Hacker News Reader

Comment by diiq | Hacker News Reader

Could be.

But the only demographic I named was "people who can wear cargo pants to work", so you kind of set me up for a "no true scotsman". There are events, and clients, to which I wouldn't wear cargo pants, therefore we're in different demographics :)

It is a little disheartening to spend so much time talking about cargo pants, when I relegated them to a postscript and only mentioned them to say "I am not talking about cargo pants".

But nice to meet another michigander! Hopefully I'll see you at some meetup or event once we have those sorts of things again.

View on HN

I think the reason people are spending so much time talking about cargo pants is that they recognize, even if they don't articulate, the logical error on your argument. You spend a good amount of the post talking about how there is a lack of innovation in the fashion world. Instead, changes tend to be incremental. You then claim to have created your own innovation, a new kind of pants pocket. Yours is a new product. "But," your audience rightfully says, "don't pockets like that already exist in some pants?" You respond that the existing pockets are on casual pants, such as cargo pants, and that your pocket is a different product because it is on dress pants. But moving a pocket design from one style of pants to another is exactly the sort of incremental change you that you say shows the absence of innovation in fashion. We're drawn to your cargo pant statement because it is demonstrably false.

> It is a little disheartening to spend so much time talking about cargo pants, when I relegated them to a postscript and only mentioned them to say "I am not talking about cargo pants".

But that is totally your own fault for denigrating cargo pant wearers in the initial version of the post.

He didn't denigrate cargo pants wearers, he just said this design isn't for people who wear them... And then cargo pants wearers decided that was reason to complain even more.

He said that people who wear cargo pants just do it dress up like their "pretend job".

Edit: It appears that this was unintentional on the authors part and he has since edited it. Which is great!

> Cargo pants are fashion-as-pretend-occupation — when not at work, wear a fancy chronometer to suggest you’re a pilot or a diver, or camo to suggest you’re in the military. Cargo pants are a paratrooper costume. Cargo shorts have giant external pouches so teenagers in the 90’s, trapped in school, could say (sartorially) “I go out into the world and do adventurous things!” even though the things they stored in those pouches were doritos and portable cd players.

> I am discussing clothing as it might be worn by people while doing their real jobs, not their pretend ones. If cargo pants are appropriate for your real job, you definitely don’t want or need my side-seam welt pockets; and vice-versa."

You did it to yourself by saying cargo pants aren’t “for the office”. This is a site filled with SWEs who work in offices where a dress code that didn’t allow cargo pants is so laughable it would be a reason to quit.

It’s just standard West-coast backlash against fashion snobbery. You might as well have said that anyone not wearing a 3-piece suit isn’t fit to go into the office.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com