Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Honey Badger Don't Care

            In this essay, I intend to supply the reader with an opposing view to the one expressed by Julia in Burn Your Nike Shorts through use of philosophical argument and poking holes in the logic Julia used to piece together her argument. At no point will I oppose dressing up; I absolutely love fancy suits, bright ties, etc., but I want to challenge the idea that one must dress up to feel confident in his- or herself.

            The largest issue with BYNS is actually hidden in a premise that makes up its foundation. Always looking good requires that everyone agrees on what looking good is. Marilyn Manson and Mark Zuckerburg have almost diametrically opposed ideas on this concept; the prior is rarely seen without makeup and leather while the latter is known for wearing jeans and a hoodie to meetings with business executives who are dressed to kill in suits that cost more than my college tuition. Unless all of Mankind agrees on what “looking one’s best” actually is, it is impossible to fulfill BYNS’s initial point without breaking its second rule, “Dress according to what suits you personally, not what everyone else is wearing.”
            Yes, BYNS' statements leave a gray area where looking good meets and meshes with looking how one wants to, but I say that the idea of an overlap must be false because it implies that everyone everywhere agrees, at least on some level, what looks good. Any old paintings or photographs of Amazon tribes show in great detail the difference time and locale has on what "looking good" means to Mankind. 
            Now that the logical fallacy has been exposed, the second issue I have with the ideas of BYNS is that clothes should not be a crutch onto which an individual leans for confidence. As I said in No More Blue Pills!, no one wants to hire someone whose security blanket can be taken away as easily as one can spill ketchup on their new $50 name brand button-up. The only safe place one can base their confidence on is something that is more lasting than looking good; mine is placed on religion which allows me to be completely devoid of care for how others perceive me.
            To answer Julia’s rhetorical question, “Who do you know that looks their absolute best in a baggy tee and flimsy shorts?” I say that anyone at their absolute best can look their absolute best in anything. It is certainly possible that I’m biased though. Due to my body type, it’s almost impossible to find pants that fit (27”-28” waists seem to be a myth in American clothing stores). I spend very little time in the category of looking good by the standard of most Americans, and I’m absolutely okay with that. Honey Badger don’t care.
            HOWEVER, if the arguments from grammer, are applied to clothing, then there is adequate reasoning to warrant the occasional spiffy outfit. Looking like what society has deemed good can be a sign of respect to those you are working with, and it can occur just to prove that one can look someone else's good. Dressing up just for acceptance and to have others you may never see again who pass you on the street think you're pretty though, that just seems the epitome of fickle.


-Jason Rossiter

QBA is on Facebook and Twitter!

No comments:

Post a Comment