#industries

[arc-hus]

Studio in Gushichan, Okinawa, Japan - Studio Cochi Architects

[georges-flayols]

Golfe de Fos Marseille

[billyengland]

Democrat DEI brain-rot is A LOT worse than you think.

Democrat Illinois Representative, Jan Schakowsky suggested in a Congressional hearing that the word ‘Manufacturing’ is sexist.

Yes, really.

Because it begins with ‘man’ it is somehow holding back women from going into the manufacturing industry.

Schakowsky, the ranking Democrat member on the House Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade Subcommittee, for some unfathomable reason, posited that only around 13 percent of people in manufacturing are female because the word itself just, “sounds like a guy.” 🙄🙄🙄

I for one, beg liberals to continue to double-down, triple-down, quadruple-down, on their DEI nonsense, because doing so will assure Libertarian Party and Republican Party victory for decades to come as well as the destruction on the Democrats.

[mintconditioned]

"CLEAN GIRL IS OVER" apparently.

So I really don’t know what exactly I did, but I was on Instagram and yo. Look, I wasn’t ever a fan of the "clean girl" trend, but I just found it fascinating how everyone’s ditching it for 2016 Zara Larsson coded makeup and outfits. Like good on you, but I was just thinking about what would happen to all the stuff from the clean girl era. I wanted to see whether certain aesthetics actually "die" or if we just stop talking about them. So I pulled Google Trends data. Then I checked resale markets. Then I made a spreadsheet.

I became slightly obsessed and turned it into a research question: How long does an aesthetic trend retains economic value after peak attention

If trends are accelerating, are they also collapsing faster? And if they are, what happens to all the stuff produced for them?

The Method

I picked three aesthetics:

Clean girl

E-girl

Cottagecore

For each one, I:

1. Mapped lifecycle phases using Google Trends

2. Identified peak attention

3. Took cross-sectional resale snapshots (30 items each, clothing only, no bundles, no joke prices)

4. Measured:

Median resale price

% under $15

Total listing volume

I treated resale value collapse as a proxy for economic devaluation.

Because once an item can't retain resale value, it's economically near-discard.

The Concept I Ended Up With

Economic Half-Life =

Months after peak attention until median resale price falls below $15.

Basically: how fast does a trend lose market survivability?

What I Found:

Cottagecore

Massive listing volume

73% under $15

Still huge resale presence years after peak

Long decay tail

E-girl

Peaked early (2021)

Lower listing volume

53% under $15

Slow bleed into low-value persistence

Smaller volume, but long persistence.

Clean girl

Slower rise (2022–2026)

Hit peak January 2026

83% under $15 almost immediately

Extremely tight price clustering (~$11)

This one collapsed economically almost instantly after peak attention.

Which suggests something new: Supply elasticity is now extremely high.

Production reacts so fast that by the time attention peaks, the market is already saturated.

I combined three proxies:

Share under $15 (value collapse)

Normalized listing volume (scale of material committed)

Post-peak persistence (how long low value lingers)

Cottagecore had the highest waste intensity

E-girl was persistent but smaller-scale waste

Clean girl had rapid short-term waste spike

The bigger pattern is that trend cycles are shortening.

Older trends take 12-18 months to collapse and ~1-3 years before resale value really died, but recent ones take 1-3 months to resale collapse and have under 6 months of survivability

Now because my entire page is about who profits and who holds risk, let’s analyze that real quick.

1. Platforms & influencers

Profit from attention velocity

Hold no inventory

2. Producers

Profit from volume

Offload surplus

3. Consumers

Absorb depreciation

Internalize resale failure

4. Secondary markets

Attempt to clear oversupply

Normalize ultra-low prices

Environmental systems absorb what markets can't, and economic devaluation precedes physical waste.

So what supreme is that trends behave like speculative assets. Early adopters extract symbolic and sometimes economic value, late adopters absorb depreciation, and platforms profit from volatility itself. As cycles shorten, the gap between profit extraction and waste generation widens. Costs move downward when move upward.

So what exactly I'm gonna do with this, I'm not sure. But I definitely want to expand because this is interesting, so here’s my very rough plan:

Expand to 10+ aesthetics

Build an Aesthetic Volatility Index

Stress-test the Economic Half-Life model

See whether post-2023 trends collapse nonlinearly faster

Anyway.

I’m hooked.

If you guys want, I'd really appreciate if you could recommend different aesthetics for me to do next, or tell me if you want a more in depth guide on how to do this yourself.

But anyway.

Expect more soon!

[walker-diaries]

[theinsidescoops]

Annabelle & Sebastian: Cannes Canoodling or Calculated Con?

Honey, let's talk Cannes. Or any red carpet, really. Annabelle and Sebastian: two beautiful people, zero visible chemistry. They’re like mannequins dressed in designer clothes, posing for the paps and then retreating to their separate corners of the VIP lounge. Unless it’s photo op time, they interact about as much as my cat interacts with a vacuum cleaner – which is to say, not at all.

Mystery Arms & Strategic Shoes: The Art of the Insta-Bait

Remember that time Annabelle posted a random arm and a single shoe on her Instagram story? "OMG, it’s Seb’s!" the stans squealed. Honey, be serious—that could be anyone’s arm. My grandma has a more toned bicep. And the shoe on the steps? Groundbreaking. What’s next? Posting pictures of socks and calling it art? Oh, and don’t even get me started on the wine. Girl loves her vino more than she loves… well, anything, apparently. It’s basically the third member of this PRomance.

Drew’s in the Picture (Again): Ex-Boyfriend or Extra in This Charade?

But here’s the real kicker: Drew Comins. Deuxmoi spilled the tea before she was bought off by Annabelle’s PR team – Drew’s the ex. So why is he ALWAYS around? Vacations, parties, award show after-parties… he’s more attached to Annabelle than her overpriced handbag. They’re practically joined at the hip, while Sebastian’s off somewhere… probably looking for a soul-retrieval specialist. Remember that Jessica Chastain event? Annabelle and Sebastian arrived together, all smiles for the cameras. Then poof! She ditches him and goes to Drew’s Christmas party. Sebastian? Nowhere to be seen. Coincidence? I think not.

The Verdict: It’s a PR Stunt, Darlings (And Not a Very Good One)

So, what’s the deal? Is Annabelle using Sebastian for clout while secretly pining for her ex? Is Sebastian contractually obligated to attend these events and pretend to be smitten? Or are they both just incredibly boring people who have no idea how to interact in public? Whatever the reason, this “relationship” is about as genuine as a spray tan. It's a PR stunt, darlings. And not a very good one. Wake up and smell the rosé – preferably one that Annabelle hasn't already drained dry.

XOXO, Julieta.

[my100sul]