I don't think clothing is so much a statement about, as a reflection of your personality. People start out as teenagers projecting their favourite bands or their high school clique or their street culture with what they wear, but as you grow up and out of that a bit, you're left with the residual shaping and impact that's had on you as a person, and what you find aesthetically pleasing, and what feels "right" when you try it on.

Personally I've always chosen clothes that represent an idealised form of myself. I'm a greasy longhair metal type, but I try not to wear anything "scruffy", like I'm trying to make the stereotypical grebo image classy somehow. I've come to think of it as gothic smart-casual. It evokes the vibe of those 90s kids with painted nails big spiky boots, without being anywhere near as silly.

Which sort of brings me onto the social dynamic. A big part of it for a lot of people is the desire, or lack thereof, to stand out from the crowd. A lot of our choices are basically "will I look like a tit in this?" at the end of the day. My girlfriend has this anxiety that people will stare, or make comments about her because of what she wears, and it impacts what she chooses, even if she really likes something. I've got considerably fewer fucks to give, so I still occasionally still wear my very silly leather trenchcoat for a night out; but I have to be in the kind of mood to engage with "'ERE NEO, WHICH PILL DO YA WANNA TEK M8" from certain types of people. I happen to think it really suits me, but I'm extremely aware it's a very cliche and attention focussing choice.

I think that's the reason you'll find most people just wearing whatever's in Next. They just want to blend in. Whereas conversely, it's why girls like in the image you posted dress the way they do. People want to look nice, but also they mostly don't want to be the one in the room everyone's staring at, for either positive or negative reasons.

Someone do a thread about interior decor so I can let my inner Laurence Llewellyn out.

When it comes to judging people by their appearance, at least what they have control over, I'd say that grooming has considerably more impact than clothing and fashion style.

Your style of hair, how you maintain your facial hair, how you look after your skin, how you smell, etc., drastically affect how you come across. When it comes to clothing for men if you want to look good then the most effective thing you can do is to have a decent physique and wear things that fit your body shape.

I tend to wear nondescript clothing.

>>6191

>I tend to wear nondescript clothing.
What is it you wear that you think is nondescript? And where do you wear it?

I'm of the opinion that no clothing is nondescript. On a council estate a navy/grey Lonsdale hoodie is nondescript, in a wine bar a white formal shirt and a blazer is nondescript in the others enviroment they are quite descript. Nondescript is entirely circumstantial.

>>6191
Good post. I mostly agree. I realised that it didn't really matter if I was wearing a plain t shirt frmo Uniqlo I've had four years with a hole in it and some tatty Levi's if I had a decent haircut and clear skin and my god it's amazing what, when you put in the effort to your face/body presentation, women will put up with in terms of questionable fashion choices.

My style, if you can call it that, is almost completely functional - a plain t-shirt, usually black or dark, and dark or slightly contrasting chinos, and basic skate or sort-of-skate shoes like Vans. If I'm feeling the need to be smart or summery, it'll be a white shirt with lighter trousers/chinos, or a plain polo Sometimes I'll replace the trainers with Doc Martens, sometimes I'll wear a plain sweater or jumper over the top. Basically my entire wardrobe could be replicated in about five minutes in the generic dad section of an M&S or Primark. It's basic, unbranded, plain, boring.

As others have suggested, with the right level of grooming, which for me is a shaved head and a trimmed but full beard, the results are undeniably good - I don't particularly have much to say about my own appearance, but I get positive feedback from others quite often. For all that most women are a little bit obsessed with their own, or each others, outfits and fashion, it seems as a bloke all that matters is wearing clothes that basically fit, or if they don't fit, it looks deliberate.

I would argue that my clothes are nondescript too, I think I could get away with a black tshirt and grey pants just about anywhere, maybe not a wedding. It's clearly a refinement of the punk and post hardcore scenes I was into as a youngster, and I'm fine with that - if it works for Rollins it works for me.

>>6192

>I'm of the opinion that no clothing is nondescript.
>Nondescript is entirely circumstantial.

Christ, what semantic hell are you in?

>>6195
Would you say cargo shorts have malebolge?

When I was a teen I used to wear mostly Topman clothes, so lots of skinny jeans, bright t-shirts, slim fit hoodies. Got called a fag a lot. In adulthood I've moved to plain t-shirts, regular fit jeans, baggy hoodies, stuff that doesn't make me stand out. I think the only items of clothing I wear that are fashionable are my Jordans.

>>6195

Have you ever tried to chat up a girl who is like "I'm just kind of normal, you know" That's you that is, that is who you are.

In my late teens I dressed as a really half-arsed shite metalhead, think band teeshirt, chains, and the ugly khakis my mom bought me from M&S.
In my early 20s, it was kind of a terrible mix of that and hipster.

I think I've kind of figured out my fashion sense a bit now, leaning heavily towards simplicity and functionalness. Generally I'm in black or dark jeans, solovair boots (partly because I prefer the option of dark grey stitching rather than the yellow of docs), chequed or plain shirts unbuttoned with a teeshirt underneath for day-to-day, and floral or paisley prints for dressing up.

I miss combats and want to get some new pairs, but I'm finding it really hard to find a decent pair that isn't butt-ugly and which has actual useable pockets.

Also an aesthetic I could really get into, inspired by a lot of musicians, is a plain black suit jacket worn over a tshirt, but suit jackets are just too impractical for me.

>>6198

I may be, but the lad I replied to is currently arriving at 'actually, clothing itself is entirely circumstantial!'.

>>6200
The term 'Non-descript' is the entirely circumstantial part, Keep up. Nothing is ever non-discript If I was your english teach and you ever used 'Non-descript' in a peice of writting I'd
rap you over the knuckles with a ruler.

>>6201

Lad.

>>6202


I know you think you are making a point but you aren't. You are just demonstrating your vapidness. Do you just lack social cognition and assume everyone knows the same things you do?

>>6203

Shouldn't that be "vapidity"?

>>6203

Could you explain to little old me what I'm getting wrong? Because I must admit I have no fucking clue what you're getting at.

>>6205

If you had to meet someone and they said they look 'normal' and are wearing 'nondescript' clothes what would you think they looked like? Would you have any clue who you were looking for.

If I told you an amazing thing happened that was 'indescribable' how long would it take for you to get bored with my story.

If I told i needed help looking for my car that looked 'ordinary' would you be able to help?

If you ask a person on tinder what they like to do with their time and they say 'the usual' how hot would they have to be for you to force the conversation?

>>6206
Serious question: are you autistic?

>>6207

I was going to ask you, you seem to fail the Sally Anne test.

>>6206

So your issue is that using a word to describe clothes as lacking distinctive features is an issue because it's hard to describe something that lacks distinctive features?

That's what the word is there for.

>>6208

I've never liked that test. There are plenty of reasons why a relatively intelligent child might intuit that Sally would already be well aware of Anne's thieving ways.

Also you lads might have forgotten that you're posting on ShedChan: The internet's most autistic gardening forum.

>>6209
Nothing lacks distinctive features. You just lack the skill to describe it. If Doctor Johnson could explain what all the words meant in English, you can say what you wear every day.

>>6211

It doesn't take much skill to describe a plain black tshirt, but it is still not very distinctive.

>>6213

What material is it made of? How tightly does it fit you? How far down does it go on you? Do you purposefully hide your midriff or expose it? What is the neckline cut? What colour of black. Is there any kind of design. What do you think you are saying when you wear black. One other person in this thread does it because they are a bit of a metal head, one did it because they are a maturing punk. Do you do it to look sexy? Do you do it to look presentable

These are all points that could be explored.

>>6214

Well, I think we've safely answered >>6207's question.

I think you're arguing an entirely different point to the others in this thread. Nondescript does not mean 'impossible to describe' but rather something akin to 'not noteworthy enough to inspire detailed attention or recall in the average bystander'

>>6215

My point is everything is worthy of description because there is an enormous amount you take for granted that other people don't know. The nondescript becomes very relevant to those who have no idea what you are talking about, if history books were written by you lot every source quote about what is common at the time would call it “nondescript” might have been true at the time, but not terribly useful looking back. I honestly have no idea what they think nondescript specifically could mean in this context which was the point I spelled out in the original post asking for more details >>6192 "On a council estate a navy/grey Lonsdale hoodie is nondescript, in a wine bar a white formal shirt and a blazer is nondescript in the others environment they are quite descript. Nondescript is entirely circumstantial."

The fact that I have spelled out why saying things are nondescript 6 different ways isn’t useful doesn't make me autistic, it makes you retarded for not having gotten the idea that I think it is worthy of mention when I explained it the first time so I had to labour the point to try make it more obvious.

>>6201

>If I was your english teach and you ever

Irony upon ironies.

>>6216

>I honestly have no idea what they think nondescript specifically could mean in this context
>it makes you retarded for not having gotten the idea that I think it is worthy of mention when I explained it the first time so I had to labour the point to try make it more obvious

Well it would strike me that it's entirely your problem. Interestingly you were easily able to pick the two 'extremes' of our society (tracksuit/blazer or informal/formal). You didn't think it meant east African clothing, you didn't think it meant female clothing either. Your entire argument is 'you should explain it because I say so'.

>>6217

>Your entire argument is 'you should explain it because I say so'.

That is the argument of everyone who asks a question ever.

>>6217

>pick the two 'extremes' of our society (tracksuit/blazer or informal/formal)


If you think those 2 are the extremes then you have never been outside your village.

>>6218

Quite wrong there lad, I see you're also in a semantic hell of your own. Never mind, I'm here to help you out.

A bad argument is easily reduced to 'because I say so', of course people with bad arguments won't admit that because it admits one's own stupidity or lack of argument. That's why the suspect is clinging hopelessly to the notion that nondescript isn't clear. You can observe this easily with children bickering amongst themselves.

A good argument is different, you can't boil it down to 'because I say so'. Take smoking for example, you should not smoke because it's bad for you and has a dramatically negative impact on your life. That's a good argument because it's true, it's not true because I think it is.

Now, if I were to say you should stop posting on this board because you're an insufferable cunt, then I can't really back that up with anything— it's reduced to 'you should not post here because I say so'. The argument is weak and ridiculous, the only hope would be the unlikely event that people would echo that. Even, the argument would make me look immature, like a child having a temper tantrum.

Don't worry, if I see you struggling again I'll step in and help you out. We'll get there.


>>6219

If you can't understand inverted commas then you have never been born.

>>6220

Well I highlighted the point multiple times that people that don't live in their head don't know what they mean if the use vague non committal terms you can't get more clearer argument than that.

Well this is only the second most insufferably bland cunt off of 2020, keep it up lads. There's time yet.

>>6222
Would you say it's a rather nondescript cunt-off?

>>6223