Perhaps the site content could be recalibrated to focus on teaching people to design & make clothing for themselves rather than dictate trends to others?

First, “dictate trends to others”? Are you serious? I have never dictated style trends to anyone -ever- nor will I. That is a design function; I am not a designer. I feel that dictating style direction and trends is an insult to my visitors who *are* designers. That’s their job, I’m not going to second guess them. I’m an engineer; I just make what they envision, happen.

Second, sure, I could recalibrate to focus on teaching people to design and make clothing for themselves but there’s a big downside. It’s called making a living. As in, I have to make one. Iow, how would I make a living posting free content? The value is only flowing one way. I give and you compensate me with ______? As it is, there’s tons of free educational materials to help improve the quality of one’s output. See the tutorials index under the ADMIN heading in the left sidebar. Lastly, I will be starting another site along the lines of what you mention but it won’t be free. Similarly, it will focus on commercial standards of excellence (lamentably abandoned as of late) which I think enthusiasts would do well to adopt.

The problem lies with the notion of trends – this is the mechanism that underpins the whole theory of fashion. You cannot actively encourage grassroots capitalism whilst simultaneously distancing yourself from its damaging effects. Whether it be brand bullying or child labour, the common cause is the very subject your site seeks to promote. I do not wish this to seem like a personal attack – it just strikes me as somewhat inconsistent logic.

Perhaps the site content could be recalibrated to focus on teaching people to design & make clothing for themselves rather than dictate trends to others? To my mind, this is simply returning to the craft philosophy that predates the emergence of fashion during the industrial revolution.

Cheers, Andy (Scotland)

You always encourage an umbrella of environmental awareness toward production to the point of less product, longer life. This is directly contrary to the speedier and speedier fashion lifecycle of garments that must be discarded for the newest, latest thing before its first wash.

Further, bullying is a feature of children’s behaviour and just manifests itself in the elements which show points of difference be it clothes or accessories.

The private school ditched the blazers before I started there, but they still had a dress code: no shorts, no “dungarees” (jeans), no t-shirts, belts must be worn with pants with loops, etc. So we weren’t traditional prep, but we weren’t a bunch of slobs, either. Every day was a fashion show in which I couldn’t compete, and it caused a lot of anxiety on my part, and probably exasperation on Mom’s (”What’s wrong with these?” “Mom, this is K-Mart!” “So?”).

When they started proposing uniforms in the mid-schools here, I found myself ambivalent. On the one hand, I’m not sure we need any more regimentation than they are already trying to induce. On the other hand, it levels the playing field a great deal and directs more attention to schooling than to the fashion show. Yeah, you can still differentiate on the basis of accessories, but snappy ties and earrings are a $15-20 highlight instead of a $150-200, Nike- and Izod- or Tommy-fueled arms race. It’s subtle rather than overt, and therefore not as likely to result in beatings and drive-bys over Air Jordans.

The thing that really drove me in that direction was the parent-supported argument by one girl in front of the school board: “My clothes are how I express myself.” I’m sorry, but you aren’t expressing yourself with your Marilyn Manson t-shirt so much as you are expressing your affinity with your clique. Today, they are literally using branding and ear-tagging to identify their herd. If you want to express yourself, try writing or learning a craft or art.

Incidentally, Megan McArdle makes this interesting observation about school uniforms in Viet Nam:

http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/11/tradition_for_thee_but_not_for.php

I think she’s right about men in the traditional dress of their native elite: in an airport in Hawaii, I once saw a man (maori? He didn’t look Hawaiian, but he did look pacific islander) in very formal looking native wear consisting of a sari-like “skirt” and interesting combo that looked like a cross between a western suit and native religious wear. Between that and his bearing (40ish and fit, which is rare in the islands), the effect was impressive.

Apart from having their chains yanked, kids need a little humility, hence my argument for requiring all High School students (maybe even starting earlier in middle school) to spend 3 weeks in a 3rd world country in order to graduate.

Frankly, the cattiness that is associated with fashion bugs me. The art and science of design I can appreciate. Knocking down your fellow woman because she isn’t Right This Moment Molly or Creative Combinations Cathy, however, is silly. However, it’s been going on for centuries, as one can tell by reading Louisa May Alcott.

I don’t know what the industry can do, but personally, we can try to be respectful to others despite their lack of “fashion” or brand name clothing.

Despite that, there was a large degree of hazing and bullying, driven substantially by the “haves” from wealthy families from Detroit and Chicago, their desire to dominate younger or weaker students, and their contempt for students from “poor” local farm families. I attribute this more to the “boarding school” aspect than the “military school” aspect. If anything, the military aspect served to dampen the worst abuses.

So, in my experience, adolescent bullying is a social phenomenon that is best defeated by adult supervision and copious examples of civilized behavior (especially at home), and regrettably encouraged by social displays of prejudice and contempt either in the home or in society at large.

We are surrounded by feverish political and sports partisanship, skillfully promoted commercial brand loyalties, religious intolerance, racial and cultural prejudice. This environment is training our young people to make immediate, exclusive social discriminations. It continually reinforces the message that only stupid, ugly, repulsive, defective losers belong to the “wrong group”, and therefore they deserve derision, contempt, or at best pity. How could adolescent bullying not arise in such a culture?

There are anthropological reasons to believe some degree of such behavior is inherent in human nature. But culture certainly plays a large part in how much takes place.

To steer my comment back toward apparel, I think the small DE has limited leverage on this issue. Larger manufacturers, specifically their marketing and advertising policies, might have a notable impact. But it would require sporting goods makers (to take an example) to stop associating their brand with winning 1st place or winning at all cost. Instead, less stratifying messages like quality, performance (absolute rather than relative), and appearance could be communicated. Makers of “designer” clothing could similarly downplay the association between their brand and the social status implied by luxury items. However, this would mean abandoning the most effective and consistently reliable marketing strategy for personal goods of any sort (see Dave’s comment near the top of this thread), and I would not hold my breath waiting for such a change.

Returning to (non-military) school uniforms specifically, there is quite a bit of evidence that uniforms can be a positive factor in education and little to suggest a drawback. Obviously, they are neither necessary nor sufficient to good education. They can serve to give a student body a common identity, reduce the conflicts between different social groups, and remind students of the whole point of hanging about the school grounds. For troubled school systems, the very act of making a change (such as imposing a school uniform) may have a positive psychological effect all out of proportion to the change itself. This is known as the Hawthorne effect in industrial psychology.