[2011-Jul-08] Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Blame Quintushalls for this.

Moderator: Kimra

[2011-Jul-08] Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Nobody important » Fri Jul 08, 2011 5:21 pm

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2300

Where did his beard go in the popup!

Questions demand answers.
Nobody important
 

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Just Some Guy » Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:24 am

Haha, those academics are so stupid. Smart people wouldn't waste their time researching semi-obscure concepts like "conspicuous consumption."
Just Some Guy
 

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Gangler » Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:02 am

Just Some Guy wrote:Smart people

No such thing. Just seventeen different brands of stupid.
Paranoid? Probably. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't an invisible demon
about to eat your face.
User avatar
Gangler
watashi wa kawaii desu ne ^o^;
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:42 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby DonRetrasado » Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:21 am

I love this since I know so many academics like this. Eventually, only being able to afford paperback harlequin romances will be seen as "hipster" and "counterculture".
Astrogirl wrote:Lethal, nobody wants to know about your herpes.

Lethal Interjection wrote:That's good to know. I can avoid a few awkward phone calls now.
User avatar
DonRetrasado
los más retrasadadados
 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:27 am
Location: ¡Canada!

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby gavin » Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:39 pm

DonRetrasado wrote:I love this since I know so many academics like this. Eventually, only being able to afford paperback harlequin romances will be seen as "hipster" and "counterculture".
I've done some social research into this and you'd be surprised how many trends have been poverty driven. Ex: "Can't afford anything but hand-me-downs from your fat brother? Make others think you're cool for not wearing clothes that fit." These trends are all around us and most can be traced back to people taking lemons and making lemonade with them. I think it's almost inspirational.
;-)
gavin
A Disappointment.
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:14 pm
Location: Florida

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Kaharz » Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:33 pm

What social research have you done exactly?
Kaharz wrote:I don't need a title. I have no avatar or tagline either. I am unique in my lack of personal identifiers.
User avatar
Kaharz
This Intentionally Left Blank
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby gavin » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:03 pm

Kaharz wrote:What social research have you done exactly?
The college I attended was a research based university (FSU). Because of this, the professors were continually requiring us to do long drawn out research papers. This was for an elective class I took and had I known the amount of work it'd require I would have taken anything else.

Basically, I used previous research papers and studies along with more than the 30 minimum required interviews (statisticians are apparently in love with the number 30 as the first legitimate sample size) to come to this conclusion. I say social research only because it involved speaking with people and observing society. The vast majority was actual references gathered from JSTOR when my college admission came with access to it. Most of it is guess work, in my opinion. The papers could not really pin down an individual who was somehow able to lay claim to being the trend starter. Most nationwide trends didn't start in only one place and so the conclusion generally assumes there is a different basis for the origin than just someone trying to be cool and deciding to do something differently.

The professor leaned a bit heavily on me to focus on sagging pants (him being an aged white man probably had something to do with that). Actual research points to people not being able to afford pants that fit and so the fad was made out of necessity (as opposed to the anti-sagging pants propaganda floating around that it involved ass-rape in prison). You'd be surprised how many people have been caught while trying to escape a police officer due to a "hindrance of apparel".

We also found a plausible correlation with several modes of transportation (aside from cars) that have come into the forefront in some regions. Perhaps you've seen someone driving a miniature motorcycle down a sidewalk that was intended for children? The idea is that it is cheaper than a real bike or car and doesn't require the effort of a cycle. But, alas, we can only really guess at all of this since we don't have a first person. I found the work to be overladen with race stereotypes due to the severe poverty found in most minority groups. Papers on gold chains and the need to wear nice clothes and have an expensive car when you live in slums and are missing meals. It's surprising what people research to make a comment about race. I branched my paper out to show other trends in other cultures. Mopeds, for example, are being associated with environmentally friendly people when cost seems to have more to do with it.

Basically, we'd find someone who was the first generation in their family to express a trend and we'd try to place them on a socioeconomic scale. I had to have at least 30 people admit to be under the poverty level and 30 people who admit to be over it. Randomizing the sample size was a bit difficult but I managed to get 125 people to take the study in five days.
;-)
gavin
A Disappointment.
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:14 pm
Location: Florida

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Gangler » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:31 pm

gavin wrote:(as opposed to the anti-sagging pants propaganda floating around that it involved ass-rape in prison).

I find every word of that sentence fragment to be mildly shocking. What I'm gonna choose to ask about though is exactly what is the reasoning in the ass-rape thing? Are baggy pants supposed to aid in being raped somehow, implying it to be desirable? Has their ass been ruined by prison rape to such a degree that form fitting are no longer suitable? My mind is racing in circles trying to figure out what baggy pants are being accused of here.
Paranoid? Probably. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't an invisible demon
about to eat your face.
User avatar
Gangler
watashi wa kawaii desu ne ^o^;
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:42 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby gavin » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:49 pm

Gangler wrote:
gavin wrote:(as opposed to the anti-sagging pants propaganda floating around that it involved ass-rape in prison).

I find every word of that sentence fragment to be mildly shocking. What I'm gonna choose to ask about though is exactly what is the reasoning in the ass-rape thing? Are baggy pants supposed to aid in being raped somehow, implying it to be desirable? Has their ass been ruined by prison rape to such a degree that form fitting are no longer suitable? My mind is racing in circles trying to figure out what baggy pants are being accused of here.
There are a few rumors becoming common knowledge and being taken as fact despite being unfounded. They take a few different forms. Here are the most typical assertions I found.

Form one: Sagging pants implies that you are already someone's bitch in prison and therefore taken (it becomes a warning that if you mess with "me" then the other guy will find you.
Form two: Sagging pants implies that you are available for butt sex.
Form three: Sagging pants is a statement that you are gay in prison.

All of those statements ended up being false. The speculation is that someone who was adamantly against sagging pants began spreading that this is where it came from. Then again, I didn't interview prisoners.
;-)
gavin
A Disappointment.
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:14 pm
Location: Florida

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Gangler » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:56 pm

Ah, that makes sense. Even in prison under these claims it would still just be a fashion statement of sorts. Marking yourself as a particular type of person. Not like has a functional role to play in the event itself though. Thanks for clearing that up.
Paranoid? Probably. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't an invisible demon
about to eat your face.
User avatar
Gangler
watashi wa kawaii desu ne ^o^;
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:42 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Kaharz » Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 pm

The more plausible prison based origin is that inmates were not allowed to have to belts* and so their poorly fitting prison uniform pants often did not stay up. This seems somewhat more plausible to me then the hand-me-down theory since someone wearing their older brothers oversized pants could use a belt as little brothers have since the invention of pants. But it could have been both and some other origins besides. As Gavin said, pinning something like that down is next to impossible.

*Shoelaces were also banned in some cases and laceless shoes came into style about the same time sagging pants did, although that didn't become nearly as ubiquitous.
Kaharz wrote:I don't need a title. I have no avatar or tagline either. I am unique in my lack of personal identifiers.
User avatar
Kaharz
This Intentionally Left Blank
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Gangler » Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:32 pm

When you wear pants five sizes too large for you, all the belts in the world won't make that look like it fits. They would still very much be the "Baggy pants" look, just with a belt so your undergarments aren't visible.

Though if you personally can fill out the ass of a pair of pants with such a size discrepancy then my hat's off to you. That has to be worth some kind of respect right there.
Paranoid? Probably. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't an invisible demon
about to eat your face.
User avatar
Gangler
watashi wa kawaii desu ne ^o^;
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:42 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby gavin » Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:22 pm

Kaharz wrote:The more plausible prison based origin is that inmates were not allowed to have to belts* and so their poorly fitting prison uniform pants often did not stay up. This seems somewhat more plausible to me then the hand-me-down theory since someone wearing their older brothers oversized pants could use a belt as little brothers have since the invention of pants. But it could have been both and some other origins besides. As Gavin said, pinning something like that down is next to impossible.

*Shoelaces were also banned in some cases and laceless shoes came into style about the same time sagging pants did, although that didn't become nearly as ubiquitous.
The article I read on that dealt with the glorification of thug behavior and the desire of black culture to mimic criminals. If you ever have to read some of this stuff, you have to wonder if the writer regularly wears a hood or if it is actually a legitimate study. I hadn't heard about the belts though. It makes sense too.
;-)
gavin
A Disappointment.
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:14 pm
Location: Florida

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Kaharz » Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:06 pm

Gangler wrote:When you wear pants five sizes too large for you, all the belts in the world won't make that look like it fits. They would still very much be the "Baggy pants" look, just with a belt so your undergarments aren't visible.

Though if you personally can fill out the ass of a pair of pants with such a size discrepancy then my hat's off to you. That has to be worth some kind of respect right there.


Yea, they would still be baggy, but they wouldn't be falling down. I was speaking solely to the 'sagging' trend. I should have been more specific, sorry.
Kaharz wrote:I don't need a title. I have no avatar or tagline either. I am unique in my lack of personal identifiers.
User avatar
Kaharz
This Intentionally Left Blank
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: July 8 - Conspicuous ABSENCE??

Postby Gangler » Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:00 am

Well if you mean sagging as in the waistband of the pants being far below the waist then yes, the belt would fix that. If you mean the inseam coming down a foot and a half past the crotch, which gives it what the older demographics seem to insist is the "Crapped your pants" look, well that would still stick around with the addition of the belt. You really need to fill out that ass in order to bring that inseam back up to it's proper height. With a size discrepancy like that no mere buttocks would do, you'd need a full blown booty.

Certainly the belt is always an improvement though.
Paranoid? Probably. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't an invisible demon
about to eat your face.
User avatar
Gangler
watashi wa kawaii desu ne ^o^;
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:42 pm


Return to Latest Comic Discussion 3: Revenge of the Son of Latest Comic Discussion 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests