is literally no rational reason for it. Landlord puts his tenants in shitty conditions? He's at least getting something out of it. Military raid kills civilians? They're at least pursuing some strategic end. It's fucked up, I oppose it (materially; I'm involved in activism), but it's fundamentally a political and moral calculation, not frequently a feeling of confused hatred.

Giving a shit what clothes other people are wearing, or anything else that doesn't affect you, and imposing your preferences on them by force? Why the fucking hell?

>>6589330
It's the school's dress code.
You may not like uniforms in schools, but it's not uncommon, especially for big events like graduations.

>>6589357
And it's fucking sick. There's at least some researched pedagogical rationale behind uniforms on a daily basis, even though I object to those, too. At a graduation? And a small accessory that doesn't even break that dumb black sea? There's no point to it. And then to deny someone a diploma and fine them $1,000 for it?

>>6589374

I think white people who spend all their time whining on PoC's behalf are committing cultural appropriation.

cf courreges
idk why i still have this tagged as kawakubo

>>6589830

*_*

>>6589228
oh, you're right.
that makes it OK then.

>>6589841
>>6589829

>>6590001
I'm not white, I didn't wear a Mao suit to my graduation just because I'm Chinese. She wore the feather to be edgy on purpose. $1000 is stupid, but she was TRYING to break their rules.

>>6589840
w2c
also can you actually see out of those

>>6590322
Yeah, of course.

>>6590315
But their rule has no moral legitimacy. Why should it even exist?

>>6590322
i wouldn't bank on ever finding correges but this guy makes repros

http://www.ijaak.com/

and yeah, your field of vision is actually pretty small, it only blocks some of your up and down peripheral vision

i asked my uncle to make one out of wood but he said it would be too heavy :(

>>6590347
Also, even if we're going to say enforcing the dumbass black poly rental robe army makes sense, a comparable act would be wearing a small decorative pin or something, not a completely different outfit.

Also, even if you were going to enforce it, you do so by preventing her from walking, not letting her walk, afterwards denying the validity of her credential, and trying to fine her $1k.

>>6590322
Obviously thats the point.

>>6590347
It's a dress code, it exists for discipline. A lot of private schools have a dress code, it must work somewhat.

>>6590348
cool
sun ra and dali are pretty tough competition though, idk if i could rock em

>>6590364
You don't seem to get this.
She was told beforehand that she would be fined and not allowed to graduate if she broke the dress code, she broke it on purpose. It's not a question of her clothes at that point, it's insubordination.
She met with the principal henself and asked if it was ok, and hen said no.

They didn't give her such a big fine because it was a Native American accessory, they gave her the fine because that is what they do to ANYONE not following the dress code. If someone had asked them to wear a pin, and they said no, they would have been punished the same way.

>>6590395
>They didn't give her such a big fine because it was a Native American accessory, they gave her the fine because that is what they do to ANYONE not following the dress code. If someone had asked them to wear a pin, and they said no, they would have been punished the same way.

see

>>6589330

I'm objecting to it in toto. The racism of it - not the personal prejudice of whatever individual made the decision, but its being one small institutional disregard and continuation of hundreds of years of genocide - is objectionable. But it's not the fundamental issue I'm taking.

This sort of thing - again, imposed arbitrariness - is always wrong, always stupid, always cruel, always vicious, and always about the assertion of power and superiority. It has no place anywhere, and certainly not at a ceremony meant to mark the end of the student's "subordination" to whatever fuckass wrote the rulebook.

>insubordination

But, lol, really? You believe that's actually a thing?

>>6590451
Insubordination is a real thing at a private high school.
The school was paid to teach the kid's discipline and to enforce rules.
If you don't agree with that don't spend money to go to a private school like she did, it's not like she didn't have any choice in the school she went to.
If you go to a military school you listen to superiors, if you don't want to do that don't fucking pay to go to a military school.

>>6590508
Somehow I don't think the school would appreciate a comparison to a fucking military school.

The most appealing line of thought about authority I've heard came from, IIRC, Christopher Hitchens: it's legitimate only insofar as its purpose and behavior is self-limiting. A doctor's authority is legitimate because it is aimed at making a patient well, upon which he will no longer need a doctor. He may do not harm because that will prolong the need of his authority.

A teacher's authority is legitimate because its purpose is making the student the intellectual equal (or superior) of the student. When the student knows everything the teacher knows, the authority vanishes. A graduation by definition marks the end of the teacher's authority, and it's the height of perversity and arbitrariness to attempt to extend it in this way.

Moreover, there is no justification for *not* letting the students wear accessories. What possible harm would come to, well, anything, by letting a student add a feather or a pin to those shiny poly sackcloths?

>>6590591
*not do harm

>>6590591
I'm not going to argue with someone who cites Christopher Hitchens. Have a nice day though.

>>6590635
And what's your huge objection to Hitchens? Don't confuse him with the batshit euphoric crowd.

>>6590776

>>6590856
Like I said, don't confuse him with the batshit euphoric crowd.

Pic related, taken at his memorial service. What fat Reddit neckbeard trenchcoat classy gentlemen, right?

Also, that picture? On your hard drive?

Anyway, I'm still waiting for someone to make a moral argument for not letting someone stick a fucking feather on their hat.

>>6590992
You sound like such a flaming fedora, whether you wear one or not.

>>6590591
But they're not trying to teach them anything? You're saying that as soon as you're as smart as the teacher, you can break all the rules of the school? It's different m80, people start out with rights, for sure, but you can contract out of them. Idividuals can contract out of every right they have as long as its not illegal to do so, and by enrolling in a private school, you're contracting into their charter of rules. If you break a rule and face a penalty, you have no place to complain about the validity of the rule because you signed up to it

>>6591073
>But they're not trying to teach them anything?

Exactly. And since the point of a school is to teach people stuff, there's no point for the rule, and without a point it becomes immoral to assert, let alone enforce.

>but you can contract out of them

Leaving aside that she says she didn't sign the additional graduation ceremony contract with the rule, isn't this kind of contractually thinking at once too simplistic and too abstract to meaningfully talk about consent? It's like saying that marrying someone is consenting to have sex with them in any manner, at any time, and it doesn't account for the innumerable individual situations that could lead someone to sign a private school contract.

It's also profoundly uninteresting - who cares what they *can* do to her? It's a stupid question, one because it's a matter of brute force, and two because there's no way for the school to actually come out on top here. Already they look famously shitty, and no real college is going to look at this case and turn her down for admission because she doesn't technically have a high school diploma. Hell, she might even get a scholarship out of this.

What's interesting - potentially, a little - is whether the school *should* have had this rule, and then whether it *should* be going off on this Pyrrhic little clusterfuck to try to enforce it.

Also, should Edward Snowden be in prison? In this way of thinking, he signed up for the US social contract, signed up for a security clearance, signed up for his job, and he broke all those contracts. And yet he's unquestionably in the right, because everything against him is morally invalid.

>>6591188
>that could lead someone to sign a private school contract.

Also, she's of course not the one signing that contract.

>>6589023
imagine like a super bright sunny day and then imagine the ground is like tinfoil