all right, it's time someone put things in a different perspective;
first, enough of this "if you buy designer clothes you are materialistic and are causing world's hunger." really, enough. first of all, I buy clothes because they are beautiful. i appreciate and follows designer's work not because i'm striking this or that pose, but because it speaks to me, because it makes me see and fell beauty. that is all. before i came to tfs i did not know a single person who either gave a crap about fashion to begin with, or had entirely different tastes from me. and you know what? we got along just fine, because they saw beauty elsewhere, and thus mentally could understand where i saw beauty. without beauty this world would die. without beauty this world would be ugly and dull. without appreciating beauty, one would not appreciate human life, because they wouldn't see the beauty of it. and if someone her on tfs can see the beatiful clothes i buy, because it supports the designer who brings the same beauty that i see, well more power to them. i do not show off here, i am happy and greatful that i am not alone in seeing beauty in clothes. it happens to come at a high pricetag? well, that's the price put in by highly qualified workers who have to survive in expensive contries they work in, fine by me. look at jurgi persoons, one of the most talented designers who had to go out of business, because his vision came at a price tag that he could not afford. look at haute couture, which Yohji Yamamoto had to abandon because there is no money to be made there. is that not a tastement that it's not all about greed?! for your information, designer clothes comprise 4%(!) of the apparel market. so, please put the blame elsewhere. put the blame on the Nikes and the Gaps of this world, because that's where it rightfully belongs.
Paul, you like to amuse us with statistics, but what does that do? have you changed anything? do you support a child in Africa by donating $2 a day? and how do you know where that money is going? how do you know that you are not enriching some African tyrant instead of feeding a child? what use is Bono's posing for Edun? why is that not called anywhere a marketing scheme? why is it that i haven't heard the break down of who gets what share of the profits off of that $200 pair of jeans? why is Carpe Diem being called gimmicky all of a sudden, because it has some support here (they never advertise, they just do their SMALL thing), and American Apparel is not, despite their initial resistance to unionizing? what use is i-D devoting half their magazine to multimillionares talking about ending poverty? Patrick Viera talking about how football educates people? WTF? He kicks the ball around for a multimillion dollar salary a year. I want to see his charity record, a real one, not the one done for tax purposes.
the change lies elsewhere, people. the change lies with the first world's governments turning the profits they extract (which are 20 times more than the formal aid they give back) from the third world back into the third world, in giving the third world education and ability to build. Sudan is going through genocide and the U.N. is quiet - that's a problem. me buying a $200 Ann Demeulemeester shirt is not.