this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
473 points (99.2% liked)
Not The Onion
21858 readers
1479 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The difference is the ethic. Or lack thereof.
Okay but how is a smelly nerd who buys Pokemon tshirts more ethical than a Stacy who buys clothing from Nordstrom they both participate in the same consooming behavior, pleasing their corporate overlords.
I don't think either of those are lead by an ethic, and therefore they are both equally terrible
...unless the Pokémon shirt was purchased second hand
I'm not sure I know this use of the term ethic, but it sounds interesting. Care to define or illuminate?
Punks that dress in patched clothes do so because they don't want to support the industry of sweat shops, exploited labor, and fast fashion. They'd rather buy something used and patch it forever.
That's an example of an aesthetic that comes from an ethic.