+
Pop Culture

Viral clip shows Vivienne Westwood accurately predicting the future of fashion 25 years ago

The icon and activist passed away on Dec 29 at the age of 81.

vivienne westwood death

The style icon passed away at 81.

The late style icon Vivienne Westwood was ahead of her time in so many ways. Her career was made up of one groundbreaking feat after another—bringing us punk fashion, mohawks, towering pumps and, last but certainly not least, boob T-shirts.

In a resurfaced interview, we see just how forward thinking Westwood really was, after she predicted the future of fashion around 25 years before it actually happened.

The video clip, posted to Twitter by magazine contributor Bri Malandro, shows a younger Westwood explaining how “pressure from the mass market” would be the biggest challenge in the industry.

She follows with a statement that’s more than a little eerily accurate.


“There’s a process whereby technology … the machinery’s been developed so much that they can more or less stamp these things out and they’d never want those machines to stop. Because they want forever and ever to be making money,” she explained.

This need to mass produce and continuously profit would be why more plain and “conforming” clothes would be marketed by various platforms.

“Everybody collaborates in this,” she told the interviewer. “Magazines then get these ordinary jeans or an ordinary white shirt or an ordinary little tube dress with two spaghetti straps and then it’s all photographed as if somehow it’s ‘lifestyle.’”

She added: “You see it all the time on a cover, constantly on the same beautiful women who presumably you feel that if you wear this clothing, this minimal, puritan, awful stuff then you’re going to look like that.”

Today, we have a term for this business model: fast fashion.

Sure, fast fashion companies sell a whole lot more than white T-shirts and jeans, but the essence of Westwood’s prophecy remains true. Fast fashion companies like Shein, Forever 21 and H&M mass produce an overwhelming amount of new (and cheap) styles coming in week after week. These companies now offer 52 “micro-seasons” rather than the standard summer, spring, fall and winter collections. That’s kind of bonkers.

This need for constant output results in, as we know, horrendous working conditions, not to mention it wreaks havoc on the environment. However, the products offer instant gratification at a fraction of the cost. Plus the internet and social media have joined in as “collaborators” to incentivize consumers. So it’s the exact money-making machine Westwood foretold—and business is booming.

Westwood would be the first to say that purchasing and wearing clothing was a vital expression of joy. However, as she famously once said, fashion, “like everything that gives pleasure, it is worth doing well.” Her suggestion? “Buy less. Choose well. Make it last.” Coming from one of the biggest names in fashion history, it seems like substantial advice.

Westwood died on Dec 29, “peacefully and surrounded by her family,” at the age of 81. Her eccentric, bold and controversial clothing choices were, at their core, a form of activism, as she used the runway to voice her opinion on various social topics such as environmental issues, human rights and climate change. She continued creating and working for a better world until the day she died. May we all live so courageously.

Our home, from space.

Sixty-one years ago, Yuri Gagarin became the first human to make it into space and probably the first to experience what scientists now call the "overview effect." This change occurs when people see the world from far above and notice that it’s a place where “borders are invisible, where racial, religious and economic strife are nowhere to be seen.”

The overview effect makes man’s squabbles with one another seem incredibly petty and presents the planet as it truly is, one interconnected organism.

Keep ReadingShow less
Sponsored

ACUVUE launches a new campaign to inspire Gen Z to put down their phones and follow their vision

What will you create on your social media break? Share it at #MyVisionMySight.

True

If you’ve always lived in a world with social media, it can be tough to truly understand how it affects your life. One of the best ways to grasp its impact is to take a break to see what life is like without being tethered to your phone and distracted by a constant stream of notifications.

Knowing when to disconnect is becoming increasingly important as younger people are becoming aware of the adverse effects screen time can have on their eyes. According to Eyesafe Nielsen, adults are now spending 13-plus hours a day on their digital devices, a 35% increase from 2019.1. Many of us now spend more time staring at screens on a given day than we do sleeping which can impact our eye health.

Normally, you blink around 15 times per minute, however, focusing your eyes on computer screens or other digital displays have been shown to reduce your blink rate by up to 60%.2 Reduced blinking can destabilize your eyes’ tear film, causing dry, tired eyes and blurred vision.3

Keep ReadingShow less
@keepingalfoatwiththejoneses/Instagram

Inexpensive and tranquil…what's not to like?

Saving money and living comfortably don’t always go hand in hand, but people do find ways to accomplish it. Sometimes all it takes is thinking a little outside the box—getting a job that allows you to travel the world or swapping out a traditional mortgage for more creative, less costly home ideas.

Take this couple in North Carolina, for example, who gave up living on land to move into a floating cabin and apparently saved $27,500 annually by doing so.

According to Good News Network, Sarah Spiro, 27, and her boyfriend, Brandon Jones, 40, break down the math: Their one-bedroom floating home, which they bought in March 2021, originally cost less than $30,000. The pair then spent two months and $23,000 renovating, for a total initial investment of less than $50,000. And now, they pay $2,500 a year to live on the lake. Yes, you read that right. $2,500 a year. They used to pay that much per month on their combined individual rents.

Obviously, it was a “no brainer,” said Spiro.

Keep ReadingShow less
Joy

Viral song hilariously imagines naming other things the way we named 'pineapple'

A clever, catchy and slightly chaotic take on the English language.

Would you like to slice some hotdoglemons into your morninggravel?

The way words get added to a language is an endlessly fascinating topic. Most English root words originate from Latin and Greek, but we also excel at borrowing from languages around the world.

Some of our words are just weird, though. For instance, "pineapple." Rather than calling the delicious yellow fruit with pokey leaves "ananas" like most of the world, our ancestors apparently took a look at one and decided, "Eh, kinda looks like a pinecone. But it's clearly a fruit. How about we call it a 'pineapple'?"

A video creator who goes by @thejazzemu made a hilarious song exploring what would happen if we named other words the way we named "pineapple"—by combining two words with "minimal conceptual link"—and it's a silly feast of musical and etymological brilliance.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pop Culture

Special ring that tells people you're single created for folks tired of dating apps

The Pear ring is a new "social experiment" trying to connect folks IRL, not online.

Dating never stays the same.

Why, it feels like it was only yesterday when dating apps were the shiny new trend in the singles world. However, with life becoming increasingly more virtual, many people are looking to become less dominated by screens. As a result, folks are once again hoping to find love from an authentic connection IRL. Swiping just isn’t as romantic (or cutting edge) as it used to be.

That’s where the Pear ring comes in. Self dubbed as the “world’s biggest social experiment,” this $25 brightly colored blue ring offers something classic, with a twist. Basically, folks wear it out to signal they’re single and ready to mingle. Almost like the opposite of an engagement ring, really.
Keep ReadingShow less
Family

New study shows spanking hurts kids' mental health and is less effective at teaching lessons

Why is it wrong to hit an adult or an animal but OK to spank a child?

Photo by Kat J on Unsplash

Yet another study shows that spanking isn't good for kids.

Whether to spank your child or not is one of the oldest debates among parents. Many live by the age-old wisdom that to “spare the rod” is to “spoil the child,” while others believe it’s wrong to resort to violence to punish a child when so many alternatives exist.

It also begs the question: If it's wrong to hit your spouse or pet, why is it acceptable to hit a defenseless child?

The 2021 American Family Study found that support for spanking has declined in the U.S. over the past few years. In 2015, 54% either somewhat or strongly agreed with the practice, but that number dropped to 47% in 2021. Thirty-five percent of respondents disagree with the practice and 18% neither agree nor disagree.

A new research study from the Parent and Family Research Alliance in Australia led by Professor Sophie Havighurst and Professor Daryl Higgins from Australian Catholic University makes a strong case that people should stop using corporal punishment to discipline their kids. The study “Corporal punishment of children in Australia: The evidence-based case for legislative reform” analyzed countless studies on the topic and found spanking ineffective and harmful.

The study was published to urge lawmakers to make corporal punishment in Australia illegal. Sixty-five states across the world have made corporal punishment illegal, protecting 14% of the world’s children.

The study defined corporal punishment of children as using physical force to cause pain, but not injury, to correct or control a child’s behavior.

The most startling meta-analysis published in the study found that "only 1 out of 111 statistically significant effect sizes was associated with a link between 'spanking' and a positive child outcome," while 110 were found to be associated with adverse outcomes.

The one positive outcome was in a 1972 study of children of the U.S. military living in West Germany that found those spanked showed less amphetamine and opiate use as adults.

However, the remaining 110 significant results found that spanking had adverse effects, including: “reducing trust and connection with those they are closest to, lower self-esteem, more internalizing and externalizing behavior problems including aggression, mental health difficulties, and increased risk for later substance abuse, antisocial behavior, and violence.”

A meta-analysis found that when children are spanked, they are less likely to internalize the moral implications of the behaviors that led them to be disciplined. It also found that non-physical discipline was more effective at teaching “alternative behaviors,” “developing a child’s conscience,” and advancing their “emotional development.”

Another meta-analysis cited in the story found that corporal punishment in childhood was associated with mental health problems, low self-esteem and antisocial behavior.

In the end, the studies show that corporal punishment is counter-productive when it comes to raising healthy, happy children. But it will take much more than a study to get people to reconsider their views of corporal punishment because they are deeply rooted in many cultural traditions.

Looking for some non-physical alternatives to discipline your child? Here’s a great place to start from WebMD.