Here's another example - so magical and inspiring.
I use photos of nature as a starting point every season - there is no way I could come up with something as amazing as our plants and animals. So why are humans so bland? Caucasian skin is a dull tone seen nowhere else in nature. Black skin is a little more exciting but still decidedly neutral. Look at this Crayola snoozefest.
Is it possible we evolved to need fashion? It's like we're a blank canvas that has to be decorated. If you put a leopard in a pair of Proenza Schouler ikat printed pants the poor animal would look hideous. But nothing clashes with human skin. And clothing allowed us to lose our body hair and still survive in cold climates.
There's a Men's Warehouse commercial that says "60 percent of women would rather be with a well dressed man than a rich man". I'm sure this finding came out of an exhaustive double blind study conducted by the vast team of researchers at Men's Warehouse. But we all know that fashion is a big part of attraction.
If good style gives men a sexual advantage the same way elaborate feathers do for a male peacock it could explain the existence of male homosexuality - something that puzzles scientists by seemingly going against theories of natural selection. Fashion sense is a feminine trait that makes men attractive to both sexes, therefore allowing them to reproduce with women even if they prefer men. This would also be a evolutionary explanation for fag hags.
So fashion can make the hairless warm, the poor dateable, the ugly fuckable and the gays survivable. Doesn't it deserve more respect?
Note these other humans whose ability to reproduce is significantly aided by their fashion sense, leading with Scott Disick - unemployed douchebag with serious anger management issues, baby daddy to Kourtney Kardashian, and the love of my life. I mean fuchsia blazer with matching pocket square? Yes, please!