Can you name a modern or even ancient tribe that do not have fashion?

garbonzo

Registered Senior Member
I would prefer an modern and ancient example, but any is fine.

Some tribes still have fashion in the form of feathers and headcaps and such. Are there any tribes that don't do any of that? Just are content with their regular clothing?

Thanks!
 
Nomadic tribes such as mongolian nomads would have fashion on the very bottom of their list. It's all about survival
 
I doubt that there are any groups/tribes/clans modern or ancient that do/did not use forms of adornment. If it is to denote ranking, status, sexual availability, religious/ritual meaning, or just as an expression of esthetics in general, does not matter. We have found jewelry and decorative fabrics among ancient grave goods.
 
Even a few non-human species of animals have a rudimentary fashion sense.

There's at least one species of bird in which the male prepares an elaborate nest full of things he's found, even human trinkets. The females choose which one they like best.
 
WRONG! There's an entire Wikipedia article on Inuit art. You don't have to scroll down very far to see some very fashionable Inuit clothing.


I have never seen Eskimos in anything other than the sealskin jackets and pants they wear. I do not live with them so I only used them as a group of people who were not "fashionable" to me. I guess I and others will have to do more research about them next time.
 
Fashion is connected to idol worship. In idol worship, objects are endowed with magic powers based on collective subjectivity. To wear the magic object transfers that subjective power to the wearer. One only has to look at fashion from the past. One may ask what were they thinking. Yet the herd, at that time, gave these fashions, magic power that endows the wearer with that magic. They strutted like peacocks, with the modern not getting that magic.

Often one culture's magic adornment may not work for another culture, since it was not properly programmed with subjective magic. One may not worship properly so the magic power does not get summoned. Atheism will allow idol worship.
 
Fashion is connected to idol worship. In idol worship, objects are endowed with magic powers based on collective subjectivity. To wear the magic object transfers that subjective power to the wearer. One only has to look at fashion from the past. One may ask what were they thinking. Yet the herd, at that time, gave these fashions, magic power that endows the wearer with that magic. They strutted like peacocks, with the modern not getting that magic.

Often one culture's magic adornment may not work for another culture, since it was not properly programmed with subjective magic. One may not worship properly so the magic power does not get summoned. Atheism will allow idol worship.

Wellwisher sometimes wears a suit and tie which is the fasion because he worships idols. I am an atheist so I permit him to worship idols.

Seems pretty obvious to me.
 
Wellwisher sometimes wears a suit and tie which is the fasion because he worships idols. I am an atheist so I permit him to worship idols.
Seems pretty obvious to me.

I am not part of the atheist idol worship religion, but if you wish to grant me access to your customs, thanks. I will politley pretend to worship your idols so you feel right at home.

Idol worship is fundamentally based on the subjectivity of art. If you look at a good work of art, it can move you emotionally. It pushes unconscious buttons creating feelings in the observer. The ancients could sense this unconscious/subjective induction in statues and totems, which are art, and realized the external object caused these feelings. They concluded the external object had a type of magic or divine power over them.

If this object could be worn, the object would still induce the magic art buzz, while creating a sense of confusion as to where the object and person begin and ended, thereby endowing the wearer with the same magic. If you saw a person with a perfect 20 carrot diamond ring, the diamond would create awe and one would wonder who this important person was. If he took it off and another person saw him, there is no magic transfer he is no big deal.

This art dynamics also applies to fashion, but with a slight twist. A good work of art does not need hyping and sales pitch for the induction. A good quality work of art will work generation after generation and is almost timeless; Michelangelo. Fashion is different in that the magic has a shelf life, until the buzz wears off unless it is reinforced by traditions which are practiced cyclically. The fashion industry has about a one year buzz life. The buzz often does not work with other generations except with those who like retro.

This is a different twist to idol worship, one used by the media and advertisers. Instead of the art inducing the buzz, the buzz is conditioned first and then added to an object. It sort of wings up the magic buzz like a toy. The new car will make you sexy and all the babes will want you. If you wear the car, its magic will be possessed by you. This is the sales wind up. If nothing was said, the object may or may not offer the same level of buzz. This can also apply to politics using abstract idol inductions to wind up a person's magic.
 
I am not part of the atheist idol worship religion, but if you wish to grant me access to your customs, thanks. I will politley pretend to worship your idols so you feel right at home.

Idol worship is fundamentally based on the subjectivity of art. If you look at a good work of art, it can move you emotionally. It pushes unconscious buttons creating feelings in the observer. The ancients could sense this unconscious/subjective induction in statues and totems, which are art, and realized the external object caused these feelings. They concluded the external object had a type of magic or divine power over them.

If this object could be worn, the object would still induce the magic art buzz, while creating a sense of confusion as to where the object and person begin and ended, thereby endowing the wearer with the same magic. If you saw a person with a perfect 20 carrot diamond ring, the diamond would create awe and one would wonder who this important person was. If he took it off and another person saw him, there is no magic transfer he is no big deal.

This art dynamics also applies to fashion, but with a slight twist. A good work of art does not need hyping and sales pitch for the induction. A good quality work of art will work generation after generation and is almost timeless; Michelangelo. Fashion is different in that the magic has a shelf life, until the buzz wears off unless it is reinforced by traditions which are practiced cyclically. The fashion industry has about a one year buzz life. The buzz often does not work with other generations except with those who like retro.

This is a different twist to idol worship, one used by the media and advertisers. Instead of the art inducing the buzz, the buzz is conditioned first and then added to an object. It sort of wings up the magic buzz like a toy. The new car will make you sexy and all the babes will want you. If you wear the car, its magic will be possessed by you. This is the sales wind up. If nothing was said, the object may or may not offer the same level of buzz. This can also apply to politics using abstract idol inductions to wind up a person's magic.

This is all very confusing.

Which one of these are idol worshipers:

1. You implied - People who wear cloths that are in fashion worship idols.
2. You state - Atheist worship idols (which is strange because they are athiests :shrug:)
3. My thought - A person that worships an idol.
 
Even a few non-human species of animals have a rudimentary fashion sense.

There's at least one species of bird in which the male prepares an elaborate nest full of things he's found, even human trinkets. The females choose which one they like best.

Do they then spend the rest of their time moaning about why the next nest has better stuff?
 
Do they then spend the rest of their time moaning about why the next nest has better stuff?

Yes, they do!
It is a ground dwelling bird and the females inspect the habitat. If it is not to their liking, they will not enter. I have seen pictures of whole estates built by the male, with colorful trinkets strewn on the "grounds" around the house.

Seems that financial security and vanity started very early and is not peculiar to humans.
•Building: Some birds seek to attract a mate by showing off their architectural skills. Constructing nests before the female arrives is a way for males to claim territory and show the suitable nesting areas they can defend. They may also decorate the nest with pebbles, moss, flowers or even litter to make it more eye-catching. The female may then choose the nest she prefers, or she may still build her own after mating with her chosen male.
http://birding.about.com/od/birdingbasics/a/courtshipbehavior.htm

Then of course there are the Birds of Paradise!! Talk about dressing up for the occasion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krD_qsK85F0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-05Z-GsGfI
 
Well if the oldest profession is prostitution and that is based upon appeal/fashion it would make sense every culture has fashion to an extent.

@ Buddha,

Even Eskimo women have long been known to braid their hair and use beauty products. Even combing your hair into a style is fashion.

Try reading,

Clan of the Cave Bear series. It is very enlightening as to how ancient tribes had many comforts and fashion.

Even nudists tan or wear their hair different or colour their bodies.

@ Birds talk,

Penguins engage in prostitution for stones.
 
Well if the oldest profession is prostitution and that is based upon appeal/fashion it would make sense every culture has fashion to an extent.

@ Buddha,

Even Eskimo women have long been known to braid their hair and use beauty products. Even combing your hair into a style is fashion.

Try reading, Clan of the Cave Bear series. It is very enlightening as to how ancient tribes had many comforts and fashion.

Even nudists tan or wear their hair different or colour their bodies.

@ Birds talk,

Penguins engage in prostitution for stones.

It's all called Free Trade..hehe
 
I have never seen Eskimos in anything other than the sealskin jackets and pants they wear. I do not live with them so I only used them as a group of people who were not "fashionable" to me. I guess I and others will have to do more research about them next time.
M*W: Well, obviously, you're reading the sports page. Try looking through the society pages of the local Inuit newspaper. The local blubbery snubbery wear less seal fat in the hopes of finding a male who still has his penis.
 
This is all very confusing.

Which one of these are idol worshipers:

1. You implied - People who wear cloths that are in fashion worship idols.
2. You state - Atheist worship idols (which is strange because they are athiests )
3. My thought - A person that worships an idol.

I said that idol worship is based on the subjectivity induced by objects. I used the art example to make it easier to see with a real life example. I was presenting in terms of the underlying phenomena that is common to all forms subjective worship, whether you call idol worship or not. The ancients were more conscious of the effects and would call it a god. Moderns are unconscious and therefore are not even aware of the worship.

ObamaCare is also called the Affordable Care Act, which in reality, is not very affordable. The prestige of the word "affordable" works like a magic cloak to subjectively induce people to think by dressing it up with words, as affordable, changes reality. How many atheist worship that idol?

Idols do not have to be representations of gods from the past so we can see say that is religion. They only need to use the unconscious dynamics. We may not call it an idol worship but the dynamics are the same. Religion worships idols but they are taught to avoid atheist idols. If I call these idols, not idols, it does not change the dynamics but it only serves to make people unconscious so it works easier.
 
Back
Top