Plagued Consoomers / Consoomer Culture - Because if it has a recogniseable brand on it, I’d buy it!

[Jonah Hill poster]

>over $100K in designer outfits
>not even made by Travis Scott himself



Apparently, people still do this kind of stuff.

 

[DJ Grelle]

Another one of those look what we get at work vids.
View attachment 3633060

Jesus Christ this is just an adult daycare. Also who the fuck thinks bringing hair tools for your workers is a good idea? Those vain assholes are going to be spending hours on their hair! Although most of them weren't hired to do any actual work it's still weird and really unprofessional.

These things are not adverts to come and work there for other women. These are adverts for the programming nerds of "we have attractive nerd-ish women, come work here maybe you' ll find someone "

 

[Andrew Neiman]

What's horrifying is that you know LOTR is going to end up with a lot more entries itt when that shitty Amazon series launches.

There was an eloquent opinion column by a Tolkien scholar in the NYT a few days ago on this topic: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/opinion/rings-of-power-amazon-tolkien.html

A highlight:

“The Rings of Power,” which will come out weekly after its two-episode premiere, is based primarily on only a few dozen pages in one of the historical appendices to “The Lord of the Rings,” meaning that almost the entire plot of the show has been created by Amazon Studios’ writers and showrunners. And there’s a huge gulf between Tolkien’s originality, moral sophistication and narrative subtlety and the culture of Hollywood in 2022 — the groupthink produced by the contemporary ecosystem of writers’ rooms, Twitter threads and focus groups. The writing that this dynamic is particularly good at producing — witty banter, arch references to contemporary issues, graphic and often sexualized violence, self-righteousness — is poorly suited to Middle-earth, a world with a multilayered history that eschews both tidy morality plays and blockbuster gore.

 

[Nicest Person on a Honda]

View attachment 3672238
>over $100K in designer outfits
>not even made by Travis Scott himself

View attachment 3672240

Apparently, people still do this kind of stuff.

"Collab" culture is fucking retarded. It is the same shit at double the price

Dior fanboys (fangirls? I don't know what Dior makes, I think handbags?) are just fucking dumb. They have the nerve to charge $10K for a 150cc vespa that looks like ass (Note: The MSRP on a 150cc Vespa on all their other current models is ~$5K-$6K as a base model, as scooters are designed to be cheap). Keep in mind the helmet and top case are extra. They are only available through dealers though, meaning that the markup is likely several times what a normal helmet and top case would go for, although they won't even publish the price.
Please keep in mind that a helmet is considered a consumable item, meaning that they really are not built to last. A helmet that has more than 5-7 years of use on the high end and more realistically 3-5 years of use is meant to be replaced as the EPS foam (the stuff that prevents your brain from painting the street, and prevents minor concussions from smaller crashes) wears out due to sweat, elements, and other shit. Since these helmets appear to be limited editions, that means that even if you ride safely, your expensive helmet won't match your expensive bike in a few years.

Ride in Style with the Christian Dior Vespa 946

Christian Dior lent its fashion sense to Vespa on a new 946, and the work became a special memory for the visionary behind the project.

manofmany.com

Vespa 946 Christian Dior

www.vespa.com

Keep in mind that underneath all the awful fake gold and Louis Vuitton ripoff designs, it is basically a Primavera or Sprint with upcharged parts. I love Vespas, but they have some of the worst collaboration projects. They add a little aluminum (read: Weight, and worse MPG) fuck slightly with the chassis (not enough to make a meaningful difference) then charge twice the price of an already high end good. Some of it is more acceptable, for example, the 946 (RED) is a charity bike that all benefits some HIV/AIDS charity. But most of the time it is a shitty colab.
The one that came after this was Justin Beiber, and it is even worse.

This $10,000 150cc scooter may appear to just be a Vespa Sprint, but it is actually slightly more aluminum and has an off-white paint job! This for some reason, doubles the MSRP as apparently the former teen hearthrob designed this himself. The "Features" advertised on the Vespa press release for both this and the Dior "colabs" include "features" that are actually required by law, for example, ABS brakes are mandatory on scooters in many of the markets that Vespa wants to sell in, that is not a feature that is a legal requirement. I don't live in europe so EU posters correct me, but I believe that ABS is required on all 125cc+ street legal scooters (not including dirtbikes for obvious reasons).

These 150cc scooters have a maximum speed of 61 MPH, making them illegal to ride on most North American highways. They require a special license to drive (motorcycle license) that only ~6% of the population has, and are easily stolen. These bikes are little more than posh versions of existing luxury goods which offer no more performance and more points of electronic failure.

I went a little off the rails, but the point is, some of this shit is peak CONSOOM.

 

[Spangled Drongo]

Something on my mind recently - is it okay for people with very small kids (i.e. babies or toddlers) to push their interests on said kids, or is it another type of consoomer behaviour? For example, buying a shirt with your favourite band or vidya on it for your infant, who can't even talk yet - their brain isn't exactly developed enough to understand and appreciate what's on their clothes. On one hand it's not going to do them any harm, on the other - isn't that forcing your own interests on your kid who's going to grow up to be their own fully fledged individual with their own likes and dislikes?

The latter could very well be a bit of a woke argument - I can see both sides, but idk, I'd much rather see people introduce their children to things they personally enjoy than just expose them to whatever's popular at the moment simply because everyone else is doing it or it's what's most readily available - that's how you create the next generation of rabid Disney freaks who'll buy every piece of Mickey Mouse shite they see.

 

[Angelic 2 the Core]

Yes, they do want to push their interests on them. I've read about consoomers wanting to pass down their collections of plastic stuff to their kids not taking into account the fact that their kids won't give a shit about it and look at it like junk one day. They think that all of this mass produced stuff will be passed down through generations of their families. In reality it will just end up a landfill soon enough. The fact is that new generations typically don't want the old shit passed down through older generations unless it's really special and even then they don't care in most cases. In fact most newer generations rebel against the previous generation by purposely not wanting the same hobbies or collections as their parents. Most stuff that is inherited is literally just thrown out by the next generation because they don't give a shit about someone else's stuff, there will be new cooler stuff for them to care about.

 

[NoReturn]

Something on my mind recently - is it okay for people with very small kids (i.e. babies or toddlers) to push their interests on said kids, or is it another type of consoomer behaviour? For example, buying a shirt with your favourite band or vidya on it for your infant, who can't even talk yet - their brain isn't exactly developed enough to understand and appreciate what's on their clothes. On one hand it's not going to do them any harm, on the other - isn't that forcing your own interests on your kid who's going to grow up to be their own fully fledged individual with their own likes and dislikes?

The latter could very well be a bit of a woke argument - I can see both sides, but idk, I'd much rather see people introduce their children to things they personally enjoy than just expose them to whatever's popular at the moment simply because everyone else is doing it or it's what's most readily available - that's how you create the next generation of rabid Disney freaks who'll buy every piece of Mickey Mouse shite they see.

Yes, they do want to push their interests on them. I've read about consoomers wanting to pass down their collections of plastic stuff to their kids not taking into account the fact that their kids won't give a shit about it and look at it like junk one day. They think that all of this mass produced stuff will be passed down through generations of their families. In reality it will just end up a landfill soon enough. The fact is that new generations typically don't want the old shit passed down through older generations unless it's really special and even then they don't care in most cases. In fact most newer generations rebel against the previous generation by purposely not wanting the same hobbies or collections as their parents. Most stuff that is inherited is literally just thrown out by the next generation because they don't give a shit about someone else's stuff, there will be new cooler stuff for them to care about.

I think when the kid it little it's fine, but you need to teach kids autonomy from an early age, too. That means while you the adult decide which choices the kids can have available, you let the kid decide between the choices you've already paired down. I think that's a hard concept for consoomer-parents. They don't understand they aren't raising children, they're raising future-adults. As adults trapped in adolescence themselves, it can be tricky.

 

[Spangled Drongo]

I think when the kid it little it's fine, but you need to teach kids autonomy from an early age, too. That means while you the adult decide which choices the kids can have available, you let the kid decide between the choices you've already paired down. I think that's a hard concept for consoomer-parents. They don't understand they aren't raising children, they're raising future-adults. As adults trapped in adolescence themselves, it can be tricky.

I guess another way to word it would be - is there much difference between putting your kid in a Nintendo onesie because you like vidya, and plonking them down in front of Disney or Paw Patrol regardless of your own feelings on said media or its quality/educational value, just because "kids like it"? Been contemplating this a lot because this discussion is one I know my significant other and I are going to have when we get around to having kids, and as much as I want to teach them to appreciate the world outside of popular culture, there are certain things we both enjoy and wouldn't mind letting our kids experience, so I'd like to know where the line is drawn between consooming and appreciation.

 

[Sarcastic sockpuppet]

Yes, they do want to push their interests on them. I've read about consoomers wanting to pass down their collections of plastic stuff to their kids not taking into account the fact that their kids won't give a shit about it and look at it like junk one day. They think that all of this mass produced stuff will be passed down through generations of their families. In reality it will just end up a landfill soon enough. The fact is that new generations typically don't want the old shit passed down through older generations unless it's really special and even then they don't care in most cases. In fact most newer generations rebel against the previous generation by purposely not wanting the same hobbies or collections as their parents. Most stuff that is inherited is literally just thrown out by the next generation because they don't give a shit about someone else's stuff, there will be new cooler stuff for them to care about.

Even well-made products can become junk if not cared properly/if society and trend changes.

Take old wooden furniture for exemple. Some of it is extremely well-made and can last for centuries, but nowadays it's not trendy. You need to care for it properly so insects like termites don't destroy it, it may not be considered fashionable to have it as home decor, and if you live in a small space, you may not have the room to keep it. So Granny's table or chest may have fetched a good price back in 58 but nowadays no one wants it.

You don't know what the futur holds.
But i am pretty sure 99% of consoomer's crap will not become treasure. We are in for interesting times, people won't have as much money to spend to frivolous crap.

 

[Amber the Hedgehog]

Something on my mind recently - is it okay for people with very small kids (i.e. babies or toddlers) to push their interests on said kids, or is it another type of consoomer behaviour? For example, buying a shirt with your favourite band or vidya on it for your infant, who can't even talk yet - their brain isn't exactly developed enough to understand and appreciate what's on their clothes. On one hand it's not going to do them any harm, on the other - isn't that forcing your own interests on your kid who's going to grow up to be their own fully fledged individual with their own likes and dislikes?

The latter could very well be a bit of a woke argument - I can see both sides, but idk, I'd much rather see people introduce their children to things they personally enjoy than just expose them to whatever's popular at the moment simply because everyone else is doing it or it's what's most readily available - that's how you create the next generation of rabid Disney freaks who'll buy every piece of Mickey Mouse shite they see.

Parents especially good ones want pass on what they consider being good in this world to their kids. Traditions, language, food, values, ethics, skills and yes entertainment. Stories are one way we learn and come together, there is nothing wrong with parents starting their kid off with what they like.

This isn't forcing your intrests on your kid because none of this means the kid isn't their own separate person or can't choose something different in future. There are endless choices in the world, some witch are very bad for you, and you have get started with something to figure out what you like. That's why parents put stuff on their kids until kids are old and experienced enough to choose themselves. Kids often find beloved hobbies and other passions trough their parents example or guidance without anything sinister about it. That only comes if the parent refuses listen objections, doesn't evaluate if the kid is being harmed or doesn't allow the kid try out something different.

 

[rdrr]

Something on my mind recently - is it okay for people with very small kids (i.e. babies or toddlers) to push their interests on said kids, or is it another type of consoomer behaviour? For example, buying a shirt with your favourite band or vidya on it for your infant, who can't even talk yet - their brain isn't exactly developed enough to understand and appreciate what's on their clothes. On one hand it's not going to do them any harm, on the other - isn't that forcing your own interests on your kid who's going to grow up to be their own fully fledged individual with their own likes and dislikes?

The latter could very well be a bit of a woke argument - I can see both sides, but idk, I'd much rather see people introduce their children to things they personally enjoy than just expose them to whatever's popular at the moment simply because everyone else is doing it or it's what's most readily available - that's how you create the next generation of rabid Disney freaks who'll buy every piece of Mickey Mouse shite they see.

This does remind me of another board elsewhere, years ago, where a man posted about when he got sick, and in a hospital, he told his daughter not to throw all his shit out, she could sell it. The father collected old video game systems and shit. She just replied, "Dad, I'll just throw all that shit out". He had to explain to her, that she could buy a car with the funds, however, she even then, with her father very ill, just let him know, up front, she could not be bothered with that. it was too much trouble. it's trash. Also caused me to make sure I had good homes for some of my goodies, as I know to most family, they'd just not want to be bothered.

 

[Pissmaster]

This does remind me of another board elsewhere, years ago, where a man posted about when he got sick, and in a hospital, he told his daughter not to throw all his shit out, she could sell it. The father collected old video game systems and shit. She just replied, "Dad, I'll just throw all that shit out". He had to explain to her, that she could buy a car with the funds, however, she even then, with her father very ill, just let him know, up front, she could not be bothered with that. it was too much trouble. it's trash. Also caused me to make sure I had good homes for some of my goodies, as I know to most family, they'd just not want to be bothered.

Video games can still be brought to like, Half Price Books. Even with a big collection, you could just walk in, plop it down, and they’ll call you in an hour with an offer. That’s a real shame to throw it out right now.

Though in 50 years, yeah, there will be a glut of very old games where the hardware is degrading, and it won’t be worth dick. Just think about the value of Elvis Presley stuff today vs. the past.

 

[rdrr]

I remember years ago, clearing out some stuff from older relatives, that had been handed down in a way. Something I ended up giving away, was some mas produced China, that was not worth selling on the bay and similar since there was too great of a chance of it getting broke. Other people were selling on there, but, it wasn't worth it to me when factoring in time to pack, mail, and also chance of things being broke in transit. I did think for a while, about how that family member spent time acquiring it, and it was something else, packing those plates and similar, to give away to charity.

What I found that I hold onto more, from that relative, are the things that have personal etchings on them, from their time at work, and just in general personalized.

 

[The Great Citracett]

Seriously? She's not even cold yet...

 

[The Southwest Strangla]

Seriously? She's not even cold yet...

View attachment 3686271

People will sell their own mother corpse for a dollar. Never underestimate the power of a dollar.

 

[NoReturn]

Even well-made products can become junk if not cared properly/if society and trend changes.

Take old wooden furniture for exemple. Some of it is extremely well-made and can last for centuries, but nowadays it's not trendy. You need to care for it properly so insects like termites don't destroy it, it may not be considered fashionable to have it as home decor, and if you live in a small space, you may not have the room to keep it. So Granny's table or chest may have fetched a good price back in 58 but nowadays no one wants it.

You don't know what the futur holds.
But i am pretty sure 99% of consoomer's crap will not become treasure. We are in for interesting times, people won't have as much money to spend to frivolous crap.

It's all true. Something I see the Boomers neglecting, however, is the matter of space. I've seen so many Baby Boomers who just assume their child/children will take their "stuff". Sometimes it's just an assumption, other times the parent will come right out and say "I want to downsize so you need to buy a home soon." They either don't understand, or don't care, that they haven't taken the steps necessary themselves to ensure the outcome they want can actually happen.

Parents especially good ones want pass on what they consider being good in this world to their kids. Traditions, language, food, values, ethics, skills and yes entertainment. Stories are one way we learn and come together, there is nothing wrong with parents starting their kid off with what they like.

Agreed, until the kid is of an age where they can make those decisions themselves, it's your job as parent to narrow down their options. You can do that from the time they're literal babies, too.
E.g. Instead of asking a baby "What do you want to eat?" (they don't know, they're a stupid baby) you can do things like offer them choices between options you have already pre-chosen or narrowed down for them as their parent. "Do you want apple or banana?"

Video games can still be brought to like, Half Price Books. Even with a big collection, you could just walk in, plop it down, and they’ll call you in an hour with an offer. That’s a real shame to throw it out right now.

There are secondhand game shops that do the same, the only problem is proximity, similar to the above.
If you are within a reasonable distance of a shop, then it's worth the trip. If, however, it's hours and hours away, then you'll need to factor in things like cost of gas, opportunity cost of your time, etc.

Though in 50 years, yeah, there will be a glut of very old games where the hardware is degrading, and it won’t be worth dick. Just think about the value of Elvis Presley stuff today vs. the past.

Elvis shit is my new favorite go-to when talking about this stuff. Thank you guys for bringing it to my attention.

 

[Judge Dredd]

I'll accept the clock stickers if this has been asked, but is there a situation where consooming is okay?

I realise there were things I did in the past that these days would be considered consoomer behaviour. A good example would be the way how at one time every Pixar was a must watch, so much so that reviews were pointless. It wasn't until Wall-E that cracks started to show and by the time Turning Red came out, no one gave a shit. You could make similar cases for first party Nintendo games before the Wii.

I guess the difference is that back then the companies in question were known for a consistent high standard of quality, but I that could be me making excuses.

 

[Pissmaster]

A good example would be the way how at one time every Pixar was a must watch, so much so that reviews were pointless. It wasn't until Wall-E that cracks started to show and by the time Turning Red came out, no one gave a shit. You could make similar cases for first party Nintendo games before the Wii.

It's fine to be excited about something when they keep putting out hit after hit, as long as you're genuinely enjoying it. Consoomer behavior is continuing to watch Pixar movies even after they started going downhill, forcing yourself to say they're great and get excited over the next one because you care more about the sense of community surrounding them than the movies themselves.

So, If you're bored of them, yet you say "The Good Dinosaur was great, I don't care what the haters say" because you feel like if you don't, you'll lose friends and get kicked out of your Pixar fan group, that is classic consooming. You're denying your honest feelings about it, which is a way of dehumanizing yourself.

I guess the difference is that back then the companies in question were known for a consistent high standard of quality, but I that could be me making excuses.

It's fine to like stuff, just don't be a simp for a corporation and feel an obligation to buy whatever they put out, regardless of quality.

 

[Something Awful]

I'll accept the clock stickers if this has been asked, but is there a situation where consooming is okay?

I would say "consooming" is never okay by definition, it's a word that mocks excessive, mindless consumption.

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

Seriously? She's not even cold yet...

View attachment 3686271

There’s something comforting about the fact that the only thing this Funko owner will know, is that you can only feel compassionate when vividly imagining the Queen looking like a bug eyed, dead eyed Funko toy and not a real person.

They seriously look at historical people as just toys that will collect dust and nothing else in this new digital age of consumerism.