BOYCOTT NIKE!!!

[FONEY]

Edited by FONEY on Jun 29, 2005 at 12:32 AM

[Meth Huffer]

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAA

WOW

pleasure doing business with you cool guy! don't worry, this is not a comeback or a smartass remark. just glad you keep on "doing you" i do get a kick out of it.

"HARDCORE man..................................... fucking HARDCORE."

[Meth Huffer]

hey dont worry bro, aint no reason for anyone to be catching feelings now... hahhahaa

so now, its all just a joke to begin with? that's fine too. im ok with that, i dont know about a few of the other kids in the room, but its all good.

but no one has been able to answer me why the fuck is it always one side or the other? either you're a blithering idiot who will cop anything thats posted on a message board, or you're a butt-hurt "anti conformist" who goes out of their way not to buy what dumbass#1 is getting, just to be different.

if that statement offends you then you're obviously one of those 2.

i rock and own like maybe a handful of nike's. they're just fucking shoes to me, thats all they are. they were the same shoes when they were on sales racks for $40, they were the same shoes since before the SB dunk explosion, and they're the same shoes afterwards, even after the MT bullshit they aint no different. yeah, i do appreciate their designs since ive got some interest in sneaker design in general. but i see no need to covet and acquire as if they hold the cure for AIDS, and i see no need to throw any away when the company who makes them suddenly "ceases to be cool". they're not pieces of political propoganda, not icons of "corporate stranglehold on the youth of today", not some special trophy, not 'cool', not 'uncool', not some fucking homosexual fantasy in denial, and not anything even remotely special outside of asian made rubber and leather.

they dont fucking deeply represent shit in a complex political way. it's just a fucking pretty pair of shoes. not who YOU are. or at least i hope not. maybe i'm the one who's just incapable of understanding the 'extreme importance' of sneakers and clothing labels.

so please explain it to me, why its all or nothing, one side or the other? you dont need to ask me if its that serious to me, but ask yourself is it really that serious to you, even though you say it isnt?

does anyone actually understand my question or am i just wasting my time?

i get the feeling no one will answer it.

[Aotearoa]

Quote: why is it always one or the other?

theres 2 kinds of sheep in the flock. you're a trendwhore or one of those people who go out of their way to avoid it. either way you're the same fucking people. follow or avoid, these trends govern your life.

whatever happened to thinking for yourself?

90% of the people who are against the Major Threat poster dont even know why. 90% of the people who like it don't even know why for the same exact reason.

different sheep same flock.

snap out of it.

WELL SAID!

[neawts]

Quote: You like just staying right around the corner from all the white sheep trendwhores (they feed your ego by letting you know your "kinda" different)

I'm a long time lurker. I decided to post after reading this last message. Selegna is right on a lot of stuff. Especially how self-conscious everyone seems to be. I'll admit I am. But Meth makes the always relevant "who gives a fuck?" point that I often use. It's funny. It's all about your perspective. But after reading all this I feel dumb even having an opinion. That's the problem with message boards. People feel compelled to have an opinion on something even if the subject is incredibly worthless. But it's still fun to watch and listen to other people's rants (not being sarcastic, it's great stuff).

[Guest]

I feel like a dumbass for even replying to a thread of such timeless significance, but fuck it:

I began my Nike boycott in '98 when I was 16 because shit was played, this is in the suburbs of Vancouver, in which case as suburban youths I should have been between 10-13 years behind peeps in NY and Tokyo respectively.

You can make as many justifications for or against the company as you like, aesthetic vs. labour practices etc., but it doesn't really matter if you wear Nikes or not, you either have style or you don't.

I stopped wearing Nike because too many cats seemed dependent on that label alone to rock fly footwear, it lacks creativity to do this, fuck the sweatshop argument because most major urban shoe conglomerates employ reprehensible labour practices the only way to escape this is:

A> Buy all your footwear from fashion houses that boast about the craftsmansihp behind their apparel ie// Hermes, Tod's, Bally etc. in which case you'd only have like fifteen pairs of kicks as opposed to one hundred , or

B> actually source out a reputable independent footwear brand that is not of great reknown for your sneakers and actually set a trend, isn't that what most of you think that you do anyway?

Either way, who gives a fuck? Would your whole style be irrevocable altered for the worse if you weren't capable of wearing Nikes. Would your denim be less crisp, your cashmere more coarse, and your hoodies more suburban? Fuck it.

On another note, do any of you actually know who Nike was, what the swoosh is, and their correlation with Knight and Bowerman's naming of their company.

Funniest of all, the rights to the swoosh were sold for $35 in `71.

Regardless, if you are buying Nike's for their superior aesthetic qualitiesit does make sense to have a few pairs, but being such an evidently self-conscious person don't you feel a tad repetitive wearing the same logo day after day?

Let me illustrate for those in need, even if you eat a different kind of burger everyday, if you

eat burgers everyday your still eating burgers everyday.

The burger shit seg-ways into the marketing tip, who cares if you think Nike has great marketing, McDonald's has a pretty brilliant albeit more pedestrian marketing team, and does that mean you go out of your way to consume that trash?

All in all, who cares? If you actually walk away from this thread today feeling a personal affront because someone shows disdain towards your collection of dunks, or doesn't mesh with your trust-fund kid anti-consumerist vibe. Go fuck yourself, or someone else, because I think your level of vanity and self-consciousness has created far greater problems for you, and you probably need to get laid and release some of those pent up aggressions you have.

[Guest]

I feel like a dumbass for even replying to a thread of such timeless significance, but fuck it:

I began my Nike boycott in '98 when I was 16 because shit was played, this is in the suburbs of Vancouver, in which case as suburban youths I should have been between 10-13 years behind peeps in NY and Tokyo respectively.

You can make as many justifications for or against the company as you like, aesthetic vs. labour practices etc., but it doesn't really matter if you wear Nikes or not, you either have style or you don't.

I stopped wearing Nike because too many cats seemed dependent on that label alone to rock fly footwear, it lacks creativity to do this, fuck the sweatshop argument because most major urban shoe conglomerates employ reprehensible labour practices the only way to escape this is:

A> Buy all your footwear from fashion houses that boast about the craftsmansihp behind their apparel ie// Hermes, Tod's, Bally etc. in which case you'd only have like fifteen pairs of kicks as opposed to one hundred , or

B> actually source out a reputable independent footwear brand that is not of great reknown for your sneakers and actually set a trend, isn't that what most of you think that you do anyway?

Either way, who gives a fuck? Would your whole style be irrevocable altered for the worse if you weren't capable of wearing Nikes. Would your denim be less crisp, your cashmere more coarse, and your hoodies more suburban? Fuck it.

On another note, do any of you actually know who Nike was, what the swoosh is, and their correlation with Knight and Bowerman's naming of their company.

Funniest of all, the rights to the swoosh were sold for $35 in `71.

Regardless, if you are buying Nike's for their superior aesthetic qualitiesit does make sense to have a few pairs, but being such an evidently self-conscious person don't you feel a tad repetitive wearing the same logo day after day?

Let me illustrate for those in need, even if you eat a different kind of burger everyday, if you

eat burgers everyday your still eating burgers everyday.

The burger shit seg-ways into the marketing tip, who cares if you think Nike has great marketing, McDonald's has a pretty brilliant if more pedestrian marketing team, and does that mean you go out of your way to consume that trash?

All in all, if you walk away from this thread today taking a personal affront to someone not feeling your collection of dunks, or not meshing with your trust-fund kid anti-consumerist vibe you should go fuck yourself, or somebody else at least, because I think that your level of vanity and self-conscioucness has left you with greater problems than you realize and you probably need to release some of the pent up aggression you have stored.

[SuperCassette]

I feel like a dumbass for even replying to a thread of such timeless significance, but fuck it:

I began my Nike boycott in '98 when I was 16 because shit was played, this is in the suburbs of Vancouver, in which case as suburban youths I should have been between 10-13 years behind peeps in NY and Tokyo respectively.

You can make as many justifications for or against the company as you like, aesthetic vs. labour practices etc., but it doesn't really matter if you wear Nikes or not, you either have style or you don't.

I stopped wearing Nike because too many cats seemed dependent on that label alone to rock fly footwear, it lacks creativity to do this, fuck the sweatshop argument because most major urban shoe conglomerates employ reprehensible labour practices the only way to escape this is:

A> Buy all your footwear from fashion houses that boast about the craftsmansihp behind their apparel ie// Hermes, Tod's, Bally etc. in which case you'd only have like fifteen pairs of kicks as opposed to one hundred , or

B> actually source out a reputable independent footwear brand that is not of great reknown for your sneakers and actually set a trend, isn't that what most of you think that you do anyway?

Either way, who gives a fuck? Would your whole style be irrevocable altered for the worse if you weren't capable of wearing Nikes. Would your denim be less crisp, your cashmere more coarse, and your hoodies more suburban? Fuck it.

On another note, do any of you actually know who Nike was, what the swoosh is, and their correlation with Knight and Bowerman's naming of their company.

Funniest of all, the rights to the swoosh were sold for $35 in `71.

Regardless, if you are buying Nike's for their superior aesthetic qualitiesit does make sense to have a few pairs, but being such an evidently self-conscious person don't you feel a tad repetitive wearing the same logo day after day?

Let me illustrate for those in need, even if you eat a different kind of burger everyday, if you

eat burgers everyday your still eating burgers everyday.

The burger shit seg-ways into the marketing tip, who cares if you think Nike has great marketing, McDonald's has a pretty brilliant if more pedestrian marketing team, and does that mean you go out of your way to consume that trash?

All in all, if you walk away from this thread today taking a personal affront to someone not feeling your collection of dunks, or not meshing with your trust-fund kid anti-consumerist vibe you should go fuck yourself, or somebody else at least, because I think that your level of vanity and self-conscioucness has left you with greater underlying problems than you realize and you probably need to release some of the pent up aggression you have stored.

[FONEY]

Edited by FONEY on Jun 29, 2005 at 12:34 AM