-
Posts
632 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Store
supertorial
Classifieds
Posts posted by Northwest
-
-
-
2
-
It seems like too interesting an option not to have competitors. I'll definitely check it out. In other news my 3A-WK2 arrived from Union LA today and I vaguely recall giggling with glee upon first trying out the unnecessary/simple/fun Fidlock magnetic slide release buckle. Dat audible click.
0 -
For a ballistic nylon, american-made pack, $140.00 seems incredibly reasonable. I was actually debating side-grading to that pack while I wait to find a 3A-8TS.
1 -
Having lived 15 or so minutes away from a mall the majority of my life, another problem that immediately jumps out at me in regards to Offshore Manufacturing is the reselling that occurs between stores. If you've ever perused a Marshalls, TJ Maxx, Nordstrom Rack, etc. you find many of the same brands in department stores like Macy's and Nordstroms. These stores thrive on the perception that you are getting a deal on the brands that can be found in the department stores, and that you too can be of the economic bracket that can afford to shop there. It feels like responsibility gets passed down the line of these stores and lessens the pressure on their buyers dramatically. If something doesn't sell well, resell it to the next "tier" of store and keep on marching. There aren't the same kind of consequences that you face in a small business.
Working in the mindframe of a small business, every brand my employer carries is a brand that is "working for us" in that we carry the brands that have the best turnover. We run our own sales like any other store, but we want items that sell themselves. When we carry quality goods a sales associate can help persuade a customer to buy it but the customer should already want it based on its inherent qualities.
I think that lessening emphasis on physical appearance is freeing in many ways. I couldn't begin to count the number of times I've felt self-conscious about appearance in my life or felt shamed by my peers about what I do or do not have. But to lessen the value of appearance to the point where "someone will eventually want this because it is clothing" is a very strange notion to me, and it feels stranger still to see cultural artifacts like wrong winner pre-printed Super Bowl winner t-shirts on the backs of children struggling to survive.
Does tossing our scraps back to disadvantaged countries make an unethical system of production justified? That seems to be an argument people make. I feel like the privilege that has been acquired should lead us to create and maintain fewer pieces of value rather than a multitude of shoddy items.
1 -
Music video is shit but the music I enjoy. Successor band to Ratatat/weird collabo deal.
0 -
Be advised: All Veilance blazers feel like they fit at least a size small in the shoulders to me. I am currently a small in most everything and I would need a medium in the Haedn for the shoulders. Unless the Seattle Arcteryx store is tagging merchandise incorrectly, which seems extremely unlikely.
Might just be athletic build complaints but I know Tigerprawn would definitely have the same sorts of issues.
On another note, got my first Veilance piece! Went down to the Arcteryx store on Monday and ended up picking up the Mionn hooded vest in a small.
1 -
The times may soon allow me to switch to a full ACR bag setup and I was curious if anyone in the community has experience with the 3A-MSOL1 (which is currently still available from Bodega, though they only have "2" left). As far as the bag accessories go, nothing seems to come close to this little guy.
0 -
I like this shade of orange for whatever reason. Kraft Macaroni and Cheese orange?
3 -
Why do Nike's design risks always seem to end up being hideously interesting?
0 -
+rep for can puns
except you can't reuse a can
WELL YOU CAN but it's SLOPPY
0 -
Do they sell water in aluminum cans? You always see bottled water but why not canned water? Is there some basic scientific idea I am missing here? And after all the worries about chemicals from plastic bottles seeping into water upon reuse canned water seems like a solution to that issue.
0 -
So on a more practical note: do practical alternatives exist? What means of economic development do smaller states that are low in natural resources have that do not rely on sponsorship by the western world?
Another question that I find fascinating and difficult to answer. The notion of "geographic luck" that Jared Diamond explores in Guns, Germs, and Steel was prompted by thoughts about these kinds of issues. Specifically, Diamond was asked , "Why do you have so much and we have so little?" He gives his best answer to why wealth/resources are currently distributed in the pattern they are, and the recognition that smaller states exist with little access to natural resources exist and face unique problems is telling about the global economy and history.
Guns, Germs, and Steel is an excellent read, and I highly recommend it, but to summarize even its major points would take a lot of text (even for me) so here's what I took away as the end lesson: geographic luck in concert with social philosophy, advances in technology, and biological oddities (Europeans spent a lot of time with their farm animals and eventually became mostly immune to their diseases) allowed for European countries to assume a position of dominance in the world when they began expanding outwards in search of additional natural resources for their growing populations. Due to enormous advantages in weapon technology and biological genocide on the peoples they visited, they were able to claim whatever resources they desired from these countries, denying the birthright of these peoples to the resources of the place that they lived in.
Imperialism by force has fallen out of favor, and with good reason. South America and Africa continue to struggle to recover from the slave trade and the claims of other countries to their resources, but their struggle is far from over. The far more insidious force of economic imperialism allows for the same countries who stole their resources by force centuries ago to now take a chunk of the country's rightful earnings by having access to the technology needed to properly take advantage of their resources. When a new mineral deposit or oil deposit is found in South America or Africa, the majority of their countries do not possess the technology necessary to mine/drill and refine these resources. In exchange for at least part of the profit, they allow MNCs to properly mine/drill and refine these deposits for them. But think how much is lost for these countries who could certainly use this money for infrastructure to promote additional trade(which they would also need to even access these resources, for example), education for their children to give them some hope of competing in a global economy, etc.
These states are not low on natural resources by accident. They are low on natural resources because the economic balance of power makes them choose to have some money rather than none, while more prosperous countries use their resources to their own ends.
On an individual level, I understand the Randian notion of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, but I still partially disagree with it. I think that we all must choose what we wish to do with our lives and follow it through to the end, but in all human endeavors we must learn, and this cannot happen without being taught, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Humans are mimetic creatures, and the basic level of learning is to learn by imitation. Struggling countries cannot imitate the route that has brought countries like the USA to a place of power at least partially because, as citizens, we should be appalled at our history. We are a country built on the back of slavery, murder and marginalization of our native people, economic exploitation of the less fortunate, and continued, willful consumption of fuel we know to be injuring our chances of surviving as a species, and . We have many bright spots as a country, but it is necessary to highlight our faults so as not to forget them...the brighter memories get a lot more attention.
5 -
The Monitor SFT doesn't have a removable liner, does it? Or did you mean the Patrol IS?
That's the one! Thank you for the correction.
Northwest, both the Monitor SFT and Patrol IS in small and on sale.
0 -
-
You guys are only seeing the immediate term. Developing countries aren't some orwellesque factory states doomed to make sneakers for all eternity. They're developing countries leveraging the fact that they bring low labor costs to the international trade economy. They're engaged in a cultural and economic transition, and parts of that transition are uglier than others, but they'll get along just fine without us feeling bad for them because we have the luxury of a moral high ground. They just need our dollars.
edit: that's not to say that wastefulness, rampant consumerism and emotional disconnect on our part aren't things we should strive to overcome, but for us to be concerned with that is still a moral luxury.
This statement I most certainly take issue with. The most basic idea of economics is supply and demand, and the current state of the world's economy sees developing countries competing to supply the demand of historically dominant/lucky countries. The idea that these countries have any sort of "leverage" is almost laughable if this cycle was not hurting other people. I do not have "leverage" in construction if I tell an employer that I can put a nail in a wall. I have leverage in construction if I am an electrician or a plumber. I have leverage if I have specific skills that can only be replicated by other professionals like myself, in which case I am in competition with them. Low production costs can always be undercut if your country's citizens are desperate enough, and so MNC's will play "how low can you go" with these developing countries. Prices going up in Bangladesh? Too much media attention on the factory collapse? An MNC can pack up and move out, albeit at a loss. Their workers do not have that choice.
As "Made in China" became more of a dirty term in the cultural consciousness, it was crushing to watch people see "Made in Peru" and mentally twist their mind to think that a major change had been made, because they had less familiarity with factory conditions. All it takes is less familiarity and geographic distance. When most Americans think of South America, it's probably a vision of the beaches of Rio de Janeiro. Perhaps factory conditions are better, perhaps the workers are paid more, but the worst part is the majority of people would never know because they do not demand to know. It takes money and connections to and document these places of production, but no company will supply such a service unless the customer demands it.
On top of all this, I think it takes great mental gymnastics to deny recognition of human suffering. We are emotional, visual, and linguistic creatures and the majority of us possess empathy. The combination of these features allows us to understand each other, and determine what the other needs. If you've ever watched elephants around a sick/dying calf, it is all the more heartbreaking to see what separates humans from animals. The elephants do not possess the ability to ascertain why the calf is sick/dying, or how to fix such a situation. As visual/emotional beings, they can only recognize that there is pain and there is an end. There is no prevention or solution; there is finality and mourning.
It is also worth mentioning that we can conceive of a tomorrow, which is one of the greatest blessings and curses ever bestowed. Tomorrow brings with it the chance to try again, but it also gives us the chance to postpone what ought to have been done today. As countries develop, we can believe that prosperity will eventually arrive to its citizens, but history offers too many examples of concentrated wealth in the hands of a few. Examine oil fortunes in the Middle East as an extremely important example. Wide-spread wealth and a place on the world stage have never come to countries of great faith, and the debate between the reality of economics and the promises of faith has become an explosive issue.
We should not condemn other countries to exist as oligarchies. We possess the ability to recognize that the economic model being repeated is creating problems and we need to seek solutions. To only sit and mourn these problems and losses is to spite our existence as human beings.
5 -
Gahhhh. Tried on the Monitor on in the Arcteryx store in Seattle and have been thinking about it ever since. Removable liner means I could use the shell year round, but now that it's sale time/xmas cash time they are getting snatched up left and right. If anyone sees a monitor in black in a size small I'd love to know, otherwise I'll continue to browse ebay/supermarket in hopes of sizing issues for somebody.
In exchange for such information, heads up on what's on ebay as of 1:20 PST:
Sz. XS Zip cardigan in Black 219.99 starting bid
Sz. Small Insulated Field Jacket in Black $895.00
Sz. Small Field Jacket in Ordessa Green $748.00
Sz. Small GEOM SFT bomber in Black $595.00 OBO
Sz. Small Composite Jacket in Black $595.00 starting bid
Sz. Small Anion Vest in Ordessa Green $199.00 starting bid
Sz. Small Survey Jacket in Black $695.00
Sz. Medium Insulated Field Jacket in Ordessa Green $895.00
Sz. Large Mionn Blazer in Green $339.99
Sz. Large Galvanic IS in Black $808.88
Sz. Large Partition Coat in Black $299.00 (one bid on it)
Sz. XL Field Coat in Black $499.00 starting bid
1 -
I find Outlier to be a company deserving of praise, but I wish their choice of manufacturing location was at least in part to intentionally combat offshore manufacturing. In interviews Abe himself has said that they chose the New York garment district to manufacture in because they were going to be working with small batches of experimental products. The intent was certainly to be a different kind of clothing company, but not necessarily an ethical one. This is not to slight Outlier, and I do hope I am remembering that interview correctly. Full disclaimer I own three pair of their pants, the minimal backpack, the merino henley, merino t-shirt, and probably 7 pair of their merino socks...even if it wasn't their initial aim I am extremely happy to see American companies working with tech fabrics and producing within the US.
Returning to offshore manufacturing, though, I find the overlap of the Planet Money video feature and ProfMonitoff/saffronrevolution's posts to be worthy of further discussion. Bangladesh is featured prominently in the Planet Money video, and definitely tries to offer both sides of the garment industry in Bangladesh. The girl they chose to focus on, Jasmine, talks about her work but more specifically how her choice to work there stems from very specific societal issues in Bangladesh (which is noted to be a significantly poorer country than Colombia, which is used as a comparison). She chooses to work in the garment industry and live in the city because there is little food and no opportunity to pay off the dowry of an elder sister.
The issue of dowries is, of course, an issue of gender and the perception of gender value in Bangladesh. As an earner, men are considered more valuable because they are given more employment prospects as long as they are perceived to be the sole earner for their wife and children. However, such a system finds itself at odds with Jasmine and other women working in the garment industry, earning money, and having greater agency because of this. Women should not be "taking jobs away" from men, even if they are better qualified and more apt at a task than their male counterparts.
This gets to Saffronrevolution's post about raising the quality of living. Comparing Jasmine's former life to her present life in the factory it is an improvement in both agency and monetary status but this change required her to convince her family to leave their home. This is a decision that they would not have had to make if the culture of Bangladesh did not view marriage as a necessity for women and their husbands as deserving of a dowry. I think that, emotionally, her life has probably changed for the worse. She looks extremely tired, she mentions that this is a factory where she feels "safe" in comparison to past factories, and her small room at a boarding house is shared with two others.
ProfMonitoff mentioned the distance from manufacturers and disconnect it creates, which is why the footage included of the factory collapse doesn't get passed around the internet too often anymore. Its a intentional disconnect with malicious purpose that will be maintained until a change occurs on a large scale.
International trade presents marvelous opportunities for good, but in the name of efficiency and low cost we sacrifice citizens of other countries. I would earn what Jasmine earns in a month in a day at a minimum wage job in Washington. Washington, admittedly, has one of the highest minimum wages in the USA but no matter where you live the comparison is stark. If the world is to fall out into niches of manufacturing in the name of efficiency, which seems quite likely, considering how most countries operate on a similar system of concentrating like businesses (even on a city level think malls, restaurant areas, garment districts, farmer's markets, etc.) then we cannot have the tremendous gap in standards of living and income that we do now.
The popular series of books the Hunger Games plays out this scenario, with the USA/First World scathingly satirized as fools who concern themselves with fashion, entertainment, and food while the "districts" under their control struggle to produce the resources that demanded by the petty amusement of the Capitol. Whether teens/young adults that consume this story as entertainment are making this connection or not, the end scenario is not hard to arrive at. If you systematically continue to treat other people as trash long enough, they will forcibly change the system.
So this leaves us back at the question of how do we change such a system. Major problems to address:
1) Emotional/physical distance from the manufacturing process
2) Psychology of fashion: desire for "easy" individuality; perception of recycled clothing
1 -
This is a big issue with "Made In Italy" these days...ProfMonitoff had an excellent post on it in the Offshore Production thread.
On the subject of Common Projects, anyone have any additional information on the waxed canvas tournament highs? They aren't selling anywhere , I like them, and they are going on sale nowm but I was hoping to confirm that its just that no one is willing to pay the same price for leather as waxed canvas (which is completely reasonable) and not that the waxed canvas severs your tendons for shits and giggles.
0 -
Really interested and happy to see that others not only think about this issue but take the time to think through the multitude of factors that influence it.
A question to the thread at large that I have been tossing around in my head that relates to the creativity side of fashion and manufacturing. Regarding conservative versus radical design elements (think Nike Air Carnivore versus Common Projects Achilles) and individualism, companies that produce offshore such as Nike often can make more radical design choices because their stakes are not as high. They have already established shoe models like the Air Force One that continue to bring in business no matter the year they are manufactured, and will choose to at least give new models a try and see if they develop a following. Common Projects is a similar company in that they have core styles that continue to sell year after year but their experiments (think mountain trail runner) are of significantly higher stakes due to cost to manufacture and cost to a retailer if they do not sell.
In a world that continues to obsess over the individual, it is far easier to announce individuality with radically designed, low cost items. Is this part of the reason that fast fashion companies and larger multinational corporations continue to find customers? If there was greater recognition of how similar human beings are and a decrease in popular demand to be able to announce individuality with their clothing would these companies begin to falter as demand for high quality, if similar, items grew?
1 -
-
-
People like to make all kinds of exceptions, but nearly all of the arguments for clothing being made offshore rather than domestically come down to an outdated and often unspoken idea that "not being able to buy new clothes means that you are poor, and being poor is bad." As I know many members of this board can attest, buying used clothes often means buying better clothes, and that's a part of high fashion that I admire. While there are exceptions like the Helmut Lang "art exhibition" of shredded clothing or Chanel burning clothes that do not sell, many high fashion manufacturers clothes get bought, sold, resold and resold many times over. As they are shared between admirers over multiple years they are still pieces that can be sought after. Knowing that the clothing you wear is desired by another person creates a chain of responsibility, and the better care you take of your clothes the greater your reward when it is passed on to another person.
That cycle of buy, sell, resell and resell is what I'd much rather see for the clothing industry as a whole. Buying disposable clothing at the expense of a full life for another human being is not a "luxury" that anyone deserves, it’s fucking stupid.
To me, this doesn't seem like a tremendously difficult idea. People have been doing this for years, especially in big families, and to have a societal shift to this way of thinking would hopefully disrupt the exploitation of "third world" countries by multi-national corporations. This exploitation, of course, is of this country's citizens and not its governing elite. Also, a fun game to play: name a "third world" country that got there by the whole country being lazy and no one wanting their country to be better.
12 -
Creating a thread to discuss ethics in the clothing industry
0
What are you listening at right now
in superculture
Posted