+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Meteorology & Climatology (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-72.html)
+--- Thread: Fashion & greenhouse emissions etc. (/thread-11832.html)
Fashion & greenhouse emissions etc. - Kornee - Mar 1, 2022
This is, indignant protests notwithstanding, an issue that is very much gender specific in terms of proportionate impact:
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/06/10/why-fashion-needs-to-be-more-sustainable/
Anyone care to argue that both genders are even remotely equally culpable? And, assuming greenhouse emissions and water use are critical existential issues as MSM portrayed, whether vanity based lifestyle choices need a drastic overhaul?
RE: Fashion & greenhouse emissions etc. - stryder - Mar 1, 2022
(Mar 1, 2022 01:44 PM)Kornee Wrote: This is, indignant protests notwithstanding, an issue that is very much gender specific in terms of proportionate impact:
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/06/10/why-fashion-needs-to-be-more-sustainable/
Anyone care to argue that both genders are even remotely equally culpable? And, assuming greenhouse emissions and water use are critical existential issues as MSM portrayed, whether vanity based lifestyle choices need a drastic overhaul?
I'm pretty sure I once saw a piece on how high heeled shoes were obviously not good from a Chiropodists point of view, they weren't designed to be good for the feet. They were designed for elevation, prose, fashion but they weren't designed by a woman, they were designed by a man.
So in essence you have an "Accessory" designed by some, not so much because women didn't have shoes but because they were creating a market for a product that no one else was providing. A man doing business.
That's kind of why it's not a "Gender" thing.
RE: Fashion & greenhouse emissions etc. - Kornee - Mar 1, 2022
(Mar 1, 2022 01:57 PM)stryder Wrote:Concede re high heels. Even concede re predominant women's apparel fashion designers in general being males. Fact remains - it's the 'fairer gender' that spends so much time and money and in the process generates so much greenhouse gas emissions/water usage. IOW - no sales if no ready market. Based on self-image. By now you will recognize I am thoroughly non PC. Sorry - not.(Mar 1, 2022 01:44 PM)Kornee Wrote: This is, indignant protests notwithstanding, an issue that is very much gender specific in terms of proportionate impact:
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/06/10/why-fashion-needs-to-be-more-sustainable/
Anyone care to argue that both genders are even remotely equally culpable? And, assuming greenhouse emissions and water use are critical existential issues as MSM portrayed, whether vanity based lifestyle choices need a drastic overhaul?
I'm pretty sure I once saw a piece on how high heeled shoes were obviously not good from a Chiropodists point of view, they weren't designed to be good for the feet. They were designed for elevation, prose, fashion but they weren't designed by a woman, they were designed by a man.
So in essence you have an "Accessory" designed by some, not so much because women didn't have shoes but because they were creating a market for a product that no one else was providing. A man doing business.
That's kind of why it's not a "Gender" thing.
There is a recent trend to mitigate that hugely wasteful situation. Recycling of clothing has become fashionable thanks to celebs taking up the cause. Long way to go though.
RE: Fashion & greenhouse emissions etc. - confused2 - Mar 1, 2022
Females should be brought up to understand that if they so much as touch a thermostat the heating fairy will leave the house and they will very likely freeze to death.