Category: Clothes

Dress from my readings I believe supports the theoretical perspective that identity theory can be referred to as interaction theory due to the way we talk, dress, address one another and our gestures, all lies within the values of the interactionism from the society in which one has spent most of their lifetime or years being a part of.

Firstly, who we are as individuals reflects how we were brought up, what values have been instilled in us and society’s influence in our upbringing. To enumerate, common to the Nigerian culture, one is taught to be very respectful of their elders, talk politely, address senior ones as SIR, MA, UNCLE or AUNTIE, dress in a manner which is not too revealing because in most cases the way you dress is an interpretation of if one is from a good home or not, gestures we make around people must be appropriate and to kneel when greeting an elderly person. From my readings of “The Interactionist Perspective of George Herbert Mead and Harvey Sacks” I would say that meads view mostly identified with my position on how the development of self was a result of interaction. As he stated, “Meaning arises and lies within the field of the relation between the gesture of a given human organism and the subsequent behavior of this organism as indicated to another human organism by that gesture. If that gesture does so indicate another organism the subsequent (or resultant) behavior of the given organism, then it has meaning. In other words, the relationship between a given stimulus – as a gesture – and the later phases of the social act of which it is an early (if not the initial) phase constitutes the field within which meaning originates and exists.” (Mead, 1967, p.75-76)

Secondly, as said earlier, dress is an interpretation or who we are and want to be perceived as, and as the saying goes, “dress how you want to be addressed.” Common to every culture, there is a common way of dressing be it in the traditional attire or every day clothes. Clothing, jewelleries and accessories all fall under dress. Individuals common to a society have already deemed a way in which it is appropriate to dress within a culture and if someone disregards this, he or she may be outcasted or looked down on by people of that common society. Hence, dress and identity go hand in hand and asides from identity, dress also represents how we communicate from an interactionist stand point. From my readings of “Dress and Identity by Mary Ellen Roach-Higgins and Joanne B. Eicher”, this helps in understanding how much our way of dressing is a means of communication that can bring positive or negative opinions from individuals. As stated in the reading, “From the perspective of symbolic interaction theory, individuals acquire identities through social interaction in various social, physical, and biological settings. So conceptualized, identities are communicated by dress as it announces social positions of wearer to both wearer and observers within an interaction situation. Some identities are assigned at birth. These identities include those associated with body variations according to sex, race, or deviations from average that a society may define as handicaps as well as ethnic category of kinship group”. (Roach-Higgins & Eicher, 1992 p.5)

Furthermore, certain dressing can be subjected to immorality especially amongst women and men. Thousands of pieces are made to embrace the woman’s body but when worn in a manner not appropriate, the wrong impression is gotten and sometimes interpreted as a means of sexuality thereby attracting the wrong attention towards oneself. To enumerate, Older women, married women, and mothers, are culturally desexualized, so dressing in a revealing way is viewed with suspicion and judgment. Older women receive the message and believe they should avoid wearing brightly colored or revealing apparel and choose their clothing with the intent of covering up perceived bodily flaws associated with aging. (Gillen & Montemurro,2013 p.168).

In addition, in an experiment conducted to determine the influence of subjects’ clothing interests on the perceived influence of dress in the enhancement of occupational attributes, it was observed that females’ clothing interest is higher than males’, a t-test was performed between females’ and males’ clothing interests. Results indicate there was a significant gender difference. (Kwon, 1994, p.37).

Dress supporting the theoretical perspective that identity theory can be referred to as an interaction theory is valid because this is a symbolic interaction. In my findings from a reading, three reasons were outlined as to why individuals act this way. Firstly, we act towards people and things based on the meaning we interpret from them. Next, those meanings are the product of social interaction between people and lastly, meaning-making and understanding is an ongoing interpretive process, during which the initial might remain the same, evolve slightly or change radically. (Cole, 1937, p.2).

Moreover, as this is a world which is constantly evolving, the way people interactionism occurs is ever changing. This is means through which other people’s viewpoint or behavior are understood and sometimes your dress speaks for in situation where the individual themselves would not like to speak. One factor which is pivotal to my viewpoint is the concept of people as constructors of their own actions and meanings, with the focus on individual action rather than wider social structures (Barron & Zeegers, 2015).

In addition to this, because self emerges in and is reflective of society, the sociological approach to understanding the self and its parts (identities) means that we must understand the society in which the self is acting, and keep in mind that the self is always acting in a social context in which other selves exist (Stryker, 1980). Moreover, because dress functions as an effective means of communication during social interaction, it influences peoples’ establishing identities of themselves and others (DeLong, 1987).

In conclusion, dress does support the theoretical perspective that identity theory can be referred to as interaction theory because from how we speak, to dressing, to gestures all influence our identity as well as interaction.

What you wear is what you are. Clothing and personality go along together. I believe that what a person looks on the outside resembles how people look on the inside. Clothes can uncover a wide range of things. For example, we can judge people by their clothes. It can tell you about personality, mood, and interests. A person wearing a suit tells you something different than a person with shorts. Color and style are specific details in clothes.

The colors of clothes tell us about the mood of the person. Before speaking with someone, people can get a general idea about their mental state by looking at the color of their clothing. First of all, people who wear bright colors like red, yellow and orange are happy and lively. For example, people who go on a trip wear clothes with bright colors that reflect their happiness. Otherwise, people who wear dark colors like black, brown, and gray are sad and depressed. when someone is dead, people who go to funerals or visit graves always wear black and dark colors.

One’s clothes can give some impressions about his personality. It may be a tool for expression. For instance, people who wear casual clothes like a pair of jeans and open shirts are relaxed, comfortable, and flexible. They are easy to approach as they prefer to express their real personality. On the other hand, people who wear formal clothes like suits or coats are often strict, professional, and more serious. For instance, if you meet someone who wears a suit or semiformal, you will guess that he has a meeting or interview or anything related he works in a company. In addition, people who wear vintage are more related to the old area, more elegant and classy. They forced you to be more respected and staid while talking to them.

Clothes can also reflect one’s interests. For example, people who wear sporty clothes and sneakers are keen on sports. But others who wear t-shirts printed with cartoons are obviously like watching animation. In addition, people who put on printed shirts with a slogan of tune band are fond of music. Others who put on printed shirts with a picture of an actor or actress are possibly big fans of that actor.

In simple words, choosing clothes is the main factor to make an impression of the person, people usually wear what they like and what makes them feel good about themselves, as we can say that clothes have 90% of one’s personality. So, we have to choose what we wear carefully to express ourselves to the people to give them the best impression of us.

Various occasions in history have influenced and changed how we perceive the way in which clothes are developed. Toward the very beginning, individuals spent hours making their clothes, and those who could afford it had them tailored. The demand for more caused the mass production of clothes to be made. Thanks to technology the way that clothes have been made for hundreds of years has changed. How individuals live, their way of life and new innovations affect how clothing is created.

Before technology, there was a time when people hand made their attires. Their own relatives, or they sewed and fabricated their clothes, but only people of the highest society could pay others to do it for them. The wealthy had clothes made by tailors, who often customized their own patterns, meaning that individuals could easily recognize those that were affluent and had power because of the intricate designs in their clothes. These kinds of apparel cost a lot of money to make, the process of making the fabric itself cost more so than the clothes themselves. We would eventually find a problem with tailoring, which is that they took hours to complete and were a sign of the wearer’s wealth, this implies that it was time-consuming to create such clothing. Ultimately this trend began to fade, clothing became a natural extension of the body rather than its decoration or disguise. In other words, clothes became more practical rather than confined.

Due to the Civil War, there was an increasing demand for more clothes. As the war continued, however, manufacturers started to build factories that could quickly and efficiently meet the growing demands of the military. Therefore, factories started to mass create uniforms for soldiers and it ended with favorable results. Despite the mass production of men’s clothing becoming a huge commercial success and a pivotal moment in the history of ready-made clothing. The mass production of women’s clothing developed more slowly, meaning it took longer for manufacturers to make a profit. The mass production clothes became more and more the norm of fashion around the United States. The new consumer industries were rapidly redefining the way Americans viewed mass-manufactured goods. However, there was a catch, the ready-made clothing did not fit as well as before, hence people started to return them or waste more money on tailoring them. This situation resulted in additional expenses for alterations. It also meant large volumes of returned merchandise.

With technology being everywhere nowadays there has been a great improvement in modern clothing. Back then designers used a pen and pencil to write and draw their ideas, now designers have machines and software that they can benefit from at any time that facilitates that creative process an example that they have is computer-aided design (CAD) software at their disposal to determine textile weaves and sizing design. We now have 3D printers that have the power to transform clothing styles and developments in clothing creation as we know it. Designers have been experimenting with 3D printed apparel, and this could revolutionize the experience of buying clothes for the average consume and it will allow consumers to print out objects like bracelets in a matter of minutes from the comfort of their homes, which indicates that fashion is always evolving, and we are finding new ways every day to keep up with an ever-changing culture.

Clothing styles and the way we create our daily attire have been greatly affected by our history, culture and new developments in technology. Garments started to be man-made then with machines it helped mass-produced clothes but since then, technology has helped further develop it into an extraordinary process. Dress styles and improvements in apparel creation have gone through many phases over the years and is still changing.

Clothing, it is such an important necessity other than food or water, things we generally take for granted. We tend to forget that hassle our ancestors may have gone through just for making self-tailored clothes. Now, all of our clothing comes through lightning-fast manufacturing and is dismissed just as quick, this goes to show how crazy the history of clothing has to offer. By examining ready-made clothing to tailoring to even the advancements we made for modernizing out own clothing, it is clear that there is a relationship between clothing styles and developments in clothing creation.

Though quite simple, clothing expresses deeply our ‘tastes’ and who we are and our personality. However, clothes before the Industrial Revolution were made and worn very differently than they are now. For many, people tend to make their own clothing by hand from fabric they made or purchased locally. This was a long and hefty process in return that didn’t allow families to make or own multiple pieces of clothing whenever they want to unlike what it is like today. Though troubling “merchants made their wealth in transporting fine fabrics and threads” which gave decent jobs especially in those times.

Then with the changes of the Renaissance era, specifically art and society, came more fitting clothes. These garments were made by sewing several pieces of fabric together. The rich and wealthy usually had a tailor which made really an ‘artsy’ aesthetic to their clothes, something that would be known by all. However, their clothes had really no form of closures like zippers and buttons, people often had to be sewn into their clothes! Fortunately, enough as political and social movements help move more restrained and practical clothing. As embellishments and flashy fabrics came out of use even among the aristocrats, fit became increasingly more important in the 19 and 190th centuries.

As those things were happening the Polynesian spent hours beating plant fibers and tree bark into tapa cloth. For Hawaiians, part of this practice took on religious significance and was conducted in scared spaces. For many, the fabric, as well as the process of fabric making, meant a lot and may well be very meaningful. While time, effort, and money were put into making or obtaining fabric, creating a garment was less complicated and was far more satisfying. These are great examples of different clothing types in the wide history of clothing.

Furthermore, in the ‘storyline of clothing’ comes ready-made clothing, something that really influences our “modern” way of clothing style and how we make it. Before the American Civil War, ready-made apparel exists but its variety was limited. Coats, jackets, and undergarments were only available in predetermined sizes. Clothing was still mainly made by tailors, individuals, or by their family members at home. Correspondingly, the Civil War was a pivotal event in the historical development in men’s ready-made clothing. At the beginning of the war, “most uniforms were custom-made in worker homes under government contracts. However, as the war continued manufacturers started to build factories that could quickly and efficiently meet the growing demands of the military. With rapid succession, the mass-producing uniform was a hit however measurements were still needed to gain a regularity between sizes. They started taking measurements of soldiers and it revealed that certain sets of measurements tend to recur with predictable regularity.

After the war, these measurements were implemented to create the first commercial sizing scales for men. Surprisingly these ratios persist in names of fits and cuts in men’s suits, shirts, and also denim jeans. The mass production of women’s clothing, however, developed slowly than men’s. But as time went on and a number of factors came into play to contribute to the success of the women’s ready-made apparel industry. The purchase of these mass-produced clothing was sometimes seen as a loss of individuality. However, American women began to accept these ready-made clothes as convenient and affordable.

However, these new ready-made clothing was often fitted poorly. A tailor would still have to adjust the measurements when making a men’s suit or a lady’s dress. What matters worse manufacturers created their own unique and sometimes arbitrary sizing system. This system resulted in additional expenses for the consumer to alter their garments. It wasn’t until 1973 that the USDA helped to create a standardized sizing system the entire industry could follow.

As time went on, as well countless fads and fashion trends came along, we come along to the advancements in modern clothing. During the late 20th and early 21st centuries, computer technology has advanced exponentially. This allows today’s fashion designers ‘unprecedented freedom’ to express their creativity. Instead of creating sketches by hand taking hours upon hours they now use computer-aided design software (CAD) that grants these designers to create something that could only be dreamt about.

The impact of CAD software on everyday clothing is becoming more and more prevalent as the software is linked to 3D printing technology. 3D technology could well be the future of clothing Designers has since been experimenting with 3D printed apparel, and this could revolutionize the experience of buying clothes for the average consumer. Though it may be a while before anyone can print out their own clothes, this ability to create customized clothing is becoming more and more of a reality as technology evolves.

As we fall into an era so filled with technology, it’s crazy to think what’s next. What’s next for the future of apparel, could it be that we will one day wear our own one-of-a-kind, perfectly tailored clothes? But I do know is that we’ve come a long way and the evidence is here. This unique history is an intermingled relationship of all styles, concepts, and truly remarkable advancements.

This essay is about clothes and how they have come to have a social value. In this essay we will discuss the different reasons behind conspicuous consumption and whether or not it is just a means to gain pecuniary strength or not. We will also discuss how a person’s politics can inform their fashions. Looking at the marginalization of women in society we will analyze and break down old-fashioned views of consumption and what their justifications might be, showing the different reasons there can be for conspicuous consumption today.

If we look at the picture of wool cloth, silk velvet, and satin applique dress by E. Coguenhem et Cie (Paris, 1899), we see a photograph of a long baby blue Victorian inspired corseted silk velvet gown with satin applique detailing on it. Underneath there is a wool cloth lining adding to the form of the dress. Looking at the silhouette of the dress it is intended to be worn by a lady who lives an easy life, it is not very adaptable to different situations. The dress is long enough to trail the floor; the waist is corseted. Corsets are not designed to be comfortable they were designed to make women more aesthetically pleasing to the common eye. Veblen believed that the leisure class purchased excessive amounts of things they didn’t really need for the soul purpose of gaining pecuniary strength. “Unproductive consumption of goods is honorable, primarily as a mark of prowess and a perquisite of human dignity” (1899:33), – he said. Looking at the dress in the photo it does assert a level of power just because of the amount of time and fabric that has gone into it. A person could wear this kind of dress to feel elevated, not necessarily around or against other people but within them self. The dress takes inspiration from the Victorian style, so it could be worn by a lady with a nostalgia for the Victorian times.

A person who involves in conspicuous consumption may get a satisfaction from new clothes and the way they make them feel when they put them on. The clothes we wear are meant to enhance our look; they’re meant to put our person into perspective showing one of many ways we can look. Free choice is just one of the luxuries we are entitled to and shopping is just one of the ways it can be exercised and better still if you’re well-off. Most people link the love of clothes with materialism, and materialism with being superficial. In the second paragraph of ‘Living in the Material World’ – the first chapter in ‘Culture and Consumption’, Grant McCracken claims that “materialism is fast becoming the villain of the piece”.

On page 80 Veblen argues, that spending significant amounts of money on clothes that you will eventually disassociate from is a waste of time. “It leaves unanswered the question as to the motive for making and accepting a change in the prevailing style, and it also fails to explain why conformity to a given style at a given time is so imperatively necessary as we know it to be” (Veblen, 1899:80). Veblen making this statement suggests that he is racking his brain in an attempt to understand why people are investing so much of their leisure time into buying clothes that cannot possibly be worth their while. He believed the clothes had no genuine value to the wearers other than to gain status among their peers, even though, they will change again in time for the coming season. Veblen is questioning how the styling of our clothes ever came to have such a high importance, he says “it also fails to explain why conformity to a given style at a given time is so imperatively necessary as we know it to be” (1899:80). Veblen believes fashions are pointless subscriptions as they’re always altering, he closes his sentence with the term “as we know it to be”. This suggests conforming to new trends is something familiar to the human brain and so he is baffled as to why everyone isn’t asking this obvious question. Is this some kind of practical joke? Why are you giving away your money, Veblen is wondering?

Fashions generally respond to the things going on in the world, for example the weather, or injustices in society and so a fashion that is on trend one month may not necessarily be trendy or even acceptable the next. Trends are commonly set by the forward-thinking members of society, however there is more than one type of consumer and so therefore, more than one type of trendsetter. According to the trickle-down theory, the upper class are assumed to be trying to differentiate themselves while the lower class are assumed to just be imitating the upper class with the middle class varying in the middle. Having these different types of consumers means there can be no one answer to the question of, “why conforming to a given style seems so necessary” (1899:80) to so many people. From the late 1800s to the early 1900s It probably wasn’t common for members of the upper class to take elements from the styling of the lower class, as opposed to now where the appropriation is almost the norm. There are many different reasons a person could do this; for example, social gain – to appear down to earth, or to camouflage themselves.

On page 4 of Grant McCracken’s book ‘Culture and Consumption’, he states: “Goods help us make our culture concrete and public – through purchase. They help us display new meaning – through use. And they help us change meanings through innovation” (2005). Our clothes can indicate to people how well we are doing currently in our lives, whether we are organized or disorganized, our punctuality in regard to interviews and the types of company we might entertain. So, while Veblen may only be able to see a person investing in and changing their style frequently as being ‘wasteful’ we can choose to see this as a sign of evolution and growth, a sign of understanding you’re not yet at your destination and you don’t have all of the answers yet but you’re going somewhere. On page 82, Thorsten claims that “when seen in the perspective of half-a-dozen years or more, the best of our fashions strike us as grotesque, if not unsightly” (1899). When evolving as a person, changing or upgrading your outward appearance is usually part of the process; this gives others the chance to appreciate your new way of living and adjust to the new you. It’s the same as when we look back on pictures as children and wonder how our parents could have ever dreamt of dressing us in such dreadful garments or looking back at teenage years wondering how our friends allowed us to think we looked good. We often have these responses because the person we see in the picture and the person we see ourselves as now bear no stylistic similarity or resemblance to one another. On page 42 of the book ‘Consumer Behavior in Fashion’ Solomon states, “Material culture includes handmade material items such as clothing tools, and furniture. We find these things, or artefacts, in museums, they are used to study how people lived” (2003). This is evidence of how important clothes are, when they can be used to examine the quality of life you were living after you are gone. This is a testimony to how important our clothes are in society, they help us tell our story. Our clothes can also help us distinguish the people were likely to connect with in a crowd. “Products and services that resonate with the priorities of a culture at any given time have a much better chance of being accepted by consumers” (2003:39). This suggests that while the clothes may be aesthetically pleasing, the appeal also has to do with what we associate the clothes with and what the clothes can do for us. As humans we have a long way to go in terms of supporting one another and trying to improve our planet. “American products that reflect underlying cultural processes at the time they were introduced: cosmetics made up of natural materials, and not animal tested which reflected consumers apprehensions about pollution, waste and animal cruelty” (2003:39). As people become more informed about the negative things going on in the world, sometimes they begin to make conscious decisions to help fuel a movement they know is good in the long run, inspiring others to jump on the bandwagon so not to look cruel and uncaring in a world that is dying for restoration.

Veblen claims that “most times the agenda of the wearer or purchaser of conspicuously wasteful apparel is to live up to the accredited standard of taste and reputability” (1899:78). Despite this being true in some situations, the seasons of the year see different clothing items as more valuable than others, for example in the winter jumpers are generally more valuable than in the summer. So, if a consumer chooses to purchase a large amount of the most desired sweaters, along with other clothing designed to keep a person warm why shouldn’t we assume they’re consuming so much because of they care about self-protection and preservation? Why should we persecute he or she for wanting to experience shelter? Veblen’s statement begs the question why must the wearers clothes center around a hopeless yearning for vindication, why can the purchase not be about a higher level of understanding. What we can assume is the way people associate women with shopping combined with people’s beliefs that women were only meant to be pretty could be a justification of Veblen’s harsh evaluation. Would Veblen go to a friend’s house and question their wide variety of food types or kitchen utensils? Could Veblen’s inability to express himself from a life spent suppressing his emotions explain why he struggles to understand how it is woman in particular are so comfortable adopting new styles publicly.

“It grates painfully on our nerves to contemplate the necessity of any well-bred woman earning a livelihood by useful work. It is not ‘woman’s sphere’” (1899:82). Veblen says that her sphere is within the household, which she should ‘beautify’, and of which she should be the chief ornament. This statement gives us an insight into how Veblen views women. What we see here is that Veblen’s views have been sculpted for him by society and so would it be wrong for us to assume that Veblen’s views on woman are mostly stereotypical. Furthermore, can we assume that the role women were forced to play as shoppers in the household, might play a role in Veblen’s belief that excessive shopping of things is unsubstantial.

‘1950’s Domestic Goddess’ is a picture of a woman in a pink long dress, in the kitchen, preparing food, most likely for her family judging by the amount of food on the table. The woman is painted half-smiling, opening the oven. Most people don’t smile when they are opening the oven, some would probably argue she might be smiling with excitement to eat the food, however anyone who spends as much time in the kitchen as a 1950s housewife did would probably want to heave at the smell of any homecooked meal. What kind of a woman was she if she did not feel this mysterious fulfilment waxing the kitchen floor? This kind of mentality being widely encouraged and accepted in society is likely one of the reasons Veblen has such a perverted perception of what being a woman should mean.

Women would blame themselves for wanting more in the 1900s: “She was so ashamed of her dissatisfaction that she never knew how many other women shared it” (Friedan, 1963:19). This infers, that society controlling and brainwashing women into thinking they were only good for things that tuned into their femininity such as, bearing children, left allot of women feeling alone, and thinking there was something wrong with them. Not because they weren’t feminine, but because they wanted more than what being a woman meant at that time. On page 19, of Friedan’s ‘The Feminine Mystique’ she writes, “When a woman went to a psychiatrist for help, as many women did, the psychiatrist would say, ‘I don’t know what’s wrong with women today. I only know something is wrong because most of my patients are women. And their problem isn’t sexual’” (Friedan, 1963:19).

The woman in the picture is wearing a long pink dress and she has pearls around her neck. In the kitchen most housewives dressed up because they didn’t really live for themselves, they were waiting for their husbands to come home so they could impress them with their looks – one of the few things, women were said to be good for. The woman in the picture is wearing a long dress and pearls just to cook in the kitchen, this suggests that she might be overcompensating for something, she wants people to believe she is happy, she wants people to think she takes care of herself and so everything is well with her meaning she is fit to take care of her husband and children too. We can only imagine what would happen if her husband arrived home one day and she was dressed in a vest and jeans, he would probably rush her to hospital. This kind of thought could only be possible in a society where men have been taught women’s lives should revolve around them.

In ‘Power Dressing’ we can see a picture that was photographed in the 1980’s of a woman wearing a grey and white pinstriped oversized Ralph Lauren suit that would commonly be associated with a rich powerful man – looking at the silhouette, probably working in the city. There are a few reasons a woman might make the decision to adopt men’s clothing – particularly in the work place. In the 1980’s, women were not seen as equals to men, they were constantly subject to being overlooked and suggestive comments. It was a well-accepted view in society that women belonged to men. By power dressing in a suit that had the same aesthetic as a man’s, the woman in the picture is letting the men know that she would like to be treated as an equal and that she is willing to do whatever it takes. In Chapter 15 of ‘All the World and Her Husband’, Joanne Entwistle highlights that the simple ways we choose to style ourselves have an effect on how people choose to respond to us: “More than simply rhetoric, power dressing set out a strategy for self-representation which laid down particular ‘rules’ as to what clothes, hair and make-up to buy in order to increase one’s chances of career success” (2000:226). This statement implies that the way you want to be seen will help to inform the way you dress. Further proving, that clothes’ social value comes from the things people familiarize them with. The way she is poised in the photo with her shoulders back, arms in her pockets and a face expression that reads ‘I’m here to stay’ infer that the suit gives her a sense of confidence, and a sense of empowerment. She feels powerful because of the suit is powerful. You can tell the suit was expensive looking at the amount of fabric there is and the way it creases over her arm giving a clear indication it is heavy weight.

On page 226 Joanne quotes from Molloy’s ‘self-help’ manual on dress, ‘Dress for Success’: “The rule, according to Molloy, is “dress for the job you want, not the job you have” (Entwistle, 2000:226). Molloy tells us that women have usually been recruited in lower echelon jobs for instance a clerical worker. Molloy emphasizes in the ‘self -help’ manual the importance of any woman working in a typically male dominated professional job, distinguishing themselves, in order to establish authority. First associations are highly important as they help to shape the relationships we have with people, also because people remember them and so if you were to be mistaken for a secretary instead of for instance a professional business woman, this could negatively influence your experience in that job altogether, especially at a time where women were marginalized on such a great scale. If by dressing in clothes commonly associated with men you can be treated as an equal, then it can be an opportunity to eliminate peoples learned negative views about women.

To conclude, the social value of our clothes is influenced by many different factors. To somebody who is more old-fashioned, the idea of clothes having any kind of substantial value is absurd. Veblen blames conspicuous consumption on an individuals need for pecuniary strength, however there are many more explanations, for example to evolve as a person. Materialism has often been used as a scapegoat in the past, due to its close link to being superficial and not being skin deep however here we learn from Grant McCracken’s ‘Culture and Consumption’ book that our “clothes help us change meanings through innovation” (2005:4). Our ability to compartmentalize growing up in a much more culturally diverse society means that we are capable of having allot more associations to our clothes.

With the invention of Jacob W. Davis in partnership with Levi Strauss and Co. in 1871 jeans paved the way to the fashion industry to become bigger to reach a wider audience. After James Dean popularized them with his motion picture ‘Rebel Without a Cause’ in 1955, wearing jeans ended up the image of the youth amid the 1950s and the 1970s. Amid the 1960s the pants got to be more worthy, by the 1970s it had ended up common in fashion in the United States for casual wear. Pants succeeded since they were able to alter through the long time with the newest demands of popular culture. Denim and pants joined overwhelming obligations fabric that permits workers to not stress of pants from tearing and is to give a support fabric that ensured the workers from burns and scraps of their skin.

Working hard is okay and studying hard but at the end of the day we wanted to reward ourselves and we all had that, ‘I deserve this kind of moment’. We have our own ways of rewarding ourselves it could be sleeping or watching a series but there’s one thing that we can’t deny that we do and that’s retail therapy it’s good to splurge every now and then as long as you’re not spending too much beyond your means. I remember way back in 2018 if I’m not mistaken, I think it was December 31 or 30 the shopping center was having a sale I went there thinking not to purchase anything and just window shopping but after roaming around I saw these pants and I was drawn to it I knew I have to get it. It was a good deal if I were to describe it, it’s a light blue washed denim skinny jeans with frayed on the hem since I liked it, I attempted to try it on and the fit was great, it was so comfortable and it was a good deal it was 800 pesos. I remember I was still hesitant because that day my cash was only 1000, to be exact. I saved up for that cash since in our family allowances don’t exist. It’s not a thing what was given to us at whatever point we go to school that’s our remittance. Because of that, that’s when I knew the value of money and significance of spending, and that’s why I’m miserly at whatever point I purchase for myself it’s hard for me to save up, but it’s easy for me to spend it. My parents work so hard with what we have today. We’re not rich by any standard, but comparing this to what they had in the past it’s better. I remember them telling me that their clothes were very limited, like 5 clothing pieces. I was hesitating since it was 800 pesos and my alter would be 200. But it’s been a while since I got to buy for myself so I bought it. Fast forward to 2020 after that, I ended up wearing it for almost every time I go out that’s my go to pants despite the occasion and in spite of the fact that I have my ‘costly’ ones I still go back to my oldie but a goodie 800 pesos jeans it’s so worn out and beaten up. I think it’s my most expensive piece that I bought.

It’s okay to buy for yourself as long as you’re not spending all your big savings in one item that you worked hard for and remember to spend beyond your means. Just like Charles A. Jaffe quoted, “It’s not your salary that makes you rich it’s your spending habits”. And don’t go broke just to look rich just because you saw someone has that item and you see it every time in social media doesn’t mean you have to necessarily buy it don’t be impulsive those are just advertisements then you ended up looking ridiculous and desperate just to have the same thing that everyone has.

“You are what you wear and your dress code determines how others perceive you”, said Julie Pace. Clothing can deliver a lot of information about a person, and wearing a suggestive clothing or specific color can make misperception and sexual intent. The salience of facial features is well documented; some factors will play a role in impression formation such as clothing. So, do clothing and color affect our perception of others? What is the influence of clothing on first impressions? What are the dress codes that tell people about personality from clothes? Many people asked if clothes reflect personality, and that’s a fact theory. There’s influence of clothing on first impression, codes that tell people about personality, and colors that affect our perception of others.

The Influence of Clothing on First Impressions

The control of little subtleties in apparel offers ascend various first impressions, even those framed in all respects rapidly. An individual clothing has been appeared to pass on characteristics, for example, character amiability, capability and knowledge, with first impression being framed in a small amount of second. Damhorst (1990) states that dress is an efficient method for transmission of data about a wearier. Individual decisions of dress can intensely impact the impression they transmit and is along these lines an incredible specialized apparatus. McCracken (1988) proposes that garments convey social importance and that this data is passed from ‘social built world’ to dress, through promoting and style. How effective an item is imparting data can rely upon the learning of gathering of people. Appearance, stance and dress have all been found to impart a scope of identity qualities, word related and social jobs. Components of body stands and expressiveness are additionally solid obvious prompts. These incorporates ‘static’ signs (for example, stature, appearance and dress style) and ‘dynamic’ signals (for example, outward appearance, act, body development, all of which have been appeared to convey precise impressions of identity (Howelett, Pine, & Fletcher, 2019).

Style and Colors that Affect Perceptions of Others

The way that the women dress along with the color affects the perception of others. The style of clothes (suggestive, not suggestive) and the color of the chosen style lead to misperception. According to Kreshner (2018), “Researches has shown that women who wear red clothing are perceived as more attractive having greater sexual intent, and having more negative qualities than women dressed in different colors, and less suggestive clothing”. Also, according to Neil Howelett, Karen Pine, Ben C. Fletsher, “A research shows that, bell tested perceptions of men dressing four different styles (daring, conservative, formal, and casual). The formal style shows (attractiveness, intelligent, popular). The casual style was less in (attractiveness, intelligent, popular) and for the other styles they were detectable and did strong impressions” (Howelett, Pine, & Fletcher, 2019).

The 7 Codes that Reflect Personality

In the article, ‘The Influence of Clothing on First Impressions: Rapid and Positive Responses to Minor Changes in Male Attire’, McCracken and Roth said: “The potency of clothing communication relies on a code. This code represents knowledge about the social and cultural norms that members of communities or social group shares. The more people that understand the code, the more potent the clothing will be at communicating information” (Howelett, Pine, & Fletcher, 2019). There are seven codes that tell individuals in the event that you are receptive, pretender, sure or uncertain. According to Julie Pace, people who wear t-shirts look like very easy-going, approachable and very practical about life. While jeans, it’s just like t-shirts looking like free and practical. Boots show a sense of power, so that for ladies it’s a strong sense of fashion and for men it’s all about alpha male. Wearing hoodies can mean two things: the first one, that you are very shy and you want to be mysterious, on the other hand, hoodies with textures can show how elevated your fashion sense is. People who wear solid colors portrayed as direct and precise, so that individuals who like solid colors look like responsible people. Individuals who dress brand clothes are all about showing their social class or trying to fit into one of them, and the ones who dress suits are perceived as sophisticated, complex and very formal (Pace, 2019).

Conclusion

Finally, ourselves affect our whole, and our fashion determines how we think or feel about ourselves. Even apparently minor modifications to clothing style can have a major impact on the information conveyed to perceivers. Also, the codes are essential to discover a person and either the red color or the suggestive clothing intent misperception.

It is absolutely correct to say that clothes make the man full. Normally, naked persons have no influence or respect within society. In today’s modern world, society is developing around us in the sense that his clothing usually reflects his social status. It is not only for women but also for men, who now wear different types of clothes for social status, as well as a method of self-pressure.

Since 1960, when the shirts were used to reflect self-depression earlier, the shirts were simpler and simpler than they were now a substitute for necktie work and to write some messages on the shirts, they used to print the screen to get any look to attract the eye. T-shirts with some letters and pictures printed on them have become very popular among ordinary people.

Today’s teenagers are now kind of conscious about them. Normally, they do not hesitate to spend some of the girls to try the most interesting directions of clothing. Unfortunately for adolescents who are more fat than ordinary people who must struggle to obtain their size from the cloth according to their choice. Again, there is a problem for them, namely that there is very little opportunity to obtain copies of the latest trends with gently and uniforms if they also find clothes suited to their body.

Clothing designers are now developing designer costumes and mobile clothes for adolescents, which can also be processed comfortably in their bulk body. This began because many fabric manufacturers have realized that crowded adolescents generally have a lot of power in spending money.

Online clothing stores throughout the network are now crowded in providing double clothes for teenagers of additional size. In addition to their size, men and women alike have an opportunity to shop according to their size. The different buying clothes from the network include beautiful shorts, shirts, skirts, genes and many other items. Internet stores also offer some wonderful innovations for swimming covers and swimming suits.

Many electronic stores offer different types of uniforms. One must choose the best according to his personal needs. Apart from shirts and skirts, different fashion dresses are also available to young girls, who generally add their beauty in these moving clothes

T-shirts available from all over the network have now become a trend towards wearing them along with their philosophies and beliefs called ‘Cottts’, graphic designs usually ranging from funny shirts, funny shirts to concert shirts. College children generally prefer these geographical congestions in shirts because they are fashioned to date.

So, nobody now has any doubt about wearing shirts with graphic lies that this is one of the clothes that reflects our personality and self-expression.

Everyday people wake up and get ready for the day. One step in doing this is deciding on an outfit that they should wear for the day. Some people strategically pick out their outfits for the day, making sure they look stylish and well put together. Others just go into their closet and pick a random outfit. When you look around at people in public, everybody is wearing different outfits. From dresses, suits, shorts and tee shirts, and jeans to dark and bright, vibrant colors everyone else is wearing different clothes. Clothing is a form of visual culture as it allows other people to express their true self. Some people like to wear clothes that make a statement or presence, and others like to just blend into the crowd. There are also people that just throw on clothes and do not care what they look like. Each of these people represent visual culture and we can use that to study contemporary culture. Jeans are one piece of clothing that we can examine for contemporary visual culture. Jeans have a variety of different styles and come in different colors, but the most interesting style is ripped jeans. Every pair of ripped jeans could be slightly different even though that particular pair of jeans could be massed produced. Over time with use and washing, the pair of jeans can change in appearance making it have a more significant meaning. I chose to research this topic because it wasn’t very popular when I was younger and the trend popped up out of nowhere to become a norm that we are used to seeing. Through this paper, I hope to find out why people wear ripped jeans, if it is socially acceptable for both genders to wear ripped jeans, and how society views people who wear these types of jeans.

The informants that I interviewed consisted of four insiders and one outsider. I selected these insider informants because I have visually seen them wear ripped jeans repeatedly, so I know they enjoy wearing this style of jeans. It’s better to interview random people because I could be interviewing someone who’s put on their last pair of pants and isn’t actually wearing ripped jeans, or someone who just ripped their jeans that day. Although I couldn’t interview these people in person, while questioning them on the phone, I learned a lot of valuable information that would help answer the questions I had regarding the visual culture of ripped jeans. The insiders that I interviewed gave me crucial information regarding ripped jeans, why they wear ripped jeans, and what they believe other people view ripped jeans. The outsider that I interviewed although wasn’t a huge fan of ripped jeans, he had some similar opinions about how society views people wearing ripped jeans and why people wear ripped jeans. Each of the informants that I interviewed gave me different perspectives on the same issue which will help me analyze the issue from different points of view, having a non-biased understanding of the issue.

Originally, I believed that people wore ripped jeans to be fashionable and to follow popular trends. However, after interviewing my informants, I learned that this isn’t always the case. In order to learn more on why people wear ripped jeans, I asked my informants, ‘How did you start wearing ripped jeans? Does it have any significant meaning to you?’. The answers replied were very mixed. Two of them started wearing ripped jeans because they liked how trendy and fashionable the pants were. Another informant stated: “In third grade I was playing sports and ripped my jeans, which I wore anyways because my family didn’t have the funds to replace jeans that I ripped”. The last informant stated: “After ripping my jeans, I was forced to wear it due to my parents not buying me anymore pants so I can learn a lesson”. These replies show that along with the fashionable aspect of ripped jeans, some people wear it out of necessity because they either cannot afford to purchase new jeans every time the jeans rip, or their parents wanted to teach their child a lesson for the misuse of their clothes. Through these responses, the ripped jeans also had different significant meanings. For the informants that had no personal connection to ripped jeans, they both stated that ripped jeans had a significant meaning of making them feel more comfortable in their own skin and happy. One of them stated, “Ripped jeans has the significant meaning of growth to me. It reminds me on where we use to be and how much we have grown regarding money”, while another noted, “Ripped jeans represents important lessons that I have learned growing up”. Although being fashionable and trendy is one of the more popular reasons why people would wear ripped jeans, some people have more personal reasons which can visually show a difficult part of their life they had grown from. They continue to wear ripped jeans to remind themselves that life gets better.

Even though people wear ripped jeans, not all rips in jeans are acceptable to wear. Most people do not want to wear jeans that have rips that expose too much skin, and the location of the rip plays an important part if the pair of jeans is acceptable. This was apparent when questioning my informants about how long rips could be in jeans. My outsider stated that “people can have any size rip that they want”. However, most of my insider informants disagreed with that statement. The general consensus from the insiders that I interviewed is that the rip should not be bigger than six inches, or big enough that your knee would go through the hole. When asked how high the rips can go, all my informants agreed that the rips should go no further than mid-thigh. My outsider believed that if people who wore jeans with rips higher than mid-thigh can be seen as promiscuous. One informant stated: “If the rips go higher than mid-thigh, then it is too close to the groin area, and undergarments could show if the rips are big enough”. When asked if it is meaningful when the rips in jeans grow through use or washing, all my informants stated that it was not really that meaningful, and that it just reduced the wearing life of the jeans. Based on these answers, all my informants agreed that ripped jeans are only acceptable to wear during casual events.

Before I interviewed my informants, I believed that rips were just rips, and that people that wore ripped jeans are either too lazy to patch up the rips or just want to show some skin. However, this is not the case as creativity and self-expression plays a large part in the rips in jeans. The rips allow people to customize their jeans to their liking so that it fully represents themselves. When asked if they would ever modify or customize their jeans or if they just buy pre-ripped jeans, most of my interviewees stated that they bought pre-ripped jeans. This is because “ripping your own jeans is a lot of work if you don’t want it to look bad”, stated one insider. On the other hand, another one was an informant who actually customized her jeans and liked to do it as she was able to repurpose a pair of old jeans giving them something ‘extra’ that she believed they need to be more trendy and she liked the freedom ripping your own jeans gave. She also believed that if the customization was done correctly, it can be more impressive than store bought jeans. The informants that bought store bought jeans had around two to three pairs, while the informant that customized their jean had around five to six pairs. From these answers I determined that the people that bought pre-ripped jeans had fewer pairs then people who customized their jeans because the people that ripped their own jeans like to rip their jeans and each of their jeans had more sentimental value to them because they had some action on how they look.

When you look around at people wearing ripped jeans, you mostly see females wearing them, but when my informants were asked if they believed that only certain genders should wear ripped jeans, both male and female interviewees stated no. One informant stated: “I do not think that only certain genders can wear ripped jeans because I do not view fashion and clothing as gendered concepts”. While hearing this answer, it made me think about how no one judges you on what you wear unless it is inappropriate for the situation you are in. Although clothes can be labeled as male and female specific clothing, any gender is free to wear that piece of clothing as long as they are comfortable with their appearance. However, when asked what the age cut should be for people wearing ripped jeans, the replies were not as accepting. All my informants stated that the age cut off for people wearing ripped jeans is around twenty-nine to thirty years old. This is because they associate younger people with ripped jeans instead of older individuals.

This ideal on younger people wearing ripped jeans continued on how society views people who wear ripped jeans. When asked what kind of people wear these types of jeans, the general answer from my informants were younger, fashionable, stylish, and trendy people are the individuals who wear ripped jeans. In addition, with the ideal of younger people wearing ripped jeans, society also views those individuals in more of a negative light depending on what generation that person was born in. The older generation does not understand the trend and associates people wearing ripped jeans with a lower social class. They also react very negative to the trend often times making comments such as ‘Do you not own real pants?’ or ‘Can you not afford good pants?’. The younger generation is very different because half of them wear ripped jeans and half of them are indifferent to the trend. All this show that society doesn’t have on opinion on people wearing ripped jeans. They have multiple opinions based upon what generation they are from because of the difference in values that they were taught when younger.

Who would have thought that the hoodie – an everyday garment – was the reason why colored people were murdered? “The politics of the Hoodie”, which was written by Troy Patterson in The New York Times, discussed how a regularly-worn garment in today’s society was once a ‘moving target’. Hoodies were originally made for athletes, cold construction workers, and farmers; however, it was converted later into a street style. When people started wearing hoodies to commit crimes, especially since they hid their faces, hoodies started being associated with hoodlums and criminals. It determined whether or not that person will return home just by wearing a simple hoodie. Although clothing can unite people from all different backgrounds and perspectives with its creative influence, it has been the cause of great turmoil and strife between people, even causing widespread violence amongst many communities around the world.

One of the biggest repeating debates that this world undergoes is how an individual is generally treated, which is controlled by their skin shading and even their habiliments. Clothing is extremely crucial because individuals establish a fast judgment and impression about other individuals from what they are wearing. For example, if a manager is searching for a laborer he or she will typically pick the individual with the most professional outfit on, as opposed to somebody who is wearing casual jeans and a shirt. The person wearing the dress or the suit will look more fruitful, confident, and wealthier than the person with the jeans on, which is the reason why they are more likely bound to land the position. In the view of a study distributed in the Journal of Social Psychology, it stated “Participants rated the same group of Black student-athletes dressed either in swagger, formal clothing, or wearing championship t-shirts. Again, the men in formal clothes were rated significantly higher on characteristics such as intelligence, trustworthiness, and warmth.” The results demonstrated that participants judged the models to be more hardworking and more bright when wearing formal attire rather than easygoing. Not only can pieces of clothing give good stereotypes, but they can likewise give negative stereotypes. Clothing can also cause bigotry and racism. A piece of clothing that exploded and got one of the greatest and most incredible images of social unfairness is the hoodie. If an African-American wears a dark hoodie to feel comfortable, they will be viewed as “hoodlums”, “a prison garb”, and “gangsters.” However, if anyone else wears it, they will be considered unharmful and comfy. It is extremely unfair for people to feel the need to be cautious and mindful of what they can wear or not. Attire should be a route for people to express themselves, not a reason they might get murdered. Now clothing can determine if you return home safely or not return home at all. In “The Politics of the Hoodie”, Troy Patterson refers to the story of Trayvon Martin. He states

“It is impossible that the production designers were ignorant of the ghost of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed 17-year-old fatally shot four years ago while wearing much the same thing.” This innocent seventeen-year-old African-American boy didn’t encounter the maximum capacity of life when he was killed for wearing a gray hoodie. Troy was murdered because of how the hoodie portrays a specific bad stereotype. A dim hoodie was associated with criminals because of people hiding their faces while wearing them, but this boy had no intention of being a criminal and had no purpose in losing his life. People like Trayvon Martin simply wore hoodies because it kept them warm and comfy and to be like the other teens, not so that it can turn into a political statement. Since the demise of Trayvon Martin, the spotlight has been put on the awareness of “The Hoodie”.

The hoodie transformed from carrying numerous upsetting beliefs to bringing incredible victories. With the assistance of many protesters and influencers African- Americans would now be able to wear Hoodies freely. After numerous long stretches of brutality individuals rose all together to ban any bad perceptions of the hooded sweatshirt. After the death of Trayvon Martin, millions of people of all races walked the streets and protested in the “I am Trayvon Martin” march. People had enough and just wanted to stop worrying about what their kids can or can not put on. All around the world people were talking about “The Hoodie” after the death of Trayvon Martin. Famous influencers used their platforms to stand up and protested for “The Hoodie”. Katherine Boyle emphasized in her article that “On Friday, LeBron James of the Miami Heat tweeted a photo of the basketball team, wearing hoodies and with heads bowed, alongside the hashtag “WeWantJustice”. Famous people were helping by indicating that dark hoodies are typical and shouldn’t be viewed as bad. Another way that the hoodie sweatshirt stopped having a bad perception and was turned into street fashion is by changing the shade of hoodies. As expressed by Troy Patterson “You must have seen a sitcom or TV commercial in which black actors wear hoodies in new millennial colors — mustard, maroon — to portray coders” (133). Presently anyone can wear a hoodie without the consequences that accompany a dim hoodie. Now the Hoodie is streetwear and everyone can enjoy it.

Although “the hoodie” helped stop clothing bad stereotypes, it did not stop it completely. Coronavirus -a worldwide pandemic that if people face together can be defeated- now drives a wedge between people. There are still many cases of violence brought by garments like a face masks. A mask is vital for the stopping of coronavirus because the mask stops the virus from spreading from one human being to another. When an individual sees another individual not wearing a mask they usually tell them to put on a mask and that can cause a conflict. In an article, Sherri Gordon states “For people who are afraid of getting COVID-19, they may resort to shaming others online or in public in an attempt to get everyone to take precautions. And for people opposed to mask-wearing, they are shaming other people because of a fear of losing their freedoms or being controlled”. We now have to deal with something called mask shaming. People are mask-shaming people because they are frightened to get sick and having the virus. This pandemic has brought nothing, but sad news: nearly one million poor citizens lost their lives due to this tragic virus. There are many cases in today’s world of mask shaming and people getting into fights for not wanting to wear a mask. Based on 4 CBS Miami “Miami police are looking for four people seen attacking an elderly man in an argument over a mask outside a restaurant”. This elder man was worried about his health so he told four boys to wear a mask, but they disagreed and attacked him. Although the number of cases went down since the protest of Trayvon Martin there are still many cases of people having bad impressions of people by what they are wearing. For instance, a bandana can be seen as a cute accessory or a garment associated with gangsters. People assume if it is a sign of trouble or not by the color of the skin of who is wearing it. Bandanas can lead to big suspicions and can cause atlertful problems. Clothing will never be something we can all do without any problems

Garments will never be something we as a whole can wear with no issues. Your outfit is supposed to be a way to express yourself and have fun, but instead, it shreds people. The main thing that attire does is cause prejudice and stereotypes, and it makes you be viewed contrastingly in the public eye. One of the major conflicts America faced was “The Hoodie” which left a major effect on the world. Even though cases of making stereotypes of people of their clothes went down, it did not go away completely. There are still many cases of people getting into conflicts for not wearing or wearing specific types of garments including face masks and bandanas.