
The Rise and Fall of Khaki (2016) - elemeno
https://www.racked.com/2016/8/25/12417314/khaki
======
acconrad
What world is this author living in? I see khaki all of the time. It's the
most common material for shorts (jean shorts may be on the rise, but the go-to
fabric is still cotton/cotton-khaki) and it's a prep staple here in the
northeast (anyone wearing Nantucket Red? it's dyed over a khaki fabric).

Also I'm aware this will make me sound like a snobby sartorialist, but anyone
who thinks of 7 For All Mankind is premium denim, especially if that someone
writes for a fashion blog, is not someone I want to take fashion advice from.
Overpriced, yes, premium, certainly not. Actual premium denim would be RRL,
Iron Heart, or any of the other Japanese workwear outfits specializing in
heavy selvedge raw denim.

~~~
gnopgnip
The article is from a women's point of view. For women, khaki is much less
common now than it was 10 years ago. 7 for all mankind is a premium denim for
women. Heavy selvedge denim is a niche market and not representative of all
premium denim

------
sevensor
> Men in khakis look like frat boys and youth group ministers from Tennessee

I wear khaki every day. I wonder which I resemble.

Contrary to the author's assertion, I don't iron my khakis. Literally nobody
cares if they're wrinkled. Plus, they're coffee-colored, which is a bonus
because I occasionally spill coffee on my lap. Also, where on earth do you
find comfortable denim? It's hot, it's stiff, and it wears out instantly. The
popularity of canvas mining trousers never ceases to amaze me.

Khaki is comfortable, socially acceptable, and inexpensive. Why would I ever
stop wearing it?

~~~
throwanem
I mean did you _see_ the picture that immediately precedes that quote? If
whoever wrote this also chose that photo as an exemplar of style, I have to
figure that by itself is pretty good _prima facie_ evidence that the woman has
no taste.

~~~
sevensor
> I mean did you see the picture that immediately precedes that quote?

Nope, this is what I get for using w3m :) I was probably not the target
demographic for this article at any rate! Guess I shouldn't be commenting on
articles about fashion without looking at the pictures.

~~~
throwanem
I hear it's not a problem if you use w3m in rxvt or xterm, or on the console.
But you're not missing much in this case!

------
onychomys
Between this and the recent article bemoaning cargo shorts, literally
everything I own offends the fashion gods, I guess. :(

~~~
frgtpsswrdlame
You're just so far ahead of the curve, these people can't see it yet. :P

~~~
onychomys
Story time: in 1999, I transferred from the University of Wyoming down to U.
of Arizona. The Friday before classes were to begin down there, I went walking
around campus, so I'd have an idea of where I should go and timing and all
that. I was an "Ecology and Evolutionary Biology" major, and so I needed to
find the EEB building. I didn't have a map, so I had to look at the big maps
on pillars that were located around campus and get a general idea of where
things were, then try to head in the right direction and hope for the best.

Anyway, I was having some trouble finding the building. I was wandering
around, somewhat lost, when suddenly I saw two middle-aged guys coming out of
a building wearing khaki shorts, khaki shirts, and floppy khaki fishing hats.
I thought, "Ah! Those look like ecologists!", and of course they were. Only us
and the geologists would ever have dressed that way. It's like a field work
uniform!

------
minikites
>The thing about khaki is that it’s not something specifically dated like low-
rise bellbottoms or t-shirts emblazoned with vintage road signs; it’s simply a
fabric.

Khaki is a color, the fabric is chino and it can be dyed many colors:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chino_cloth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chino_cloth)

I know this seems like a minor nitpick but it's hard to take the rest of the
points seriously with such a major misunderstanding of the basics.

------
StevePerkins
I understand that fashions wax and wane, and that khaki slacks might not be as
haute couture (or whatever) in 2017 as they were in 1997. However:

(1) They're still ubiquitous in most office workplaces. Perhaps not for the HN
crowd here, but certainly out in the real world.

(2) I'm sure the fashion trend pendulum will swing back around eventually. The
author's argument to the contrary is basically, " _Khaki 's require an iron,
and millennials don't own irons_". I don't know if that assumption about iron-
ownership is true or not, but I do know that wrinkle-free khakis have been the
norm for 30 years now. Where are you buying slacks that still need ironing?

~~~
L_Rahman
From the store that explicitly does not sell non-iron khakis because they have
a sheen and texture that many find unappealing.

~~~
StevePerkins
(shrug) I guess that must be the same store that sells blue jeans for $200 or
more, instead of around $50 or less. I wouldn't really know.

Man, I'm glad I'm not in my 20's anymore.

------
mikekij
No one told VCs apparently.

