Dressing ultra casual on purpose when there is an economical equivalent in attractive dress means you are dressing as primarily a statement or protest. The real question is what do you hope to gain through it; physical comfort, social awareness, revenge, and -don't take this as a spiritual insult- but perhaps even self-righteousness?
Since you asked a direct question I feel compelled to acknowledge it, but I don't wish to engage you further. You value different things than I do. If you want to call me self-righteous, feel free.
If you re-read what I wrote you would see that I never called you self-righteous, I merely suggested it as a motivational possibility based on what you said in your OP.
"We don't talk much about spirituality here at MMM or simple living for a higher cause, but that's a great deal of it for me. It is a compliment that I was not considered worthy of the flashy sales pitch. I am not a consumer and apparently that is visible to others as well."You brought up spirituality so that why I mentioned it. I won't disagree with you that you and I have different values. I don't even know your values. It'd be true whether I did or I didn't since we are different people.
Anyway, my comment wasn't meant as an insult, that's why I prefaced it with a disclaimer. I am sorry if I inadvertently offended you.
You can look great without looking like a "consumer". Dressing ultra casual on purpose when there is an economical equivalent in attractive dress means you are dressing as primarily a statement or protest.
Or maybe the real question is why you think your "put together" thrift-store look is attractive. Who exactly are you trying to attract? De gustibus and all that, but I happen to think ultra-casual is usually quite attractive
Again, I didn't say my "put together" look was attractive nor that I was trying to attract. You can read that into my post if you like but it doesn't reflect the truth. I actually do not try to attract but I do find my clothes themselves attractive because they reflect my favorite style elements. I simply dress neat and classic(which is the most preferred style by our business and professional culture at large). Being a homemaker/homeschooling mother is my job and I treat it as such. When I shop, I'm working, and I present myself as a person on a mission. If I subconsciously wished to attract anything it is good service. ;)
On the flip side, the OP pretty much admitted that they do not dress this way to avoid service since they don't wish to have it. That's a good thing since it saves the salesperson's time for those who are buying. What I dispute is the idea that the difference between my put-together look and their ultra-casual look is measured by others as a level of consumerism, but rather by a level of professionalism and intent. A decorator isn't a consumer either in a personal sense of the word. They are shopping for clients. They are working. They dress with the intent to receive good service.
But the OP might be perfectly right with feeling judged on their personal level of consumerism by their attire in LA. Regional societal pressure is something others cannot gauge unless they also live in that region. How do any of us really know what our attire says to others unless we poll everyone who comes our way and get their true thoughts? Where I come from, ultra-casual attire is the norm and levels of consumerism are more often ascertained by vehicles and jewelry. It's not unusual in NJ to see affluent people pull up somewhere in their Cadillac SUV wearing a Walmart track suit with their arms and appendages dripping with designer handbags and jewelry, pricy athletic shoes on their feet, with extravagant nails and hairstyles. Those don't change the fact that their actual outfit cost less than $25 new but they are clearly consumers. Regional experience is an interesting aspect of how we come to our opinions about attire.
There have been enough studies done for
me to believe that dressing classic and neat will not offend anyone and is accepted almost everywhere so it's the most logical course for me to follow on a limited budget and minimalistic wardrobe.
Ultra-casual is a loaded term and will mean different things to different people. I was specifically thinking of the folks who wear pajamas and house slippers to shop in or attire themselves in clothes that are obviously many sizes to small or too large. An outfit of a white t-shirt and jeans can actually be quite put-together if they fit well and you don't pair the outfit with destroyed boots, a ratty ballcap or a lack of personal cleanliness for instance. Designers have been promoting jeans and tees as regular attire for over 30 years so it's hardly ultra-casual anymore unless it is in very poor condition or fit.