The Coast | News, events, restaurants, concerts and Burger Week for Halifax, Nova Scotia
Home of the Best of Halifax Reader's Choice Awards, the award-winning independent newspaper covers the Halifax news, politics, events, concerts, movies, restaurants, and nightlife scene.
I can somewhat understand the return of late 80’s/early 90’s fashion but when did high waisted shorts become underwear?
First of all you look stupid and second how in the hell is that comfortable? ? —grannie panties
This article appears in Jul 30 – Aug 5, 2015.
13 Comments
Be the first to know about breaking news, articles, and updates.
Back to the grave Nan!
I thought this bitch was going to be about the too many bums asking for spare change in this fair city.
agree the number of bummy politicians begging for money in both countries is to damn high!
Probably more comfortable than a small triangle in front and a piece of string between the cheeks of your ass.
ASSESSMENT
1. Problem or Conflict
The issue here is one of fashion, i.e., how did high-waisted shorts become underwear? Is there a coherent way in which this issue might be addressed? What, for that matter, IS the conflict or problem? (5/20)
2. Structure
Fashion, of course, has its own imperatives. In other words, changes in fashion lack perspicuous reasons. There are none. In the same way, the bitcher fails to advance compelling reasons why such changes are to be resisted. She claims that that the new fashion looks ridiculous and lacks comfort but while the former lacks supporting reasons the latter misses the point of fashion and its mutations entirely. In other words, fashion may look ridiculous but still be fashionable while comfort has nothing to do with it. (2/20)
3. Content
Neither perspective, that of changes in fashion nor their ridiculous appearance and discomfort are supported by reasons. Given the absence of structure, the content criterion has nowhere to go. (1/20)
4. Articulation
The criterion of articulation is completely dependent on the content criterion with the result that the articulation of this bitch was completely pedestrian, lacking both depth or flair. In addition to the poverty of structure and content one has to wonder about the mind of the bitcher herself, whether she suffers from a severe conceptual shortfall. (3/20)
5. Philosophical Depth
Given her conceptual shortfall it comes as no surprise that there was absolutely no philosophical depth to this bitch. It was, philosophically speaking, a damp squib. (0/20)
Mark: 10/100
I agree, high waisted shorts, pants and skirts are unflattering, and just plain look horrible. How any woman looks in the mirror and thinks she looks good while wearing that crap is beyond me.
Some woman only wear a skirt on their husband’s birthday.
looks really aren’t everything…
it’s whether they’re an idiot or not that counts.
I saw a woman on Willett yesterday wearing those LuLu Lemon pants apparently testing the tensile strength to its limits. OMF! What a sight. Looked like she was carrying a bag full of gelatin in the front of her pants. Don’t people look in the mirror before they walk out the door?
WHAT IS FASHION?
As indicated above (Montrealman 08/07, 10:33AM) the issue here is one of fashion, specifically changes in fashion as they relate to clothes. Some distinguish between fashion and style where the latter is understood to form the basis of a relatively stable individual taste. Fashion, on the other hand, is both changeable and collective. The question, of course, relates to the nature of those social forces bringing about changes in fashion and, in addition, the reasons, if such there be, why some fashions take hold and proliferate in the population at large while others do not.
To speak of “fashion” is, of course, to speak of that which is ephemeral, that which by its nature, is constantly in a state of flux. Consequently, it is misconceived to seek out any stable core in terms of which fashion might be conceived. It is not the object of any standard denotative reference. Where the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides held that “Nothing changes,” Heraclitus maintained that, “One cannot step twice into the same river for fresh waters are forever flowing in upon you.” Clearly, it is Heraclitus to whom one should give pride of philosophical place in the matter of fashion.
So, if fashion by its nature is constantly in a state of change, of continuing flux, what are those forces which generate that flux? But to speak of “forces” in this context may well be misleading since it suggests the impersonal forces of history – things like class struggle and all that. I think we have to look for the influence of seminal individuals, those who initiate changes in fashion. Who, for example, started the trend of those canvas men’s shoulder bags which hang over one’s shoulder as one walks along? (What the hell do they put in them? Even school children have these enormous bags on their backs.) This is a comparatively recent phenomenon and so the answer as to who started the trend should be easy to discover.
But it is not. No one knows who started the trend of men’s shoulder bags which hang over one’s shoulder as one walks along. Further, no one knows why the fashion has caught on. It is a conundrum. That, perhaps, is the main reason why the serious study of fashion is so philosophically unrewarding.
Thank you very much.
A pleasure as always,
Cheerio!
Hola Senor Campana!
I have seen many such abominations (worn by men and women) in recent years. I’m not sure if their choice of clothing is aspirational, i.e. they hope to one day look good in them, or the self-esteem movement has gone a bit too far and created a generation of delusional people.
I tend to believe the latter.
RSVPS
: Son of Mac (08/08, 7:36PM)
Why do you tend to believe that the self-esteem movement has gone a bit too far and created a generation of delusional people? Is this a legitimate deduction from your observation of those “abominations worn by men and women?” Can you support your assertion about these delusional people with reasons? Why must they be delusional?
: The Larch ((08/09, 2:58PM)
Why would you rather see those shorts rather than fat “waddlers in Lulu Lemons?” What is it about Lulu Lemons that repels you so? Can you support your preference for shorts as opposed to Lulu Lemons with reasons? Let me listen to your mind at work.
Cheerio!
The title “Too many bums” reminds me of the Monty Python classic:
“And now for something completely different… a man with three buttocks..”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqosS6DBwhA