Why Can't Fashion See What It Does to Women?
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
nytimes.comOtherstory
calmnegative
Debate
20/100
Fashion IndustryWomen's IssuesBody Image
Key topics
Fashion Industry
Women's Issues
Body Image
The New York Times article explores how the fashion industry affects women's self-perception and body image, with HN commenters discussing the industry's impact and potential for change.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
29m
Peak period
2
0-1h
Avg / period
1.5
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 11, 2025 at 9:43 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 11, 2025 at 10:12 PM EDT
29m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 12, 2025 at 1:09 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45554397Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 10:03:35 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
From that emerging at the individual level, when we move to group level, we get things like Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class.
Look at what I eat. Look at where I live. Look at who I spend time with. Look at all my toys, my hobbies, my mate. And naturally look at what I wear, and what I spend on my mates appearance. Each is a small piece of that same signal - Look how much I can afford to waste so I must be fit. Think of the military medals, religions rituals, the judiciary robes, the scientist lab coat, the elaborate parades and buildings they need to be housed in etc etc. Every system invents its own costume to show who belongs and who leads.
Veblens theory came out a century ago and he predicted tech (rooted in efficiency/optimization/waste elimination) would disrupt or dilute the need for all this. But the opposite happened. Tech made signaling cheaper, faster, and global. Everyone is running some kind of circus act cause its become easy to do. As Attention available is finite and bounded by number of people and hours in a day, we enter arms race territory. Things get more and more ridiculous.
But what goes out of focus in all the attention wars is signaling was never about waste. It was about cohesion.
In any group, people differ by a lot in strength, wealth, beauty, luck etc etc. Biology says this leads to violence/schisms/chaos. But social signaling creates a pecking order that keeps the peace. There is silent agreement you look the part, you get to lead - you like what you see me doing then do what I tell you to do.
Fashion plays a big role in building hierarchy. So even commie and egalitarian groups end up doing a whole lot of signaling. Through it, there is constant testing who notices, who approves, who follows.
Most of the cost of this system falls on women. Cuz thro history the rules of beauty have been written mostly by men and enforced through fashion.
In classics like Herland or Sultanas Dream the question that gets pushed is what happens if women designed the rules themselves? Such thought experiments imagine worlds ruled by women and how the signaling becomes less about power/status/hierarchy maintenance and more about cooperation, play, self expression. Until these experiments run in practice the peacocks shall still strut.