Literally how the fuck did this happen?
Lack of dignity, and laziness.
>>10698767
Oh shut up. 4 people cannot represent an entire generation.
a combination of laziness and clothing just becoming plain ugly over the years
Sportswear, athleisure etc is fashion cancer and it will only get worse in the future.
>>10698767
Cheap 3rd-word manufactured clothing became more widely available.
tl;dr globalization ruined it like everything else.
>>10698784
This basically, sportswear is cancer
>>10698780
>laziness
This
>lmao why buy pants when I can just wear shorts year round
>jeans are too uncomfortable, I'd rather be in sweatpants
>>10698767
in 1965 those were just seen as normal clothes, just like how in 2015 the ones in your pic are just seen as normal clothes
in 50 years people will dress how lazy normies dress now and it will be considered /fa/
>>10698767
Cherry picking.
>>10698767
qualification inflation, more poor shitmunchers can get in like me
>>10698803
Probably, but as a challenge, find a candid shot of people circa 1965 dressed worse than those on the right.
>>10698797
so much this
It's quite hysterical that people never realize they're actually doing this and "this time it's different"
>>10698797
nahh its really not that simple though
>>10698767
>actual photo of Princeton
vs
>stock photo of some teenagers at a random state school
Woah man what a surprise that rich kids dress better, what could possibly explain this?
Non-whites.
>>10698817
nobody dressed as bad as the right in 1965, rich or poor
>>10698767
Global warming
>>10698823
And what data do you have to back this up, a survey from the "I'm a huge faggot" Research Firm?
>>10698827
>>10698829
none, where's yours?
>>10698842
None either, but I don't make presumptions about things I know nothing about.
>>10698845
>>10698817
>rich kids dress better
>>10698854
And? That's a true statement regardless of the era. You, however, seem to think that all people dressed better 50 years ago.
>>10698817
any better?
tbf blondie on the left would do alright in 1965
>>10698868
The sample size is too small to make any real assertions. Your methodology is fundamentally flawed.
>>10698767
People in 2015 dont even dress like that
>>10698808
I have nothing to prove, dipshit. You're the one claiming that EVERYONE was dressed well in 1965 which is fucking retarded.
>>10698767
Foreigners and white women. Check your privilege, fags : ^)
>>10698863
And what data do you have to back this up, a survey from the "I'm a huge faggot" Research Firm?
>>10698868
highwaist meme needs to end
>>10698884
low waist meme needs to end
>>10698869
>i'm a first year stats student
fuck off
>>10698884
>>10698868
more like leather boots with jeans
>>10698884
>>10698886
>2015
>having a waist
>>10698890
>implying he's not right
Fuck off OP.
>>10698894
did you see the leather boots with dress though? jfc
>>10698895
>2015
>existing in the physical world
>>10698899
>random pictures of random students
i'm not cherry picking shit
eventually if you line up every student from the graduating classes of 1960 to 1965 and compared them to every student from the graduating classes of 2005-2010 then my "methodology" would become very correct
so how many more pictures of random princeton students do you need?
last pic
So fucking what, OP? If you have such a boner for 60s fashion and want to dress like a square, go ahead. No one is stopping you.
PS here's your fedora.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/09/08/why-americans-dress-so-casually/
>>10698767
>modern people: happy, comfortable, smiling
>previous generation people with 'standards': miserable, dour, joyless cunts
go figure
>>10698890
You must be a highschool freshman then
>>10698914
i think it's worth noting that while there are cultural and economic factors in this change, you also must consider the prevalence and easy-of-use regarding cameras. as cameras were less common on convenient, things that were less than worth photographing were not photographed, unlike today.
>>10698930
modern people are miserable and dour as well, don't be silly
>>10698952
fair enough
don't know why you seem bent on defending modern kids today when everyone blatantly dresses like trash. You must be like 27 years old living in some hip area of New York or something.
>>10698946
I wish I was anon. Then I could do it all over again...
>>10698962
other youth dressing like shit makes it easier for me to get jobs
>>10698964
TRUTH
>>10698962
You're the one shitting their pants because we don't want to conform to your idea of being fashionable.
>>10698767
Here's a time machine, OP. Now go fuck yourself.
>>10698767
Polymerization
>>10698977
so you're underage huh? defending your peers?
Nice la MORON
Womans lib allowed women into higher education op
>>10698977
i don't even agree with this guy but you sound like a teenager who dresses like shit
>>10698868
I would fucking destroy crop top girl.
The one on the right, that is.
Too bad I look like far left dude. Do you think she'd agree to that dick? I don't even care, crop tops are the hottest piece of clothing.
>>10698986
>gets called out
>can't think of a rebuttal
>LOL YOU MUST BE UNDERAGE
Check your autism, bro.
>>10698962
i agree that regardless of contemporary style, modern youth seem to put less effort into looking good
if they do, instead, it's rather related to an image they've been sold or perpetuated through their social media hugbox
>>10699000
>can't handle the bantz
back to /cückcore/ general with u lad
>>10699013
>all these people defending basketball shorts with flip flops and equating prep with fedoracore
Am I really on /fa/?
>>10699031
Yep. Fucking dealing with it.
>>10698962
>>10698916
Kek do you know the color palettes that were fashionable in those eras? It's actually depressing.
>>10698868
Those girls are qt (on the left)
Any more?
People used to wear hats and coats all the time because they cared about their appearance. Now you can just wear yoga pants all day every day.
>>10698869
Kinda like OP'S pic?
who cares, im swaggin enough to compensate all dem there normies :^)
>>10698779
#NotAllStudents
Back then:
Cameras had film so you wouldn't waste your money taking pictures of uggos
Said uggos were mostly lower class and therefore working in the coal mines or some shit and not going to college.
>le born in wrong generation faec
>>10699287
>le i'm a k00L millennial face
go2beds pops :))
>>10699051
yeah, how come everybody dressed in grey colors back then?
>>10698784
>>10698789
Found the obese
the people in the 60s didn't have any better sense of fashion, casual fashion in itself has become very diluted. designs trickle down and you end up with gross replicas of replicas of replicas at kohls that are cheap and accessible and no one really questions what their parents buy them
>>10698914
my nigga EZRA Miller making the GU-WOP
>>10698767
Democracy happened
>>10699299
More like burnt orange and flesh pink. Fuck that noise.
>>10698829
Rekt
You're comparing a very niche fashion with a mainstream look. If you lived in the 60s you'd see this everywhere and be just as sick of it.
>>10698920
This. Complaining that "people were classier then" is literally fedora-tier.
Since far fewer people went to college back then, it really was an elite club. Even if you weren't rich, you best had better dress the part - there was a much heavier social pressure to dress that way.
I'm not defending people gym shorts and T-shirts as a better style. What's better nowadays is that you have far more choices in what to wear. Outside the realm of really avant-garde fits, you can wear a wide variety of outfits without risking social backlash (or worse - even getting kicked out of class). This simply wasn't present back then.
>>10699431
Basic bitches truly never change
>>10699488
whoops, just realized you were probably referring to their clothes and not their race, I'll quarantine myself back to /pol/ now
>>10699488
>>10699497
>>10698767
>comparing subculture to mainstream
nice try
It is because of cheap brands that market their products as cool and hip.
>>10699864
What are you people trying to argue, really? Here's UCLA, which was a pleb state school in the 1960s probably:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkrMXtU2aTY
It's not Northeast prep, but they're still dressed leagues better than right OP
>>10698767
Clothes are cheaper now. More people live on campus now. There are less stigmas now. More so they're going to class from waking up, if you compared party goers you'd see some greaser tier or punk shot head in the 60's while worst you got now is low riders.
>>10699959
What are you trying to convince to yourself? That isn't mainstream, that's niche fashion of rich white kids in the 1960s.
Most rich kids of today don't dress like daddycore heritage cuccks.
Clothes got cheaper. People no longer have the time/knowledge/inclination to buy fewer, higher quality pieces of clothing and care and maintain for them properly. Now they can just buy 5 t-shirts and 2 shirts for $20 from H&M and throw them away once the seams rip and they fall apart. Back then that wasn't an option.
>>10698868
what the fuck is going on here
>>10698767
Global warming...Gloomy weather/after rain vs. Sunny/dry, t-shirts/shorts vs. Jacket(sweater)/Pants...duh!!!
crazy to think there has been change in 50 years
>>10698868
Bitch on the right ruins this pic. All the other girls are hot and i would rape all of them
>>10698817
>usc
>state school
>not full of uber rich people
strike out, bud
>>10699252
Underrated post
>>10699959
God damn. I fucking hate the current era. Everything after the 80s went to shit. Nobody cares about dressing well and looking respectable anymore. It's all about the latest trend and "self-expression" bullshit. And the thing is, it's probably not even their fault. People just buy whatever happen to sell at the mall. Blame the big companies and the media.
>you're mad at what other people wear
never change /fa/
>>10700159
Did you even read past the first sentence of my post? UCLA was not niche in the 1960s. It was a lot more representative of the general population, and people still dressed better.
>>10700574
Grandpa, I told you to stop visiting the websites I do.
>>10700172
>>>10698868
>what the fuck is going on here
My dick, hopefully
>>10700172
jeggings
>>10699431
It's still kind of funny to think of a time where, as a twenty years old, wearing a suit and a tie was pretty much normal.
>>10701373
hEYO
>>10699310
pretty much.
Everyone wants to follow the meme. Now they can with h&m etc.
>>10701495
And now, wearing a button shirt and leather shoes is considered "dress-up".
>>10698868
top tier qt's
>>10698962
kid in the letter's fit is dope as fuck
OP, kids would dress like this in the 60s if their society allowed them. (Look at how t-shirts took off once it was 'ok' to wear 'em)
Don't be a faggot.
>>10698812
Yes, it really is.
There were plenty of kids in the 60s who wanted to wear their gym shoes, shorts, and t-shirts out of the locker room, they just couldn't.
>>10698914
why is that chad hiding his powerlevel
>>10699431
Sick of it I would be. Recognize that they're plebs, sure.
But It was nice that people took pride in their appearance, and wanted respect.
princeton students in '65 had a lot more money (and came from a much higher class) than the average state school-er in 2015
>>10703645
True
>>10698767
He's got a "P" because he is a "PUTO"!
>>10703673
>>10699431
every fit in this pic is objectively good though
>>10699497
please do
Global warming
>>10698914
that lock is shit. super thick and study, but it uses a cylinder lock that you can pick with a bic pen
>>10698767
Those do look like typical USC kids tho
Every time I match with a chick from USC on tinder she looks basic af
And the parties there are basic too
sad face
>>10704077
>Europeans were already far superior to all other people in all aspects
This boggles me - you go into the psuedo-historic shit and then make
up something about Europeans being superior from the year 0-1000 AD.
A span in the Arabic world has double-entry bookkeeping, spread risk capital, science
yada yada (JAIRUS, 2007)
It is during this time span that Europe reversed its fortunes and forgot plumbing, paving,
state-formation ect.
Also China is far more advanced (in bureaucracy, handicraft, ect.) - In the 15th Century
they only trade with Europe for silver because none of the European wares are up-to-scratch
(ATWELL,1998)
Europe only gets real economic supremacy (briefly) in the 19th century (see pic related)
CITE SOMETHING - DEBATE ME LAD CMON
>I'm not arguing with you about racial supremacy because you're obviously a bigot - but
what is clear is that you ALSO don't know any history.
Banaji, Jairus. (2007): "Islam, the Mediterranean and the Rise of Capitalism." Historical Materialism 15.1 pp. 47-74.
Atwell, W. (1998) Ming China and the Emerging World Economy, 1470-1650, The Cambridge history of China. (1998). Cambridge University Press
>>10704077
>>10704099
>>10703311
It's really not nice. Imagine Asian societies' peer pressure attitudes about respectability and status.
>>10703771
KEK. Not a single one of those shirts fits you artless pleb. And you'd better pray you never see what those fabrics looked like in color
>>10698817
>stock photo of some teenagers at a random state school
The shitty stock photo probably had a stylist to pick out all those outfits. So there's a professional opinion out there that thinks this is how students dress. Which isn't wrong.
>>10698767
Yeah I can't believe they let women to attend college either.
>>10703227
Ppl would shit in the streets if society allowed it
Someone thought that 4 neonazi skinheads represented the movement and now everything that's not shitty jeans or flashy sneakers is "Old" or "Nazi".
You can't judge these photos from the same positionality.
>>10698773
Both are dressed down, casual styles in their respective time periods. Take Ivy is basically a celebration of how lazy Ivy League preps were in the 60s.
>>10698789
Both photos are of people wearing sportswear.
>>10698797
This anon gets it.
>>10704649
You can dress like a tasteful lazy fuck
Most college students today dress like the most lazy, tasteless pieces of shit
This is only true in the anglo countries.
In Sweden, kids dress better than ever. They wear expensive clothes and fit them well. Still shit, but again, they're kids. Clothes like the OP pic wouldn't even be tolerated in the poorest kebab suburbs. Even they dress better than that.
Who gives a flying fuck. I often work out and go to gym between lectures/mid day if I have time, and it's more convenient if you have clothes that are easy to change and pack away.
If it's girls you are worried about, they don't give a shit about what you dress, if you can confidently sport sweatpants and tee shirt, and are in good shape you will get laid in college like no tomorrow anyway.
>>10704700
People were saying that about the Take Ivy students too.
>>10698879
You literally said exactly that right here.>>10698823
>>10704729
That's not true at all. How you dress, your haircut and your overall look is extremely important - it's what gives your personality a chance to begin with. If you don't get said chance to talk without her just unconsciously rejecting you because shit clothes, you'll never get anywhere.
ITT nostalgia goggles and unironic 50's worship.
>>10704741
It's not really true desu.
>>10704741
This is true, but very little of what /fa/ likes and deems worth wearing will be respected, admired, or lusted after on a college campus. Dressing for an audience requires knowing that audience's expectations and working with them. You have some room for play, but not much.
>>10704754
I only come to /fa/ to w2c threads mainly. Normie dressing is fairly easy and all you really need to do is get well-fitted clothes with good quality that aren't flashy Italian guido-tier like Gucci etc.
To impress normies is extremely easy and very rewarding. You can wear h&m shit and as long as it's matched they'll be impressed.
>>10704785
Agreed. I think a lot of people in /fa/ don't realize the way they dress in over-the-top designer clothing only gets them ridicule in public. The only people who appreciate it are maybe 0.001% of the population
Seriously, how can people think >>10693907 is a good idea.
>>10698868
Lel at the fact that only the white guys are trying to dress professionally.
>that skanky jewfu on the left
Hnnng
>>10698767
left looks like a bunch of stuffy cunts, good riddance
>>10704741
Everyone knows that the "fun to be around, chill but confident jock" image pulls the best pussy in college/uni. It's a terrible look in terms of clothing but women/college girls love the image.
The whole negative vibe that the confident athletic guys are douchebags/chads/treat women like shit is purely made up by other guys, women don't share that opinion at all trust me.
>>10704616
Nobody wants to admit it, but you're right. Globalization has ruined pretty much every aspect of Western culture that was beautiful and sacred--I'm not exaggerating, I really do think there was some sacred element to European culture that was destroyed by Marxist/Communist ideals, non-Western immigration, and globalization.
It's a damn shame, honestly. The last place I can think of that actually retains culture is Denmark, and they're getting shit from the Commies for wanting to preserve their culture and restrict "refugees" from tainting their systems.
>>10705044
Yea right man
>>10704649
Just how much more casual can we get? What can be lazier than wearing pajamas to class? People are rolling out of beds onto campus without changing. This is literally rock bottom
>>10698767
It's an IVY LEAUGE rich boy school. And you're comparing it to some piece of shit city college probably in a shit prt of town. This is the stupidest picture I've ever seen.
>>10705061
in what way have the Danes retained their culture?
i' curious because i live near the danish border.
I can see that they have a few more traditional celebrations, more self-esteem and nationalism than the Germans but in general it seems very western.
They still like to charge tourists a lot though like in the old days.
>>10705136
They restrict non-Western immigration. They cherish (and pretty much enforce) continuing their culture, not race-mixing, staying insular and tight-knit.
Nationalism isn't necessarily a bad thing. You can respect other cultures, and foreigners, without embracing them into your own culture. "Tall fences keep neighbors honest" kinda thing.
>>10704118
cringe
i can tell you read gq and complex as gospel
>>10698767
>new jersey
>southern california
>>10705044
True to be honest.
If you are genuinely a "nice guy" and pack on some muscle your life will change because only people who are actually strong can be nice. Nice and weak is actually just meek, pathetic, sycophantic.
Strong + nice = benevolent.
>>10704649
liberal relativist pls go
>>10698767
Decline of good cultural values. Its ok to be fat, look like & dress like shit, because we've basically erased people's accountability from every aspect of life (the "just be yourself" cultural meme). Its ok not to take care of your appearance today. How other people see you is as important as how you see yourself.
>>10705061
>>10705159
>Dansk Folkeparti
>A reasonable party
>You can respect other cultures, and foreigners, without embracing them into your own culture.
The issue is, if you do this, they'll never be integrated and you'll get ghettos like you're attempting to avoid (like Mjolnerparken). Non-viable solution already here.
"Tall fences keep neighbors honest"
But it clearly doesn't, it has created this awful friction between cultures, that has spawned a lot of racism and neo-nazi sounding opinions. If anything, it has created more problems inside Denmark.
Source: I live in Sonderjylland, DF land and I also live next to an asylcenter.
>>10698977
Fashion relativism is false. Good fashion is for the most part objective ex trends that survive for decades.
>>10699993
This. Why can't people realize this?
You may as well be taking a picture of a guy in fucking 1870 and wondering why all the men dressed in suits or waste coats. On one end of the spectrum, you had people who wore suits everyday. On another end, you had peasants in rags.
By the 1960s in the USA, there was a ripe and good mixture and concentration of both. People often still dressed in seemingly "high class" (by today's standards) clothes. But for the first time these clothes were being mass produced. So, it appears that EVERYONE in America was wearing clothes like that.
It's 2015 -- there's a lot of different types of clothes now that can be easily found at a local supermarket for a low price. Mix that with like other people said, low standards and expectations, and viola', you get 30 year old men who still wear basket ball shorts all year round
notice how much happier the kids from 2015 look in their photo? theyre all laughing and smiling. probably because theyve realized that being comfy is whats important, even if it looks shitty. they all look like lazy pot smokers and acne faced, burger eating normies, but they dont give a shit, and theyre happier for it.
>>10704118
>Not a single one of those shirts fits you artless pleb.
But they do? Derp?
stop projecting your irrational fear of 60s pallets onto others?
>>10705061
>denmark
aren't they continuously rated as the world's happiest people?
i wonder why...?
>>10698868
When is this pic from? I've never seen any of these kids on campus before.
>>10706017
i know right... this girl shows up on the front page of my uni website
i'd ravage her
but i've never seen her on campus
would you look at this
just...
>>10705119
They're not rolling onto campus; they live on campus. I wouldn't wear pajamas to class, but I'd be tempted if I lived 100 yards away.
>>10705119
I doubt we'll see much development at the level of casualest clothing. What we'll see instead is a loosening of formality everywhere else (and we're pretty much there already on the west coast).
>>10705507
>I don't understand semiotics
>>10700532
overrrated meme post
inb4#_____livesmatter
>>10705533
Enjoying your first day with fashion as a hobby?
>>10705136
nice try amerikek
go back to reddit
>>10705336
This is a rather silly way to think. I do however like the idea of sensitivity housed in a strong body. I think you become a much better advocate for everything in your life when you're physically stronger. I love animals and little girls and being fit and fay makes that a little less weird
>>10706406
.... except for the fact that you love little girls...
>>10706412
Little girls are the best.
>>10706048
Shit that's Linda Cardellini
One is a picture taken at Princeton. the other is a picture taken of sophomores at a southern California high school, circa 2008.
>>10698767
Look at the men in the second picture. That's why diversity
consider the following:
http://streetetiquette.com/the-black-ivy/
Not necessarily agreeing with OP but the aesthetics that were fashionable back in the day are much more appealing than ones now. I'd rather dress like pic related (something that was supposed to represent how working class people dressed) than like a skelly fuccboi rocking $8000 worth of SLP. You could look better poor then than a rich person does now, imo.
>>10698797
How could it become less lazy? Next step is literally being naked and not showering
>>10706890
Marlon Brando's look is carefully tailored to fit his look and romanticize the working class attire. There's no way that was the national standard for working class.
>>10706890
>that were fashionable back in the day are much more appealing than ones now
DAE Led Zeppelin > Justin Beiber todays music sucks if i lived in the good ol days i would love all music ever created at that time
>>10698767
College got harder and more competitive so students couldn't bother to dress up.
>>10698767
It's almost as if things change as time goes on!
>>10706880
These guys are really good at taking photos. Their fits are so good, too bad they're probably expensive as hell
>>10698767
>http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/stalking-the-wild-madras-wearers-of-the-ivy-league
>On May 23, 1965, the eight-person team boarded a Northwest Orient Airlines flight to Boston. During the voyage, Shōsuke fretted over the contents of his luggage: stacks and stacks of yen notes required to fund the filming. Japan’s strict currency controls prevented travellers from taking more than five hundred dollars out of the country, but the Ivy film would cost more than four hundred times more. Production started at Harvard University. After a decade of obsession around the Ivy League, Kurosu thought that Harvard Yard looked exactly as he had imagined. So he waited for the students to appear in their signature look: three-button jackets, pants with a strap on the back, white oxford button-down collar shirts, regimental ties, and wingtips.
>Yet the first students to exit their dorms that Monday morning slumped into view wearing frayed cutoff shorts and decaying flip-flop sandals. Kurosu thought, maybe these were the class derelicts. But then the next group appeared, and they looked just as sloppy. Kurosu remembers, “I was shocked at how dressed-down they were—actually, it was absolute despair.” Footage of students in T-shirts and cutoff pants would not convince anyone in Japan to rethink Ivy style. Before they left Japan, Hasegawa had told Kurosu, “Jacket and ties were for Sunday chapel, the occasional date, or when you wanted to impress someone,” but Kurosu refused to believe him. Now, he had certainly squandered VAN’s war chest on a misunderstanding of American campus style.
>The team eventually found dapper students in madras blazers and khaki pants filing out of Memorial Church, and tuxedoed seniors celebrating graduation. But, as much as they searched, Kurosu and the crew could not locate any students wearing the three-button worsted-wool suits that VAN had convinced everyone were the standard uniform on East Coast campuses.
>>10698767
Obvilously people in upenn dress more preppy than in a random uni you dumb fuck
>>10706860
Look at the shirt in the right. It's USC
>>10708005
That's Princeton, though. Orange P on black field (as opposed to crimson P on a navy field).
>>10706880
Those are nice fits. Penn has such a nice-looking campus, too.
I walk through UPenn every day. I definitely see people dressed like that every day. I also see the short-and-T-shirts a lot, but actually perhaps less so than outfits which at least required some thought (and not just menswear; I see some good streetwear fits, too).
>>10698877
/thread
>>10707205
Go back to reddit kekboy
>>10698767
Ivy League v. Other schools
>>10708643
are you fucking stupid or nah
>>10708684
I think he is; that post's satire was as obvious as possible.
We have not completely recovered from the anti-fashion movement of the 90's.
>>10698868
W2c qt 3.14's on the left.
>>10707843
Fascinating great post
>>10698767
the jews
>>10698767
FIGHT ON!
Also those schools are on the opposite sides of the country, so this isn't really a fair comparison. People at USC generally dress like dudebros or sorority girls though
>>10711007
Oh except for all the rich China FOBs
They got really hot pieces sometimes, except the fat ones who ruin pieces. They were a lot of meme clothes too, like Givenchy rottweiler tee
>>10708359
My bad
same can be said about niggers
>>10711495
>>10711495
gotdam imagine the siqq dick fadez they'll get
