Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

The article “Nobody pays attention to your workout clothes,” written by Willie Kamawe,  argues that we don’t need a bunch of fancy, high-priced fitness apparel in order to pursue fitness goals. But his argument is flawed for several reasons.

First, Kamawe claims that certain fitness companies work to prove that your old pair of running shoes or T-shirt aren’t enough for your fitness routine. While products by Nike, Adidas, Lucas Hugh, and Trimark often enhance your physical activity, none of these fitness companies try to prove that you couldn’t work out without their product. They simply produce and advertise a reasonable product that potentially enhances your workout regime.

Secondly, Kamawe argues that people don’t pay attention to what you wear at the gym. Though, if they don’t, why does one see high-end fashion in the gym? Fancy, high-priced apparel sells because most people care about what they look like, regardless of whether they’re sweating. Fitness companies merely capitalize on making a product that is not only functional, but also aesthetically pleasing.

Another point brought up is that we shouldn’t have to look good while we exercise. He believes that wanting to look good while exercising is a “tad shallow.” But what’s the difference between looking good while exercising and, say, looking good while at work? It seems absurd to say that because I am sweating while working out, I can’t look good. Football players sweat and become dirty as they play, but this doesn’t mean that both teams should take off their fancy jerseys with eye-catching logos and replace them with tattered sweats.

People who want to excel in their sport want apparel that enhances their abilities, and if this apparel happens to be eye-catching as well, that’s a benefit, not a problem. Imagine choosing between two cars that performed equally well, but one was faded and scratched. Which would you prefer? Moreover, there’s nothing wrong with wanting and purchasing both a functional and aesthetic product.

The article claims that we’re victims of western consumerism. And sure, a lot of us are. I believe an argument can be made for individuals who spend what little money they earn on expensive, aesthetic products. But, that’s an argument about being financially irresponsible, which has nothing to do with buying a product that is both functional and aesthetically pleasing.

Sincerely,

Anthony Bianco

SHARE