Every fashion week we see an article about the crazy, unwearable side of fashion. It's always a bit of a fish in a barrel article to me, if you're going to attack something, do it with wit and insight. Just saying 'look at these mentalists!' doesn't do it for me. But I do get why it happens. To the outside world, fashion has the irrestible mix of silliness and pretentiousness, which makes it ripe for parody. Even my favourite magazine, Private Eye, has a strip dedicated to the world of fashion and it's actually pretty funny for the most part.
But there's times when parody is just lazy, like on this Get Kempt article. My first issue is that they assume the designer is selling the entire outfit as one piece, which is the issue I've seen a lot of 'style not fashion' (let's call them SNF for short) have. And the end result of this assumption is that people end up rating the styling instead of the clothing, which is what Kempt do throughout their article.
And this is where the disconnect between style and fashion comes in for a lot of guys. They see a crazy outfit (or even a regular outfit with crazy hair, makeup or whatever) and immediately get put off the whole thing. But that shouldn't be the reaction for fashion writers - and yes, even if you're writing about 'mens style' you're still a fashion writer. You should be breaking it down into digestible chunks, using your inside knowledge to showcase things the reader might not have noticed. Otherwise, why bother going to fashion shows? And if you feel you aren't educated enough, then take some time off, learn about fashion history and then come back with some insight. Just pointing and laughing is a waste of everyone's time.