U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-08-2014, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,304 posts, read 17,964,136 times
Reputation: 6257

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jennifat View Post
You clearly experienced the Twin Cities of another era. To the contrary, I think you have that exactly opposite. 25 years ago, Chicago would have absolutely been the more fashionable city. Minneapolis was crime-ridden, emptied-out, and not a fashionable place to be in the late 80s.

These days, the fashion playing field is much more level in terms of sophistication, although Chicago wins the "ultra-wealthy fashion elite" trophy, and only because it's three times the size of the Twin Cities. You'll see a fair amount of that here (particularly in Kenwood/Lake of the Isles in Minneapolis, Cathedral Hill/Summit Ave. in Saint Paul, and and Lake Minnetonka). Chicago just has a lot more and thus caters more to that crowd.
I've been in Chicago for 5 years - it's gotten more fashionable every year I've been here, noticeably. At least in the area where I live (downtown) and a few other areas. Not every area of course is like that and some have remained fairly stagnant. Size of a city has absolutely nothing to do with fashion, especially now in the days of mass media and the internet where you can get pretty much anything online anywhere in the US.

Chicago has a lot more than just upscale crowd though. if you don't think that Chicago has loads of urban/hipster type fashion going on then you aren't well versed in the city as of current. The African American and Hispanic population especially at the teenager and early 20s ages are big on urban wear as well. A lot of the younger Hispanic males are wearing stuff that you'd find in LA. I remember visiting Chicago before I lived here and it is more fashionable now, even versus the late 90s/early 2000s from what I remember. Not on the same level as LA, NYC, or Miami overall, but it's still definitely above where it was even when I first moved here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-09-2014, 01:24 AM
 
5,807 posts, read 10,362,817 times
Reputation: 4311
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
I've been in Chicago for 5 years - it's gotten more fashionable every year I've been here, noticeably. At least in the area where I live (downtown) and a few other areas. Not every area of course is like that and some have remained fairly stagnant. Size of a city has absolutely nothing to do with fashion, especially now in the days of mass media and the internet where you can get pretty much anything online anywhere in the US.

Chicago has a lot more than just upscale crowd though. if you don't think that Chicago has loads of urban/hipster type fashion going on then you aren't well versed in the city as of current. The African American and Hispanic population especially at the teenager and early 20s ages are big on urban wear as well. A lot of the younger Hispanic males are wearing stuff that you'd find in LA. I remember visiting Chicago before I lived here and it is more fashionable now, even versus the late 90s/early 2000s from what I remember. Not on the same level as LA, NYC, or Miami overall, but it's still definitely above where it was even when I first moved here.
Yes. You live in the gold coast/river north area. You definitely sound like you hang out in the more fashionable areas of Chicago.

Chicago may have a much wider subculture spectrum than Minneapolis might have. Greater downtown Chicago (primarily centered around River North/Gold Coast/Mag Mile. On the other end of the spectrum you have your homogenous big ten crowd in Lincoln Park/Lakeview (to lesser extent) or your staunchly blue collared native born Chicagoans in the segregated white neighborhoods on the south side (where there gaydar would go off, if you wore anything too hip).
Minneapolis is small enough, that maybe at least in the city limit the hipster culture might penetrate more facets of that city, whereas in Chicago one is isolated in the far NW or far SW sides of the city.

And if you don't mind, can you give me an example of what younger hispanic males are wearing in Chicago that one would find in LA? Not disagreeing with you at all necessarily. White collared, upper middle class hispanic culture is generally more fashionable than the typical native born white american culture of the same socioeconomic level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2014, 01:58 AM
 
Location: San Leandro
4,576 posts, read 7,634,579 times
Reputation: 3248
When I was growing up in the 90s chicago was behind in fashion. But with social media all that has changed.

Chi vs mn, not even close.

Chicago has more of everything and a much larger spectrum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2014, 02:03 AM
 
112 posts, read 102,404 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal Dude View Post
When I was growing up in the 90s chicago was behind in fashion. But with social media all that has changed.

Chi vs mn, not even close.

Chicago has more of everything and a much larger spectrum.
So social media has really closed the gap you say, however you then follow that up with Chicago>>>>>Minneapolis, do you see the contradiction?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2014, 09:01 PM
 
Location: San Leandro
4,576 posts, read 7,634,579 times
Reputation: 3248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuggah View Post
So social media has really closed the gap you say, however you then follow that up with Chicago>>>>>Minneapolis, do you see the contradiction?
I'm talking the gap between the midwest and nyc/la.


Minneapolis arguement seems to be, that because they are more hipster, they are more fashionable.

Portland is more hipster than nyc, are they more fashionable than nyc?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2014, 10:23 PM
 
5,807 posts, read 10,362,817 times
Reputation: 4311
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal Dude View Post
I'm talking the gap between the midwest and nyc/la.


Minneapolis arguement seems to be, that because they are more hipster, they are more fashionable.

Portland is more hipster than nyc, are they more fashionable than nyc?????
The bigger the city the more shopping opportunities they are going to be. Few places in the country can compare to the options on the Mag Mile. Its a one of a kind place.

Chicago women are certainly on average clearly more fashionable than Minneapolis. And the whole near north side is the probably the most fashionable area of the country away from the coasts.

The issue that Chicago has over Minneapolis however, is that Chicago has large swaths of the city where staunch machismo dominates and can discourage men from taking fashion risks. Minneapolis being a much smaller city where hipsters and gays can be found throughout the city, can have an effect on your average straight dude taking a fashion risk because it just integrates itself into the culture.

Also I'm not sure why you say Portland is more hipster than NYC. There are probably more people with hipster style in Brooklyn of 2.5 million, than the entire city of Portland (600,000)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2014, 08:41 AM
 
Location: Maryland
3,927 posts, read 5,059,848 times
Reputation: 4191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex?Il? View Post
The bigger the city the more shopping opportunities they are going to be. Few places in the country can compare to the options on the Mag Mile. Its a one of a kind place.

Chicago women are certainly on average clearly more fashionable than Minneapolis. And the whole near north side is the probably the most fashionable area of the country away from the coasts.

The issue that Chicago has over Minneapolis however, is that Chicago has large swaths of the city where staunch machismo dominates and can discourage men from taking fashion risks. Minneapolis being a much smaller city where hipsters and gays can be found throughout the city, can have an effect on your average straight dude taking a fashion risk because it just integrates itself into the culture.

Also I'm not sure why you say Portland is more hipster than NYC. There are probably more people with hipster style in Brooklyn of 2.5 million, than the entire city of Portland (600,000)
There are also likely more hipsters in Chicago than Mpls, but because they represent a larger fraction of what is considered the fashionable populace in Mpls, they are more obvious. However, if anything, hipster is representing more main stream fashion than edgy or avant garde. When hipster fashion has become popular in places like Wichita or Tulsa, you aren't really on the cutting edge. For this reason, the hipster aesthetic shouldn't be a benchmark for fashionable, in my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2014, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,304 posts, read 17,964,136 times
Reputation: 6257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex?Il? View Post
On the other end of the spectrum you have your homogenous big ten crowd in Lincoln Park/Lakeview (to lesser extent) or your staunchly blue collared native born Chicagoans in the segregated white neighborhoods on the south side (where there gaydar would go off, if you wore anything too hip).
While true, I have seen a noticeable change in some of these neighborhoods. Still, even when I moved here 5 years ago, guys while not FASHIONABLE were still dressing nicely in areas like Lakeview, Lincoln Park, etc. In the last few years, I've noticed guys take more risk even in these areas. I think it's mainly because the women, I've noticed, especially in the last two years are a lot pickier with the guys they go for and many of them now won't even give a chance to a guy who can't dress decently well in the least.


Quote:
And if you don't mind, can you give me an example of what younger hispanic males are wearing in Chicago that one would find in LA? Not disagreeing with you at all necessarily. White collared, upper middle class hispanic culture is generally more fashionable than the typical native born white american culture of the same socioeconomic level.
For one, the whole pants tucked into high top shoes type of stuff. I have a hard time explaining so maybe I'll try and candidly take a picture next time I see it. I remember when I went to an area of the south side (near Bridgeport) a few months ago and remember seeing a bunch of younger guys basically wearing more urban but kind of fashionable in a younger way fashion. Then when they are in my neighborhood, you see it all the time too especially in the summer. They're far from just wearing tshirts and ****ty stuff like that. You won't even see that a ton in the Big 10 neighborhoods. At least they're in button ups when they go out. The blue collar more white areas? Yeah of course it won't be that fashionable, but I can't name a city where a lower class area is still fashionable in the US. It doesn't exist that often.

Last edited by marothisu; 05-10-2014 at 10:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2014, 10:52 AM
 
Location: San Leandro
4,576 posts, read 7,634,579 times
Reputation: 3248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex?Il? View Post
The bigger the city the more shopping opportunities they are going to be. Few places in the country can compare to the options on the Mag Mile. Its a one of a kind place.

Chicago women are certainly on average clearly more fashionable than Minneapolis. And the whole near north side is the probably the most fashionable area of the country away from the coasts.

The issue that Chicago has over Minneapolis however, is that Chicago has large swaths of the city where staunch machismo dominates and can discourage men from taking fashion risks. Minneapolis being a much smaller city where hipsters and gays can be found throughout the city, can have an effect on your average straight dude taking a fashion risk because it just integrates itself into the culture.

Also I'm not sure why you say Portland is more hipster than NYC. There are probably more people with hipster style in Brooklyn of 2.5 million, than the entire city of Portland (600,000)
And chicago probably has more people with hipster fashion than the entire population of minneapolis.

Nyc has vast blue collar areas where people do not care about hipster fashion. Again does that make portland more fashionable than nyc?

And since when is hipsterdom the bench mark for fashion??

Post like yours are exactly why people can't stand hipsters.

The same suburban milquetoast conformists who dressed in abercrombie or wanna be skater fashion, now dress like faux urban hipsters and still think they define fashion.

Once again I have treated you, and you are now cured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2014, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,379 posts, read 7,682,079 times
Reputation: 4347
Probably Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top