Way the Jewelry is being marketed

[Clord]

I don't know when the trend began but lately I have seen a lot "unisex" jewelry online even though the design outside of sizing options looks like a female would wear it. Some sellers spam it to every product even when they are too small to male wearing.


I bought this cheap collar and seller assured me it would fit, turns out it was sized for female neck only despite being sold as "unisex" product. I like to wear unisex stuff due it fits and yet looks feminine.

 

[GrandmaDeb]

**looks at measuring tape**

 

[Wavelength]

I don't usually wear any jewelry (I'm a function-over-fashion guy, probably to a fault), but whenever I do buy jewelry, I make sure to try it on before I buy it.  If the seller won't let me try it on, I won't buy it.

 

[KanaX]

"Unisex" is a very nice way of a seller to potentially double his costumers. Instead of marketing for one sex, they market for two. Something significantly easier now that the lines between genders are getting blurred, as people tend to experiment with their tastes and preferences.

If you like it, just wear it and don't mind about the unisex/not-unisex thing.

 

 

[hian]

"Unisex" is a very nice way of a seller to potentially double his costumers. Instead of marketing for one sex, they market for two. Something significantly easier now that the lines between genders are getting blurred, as people tend to experiment with their tastes and preferences.

If you like it, just wear it and don't mind about the unisex/not-unisex thing.

Well, to be fair, the problem the OP had is that though a product he bought was marketed as "unisex", it was obviously made based on average female size, and therefore not feasible for most males, and therefore not really unisex.

In cases like that, "unisex" is not a nice way of a seller to potentially double his or her customers - it's dishonest marketing that tries to get two target demographics to buy into something that is really only intended for one of them.

I never really got the deal with "unisex" jewelry and accessories in either case - as these kinds of fashion items are just that, fashion items - there is no rule or law out there stopping me from buying fashion items intended for the opposite gender. The only real issue is whether you care about social backlash, and/or whether the item exists in your size.

Point in case, I pierced my left ear at 16 (I'm a guy), and I've worn a lot of piercings over the year that were originally intended for girls/women.

I literally don't care, as long as I like the design, and it fits. I also wear necklaces, bracelets, expensive watches, rings and whatever else catches my fancy at the moment.

Unless what you're designing obviously does't fit one gender on average due to size-constraints, then the label "unisex" is completely pointless and redundant and only serves as another addition to the political correct language evolution meant to help emotionally insecure people feel better themselves I.E about wearing stuff that some people out there might consider inappropriate for one gender -

and that is psychologically speaking, not constructive at all.

Humans can learn to live with, and ignore, idiots and their opinions,

and the ability to do so is of vital importance for your mental health on a long term basis.

Indulging the very character flaw that makes it difficult for you to go

"You know what? Screw you guys, I'll wear whatever I want, thank you very much.",

by expecting people to police language and opinions, only creates a downward spiral of emotional frailty.

Instead of stores putting the label "unisex" on everything, they should just label the stuff clearly with sizes and let the consumers decide

for themselves whether they're comfortable wearing it. And if a consumer can't be comfortable wearing something because it

isn't labeled unisex, or is only found in the section for the opposite gender,

they need to take a good, long, and hard look in the mirror and start working on their self-consciousness

(ex. see a therapist) issues before it lands them into bouts of serious depression, or something even worse.

 

[KanaX]

@hian yeah that's exactly my point.

It's a very nice way for the seller to profit at the consumer's expense.

Still, fashion is fashion and what was ridiculed yesterday, could be admired tomorrow.

Despite that, my point is that OP should wear something is he likes it, without caring if it truly is unisex or not. Not so much with the mentality of "You are stupid and I ignore you". More like "You may have a point but this is my stylistic preference and since I have authority over myself and I don't harm anyone, I won't feel bad for it".

 

[hian]

@hian yeah that's exactly my point.

It's a very nice way for the seller to profit at the consumer's expense.

Still, fashion is fashion and what was ridiculed yesterday, could be admired tomorrow.

Despite that, my point is that OP should wear something is he likes it, without caring if it truly is unisex or not. Not so much with the mentality of "You are stupid and I ignore you". More like "You may have a point but this is my stylistic preference and since I have authority over myself and I don't harm anyone, I won't feel bad for it".

Okay, nice in the sense that it's easy profit - not in that it is nice to the consumers. Gotcha.

I do not see why anyone would want to concede as a point that it's okay to hold someone in negative regard for using fashion items made for the opposite gender though.

A person like that is, at least by my definition, stupid.

I do agree that the "this is my stylistic preference and since I have authority over myself and I don't harm anyone, I won't feel bad for it" is a more positive frame of mind though, and perhaps in that sense more progressive.

My attitude though, is that sometimes we need to call things what they are. And, granted I am no social justice advocate, I still think it's prudent to tell tradtionalists and people who think it's okay to shame other people based on inane stuff like fashion-choices to go do something nasty to themselves.

Whether you do route A or route B though, what matters is that people behave progressively and take matters into their own hands -

don't wait for or expect society to validate your every choice in life - learn to live with the fact that they often won't, and learn to cope with it

instead.

 

[KanaX]

I do not see why anyone would want to concede as a point that it's okay to hold someone in negative regard for using fashion items made for the opposite gender though.

A person like that is, at least by my definition, stupid.

I do agree that the "this is my stylistic preference and since I have authority over myself and I don't harm anyone, I won't feel bad for it" is a more positive frame of mind though, and perhaps in that sense more progressive.

My attitude though, is that sometimes we need to call things what they are. And, granted I am no social justice advocate, I still think it's prudent to tell tradtionalists and people who think it's okay to shame other people based on inane stuff like fashion-choices to go do something nasty to themselves.

Unfortunately though, we cannot control the actions and opinions of other people and enforce our own. That would mean that we believe that our own morals and ideas are the absolute truth (ergo absolutism and dictatorship).

What we can do, is be tolerant, kind and informative. When I would be wrongly aggressive against  people of different mindsets, I wouldn't be persuaded to change my mind from the person who treated me like a piece of trash. I would be persuaded from the person who would take his/her time to give me a smile and explain humanely their point of view. Even if I would still disagree, it's difficult for a normal person to not respect logic and kindness.

Alas, there are people with uncommon-but-harmless lifestyles/opinions/actions that are still shunned by society. There are people that just won't listen to logic and might even attempt to hurt you if you make them question their own logic. We cannot hope for a mass extermination of "everything bad", because we are not good/thorough judges of other people. People die of age and old ideals with them. What we can do, is nurture the younger generations and shape them accordingly.

But I think we are getting off topic, so I won't continue the subject any further.

@Clord, as stated multiple times, you should not care about the acclaimed qualities of the jewelry (or anything else for that matter). See if it's alright for you and if you like it. The rest is trivial. Especially in the world of advertisement. Can't you return it and get a bigger size?

 

[Clord]

You can call me "he" if you want. I don't really mind considering I have messed that up too by not using "they" etc. Also I kind of consider myself to be both.


Anyway this is what I wear in my right wrist.


http://puu.sh/hyH6R/8fb39cf305.png


There is this online store front that advertises with the focus towards women in their store pages while labeling their stuff as "unisex." This is one of the shops that actually sell what they claim and you can see it from the size that they are made to fit on men too. I bought from there too.


http://puu.sh/hyIBs/904eebf530.png

 

[hian]

Unfortunately though, we cannot control the actions and opinions of other people and enforce our own.


That would mean that we believe that our own morals and ideas are the absolute truth


(ergo absolutism and dictatorship).

This is a strange interpretation of what I said.


Telling someone you think their opinion is stupid/bad/wrong/innacurate is not an attempt at control


(if anything, it's an attempt at influence, which is completely normal, and something we do all the time),


and just as others have the freedom to hold whatever opinion they please, we are at the liberty to


hold whatever opinions we please about those opinions in turn.


Everybody believes in one way or another that their values are superior to values running counter to


them, which is why you hold one set of values, and not another.


The idea that advocating for a set of values is absolutism and dictatorship is patently absurd.


Values are subjective - but they're not arbitrary. They're held for reasons, and having debates about


those reasons in a critical way is the cornerstone of human civilization. If we didn't do that, we'd


still be stoning homosexuals in the street, and lynching people of color.


Would you really make the argument that pointing out the absurdity of the attitudes that inform


such actions, and advocating against those attitudes is the same as absolutism and dictatorship?


Really?

What we can do, is be tolerant, kind and informative.

To some people - namely the ones interested in listening in good faith. Many however, are not.


I am content to ridicule those people, because I know I won't be changing their minds -


at least I can make sure they know I (and others like me) have no intention of treating them


nicely when their very presence in a discourse is framed on extremely narrow-minded, and frankly,


biggoted opinions.

When I would be wrongly aggressive against  people of different mindsets,


I wouldn't be persuaded to change my mind from the person who treated me like a piece of trash.

You're making the assumption I am trying to change the mind of the person I am talking to.


Also, that people cannot change their minds from feelings of belittlement, despite the fact that


many do all the time. Some　opinions are stupid, and some people won't abandon those ideas until


they're made to face that fact repeatedly. Again, it depends on whether or not you're dealing with


a person who's listening to you in good faith. Most biggots are not.

Alas, there are people with uncommon-but-harmless lifestyles/opinions/actions


that are still shunned by society.


There are people that just won't listen to logic and might even attempt to hurt


you if you make them question their own logic.


We cannot hope for a mass extermination of "everything bad",


because we are not good/thorough judges of other people.


People die of age and old ideals with them.


What we can do, is nurture the younger generations and shape them accordingly.

What we can rely on though, is that there is more change resulted from trying, then


giving up because you cannot achieve perfection.


We don't have to be perfect judges to make judgements on specific attributes and attitudes.


If you think it's okay to stone homosexuals, for what is essentially the "victimless crime" of two of


the same sex expressing love for one another, me calling you out as a biggot does not require


larger analysis.


Rough and strong vocal disagreement can be a good thing, because it can, even if it doesn't


necessarily change the minds of biggots, let them know that their opinions are not tollerated


by the general public, and that if they're going to come out and say judgemental and biggot stuff


in public, they will be responded to in kind.


It's essentially the same reasons we have jails, and a criminal justice system - it's a social sanction


against unacceptable behavior.


It exists as an acknowledgement that we can't change the minds of all the bad people out there, but


we can dissuade some of them from acting by imposing a burden on those kinds of acts.


Anyway, I'll end it here per your request. It isn't exactly off topic though - I think it's pertinent to


the issue of the OP.

 

[Clord]

To be honest, you can continue this discussion here in my opinion. I see the relation.