Charlie Kirk assassinated at Utah campus event

Status
Not open for further replies.
But would you show up in a t-shirt and sweats?

A polo and jeans (I'm gonna guess they are clean, not ripped or torn, and not excessively faded) is a middle class mode of dress. I also assume you are in a middle class profession, probably IT, and not senior management if that's what you are wearing. It also seems like you have a low opinion of the people you work with/for, which probably means they have a similar opinion of YOU and your style of dress reflects the relationship accordingly.
My first permanent job I had the director who complained about my torn jeans and I replied it cost more than his ugly suit.
 
who cares? the church is what the university grew from, most faculty buildings aren't churches nor is anyone required to be christian to attend; I went to a christian school with "christian" literally in the name of it, doesn't mean I had to clasp a bible and walk around in robes, because that dogmatic shit doesn't belong in education and why school are expected to remain neutral; separation of church and state and all that 🤷‍♂️
We are 'debating' whether the use of the term "hallowed" is appropriate when describing Oxford. There is LITERALLY a church in the middle of campus. I offer that "hallowed" is a totally correct word to use with respect to Oxford, as not only has the term come to refer to academic institutions in general but that Oxford is a RELIGIOUS institution as well, indeed it has a Theology Department. It may not endorse a specific Christian sect, and may even be moving from Christianity as a whole (to it's peril, I think), but it most certainly is a religious organization in many respects.
 
My first permanent job I had the director who complained about my torn jeans and I replied it cost more than his ugly suit.
what was the job?

Torn jeans would get you canned at every place I have ever worked. Even fast food joints had a higher dress code.

edit: damn, we used to have a couple good fashion threads here, need to revive them I guess :P
 
Last edited:
Says who? You. I can show up to a meeting in jeans and a polo shirt and run circles around some of the clowns in suits there.
Maybe.

But someone wearing business casual or a suit who does equal or better work than you will get the job. Or keep it better. Or have a higher chance of getting hired.

Unless it's a lax job or sector, most companies trust better dressed people because if someone slobs their way in interviews or at work, they wont be trusted as much. If they cant handle dressing nice for work or in front of customers, they probably cant be trusted at all. Even for most retail jobs, they got to put on a decently neat and tidy company branded shirt or uniform of some kind.

That's why for just about every job regarding medical, finance, law, they dress nice and tidy because it gives a sense to the patient or customer they care. You dont see them waltzing in wearing trashy clothes. And from there it goes downhill in a sliding scale. You dont need someone dressing great to be a car mechanic or warehouse guy. But usually, the more important and higher paying job, the better you got to dress.

A lot of office environments still dont even allow jeans. Never mind ultra casual stuff like coming in wearing sandals, halter tops, cut off jeans and shirts etc... Every office I've worked at doesn't even allow tshirts. Shirts must have a collar.
 
Last edited:
No,you DON'T get it. I, personally, don't give a shit what you wear to a meeting or anything else because it's not important to me on a technical/intellectual environment.
What Fortune 500 company do you own so we can all apply to work there in our sweats? You are clearly on the cutting edge of industry to be so progressive with your attitudes and I want on your train!
 
But would you show up in a t-shirt and sweats?

A polo and jeans (I'm gonna guess they are clean, not ripped or torn, and not excessively faded) is a middle class mode of dress. I also assume you are in a middle class profession, probably IT, and not senior management if that's what you are wearing. It also seems like you have a low opinion of the people you work with/for, which probably means they have a similar opinion of YOU and your style of dress reflects the relationship accordingly.
Again, the way one dresses has no bearing on wether someone is credible or trustworthy. That's why it's a logical fallacy. There's really nothing to argue about here lol
 
We are 'debating' whether the use of the term "hallowed" is appropriate when describing Oxford.
no, you used hallowed in a way to amplify your argument the "disrespect" this student was showing by not dressing in a suit, because how dare he wear sweats in the holy, consecrated, sacred, revered halls of oxford?
Justin Timberlake What GIF


My point is that it's a school, and the "hallowed" dogmatic shit has no place there; even if you want to make that your argument now, as I said the church is only where the university started, there's like 300 faculty buildings there that have nothing to do with christianity now and only a handful of chapels, so no I'd disagree on using dogmatic language being appropriate to describe oxford as whole.
 
Trump declared Antifa a terrorist organization in the wake of Charlie Kirk's death. Immediately after that Antifa cells activated.

Last night we saw organic anti-Charlie "protests" in NYC and Boston. Today this.

The temperature is not going down. It's only a matter of time before someone else gets killed. Rinse repeat.
Antifa doesn't even know the definition of fascist but they are more authoritarian than those they accuse of being fascist. Much more violent too.
 
this is a textbook example of the appeal to false authority fallacy; it's a logical fallacy to assume one's qualifications or intelligence based on how someone looks. Conversely, just because someone dresses up like a priest does not mean they deserve respect and trustworthiness
Looks like he took the same thing from it, and loved it.
The student in question reportedly scored an ABB on his A levels. There are over 50,000 students in the UK each year more qualified to attend Oxford who didn't get in over him.

He then proceeded to act disgracefully by publicly celebrating the murder of the person he had previously shook hands with and debated as president-elect of the Oxford Union debate society.

He would be expected to dress formally to represent the institution as president, particularly while engaging in debate on stage. It is a prestigious event where world leaders and iconic figures have participated numerous times.

It is inappropriate to assume those users came to their conclusions thanks to racial bias and ignorance instead of familiarity with the facts of the incident.
 
Again, the way one dresses has no bearing on wether someone is credible or trustworthy. That's why it's a logical fallacy. There's really nothing to argue about here lol
Absolutely untrue.

I'd like to see anyone at face value pick a doc, lawyer or mortgage broker wearing a tshirt and sweatpants over someone wearing business casual/suit or clean and tidy medical clothes. If a Walmart buyer had an account manager come in trying to wheel and deal wearing cruddy clothes, they'd get blackflagged as a slob.

I can tell you dont work at a job or environment that has well dressed people.
 
Last edited:
Depending on the setting and occasion it can also project disrespect for the setting and those around you. This can be viewed as a statement and the willingness to make the statement can be seen as a reflection of character. It is a flex for billionaires to dress casual where others may not precisely because they are beyond needing to give a shit how they are viewed, though even they still usually will in some situations.

As for 'hallowed halls', it is routinely used to describe settings which are not religious in nature. Using the term would be appropriate for the Oxford debating chamber regardless of any religious connection.
 
Again, the way one dresses has no bearing on wether someone is credible or trustworthy. That's why it's a logical fallacy. There's really nothing to argue about here lol
You sound like someone who can not define the word "woman" as well.

Clothes ABSOLUTELY convey credibility and trustworthiness (or the lack of it). There are CENTURIES of evidence of this. How has this become a topic of discussion?

Trying to tear down fashion is how the outcasts work to destabilize society. While fashion can and should evolve, you can look back for decades and decades and it has not changed very much. Women's fashion is a bit more fluid, but it really just incorporated mens styles to a larger degree than men adopted womens fashion (principally jewelry and wristwatches). The cut changes, the length of some things, the fabrics used, colors, hats yeah or nay, etc but you can take a gentleman from 1820 and it isn't fundamentally that different from a gentleman today.

y3zpu95A8dkExXnY.jpg


to

ceSuv99BWpIg21GM.jpg
 
The student in question reportedly scored an ABB on his A levels. There are over 50,000 students in the UK each year more qualified to attend Oxford who didn't get in over him.

He then proceeded to act disgracefully by publicly celebrating the murder of the person he had previously shook hands with and debated as president-elect of the Oxford Union debate society.

He would be expected to dress formally to represent the institution as president, particularly while engaging in debate on stage. It is a prestigious event where world leaders and iconic figures have participated numerous times.

It is inappropriate to assume those users came to their conclusions thanks to racial bias and ignorance instead of familiarity with the facts of the incident.
Well I wasn't familiar with it, like I indicated in line 1 of the post when I asked about it. But fair enough, I stand corrected on that one.
 
The student in question reportedly scored an ABB on his A levels. There are over 50,000 students in the UK each year more qualified to attend Oxford who didn't get in over him.

He then proceeded to act disgracefully by publicly celebrating the murder of the person he had previously shook hands with and debated as president-elect of the Oxford Union debate society.

He would be expected to dress formally to represent the institution as president, particularly while engaging in debate on stage. It is a prestigious event where world leaders and iconic figures have participated numerous times.

It is inappropriate to assume those users came to their conclusions thanks to racial bias and ignorance instead of familiarity with the facts of the incident.
I understand, but this does not contradict what I said nor did i say anyone was making assumptions based on race.
 
Absolutely untrue.

I'd like to see anyone at face value pick a doc, lawyer or mortgage broker wearing a tshirt and sweatpants over someone wearing business casual/suit or clean and tidy medical clothes. If a Walmart buyer had an account manager come in trying to wheel and deal wearing cruddy clothes, they'd get blackflagged as a slob.

I can tell you dont work at a job or environment that has well dressed people.
Don't make me post pics of how good I look in a suit :messenger_sunglasses:
 


Was just listening to Ben Shapiro's show this morning and I 100% agree with his take re. Jimmy Kimmel, there's a clip ^

TL;DW happy the show is gone, however the government/FCC should not be threatening networks because

- the other side will sure as hell do the same when they're the ones in power

- just on principle that the government shouldn't be telling the networks what they can/can't say

- now this muddied the waters and created the appearance of Trump administration silencing his media critics, which Dems are capitalizing on

He also criticized Trump for gloating and calling for Fallon/Meyers to be canceled.
 
T

We're just talking past each other at this point - you agree that Its possible the bottom guy could be running ponzi schemes, securities fraud, be a tinder swindler, etc - if so, we are on the same page. Let's move on
Is is possible? Sure.

But i think the likelihood of the guy dressed in all black running gear and a mask is gonna rob you in the street is 1000x more likely than the guy in a three piece suit.

I also think that the likelihood of the guy in the suit is gonna try to get you to sign a bad loan is 1000000000000x more likely because NOBODY WORKS AT A BANK IN SWEATS which is the point of this ENTIRE discussion.
 
That is an AMAZING example of "All Nike" clothes coordination! I'm not a sneaker guy so can't say if the kicks are Nike, but I suppose they probably are.

Nike is such a lame fucking company. Low quality, woke advertising, support for BLM, child labor, dodgy sponsorships, how ghetto people embraced it and made it a 'status' symbol. I'd be embarrassed to be seen in anything with a Swoosh on it.

We're just talking past each other at this point - you agree that Its possible the bottom guy could be running ponzi schemes, securities fraud, be a tinder swindler, etc - if so, we are on the same page. Let's move on

It's called perception. And how people perceive you is everything. It's more important than what you actually do, and more important than what you actually know.
 
Yeah I don't have a strong stance on the vaccine thing, but shit like this is why I hate him. Not to mention him gloating when other people got cancelled.

He's such a fucking weasel wrapped in human skin. If you put on the glasses from They Live and looked at him, you'd see this:

7jSEvqgroqA2p5koPJYTtX.jpg


His voice even sounds like a weasel too.
Your pic even has that "head tilt" thing he does.
 
Is is possible? Sure.

But i think the likelihood of the guy dressed in all black running gear and a mask is gonna rob you in the street is 1000x more likely than the guy in a three piece suit.

I also think that the likelihood of the guy in the suit is gonna try to get you to sign a bad loan is 1000000000000x more likely because NOBODY WORKS AT A BANK IN SWEATS which is the point of this ENTIRE discussion.
As a side note regard dress code, you'll notice how people who hate dress codes of any kind typically trend to either low end jobs, or simply a blue collar job that comes with overalls as well as no point wearing nice clothes since the person will get dirty. Or skews to WFH.

But for your typical white collar job at the office, the higher level, higher paying, and more respect needed from workers/customers the trend is to dress nice. Even when our office was WFH for 2 years during covid, everyone was still asked to dress respectfully. So no PJs or slobby bedhead. It shows you care, instead of rolling out of bed.

I dont think you'll see too many real estate agents selling homes or sales guys at a dealership coming out wearing tshirts and jogging pants. But a guy stocking shelves might. One kind of job demands respect in terms of job and customer facing. The other, nobody gives a shit so dress how you want.
 
Last edited:


Was just listening to Ben Shapiro's show this morning and I 100% agree with his take re. Jimmy Kimmel, there's a clip ^

TL;DW happy the show is gone, however the government/FCC should not be threatening networks because

- the other side will sure as hell do the same when they're the ones in power

- just on principle that the government shouldn't be telling the networks what they can/can't say

- now this muddied the waters and created the appearance of Trump administration silencing his media critics, which Dems are capitalizing on

He also criticized Trump for gloating and calling for Fallon/Meyers to be canceled.

It's way more than the appearance, in my opinion. The broader context is that Trump is pretty much wielding tariff policy as his own personal carrot and stick for virtually any whim he has (which has been ruled illegal). He's demanded that entire countries forfeit their sovereignty on a whim like Canada and Greenland; bombed Iran and Venezuela, threatened to rescind Elon's contracts because of a personal falling out, and has a long history of repeatedly asking for TV hosts to be fired and rewarding those networks with merger approvals. Trump's entire life is one long quid pro quo. Trump then specifically verbalized wanting positive coverage from networks, or their licenses could be revoked. Just explicitly said it. The FCC also explicitly said it, out loud. In English.

The main reason to be against it is because it's a huge threat to the integrity of the 1st amendment which is required to have a functioning democracy, not primarily because they're fearing revenge in the next term.

But credit to Shapiro for having a more correct interpretation than many others.
 
Last edited:
Always with the mask as well. Cowards.
Oh ya, that's another thing about liberals when they mob up or do protests. They love wearing masks to hide their identity.

So on one hand, they are supposed to be ultra proud of their view and support cancel culture finding people's identities. But then they arent so public trying to hide their own identity. LOL.

If there's a correlation in life...... any time you see some shady people wearing masks at a protest, there always seems to be violence or dumb shit going on. It doesnt seem to often everyone there wearing masks are ultra chill.
 
The US - and the rest of the western world for that matter - really needs to do something to fix the political divide.

Having people killing each other and trying to silence their opponents isn't healthy.

The killing of Charlie Kirk should have been the "shit has gone too far moment", but instead all I see is further escalation.

Oh no, they got Captain Antifa.



SP4MEuWicmzRHWtB.gif


Like this. Shouting Nazi and Fascist without knowing what the words means.

Prominent voices in politics, celebrities, etc could deescalate this nonsense by telling these clowns that ICE are not Nazis and they're not fighting an evil tyrant, but they just let it continue. In fact, some of them they get off from escalating tensions.
 
Last edited:
Youre right. After the left started doxxing them years ago hoping people go after them and their fam at home. As always two can play the same game.
It's not the same game though. The federal government should be held to a higher standard. They're paid by taxpayers. Officers have to identify themselves and they do just fine. Comparing them to protestors is such a low standard it's insane. But no one cares about those masks. Hypocrisy, again. You're supposed to identify yourself if asked, and process people during arrests in accordance with their rights, and the law.
 
Last edited:
Prominent voices in politics, celebrities, etc could deescalate this nonsense buy telling these clowns that ICE are not Nazis and they're not fighting an evil tyrant, but they just let it continue. In fact, some of them they get off from escalating tensions.
The good ones (which are the majority!) are just waiting for the perfect moment to speak up.
 
As a side note regard dress code, you'll notice how people who hate dress codes of any kind typically trend to either low end jobs, or simply a blue collar job that comes with overalls as well as no point wearing nice clothes since the person will get dirty. Or skews to WFH.
I blame IT, personally.

They were the bridge between "working on hands and knees, in dirty spaces" and "gotta show up in presentations in front of $$$ people" that drove the "office casual" stuff that has now led to a near collapse of proper dress.

We also just moved away from the high maintenance clothes. Good suits should be tailored, something a lot of cheap off the rack stores can't do. So instead of a few sizes of pants that need to be taken in for each individual, we have dozens of sizes of pants made in asia to try to get a mediocre fit off the rack. They also should be dry cleaned, but everyone has a washing machine now and want clothes suitable for that contraption. Plus part of upper class fashion WAS the difficulty in dealing with it, because it meant you could afford the help. This doesn't translate well to the modern era where convenience is king and everyone wants wrinkle free, dryer capable clothes.

Throw in the movement to hotter climates and even liberal use of A/C makes a wool suit untenable most of the year for folks that value comfort over appearance. And who would wear a plastic suit????? Bleh (though the newer synthetic fabrics ain't so shabby)
 
It's not the same game though. The federal government should be held to a higher standard. They're paid by taxpayers. Officers have to identify themselves and they do just fine. Comparing them to protestors is such a low standard it's insane. But no one cares about those masks. Hypocrisy, again.
Not when they are just trying to do their job and got additional threats online and on light posts the past few years saying go after them at home. Here's a pic of him and his info. And go after his fam too.

Authority figures wouldnt have to go through all these hassles and law enforcement if people just chilled and didnt do dumb shit. There wouldnt even be any cops or federal workers patrolling these places if there werent angry protesters standing there to begin with causing trouble.

Just be a chill person not causing trouble and no solider dude will smack someone's butt on the ground. It cant be hard to understand when 99.99% of other people get no hassles or slams either.
 
Youre right. After the left started doxxing them years ago hoping people go after them and their fam at home. As always two can play the same game.
you're ok with democrats using federal funds to build a masked army to make arrests with no judicial warrants and no clear identifiers? I hope you realize what you are saying
 
I blame IT, personally.

They were the bridge between "working on hands and knees, in dirty spaces" and "gotta show up in presentations in front of $$$ people" that drove the "office casual" stuff that has now led to a near collapse of proper dress.
Makes sense. I never thought of it that way.

Problem is people are idiots and think if something applies to one set of people it should to another. Different jobs, different responsibilities, customer facing vs 100% internal etc... Some jobs can have people dressed grubby, while some need to show some respect.

No different than a funeral. Someone can be the exact same guy giving condolences and a nice card. He can choose to wear formal dark clothes, or go in wearing a Hawaiian shirt. There's a correct choice and an incorrect choice. A lot of people lack awareness and respect for their situation. Dont worry about what Bob wears in the shipping bay. Just worry about your job and department.
 
Not when they are just trying to do their job and got additional threats online and on light posts the past few years saying go after them at home. Here's a pic of him and his info. And go after his fam too.

Authority figures wouldnt have to go through all these hassles and law enforcement if people just chilled and didnt do dumb shit. There wouldnt even be any cops or federal workers patrolling these places if there werent angry protesters standing there to begin with causing trouble.

Just be a chill person not causing trouble and no solider dude will smack someone's butt on the ground. It cant be hard to understand when 99.99% of other people get no hassles or slams either.
Funny thing is as someone working for the public you aren't supposed to be masked and your name is in a database to be looked up for public safety. Because of Ice wearing masks, there's been people pretending to be ice.


It's gotten so bad that California had to pass SB 627 to ban ice and law enforcement from wearing masks or covering identifying information such as badge numbers as many officers were refusing to give that information when requested.

That sentiment has some privilege attached to it. "Don't be causing no trouble and they won't beat you." Ever get pulled over and taken to a cornfield by an officer who tried to pull out a piece. I know you said you're from Canada, but there is a lot of history in the US and most of it still fresh with many of those people still alive and it still happening in many Southern areas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom