Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You must have have had a silk Hammers scarf to

> wear like a tie or tied round your wrist too

> Maxxi? Cherry 8 hole DMs naturally, you daren't

> wear any with more holes or the Mile End skins

> would kick your arse (they might anyway)



oh yes - but only graduated to a pair of docs (8-hole oxblood) when I got my first pair of Skinners - remember them? Weird baggy jeans that, fashion demanded, you wore with a turn-up of 10 inches or more. I grew up in Coventry so my version of Mile End skins were the CCFC Boot Boys.

Do you know that Harrringtons have no shoulder seams and deep pockets because they were designed as a golfing jacket? The lack of shoulder seams means they move more freely during the swing.


Would skins and mods have known that they were being just so... middle class... when they wore them?



Or that when they wore Crombies with silk handkerchiefs they were being ex-military types? Or that the Pringle, Aquascutum, Burberry, Lyle and Scot etc. they wore as 'casuals' in the 80s or the Berghaus, Ralph Lauren and Barbour of today makes them a little sloaney?


On reflection I don't think Harringtons would have made them feel like class traitors.

Rubish - they were completley aware just carried it off with far more style.


Working class youth culture up until to the 1980s tended to:


Like to dress up (they wore overalls, tougher working clothes all week after all)

Always liked the preppy look

Readily and unironically borrowed from more tailored upper class looks formally - ie teddyboys in edwardian drapes or uinformally egsportswear - Fredperryetc


It's the middlecalss yoythcultures that have tended to either dressdown or look crap in stuff designed for them but not wearing it wirth any sense of style - think deck shoes; golfing jumpers, etc etc


PS Talking males


Nowadays as the white working class has gone young black guys dress the coolest (on the whole)


Add that to your generalisations ;-)

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> irony is difficult on line, now I know it looks

> more obvious :))



Don't use it much but is often only way of correcting/challenging Huguenot without provoking page-long diatribe about why he is right. ;-)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...