Fashion Board 12-09-03 through 1-08-04

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Huh? They're curiously tall, and wear those weird panties during games. Swimmers and/or divers hold much more appeal.

Unless you're talking about beach volleyballers, in which case you're talking about a stripper-athlete hybrid, which isn't bad at all. BUt you don't find many of them in college, just on the beach.

No one tops the skiers and snowboarders.

No one.

[dtb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Most of the chicks you're referring to have shit for brains anyway, and are only worth fucking and chucking.

Wow, you are so classy! It's no wonder you were snapped up -- she's one lucky gal!

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Those you'd really want to meet are open-minded enough not to judge a man solely by his shoes.

While this whole discussion is really tiresome, to be fair, that's not what she said. She said that was one of the elements.

Just to add some market color (OK, I've totally given away what I do for a living....), a friend of mine from college told me some advice her mother gave her when she was a wee lass:

If you ever get lost, try to find a policeman to help you, if you can't find a policeman, try to find a woman with a child to help you, and if you can't find either of those, look for a man in a suit wearing [nice] [expensive] (can't remember which she used) shoes.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by spookyfish
Just off the top of my head, I'm surprised that Sgt. Pepper's is at number one. It isn't even the best Beatles album. Revolver should take the #1 slot. I've never understood why Sgt. Pepper received the hype it does, other than that it was the Beatles response to Pet Sounds. It's a great album, but frankly there are better albums out there.

I think there are two ways to rank albums over a long period, and RS has picked my favorite method, which involves more the impact of an album at its contemporary height as opposed to a current look. SPep was very much a high-impact album when it came out, signaling a course change of sorts for the Beatles, and also containing quite a few themes that were meaningful then, but old and cliche'd now. Revolver, while it might be ranked better today, didn't have near the impact back when.

This poll doesn't appear to be the play list of every "classic rock" station across the country today. It does, however, resemble a sampling of every monthly slice of musical importance over time.

[purse junkie]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
And isn't gelt like passover wine: doomed to be horrible tasting for eternity through over-sweetness?

I refuse to accept eternal curses on chocolates. Just as there are now some decent kosher wineries popping up that avoid the Manischewitz cough-syrup effect, I fully expect, and demand, more sophisticated Hanukkah sweets.

And in the interests of cross-cultural harmony, I promise I will also lobby for less crappy chocolate Easter bunnies. So help me out here someone!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by paigowprincess
I have no issues bc music is totally subjective and the fact that you cannot go two seconds without seeing yet another list of the greatest whatevers in a magazine or tv channel doesnt really enhance my faith in such things.

That said, I think the Dead are underated for studio albums. American Beauty is a great album (Candyman haunts me), and Working Man's Dead is killer. The Here Comes Sunshine on Wake of the Flood is one of the greatest tunes ever recorded and so is Alabama Getaway from Go to Heaven (an album widely derided as schlock on a new label as I recall). Very few records put out in recent years could hold a candle to any of this. Jerry Garcia was an absolute musical prodigy, as shown in the wide range of musical styles that the Dead covered, wrote and innovated. I don't think I would know anything about jug music (and I dont mean the Bob Seger tunes that the strippers rub themselves to at tittie bars) were it not for the Dead. And I dont think a RS defintitive list is gonna change my mind. Just remember when you were growing up and they had these countdowns of the Greatest Rock N Roll Song Ever and the number one tune was always Stairway to Heaven? Exactly.

I hate you for going down this road Paigs...

Anthem of the Sun is THE Dead masterpiece. Sure, Beauty and Workingman's are classics, but Anthem is true Dead as they sounded at Kesey's acid tests. Did you buy Dicks Picks 22 yet? Its fucking amazing.

The Dead were not undderepresented in regard to albums on that 500 best list, except that Anthem should have been there. Where they were underrepresented was in rank - American Beauty and Workingman's should have been top 75. Anthem and Live Dead should have been top 50.

And Please buy Two From the Vault. Next to DP 22, its the finest slice of real primal Dead as they should be heard available.

As to the remainder of the 500 list, I say fuck any list where Neil Young's higest rank is in the 70s.

Oh, and one more thing... 5 years ago never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols was #2. In the 500 list is was 53. It fell forty eight slots in 5 years? WTF? Pretty fucking arbitrary.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Well, that and pairing loafers, no matter how nice, with a suit.

1. They're more comfortable.

2. It shows subtle contempt for the grooming rules adhered to by the white shoe assholes I work around.

3. I'm talking Alden point toed loafers, not penny loafers or Guccis with silver shit on them.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by purse junkie
I refuse to accept eternal curses on chocolates. Just as there are now some decent kosher wineries popping up that avoid the Manischewitz cough-syrup effect, I fully expect, and demand, more sophisticated Hanukkah sweets.

Well, it took only 5700+ years to get the wine straightened out. What's another 5000 or so for the chocolate?

[notcasesensitive]

This entire shoes/watch discussion has reinforced that I must be a lower class loser at heart. I will now publicly admit that I have never looked at any guy's shoes or watch upon meeting in a bar. And, even more alarming, I would not know Gucci from Ferregamo from anyone else. I don't shop for men's shoes. I suppose if I looked at a watch and (a) the emblem was a commonly recognizable one and (b) it was large enough to see it, then I might know what brand the watch was. Having never in my life looked at a guy's watch in a bar though, this is only speculation.

And when I have met guys with super expensive cars, I've typically had the impression that they were either living beyond their means or they placed way more value on cars than I do.

Seriously, do women do this shit? None of my friends do (that I know of) and I live in the runner-up shallowist city in America. And what are they hoping to gain? (that was rhetorical, I guess)

I must have been doing the whole singles scene incorrectly when I was in it.

As an aside, there is a trust fund loser who siphons money off of his family instead of holding down a job who is available in Dallas, for any golddiggers out there. I'm not really sure that much gold is involved, but it is apparently enough for the 28-year-old loser who I dated a couple years back to sit around his house all day. Maybe if I had studied his watch and shoes I might have picked up on how worthless he is, but I doubt it.

I'll take my work-a-day lawyer bf, complete with his normal guy car, shoes and watch.

[DFH's_Shit_Shoveler]

Originally posted by purse junkie
Where the hell can I find good *dark* chocolate gelt? The artificial 'milk chocolate' crap from CVS is not going to cut it. Sweet tooths of the FB, please help!

Also, Sebby's just wrong on shoes. Nice ones are not a dealbreaker. But most guys set the fashion/grooming bar so low with the same pair of half-poly Dockers and dead-dot-com polo shirt that it's an easy way to show you're not a tasteless blockhead. Why not give yourself an edge?

And if you have nice shoes but are still an ass, the women will figure it out fast anyway. So don't worry about well-shod losers getting quality play.

Thanks for visiting the stall. However, though it may look like chocolate at a glance, it is shit. Beware.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Oh, and one more thing... 5 years ago never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols was #2. In the 500 list is was 53. It fell forty eight slots in 5 years? WTF? Pretty fucking arbitrary.

Not if you look at this as not being weighted towards current sentiment over the sentiment at the time of the music.

(But, by those standards, 2ftV should have been in there, too.)

[DFH's_Shit_Shoveler]

Originally posted by dtb
Wow, you are so classy! It's no wonder you were snapped up -- she's one lucky gal!




While this whole discussion is really tiresome, to be fair, that's not what she said. She said that was one of the elements.

Just to add some market color (OK, I've totally given away what I do for a living....), a friend of mine from college told me some advice her mother gave her when she was a wee lass:

If you ever get lost, try to find a policeman to help you, if you can't find a policeman, try to find a woman with a child to help you, and if you can't find either of those, look for a man in a suit wearing [nice] [expensive] (can't remember which she used) shoes.

Didn't you get the memo?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
As to the remainder of the 500 list, I say fuck any list where Neil Young's higest rank is in the 70s.

And that includes the Caprenters and No Doubt.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
1. They're more comfortable.

So are these:



But I'm not wearing them with a suit, even if my client is Playboy Inc.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
So are these:



But I'm not wearing them with a suit, even if my client is Playboy Inc.

Right. Because you'd be wearing pajamas and a smoking jacket. Duh.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive


As an aside, there is a trust fund loser who siphons money off of his family instead of holding down a job who is available in Dallas, for any golddiggers out there. I'm not really sure that much gold is involved, but it is apparently enough for the 28-year-old loser who I dated a couple years back to sit around his house all day.

If my similarly limited experience, those ones who sit around the house all day are the ones who can least afford to do so on their limited trust funds. Soon they'll be 35, have $200k left in some crap stocks, and have to figure out how the fuck to make an actual living for the next 50 years. It takes a while for some folks to realize that unless you live off of only the interest (or less), a trust fund actually can be depleted.

The ones whose funds are sufficiently ample to allow for a lifetime of such behavior are either working at daddy's/family's bank (or similar fairly legitimate business) or are doing things like teaching schoolchildren or working for some sort of charitable foundation.