Designer

>I feel way too many people just buy [luxury/sportscars] to flex and act like they care about [cars]. I mean some [luxury/sports] stuff is actually interesting design or really good material but the stuff which is just basic [brans name] ends up just being overpriced flex pieces. I understand why some people buy them but don't claim you like [cars] and buy this shit.

you can apply this to anything where capitalism and marketing exists

>>12683118
yeah I understand but generally people with expensive cars understand they are doing it to flex and do act so snobby about their fashion. Like they don't care about colors or shit just throw enough money on themselves and they think they look good and can talk.

>>12683128

people who are wealthy but insecure about things other then (or including) their wealth compensate by spending money rather than having taste

luxury brands exploit this

you sound like a highschooler

>>12683149
?

>>12683149
a highschooler who happens to be right

whenever you buy a piece of garment, just ask yourself the question: if i would be able to wear this only at home and no-one would see it, would i still buy it? most of the luxury, "hyped up for no good reason" brands would be dead in no time

>>12683161
> if i would be able to wear this only at home and no-one would see it, would i still buy it?

this isn't really a good test

a lot of people would just be naked

>>12683163
I think what he means is that if you like it that if you had no one to flex to you would still wear it.

File: 46532231lh_12_f.jpg (36KB, 650x848px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 650x848px

How do I get the small white specks of dust and dirt off of my jeans. I would use a roller but would that damage the jeans or the ripped parts.

>>12683205

still kind of a shit point because once again i'd probably not even be presentable to the public

i think a better point would be "if nobody would recognize it would you wear it" which is fair

i try to avoid any specific brand names/logos even if i occasionally wear recognizable items

>>12683210
well recognize doesn't work cuz that allows brands like gucci and lv to just sell a tshirt with their large logo on it and charge a lot

>>12683114
>I feel way too many people just buy designer clothes to flex
Are you 15 and just now realizing that's how literally most things work?

>>12683209
ignore this wrong place

>>12683213

which would mean people recognize the name/logo

>>12683114
You're talking about hypebeast and they are everywhere now. Which is why you see a lot of heavy logo clothing on people, especially on the internet. They are obsessed with the idea of "breaking peoples necks." In other words having people stare at their clothing.

>>12683216
No its just I don't see it called out too often.

>>12683210
more like "if the logo/brand wasn't there to begin with". You could still associate by price though, but still people will be shopping by taste at that point. Most designer things I would still buy simply because I like the aesthetic of the garment. Whether or not everyone can see it, won't matter then. People should shop that way desu

People seek validation. Obviously some flaunt with branding and logos.

I think people with a true sense of style can create good outfits without reliance on what I just mentioned.