# Young Men's Style and Why I Refuse to Do It



## angry young and poor (Jun 5, 2010)

When I walk around Albuquerque, I notice there are few or possible even no young men with a particular sense of style. Everyone seems to fall into one of the "looks" as I call them. A particular basic uniform to be followed with little or none of that extra 10% that really separates one from the bunch. i don't really get it but it seems that what is popular amongst people my age who are trying to look professional or "dressed up" is a plain black pair of super-snug slacks, and either a solid shirt in a loud color, or a shirt with both bold colors and lines. I don't know what your opinion is on this, or if you even know that look that I'm referring to, but I think its just awful. Among the popular retailers are Banana Republic, Express, and the like (stores typically found in the mall). I went in to a banana the other day, and ways completely unimpressed with the quality and look of their clothing. How do they justify their outrageous prices? I looked at a suit jacket that was retailing for ~$400 and was appalled at the quality of the fabric and craftsmanship that went into the garment. I see better quality pieces at half that price at the various department stores. This look just don't feel stylish to me, but faddish. Especially when you walk into a bar or club on a weekend and see everyone looking the same. Am I wrong for thinking this? What do you think?


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

I think you're on track to having your own sense of style. Revulsion at what one's peers are wearing is often the starting point.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

angry young and poor said:


> When I walk around Albuquerque, I notice there are few or possible even no young men with a particular sense of style. Everyone seems to fall into one of the "looks" as I call them. A particular basic uniform to be followed with little or none of that extra 10% that really separates one from the bunch. i don't really get it but it seems that what is popular amongst people my age who are trying to look professional or "dressed up" is a plain black pair of super-snug slacks, and either a solid shirt in a loud color, or a shirt with both bold colors and lines. I don't know what your opinion is on this, or if you even know that look that I'm referring to, but I think its just awful. Among the popular retailers are Banana Republic, Express, and the like (stores typically found in the mall). I went in to a banana the other day, and ways completely unimpressed with the quality and look of their clothing. How do they justify their outrageous prices? I looked at a suit jacket that was retailing for ~$400 and was appalled at the quality of the fabric and craftsmanship that went into the garment. I see better quality pieces at half that price at the various department stores. This look just don't feel stylish to me, but faddish. Especially when you walk into a bar or club on a weekend and see everyone looking the same. Am I wrong for thinking this? What do you think?


Congratulations, young man! You are an individual, a potential person of worth who stands every chance of evolving a high level of personal style. While not familiar with the specific "look" you describe, I'm all too familar with the phenomenon. You need not be a fashion victim.

How does Bananas justify a $400 tag? Easy, they want the money!

I should add, to avoid any confusion, that my definition of a person of worth is entirely different from, and often in contrast to, a person's net worth.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

Yes, there comes a time when one decides to grow up.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

angry young and poor said:


> This look just don't feel stylish to me, but faddish. Especially when you walk into a bar or club on a weekend and see everyone looking the same. Am I wrong for thinking this? What do you think?


Are you speaking of the untucked dress shirt with jeans and black squared toed shoes? It appears Albuquerque is no different than most of the U.S.

You will be amazed how little effort it takes to exceed 90% of your contemporaries in the style department.


----------



## Sean1982 (Sep 7, 2009)

Good on you sir!


----------



## camorristi (May 9, 2010)

I guess we're a dying breed :icon_smile_big:, I'm 23 and I hate Abercrombie & Fitch and American Eagle that everyone wears.


----------



## fat paul (Aug 26, 2008)

I have lived in Albuquerque for the past 20 years. It is, with very few exceptions a sartorial HELL. I went to dinner last saturday night at a upscale resturant. No one other than myself wore a tie.
fat paul


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

I understand how you feel, because everyday I have to see kids my age wear nut-hugging jeans with Ed hardy shirts. (Think: Russell brand mixed with The Jersey Shore):crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:


----------



## Beefeater (Jun 2, 2007)

ZachGranstrom said:


> Think: Russell brand mixed with The Jersey Shore.


That is scary indeed.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

camorristi said:


> I guess we're a dying breed :icon_smile_big:, I


I suspect you are actually ahead of the curve. Hopefully, gents in their early 20's rebel against the business casual and sloppy casual nonsense that became the norm in the dot.com era.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

I'm 47 and I hate the Versace, D&G and Emporio Armani that everyone around here wears. Especially when I know it's all made in some sweatshop factory just up the road.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

I see daily throngs of people wearing clothing unbecoming. But why does it bother you all so?


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

46L said:


> Are you speaking of the untucked dress shirt with jeans and black squared toed shoes? It appears Albuquerque is no different than most of the U.S.


Or for that matter most of Europe. Exactly that look, which I also hate, is ubiquitous in Sweden. It started off in the design and ad branches and was then adopted by retail and public sector and so on,until now it has become semi-formal wear not just during work hours but when these guys go out in the evening, for which a couple of years ago it earned from a friend of
mine, the negative style name "Dance band chic". It's everywhere, the black shoes, jeans (often distressed) untucked shirt (often black) are usally then topped off with a blazer/jacket, also in BLACK! A variation is the white shirt with some kind of images on it...almost putting it into Ed Hardy territory....but still with the black jacket...aaagggghhh!!!!!

Here's what we said about it in March https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...3692-How-guys-dress-in-my-workplace&p=1080311


----------



## riyadh552 (Mar 4, 2009)

ZachGranstrom said:


> I understand how you feel, because everyday I have to see kids my age wear *nut-hugging jeans* with Ed hardy shirts. (Think: Russell brand mixed with The Jersey Shore):crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:


That just sounds painful...

One of my personal peeves is a variation on the square-toed black shoes with jeans and un-tucked dress shirt look: with a sweater or vest added, and the shirt tail and front hanging out from the bottom of the sweater. Apparently, that's "trendy" and "fashion-forward".


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

'Trendy' and 'fashion forward' indeed.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

Peak and Pine said:


> I see daily throngs of people wearing clothing unbecoming. But why does it bother you all so?


Because I keep on seeing the same obvious brand names like Prada and Emporio Armani over and over again. They're like sheep, no individuality. They're paying a fortune for having these names shown on the jeans and things, and non of these garments ever been anywhere near Italy.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Peak and Pine said:


> I see daily throngs of people wearing clothing unbecoming. But why does it bother you all so?





MikeDT said:


> Because I keep on seeing the same obvious brand names like Prada and Emporio Armani over and over again. They're like sheep, no individuality. They're paying a fortune for having these names shown on the jeans and things, and non of these garments ever been anywhere near Italy.


I repeat:_ Why _does it bother you so?


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Or this: why does it_* bother*_ you so?
Or this: why does it bother you _*so*_?
Or this: why does it bother _*you*_ so?


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Maybe what I'm getting at here is that I could understand if the house across from you was a dump (as was my case until I torched it last Halloween), but why does how others choose to dress affect anyone here or anyone there or anyone period?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

angry young and poor said:


> I see better quality pieces at half that price at the various department stores. This look just don't feel stylish to me, but faddish. Especially when you walk into a bar or club on a weekend and see everyone looking the same. Am I wrong for thinking this? What do you think?


Worse, the style infiltrated the Department store I used to frequent. (Lord & Taylor since Woodies closed)

Fear not, my discontent drove me here and now I feel I am redeemed!!

Decent quality and more timeless style exists, it's just harder to find than ever!!


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

You brush by the question so, short of using it as an opportunity to dump on Lord & Taylor, am I to assume you cannot/will not articulate why the dress of another bothers you?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Peak and Pine said:


> You brush by the question so, short of using it as an opportunity to dump on Lord & Taylor, am I to assume you cannot/will not articulate why the dress of another bothers you?


I am accepting of myself and do not require introspection on anything so trivial!!

Let's move on, shall we??


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Swell. But the point is not that you're accepting of your refusal to articulate why you dump on the dress of others; it's that I'm not accepting of it. But you've moved me on, so bye.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

MikeDT said:


> They're like sheep, no individuality.


It really doesn't matter whether you wear the finest bespoke suit or a hoodie, almost everyone attempts to conform to a group. Some groups are bigger than others, but it is group conformity nonetheless.

A few days reading a forum such as this will tell you that there is little individuality present as any deviation from the many "rules" about what to wear with what and what style to wear will be met with derision and downright hostility. The last thing I find among the well dressed is individuality. I don't mean this in a negative way as it applies to all groups.

Having said that, I also wonder why so many forum participants spend so much time anguishing over how other people dress. If you truly are wanting to express your individuality, why would you insist that others be like you? All that would give you is a larger group of sheep.

Cruiser


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> ... I also wonder why so many forum participants spend so much time anguishing over how other people dress.
> Cruiser


Well there. Now there are two of us here.


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> A few days reading a forum such as this will tell you that there is little individuality present as any deviation from the many "rules" about what to wear with what and what style to wear will be met with derision and downright hostility. The last thing I find among the well dressed is individuality. I don't mean this in a negative way as it applies to all groups.
> 
> Having said that, I also wonder why so many forum participants spend so much time anguishing over how other people dress. If you truly are wanting to express your individuality, why would you insist that others be like you? All that would give you is a larger group of sheep.Cruiser


Here is where I see the difference. Those individuals who wear Ambercrombie, etc. are all usually part of the same group. Everyone in that group looks the same and, at least after visiting the store in the mall, smell the same. Whether you consider it to be good or bad, they are a flock of sheep trying to be like each other.

This site leads to something different. Even if we all want to look like each other (again, for good or bad), we are NOT part of the same group. Barring an AAAC convention*, rarely will two of us meet. I know of one other person in my town who frequents this site, and he will be here only temporarily. I would consider it a safe wager to bet that fewer than 20 people within 100 miles of me visit this site often. I come to this site to be different than other people around me; to be the Cashmere goat among sheep.

MRR

* I expect that at said AAAC convention, people who would normally wear similar clothes would wear something different so as to "not quite" conform.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

The reason other people's dress so often bothers AAAC posters - especially the younger ones - is the peer pressure that is exerted on them to conform. Overcoming that pressure when young takes a good deal of nerve and energy. And if there's one thing that gives a young man a shot of nerve and energy, it's anger - that's the _real_ "Irish courage." By getting angry at the dominant social norms, they can work up the will to do rebel. When they're older and wiser, and have decades of self-reliance to look back upon, they'll be able to go their own way without the need for a rage-crutch. In the meantime, if they need to come to AAAC and vent a bit, let them.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> The reason other people's dress so often bothers AAAC posters - especially the younger ones - is the peer pressure that is exerted on them to conform. Overcoming that pressure when young takes a good deal of nerve and energy. And if there's one thing that gives a young man a shot of nerve and energy, it's anger - that's the _real_ "Irish courage." By getting angry at the dominant social norms, they can work up the will to do rebel.


And here's where one of my favorite posters and I knock heads.

I agree with hardly anything you've said. Your equation that anger = energy = rebellion may hold among the young that you observe, but not among the ones up here. Personally, when I get angry I become a fool and it does not induce energy for anything (so anger gets stuffed in the liquor closet some thirty years ago and I've not touched either since.).

While the peer pressure excuse is convenient, it is only that. It is a chimera. It exists only for its convenience of use when other motivations cannot be found. I know of no peer who has actually pressured another to do anything, save drug pushers, but that's just good salesmanship. When others do as others do it is often as admiration. I dressed ( poorly, upon reflection) like my big brother because I wanted to be like him. He did not pressure me, nor did I feel he did. If there actually is something known as peer pressure, it would seem to exist only in the mind of whomever feels pressured. Did you ever experience this?. Were you ever pressured into doing anything your peers did? You read like the sort who wouldn't and didn't. So why do you assign this to others?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> I also wonder why so many forum participants spend so much time anguishing over how other people dress. If you truly are wanting to express your individuality, why would you insist that others be like you? All that would give you is a larger group of sheep.
> 
> Cruiser


I don't see anquish, peer pressure or conformity in "I'm tired of poor quality and bad fashion being peddled by major marketers."


----------



## Dragoon (Apr 1, 2010)

The only time other peoples dress bothers me is when it is so atrocious as to be disrespectful. The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

P&P,

Peer pressure does not have to take the form of overt pressure. You are now aged and wise, and may have forgotten what it is like to be young and uncertain. One of the great pieces of wisdom I recieved in my life came from an older friend, who said this: "When I was young, I used to walk into a room full of people and wonder if any of them would like me. Now that I'm older, I walk into a room full of people and wonder if I will like any of them."

Younger people simply feel more pressure, even if nobody ever tells them "wear Ed Hardy or else." Learning to be comfortable standing out from the crowd is something that comes easily to very few - for most, it is a learned skill (if the skill is acquired at all). For those making their first forays into it, some level of indignation/anger/rebellion is necessary to get over the hump and _just do it_.

As for anger being used as a tool (albiet an imperfect one), I can only say that it is very much my personal experience, and my observation, that many, many, many people need anger to get them to do unpleasant things. Anger is often corrosive, and it's a dangerous substance, but it can be useful in the right spots.


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

Dragoon said:


> The only time other peoples dress bothers me is when it is so atrocious as to be disrespectful. The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example.


 Bothers me as well. To be fair, that annoyance diminishes based on the attractiveness and sex of those who wear thigh-warmers.:rolleyes2: I am sure that a particular photographer on this site can make it look nice.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Dragoon said:


> The only time other peoples dress bothers me is when it is so atrocious as to be disrespectful. The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example.


Just where in Georgia do you see _that_?

Mr. Mirth here doesn't like to not get the joke, so I assume you're making one (so: good one that, jolly,jolly!) else this is another of the exaggerated claims of lousy dress amongst the young.


----------



## Dragoon (Apr 1, 2010)

Peak and Pine said:


> Just where in Georgia do you see _that_?
> 
> Mr. Mirth here doesn't like to not get the joke, so I assume you're making one (so: good one that, jolly,jolly!) else this is another of the exaggerated claims of lousy dress amongst the young.


A rural town with a population of about 3,000. I see it nearly every day. Communities have or have attempted to pass laws against the practice so I don't think it is restricted to this three redlight town.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> P&P, peer pressure does not have to take the form of overt pressure.


Yeah, it does, else it's imaginary. And since kids don't really pressure other kids into dressing poorly, this peer pressure of yours exists, if it does at all, purely inside their iPod encrusted heads.



> "When I was young, I used to walk into a room full of people and wonder if any of them would like me. Now that I'm older, I walk into a room full of people and wonder if I will like any of them."


While sage at first glance, that reads more like a guy who just switched Party affiliations, though I can't mention from which to what because this isn't the Interchange. For the little it's worth, I still walk into a room and wonder if people will like me, but it can't stop at wonder; you have to do something to make it true, because when they don't like, they don't listen. (This may sound antithetical to the abrasive nature of certain posting crimes I've committed. Chalk that up to the single alteration that age has made upon this thinking: the numbers. I don't need everybody to like me; but a select few would be nice. Like you and maybe a babe or two)


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Dragoon said:


> A rural town with a population of about 3,000. I see it nearly every day. Communities have or have attempted to pass laws against the practice so I don't think it is restricted to this three redlight town.


Excuse me? Maybe you've not painted this picture properly. " _The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example"_ would mean that the entire genital area is exposed. Altho perhaps I am picturing commando and you are seeing Jockey.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

Dragoon said:


> The only time other peoples dress bothers me is when it is so atrocious as to be disrespectful. The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example.


Yup, this basically sums up why it bothers me. Although, I usually have to worry about people wearing either skimpy clothing or tight,(and I me TIGHT) clothing.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> Excuse me? Maybe you've not painted this picture properly. " _The waist band of shorts worn half way between the crotch and the knee for example"_ would mean that the entire genital area is exposed. Altho perhaps I am picturing commando and you are seeing Jockey.


Here's an article on the phenomenon.

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnlyinAmerica/story?id=3519569

And here's a photo:

Incidentally, this look began in prison, where belts are not permitted.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> Maybe what I'm getting at here is that I could understand if the house across from you was a dump (as was my case until I torched it last Halloween), but why does how others choose to dress affect anyone here or anyone there or anyone period?


For the same reason -- one has to look at them.


----------



## ExpertiseInNone (Nov 5, 2008)

Couldn't the reason they are dressing as they do is because they don't want to dress like their elders? The last thing these kids want to do is look like their parents. If Dad wears a full cut suit from Brooks Brothers, the last thing they are going to want to wear is a full cut suit made by anyone. It is certainly not a new concept. We have to look at them in the same manner that we look at all other unsightly things in this world.

It's just a matter of taste anyways. As people grow up their tastes and styles change. When I was at UCLA for some the law school graduation this past week, they did dress poorly, but in their opinions, why dress like someone ten years their senior when they will sooner or later have to dress in that manner.


----------



## dwebber18 (Jun 5, 2008)

I, as a 25 year old young man also rejects the image of my age group pushed on me. Mainly because I desire to stand out from the crowd, and partially because I have grown tired of cheaply made, poor quality high fashion items. I have too little money ot waste it on cheap fashion items. My office is "business casual" as in shorts and a polo is completely acceptable. I tend to wear atleast khakis and a polo if not a dress shirt and khakis or slacks most days. I walk by AE and AF and Holister and shake my head that people pay those prices for thin cotton t-shirts. Especially those in their 40s who just want to be cool and dress like their kids. I agree that you align yourself with 1 group or another no matter what your fashion sense is. However, some are clearly more tasteful and classic, while others are fashion forward and lack any sense of personal taste or subtlety(sp). Even in a group where most will wear similar suits, its the subtle color of a shirt or patter in a tie, and how thats brought together with a pocket square that sets them apart from going in and buying the outfit on the dummy in the window. I can not afford nicer items or many items of good quality, but I believe that my style represents who I am, and even some of my older items from lesser establishments are worn in such a way to look classy and in the manner I view myself. Most noticeably is when I go to the outlet mall with my wife. I am typically the only man wearing khakis and loafers with a polo and not jeans a t-shirt and trainers that most everyone else is wearing. It just seems like the masses put no thought into their outer appearance whether that be grooming, or garments. I'm not obsesssive by any means, but I try to look put together and like I have some sense, not just doing what the masses do or the markets say is cool.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

WouldaShoulda said:


> I don't see anquish, peer pressure or conformity in "I'm tired of poor quality and bad fashion being peddled by major marketers."


Neither do I, but that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm referring to the all too common derisive comments about how "clueless" people are, how "insecure" they are, how they are like "sheep," etc., etc., simply because they choose to wear different styles of clothing. These comments aren't about the "major marketers" but rather the individuals who wear the clothing.

And keep in mind that these comments aren't usually directed at the guys wearing low riding pants with the crotch down around the knees. Even I agree that there is a point at which time bad taste becomes offensive.

Cruiser


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Taliesin said:


> And here's a photo:
> 
> .


I didn't know the reference was to inner city Black kids. I don't know much about what goes on there. Like the music tho. And the kids you've posted must have extremely high crotches (like close to their Adams Apple) for the waist of those pants to be sub crotch.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

To the youngish posters (and it's your thread after all), your well-reasoned approaches to dressing in manners that set you apart from the other slobs is fully understood and appreciated by me. Really. But there's a big, fat missing hole that is not understood. Why do you, the older ones here too, insist upon dumping on those that aren't as fastidious as you? It has nothing to do with you. They are not doing it to aggravate you. They just don't care. Like in the currently running thread entitled GANGSTA where four well-known posters are haranguing each other about how much French Fries cost back in '75. I don't care about that. Zero interest. And I'd just as soon not be cited for lacking in inflationary economic skills or interest. Dress well, enjoy it and let the others be.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> Neither do I, but that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm referring to the all too common derisive comments about how "clueless" people are, how "insecure" they are, how they are like "sheep," etc., etc., simply because they choose to wear different styles of clothing. These comments aren't about the "major marketers" but rather the individuals who wear the clothing.
> 
> And keep in mind that these comments aren't usually directed at the guys wearing low riding pants with the crotch down around the knees. Even I agree that there is a point at which time bad taste becomes offensive.
> 
> Cruiser


That was nicely put. It seems like you and I are alone in this.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> And the kids you've posted must have extremely high crotches (like close to their Adams Apple) for the waist of those pants to be sub crotch.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> But there's a big, fat missing hole that is not understood. Why do you, the older ones here too, insist upon dumping on those that aren't as fastidious as you? It has nothing to do with you.


One has to look at them.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Taliesin said:


> One has to look at them.


Okay, you're repeating yourself. You also said that when I spoke of torching my neighbors house (it _did _affect me; it brought the property values down, not that they were all that high in this god forsaken Hooverville from whence I write). Nouns (persons, places and things) do not exist for your personal visual pleasure. Just look the other way. Or not. You could visibly spit on the ground in an audible display of disgust when they pass. Am intrigued by your name. You're an architect?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Sometimes, I care about how others are dressed because I feel sympathy for them or the people around. For instance, the one guy who showed up in shorts and sandals when everyone else is dressed in at least a button front shirt. Or the guy who inevitably shows up wearing the same thing to a fancy restaurant when his girlfriend is in a nice cocktail dress. They don't bother me to the point of insanity, it's more along the lines of, "Hm, he could've put forth a little more effort." The only times I've gotten a little offended are when the same outfit is seen at a funeral or wedding, which clearly dictates a coat and tie. That's outright lack of respect.


----------



## Hanzo (Sep 9, 2009)

I'm going to do my best to avoid the present debate, yet still offer my thoughts.

I believe that we all conform. We have an entire forum here of "rules" that one must follow or feel the wrath from others. A recent post about one gentleman's shoes resulted is multiple negative comments about the rest of his clothing. Granted, it was taken well, and on this site, we expect that if we post a picture of ourselves, we will receive (primarily) constructive criticism, but the fact remains. Peer pressure exists in all groups, and in many ways.

As for the look of my peers, I may not be a fan of it, and it's not what I wear, but lets look at the facts. It IS what most young men wear, so immediately, you don't fit in. Is that a problem? It depends. I have, however, been chided by a young (and very attractive) woman for wearing a suit out while her boyfriend was dressed like a Hollister model. Do I prefer the way I look? Yes. But guess who's going home with the hot blonde with the nice set of bolt ons? He's laughing all the way to the bedroom.

We call them sheep, but the fact that they are doing what is trendy shows that they are being more different than we are. Every trend starts off with one guy doing something new and different. Then more people want to be different, till there's enough of them that they're no longer different. Dr. Seuss wrote the story of the Sneetches talking about exactly this topic. Its nothing new.


----------



## billingslyworthington (Jun 23, 2009)

Jovan said:


> Sometimes, I care about how others are dressed because I feel sympathy for them or the people around. For instance, the one guy who showed up in shorts and sandals when everyone else is dressed in at least a button front shirt. Or the guy who inevitably shows up wearing the same thing to a fancy restaurant when his girlfriend is in a nice cocktail dress. They don't bother me to the point of insanity, it's more along the lines of, "Hm, he could've put forth a little more effort." The only times I've gotten a little offended are when the same outfit is seen at a funeral or wedding, which clearly dictates a coat and tie. That's outright lack of respect.


+1

Dressing inappropriately for the situation is the only time I'll call out someone for not dressing well. Otherwise, you're being a complete douche for looking down on the guy at the mall wearing a baggy tshirt and cargo shorts.

Secondly, dressing up does not equal dressing well and vice versa. Khakis, a polo shirt, and loafers while everyone is in shorts and tshirt doesnt make you the best dressed person in the room.

And young people dressing the way they do because that's the way their peers do and they don't have the willpower or something to break away from that? Sorry but that's pretty damn hypocritical to say on aaac or sf or any other board.

And can you guys stop posting those mid 90s esque pics of black people wearing baggy jeans? I just got some awesome aaac points b/c this is supposedly a "gentlemen's" forum but there's posters here throwing those pics around like they represent the youth in the country.


----------



## amplifiedheat (Jun 9, 2008)

Hanzo said:


> I have, however, been chided by a young (and very attractive) woman for wearing a suit out while her boyfriend was dressed like a Hollister model. Do I prefer the way I look? Yes. But guess who's going home with the hot blonde with the nice set of bolt ons? He's laughing all the way to the bedroom.


There have always been dumb but attractive women, and dumb but attractive men. They tend to sleep with each other.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> Okay, you're repeating yourself. You also said that when I spoke of torching my neighbors house (it _did _affect me; it brought the property values down, not that they were all that high in this god forsaken Hooverville from whence I write). Nouns (persons, places and things) do not exist for your personal visual pleasure. Just look the other way. Or not. You could visibly spit on the ground in an audible display of disgust when they pass. Am intrigued by your name. You're an architect?


I haven't yet answered the question as many times as you asked it, so I'm still playing catch up. I might just say "one has to look at them" a few more times. One *has* to look at them. One has to look at *them*. ;-)

Clothing is one of many things that sets the tone of our discourse with each other. No man is an island, etc. That's why I care.

Not an architect. I once lived in Wales, and liked it.


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

Peak and Pine said:


> That was nicely put. It seems like you and I are alone in this.


No not alone...


----------



## angry young and poor (Jun 5, 2010)

Well, this has certainly turned into an interesting conversation. I'd like to clarify that I do feel pressure from the... lets call it the "young cultural hegemony". By choosing not to shop at the mall stores (AF, AE, Banana, Express, etc..), and by not wearing trendy graphics on my shirts, t-shirts, and pants (ala ed hardy). I have put my self outside of what is generally normal for people my age. While I wouldn't classify it as peer pressure (no one is holding up an ed hardy shirt tell me "com'on man put it on"). It is a pressure that I feel, possibly even stemming form within me. The fact is that if I go out to a bar or club at night, I will immediately be the odd man out. I notice it, and so does everyone else there. 

On another note... I think looking stylish and individual is knowing what rules to break. Since I'm young I feel I can get away with a lot more than someone older than me can. So I'm effectively rebelling against two things: Breaking away from the shoddily dressed masses of 20 something year olds out there, and breaking the traditional rules held so fervently among the better dressed. Yes I will untuck my dress-shirt and go tie-less, I will wear a suit jacket with out the pants, I will wear jeans and a suit jacket with a pocket square and so on. Someone said earlier that anger has a lot to do with it and I agree. I'm angry for many reasons. I'm angry that sloppy and fashionable styles are being peddled to me at outrageous prices, I'm angry that the majority of people fall for this, I'm angry that the "rules of style" forbid combinations of this and that. blah blah blah, <--- that's me venting.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Taliesin said:


> Not an architect. I once lived in Wales, and liked it.


I see. I only know Taliesin as Frank Lloyd Wright's home.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

angry young and poor said:


> I'd like to clarify that I do feel [peer] pressure... it is a pressure that I feel, possibly even stemming from within me.


That was the OP talking. The man who began this thread with a 6" post, every inch of which dumped all over his New Mexican peers. Now a feeling is bubbling up inside him. One of pressure to cave and be like them. No! Be strong! Here, drink this! (It's a little something I mixed up. Jekyll swears by it.)

You seem like a good guy. A good guy who dresses well. Your best buddy Joe has nipple rings, a soul patch and a very narrow selection of wife-beaters. Get over it. You have no best buddy Joe? You could, if you got over it.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Taliesin said:


> Not an architect. I once lived in Wales, and liked it.


You mean like Moby Dick?


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Geez, there's more I didn't see:



angry young and poor said:


> Someone said earlier that* anger* has a lot to do with it and I agree.
> 
> [But that was Cuff Daddy and he's prepared to sign a document stating that he was wrong.]
> 
> I'm *angry* for many reasons. I'm *angry* that sloppy and fashionable styles are being peddled to me at outrageous prices, I'm *angry* that the majority of people fall for this, I'm *angry *that the "rules of style" forbid combinations of this and that. blah blah blah, <--- that's me venting.


I hated it when a wheezer would teeter over with omelet breath and give me their 10-cent wisdom, so I'm hating myself in advance for what I'm about to tell you. But like booz, you're alloted just so much anger in life. Really. I know about this. I ran thru my liquor allotment by 25, my anger by 30. I wished I'd paced it differently; so I could have a drink now and then or get angry at Kabbaz or have a drink _while_ getting angry at Kabbaz. But I'm tapped out in those departments. So save your anger for the big stuff, tho there's very little in life that will ever require it.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Taliesin said:


> Not an architect. I once lived in Wales, and liked it.





Alexander Kabbaz said:


> You mean like Moby Dick?


No, O not-so-careful reader. *In* Wales. Like Jonah.


----------



## Kyle E. (Jan 15, 2010)

dwebber18 said:


> I, as a 25 year old young man also rejects the image of my age group pushed on me. Mainly because I desire to stand out from the crowd...


Touching on this, and what's been said along the same line by others in this thread, it reminds me of when I was going to punk rock shows in high school. Everyone patted themselves on the back for their non-conformity but you'd look around the venue and everyone was still wearing a uniform, just like those outside the scene who were looked down upon for that reason. It was a different uniform, used by a smaller group, but a uniform nonetheless.

The fact, as others have pointed out, that there are codified rules of dress seen by many in this scene as "correct" should raise flags when combined with claims of individuality as motivation for adherence to such a set of rules. Adherence to these rules mark your membership within a particular group; trad, prep, ivy, whathaveyou.The fact that the membership may be smaller and more widely dispersed over the country and/or world while tied together over the internet doesn't increase one's expression of individuality while still adhering to a group's ruleset.

What you wear doesn't make you a better person and its not an outward reflection of your character. Snobbery in any form isn't grounds for self-congratulation.

I used to wear band tee shirts, now I have my button-down oxfords taken in at the sides and I know what a French seam is - how individualistic I've become!


----------



## Martin Stall (Sep 11, 2006)

Peak and Pine said:


> Or this: why does it_* bother*_ you so?
> Or this: why does it bother you _*so*_?
> Or this: why does it bother _*you*_ so?


Oy mr Belpit.....


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> Or this: why does it_* bother*_ you so?
> Or this: why does it bother you _*so*_?
> Or this: why does it bother _*you*_ so?


Why are you asking such an odd question? If one is on a style forum obviously they take clothes seriously.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> You mean like Moby Dick?


No.. More like Jonah.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Peak and Pine said:


> No, O not-so-careful reader. *In* Wales. Like Jonah.


You stole my joke. That was mean.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> Why are you asking such an odd question? If one is on a style forum obviously they take clothes seriously.


Taking clothes seriously has nothing to do with obsessing over clothes worn by other people. I used to participate in a Harley-Davidson forum where Harley-Davidsons were taken very seriously. We talked about our bikes and things/events related to our bikes. We didn't talk about other people who rode Hondas or Yamahas, and bemoan the fact that they weren't riding Harleys; and it certainly wasn't our mission or goal in life to put everyone on a Harley.

Cruiser


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> > Originally Posted by *Peak and Pine*
> > No, O not-so-careful reader. *In* Wales. Like Jonah.
> 
> 
> You stole my joke. That was mean.


You repeated something that he posted several hours before you. Now you claim that he stole it from you, instead of admitting that you plagiarized. You, sir, will have a wonderful career in the law. :icon_smile_wink:

Wait! Isn't this the same kind of copying that we are decrying?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I'm thinking that Peak must have telepathically invaded my subconscious during my sleep. It was MY joke and it's very unfair that he posted it first!! (Pounds fist on table)


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

jpeirpont said:


> Why are you asking such an odd question? If one is on a style forum obviously they take clothes seriously.


Right. They take_ their_ clothes seriously. Now leave everyone else's alone. For more on this pls re-read My Man Cruiser's already-posted reply to your inquiry of me.



Cruiser said:


> Taking clothes seriously has nothing to do with obsessing over clothes worn by other people. I used to participate in a Harley-Davidson forum where Harley-Davidsons were taken very seriously. We talked about our bikes and things/events related to our bikes. We didn't talk about other people who rode Hondas or Yamahas, and bemoan the fact that they weren't riding Harleys; and it certainly wasn't our mission or goal in life to put everyone on a Harley.
> 
> Cruiser


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

[


forsbergacct2000 said:


> I'm thinking that Peak must have telepathically invaded my subconscious during my sleep. It was MY joke and it's very unfair that he posted it first!! (Pounds fist on table)


No. I'm thinking that, according to the time codes, you spent 12 hours and 18 minutes scratching your head trying to come up with that. Meanwhile, Mr. Mirth here was reading his voluminous PMs of admiration for being such a funster, some of which bemoaned the fact that F'berg, while being a nice old guy, was losing his touch, except when he touched himself (which could be happening right now).


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

Peak and Pine said:


> I see. I only know Taliesin as Frank Lloyd Wright's home.


Welsh Author cä 533 to cä 599 AD.

The Pleasant Things of Taliesin
_Book of Taliesin IV_​A pleasant virtue, extreme penance to an extreme course;
Also pleasant, when God is delivering me.
Pleasant, the carousal that hinders not mental exertion;
Also pleasant, to drink together about horns.
Pleasant is Nudd, the superior wolf-lord;
Also pleasant, a generous one at Candlemas tide1.
Pleasant, berries in the time of harvest;
Also pleasant, wheat upon the stalk.
Pleasant the sun moving in the firmament;
Also pleasant the retaliators of outcries.
Pleasant, a steed with a thick mane in a tangle;
Also pleasant, crackling fuel.
Pleasant, desire, and silver fringes;
Also pleasant, the conjugal ring.
Pleasant, the eagle on the shore of the sea when it flows;
Also pleasant, sea-gulls playing.
Pleasant, a horse with gold-enamelled trappings;
Also pleasant to be honest in a breach.
Pleasant, liquors of the mead-brewer to the multitude;
Also pleasant, a songster generous, amiable.
Pleasant, the open field to cuckoos and the nightingale;
Also pleasant when the weather is serene.
Pleasant, right, and a perfect wedding;
Also pleasant, a present that is loved.
Pleasant, a meal from the penance of a priest;
Also pleasant to bring to the altar.
Pleasant, mead in a court to a minstrel,
Also pleasant, the limiting a great crowd.
Pleasant, the catholic clergy in the church,
Also pleasant, a minstrel in the hail.
Pleasant to bring back the divisions of a parish;
Also pleasant to us the time of paradise.
Pleasant, the moon, a luminary in the heavens;
Also pleasant where there is a good rememberer.
Pleasant, summer, and slow long day;
Also pleasant to pass out of chastisement
Pleasant, the blossoms on the tops of the pear-trees;
Also pleasant, friendship with the Creator.
Pleasant, the solitary doe and the fawn;
Also pleasant, the foamy horseblock.
Pleasant, the camp when the leek flourishes;
Also pleasant, the charlock in the springing corn.
Pleasant, a steed in a leather halter;
Also pleasant, alliance with a king.
Pleasant, the hero that destroys not the yielding;
Also pleasant, the splendid Cymraec language.
Pleasant, the heath when it is green;
Also pleasant, the salt marsh for cattle.
Pleasant, the time when calves draw milk;
Also pleasant, foamy horsemanship.
And what is pleasant to me is no worse.
And the paternal horn by mead-nourished payment.
Pleasant, the directing of fish in the pond;
Also pleasant, calling about to play.
Pleasant, the word that utters the Trinity;
Also pleasant, extreme penance for sin.
Pleasant, the summer of pleasantness;
Communion with the Lord, in the day of judgment.


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Taking clothes seriously has nothing to do with obsessing over clothes worn by other people. I used to participate in a Harley-Davidson forum where Harley-Davidsons were taken very seriously. We talked about our bikes and things/events related to our bikes. We didn't talk about other people who rode Hondas or Yamahas, and bemoan the fact that they weren't riding Harleys; and it certainly wasn't our mission or goal in life to put everyone on a Harley.


 That's interesting. I have often related my fashion and this site to my limited motorcycle experience. Prior to dating my former g/f, whose family was really into Harleys, I would have thought that a Sportster is as large a bike as anyone would want (for those who do not know, that is probably HD's smallest bike). The large bikes that they all rode seemed unnecessarily huge. After a few months, though, I became accustomed to the larger bikes and now I would never getting something so small as a Sportster.

In the same way, I used to believe that good fashion was a black suit and black shoes. I thought that blue suits or sports coats were for low-end assistant managers. Because I worked and lived in small towns, nobody was able to point out to me that I was wrong. Maybe people use antagonistic language when discussing other people's clothing, but I value the information I get from those rants.

BTW: I'll bet that if someone went on your HD site with the following; "I have never owned a motorcycle before. Should I spend my $20,000 on a Harley or a rice-burning crotch-rocket?" you would get some people ranting that Harley is the only way to go.

That Harley site would probably never see a question like that because it is a site for people who already own a Harley (which is an expensive motorcycle). I never would have joined that group because I only had a 1982 chopped Goldwing. AAAC would be a very different site if joining it implied that you already own a few bespoken suits. None of the members would rant about the clothing that "lesser" people wear, they would have other things to talk about. But this site has those people along with poor people, like me, who trying to learn fashion and have grown up with a lot of misinformation. I am certain that a lot of the questions asked by us Plebeans seem so silly to "better dressed" members that the questions themselves annoy them.

So long as most of the posts involve valid discussions about proper fashion, I will gladly accept the rants. They break up the monotony.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

No, no self-touching at work. (Also, believe it or not, I'm pretty sure Michigan and Maine are both in the Eastern Time Zone. If Maine does not do Daylight Savings Time, you may be correct.)

Even if I am losing my touch, it's far easier to berate joke stealers. After all, you know what they did to cattle rustlers in the Old West. Ah, to be young and spry enough to gather up a posse!! 

(This would give me something positive to do instead of cringing with embarrassment because I did not read the thread carefully before posting my joke.)

Back to hubris. (Pounds fist on table in defense of joke once again.)


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Thank you, Mr. Grey, for the Taliesin poem. But it doesn't rhyme.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

MRR said:


> BTW: I'll bet that if someone went on your HD site with the following; "I have never owned a motorcycle before. Should I spend my $20,000 on a Harley or a rice-burning crotch-rocket?" you would get some people ranting that Harley is the only way to go.


Of course they would, and if someone came into this site saying that they were trying to decide between buying a Hickey-Freeman suit and a Thom Browne suit I would expect a similar response, perhaps even from me.

That's very different than coming into the forum and saying that they were out riding their Harley that morning and saw a bunch of goobers on Honda crotch rockets at the diner, and then going on and on about how they should "grow up" and get a real man's bike and stop being a bunch of sheep following the crowd of young people trying to be hip crotch rocket riding so and so's.

Do you see the difference?

Cruiser


----------



## MRR (Nov 19, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> That's very different than coming into the forum and saying that they were out riding their Harley that morning and saw a bunch of goobers on Honda crotch rockets at the diner, and then going on and on about how they should "grow up" and get a real man's bike and stop being a bunch of sheep following the crowd of young people trying to be hip crotch rocket riding so and so's.
> 
> Do you see the difference?


I see the difference, and agree. But I'll bet many hog riders still think the above thought.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

I don't know anything about this topic, but I do like the phrase_ crotch rocket_.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

Peak and Pine said:


> Yeah, it does, else it's imaginary. And since kids don't really pressure other kids into dressing poorly, this peer pressure of yours exists, if it does at all, purely inside their iPod encrusted heads.


I do not think there is pressure to dress poorly, but there can certainly be pressure to conform. Just the other evening at dinner, I was urged to lose "the monkey suit" and later to take my jacket off and "relax." I was relaxed thank you very much. At the same dinner one of the other gentleman declared he felt that he was at a disadvantage because he was not wearing a jacket. WHAT!?!

The above example is not an isolated occurrence. I am sure I will be told some variation of "why the jacket" or "aren't you hot" this afternoon when I grab a beer to watch the World Cup with some business associates.

Does it make me angry? No. Does it get annoying? Absofreakinglutely!


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

There may be pressure to conform in the work place or in the military because they're paying you to conform. And there may be pressure to conform and follow instructions at the doctor's office or in school because you're paying them for a commodity which includes conformity. But in the social situations you describe, where there is no exchange of money, there is no pressure. Your friends were simply making friendly suggestions. You are the one who turned it into pressure.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> That's very different than coming into the forum and saying that they were out riding their Harley that morning and saw a bunch of goobers on Honda crotch rockets at the diner, and then going on and on about how they should "grow up" and get a real man's bike and stop being a bunch of sheep following the crowd of young people trying to be hip crotch rocket riding so and so's.
> 
> Cruiser


That's a very well thought out scenario for something that couldn't possibly happen or have happened!!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

46L said:


> I do not think there is pressure to dress poorly, but there can certainly be pressure to conform. Just the other evening at dinner, I was urged to lose "the monkey suit" and later to take my jacket off and "relax."


I think that you may be confusing good natured comments from friends as "pressure" to conform. Just about every time I've ever gotten together with friends there have been good natured comments directed toward anyone who was dressed differently from the group.

For example, a bunch of us gathered one afternoon after work at a local watering hole. One of the guys was off that day but stopped by wearing jeans. Everyone else was wearing a coat and tie. Within a matter of seconds one of the coat and tie clad guys told him "You didn't have to get all dressed up just for us" and everyone laughed.

Was he being "pressured" to go put on a coat and tie? Of course not. Next time you get together with friends try wearing a Hawaiian shirt when you know everyone else will be wearing ordinary dress shirts, and then wait for the jokes and comments. It's just a facet of group dynamics.

Cruiser


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> I think that you may be confusing good natured comments from friends as "pressure" to conform. Just about every time I've ever gotten together with friends there have been good natured comments directed toward anyone who was dressed differently from the group.
> 
> For example, a bunch of us gathered one afternoon after work at a local watering hole. One of the guys was off that day but stopped by wearing jeans. Everyone else was wearing a coat and tie. Within a matter of seconds one of the coat and tie clad guys told him "You didn't have to get all dressed up just for us" and everyone laughed.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the lesson in group dynamics, but I am not speaking about friends (or even acquaintances) busting balls. I quite enjoy that type of banter. There are times when I will wear seersucker or white bucks specifically because I am going into "hostile" territory.

I am speaking about people who I do not know very well making comments about my dress. I am old enough to recognize the difference.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Douglas Brisbane Gray said:


> Welsh Author cä 533 to cä 599 AD.
> 
> The Pleasant Things of Taliesin
> _Book of Taliesin IV_​A pleasant virtue, extreme penance to an extreme course;
> ...


So much nicer to read than "crotch rocket".


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

I'm not so sure, unless of course you really get off on centuries old obtuse corn ball poetry.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

46L said:


> Thanks for the lesson in group dynamics, but I am not speaking about friends (or even acquaintances) busting balls. I am speaking about people who I do not know very well making comments about my dress. I am old enough to recognize the difference.


Cruiser is not talking down to you. Together, we're approximately 135 years old. We've learned something. Disregard us if you wish, we're just trying to get you and others here to see that this peer pressure thing is mostly in your heads. While I understand you know the difference between good friends and semi strangers, your reactions to them need not be so wildly different..


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

^ Oops. Make that 125 years.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

Peak and Pine said:


> Cruiser is not talking down to you. Together, we're approximately 135 years old. We've learned something. Disregard us if you wish, we're just trying to get you and others here to see that this peer pressure thing is mostly in your heads. While I understand you know the difference between good friends and semi strangers, your reactions to them need not be so wildly different..


I do not take any offense to Cruiser being Cruiser. I am closer to 40 than 30, so I am not in the same category as the OP. My post was in response to your comments about peer pressure being imaginery. I am only pointing out there can be pressure to conform.

The difference in my reaction to comments is that when they are being made by a friend I give a biting response as friends are not offended. It actually makes for a lot good natured banter. When comments are made by a stranger, I am more polite as my sarcastic reply may not be taken in the light hearted manner intended.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

^^^^
I get the same comments from people,(I'm 19 and I like to wear a tie and jacket... So, you can see why people always comment on me) But all I do is listen to there response, wait till they walk-away, and forget what was said. (I don't give them the time of day to care what they think, all that matters is what I think.)


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> I'm not so sure, unless of course you really get off on centuries old obtuse corn ball poetry.


I guess I do, but don't worry, I won't exert any peer pressure to convince you to do the same. Query: are we peers?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

46L said:


> I do not take any offense to Cruiser being Cruiser.


I'm not sure what "Cruiser being Cruiser" means, but I wasn't trying to talk down to you or lecture you on anything. If it came across that way I'm sorry.

It's just that my experience has taught me that when folks are passionate about something it is easy for them to be extremely sensitive to anything that is said regarding whatever it is that they are passionate about. Conversely folks who don't share that passion aren't usually paying much attention to the comments they make; therefore, what is a meaningless, innocent comment in their viewpoint can be taken much more personally by another.

I must agree with Peak and Pine (I guess the old fart has to be right every now and then) that what many here see as pressure or criticism is more perception than reality. I always reacted the same way about my Harley-Davidson or my telescope, things about which I was passionate. For example, one of my telescopes is a hand made apochromatic refractor. It always hurt my feelings when some novice innocently compared it to a mass produced department store telescope, especially since my instrument cost as much as 30 times more than the department store toy. They didn't mean anything negative in what they said. To them a telescope is a telescope.

The average person here probably thinks more about clothing in a day than most do in a month. It's only natural to be more sensitive to anything that is said about that clothing.

Cruiser


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Cruiser said:


> Taking clothes seriously has nothing to do with obsessing over clothes worn by other people. I used to participate in a Harley-Davidson forum where Harley-Davidsons were taken very seriously. We talked about our bikes and things/events related to our bikes. We didn't talk about other people who rode Hondas or Yamahas, and bemoan the fact that they weren't riding Harleys; and it certainly wasn't our mission or goal in life to put everyone on a Harley.
> 
> Cruiser


Because your reaction is the definitive reaction? Likely not, the more knowledge of clothing you gain the more you'll notice how slovenly others are dress. People will react to that in an manner organic to them. Anyway who says creating a thread equals obsessing?


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Cruiser said:


> I'm not sure what "Cruiser being Cruiser" means


 The rest of us are. :icon_smile_wink:



Cruiser said:


> ... Peak and Pine (I guess the old fart has to be right every now and then)


 I think you forgot the IMHO on that one. :devil:


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Was he being "pressured" to go put on a coat and tie? Of course not.


Cruiser, you and P&P are taking "pressure" to mean some nefarious tactic, some coordinated conspiracy of repressors, some intentional bullying... that's not what I'm talking about. People have internal, subjective psychology-driven reactions to social interactions that are not entirely rational. People do _feel _pressure, even when noboy else is trying to exert it. In fact, I'd suggest that's about 99% of peer pressure in real life (as opposed to After School Specials).

For some folks, particularly the young, overcoming that subjective feeling of peer pressure requires some agent to give them nerve. And anger is a common (and often effective) nerve tonic. Recognizing the validity of that statement, and the utility of that psychological strategy, does _not_ mean that I think the subjects of that anger _deserve_ to be showered with rage. But if the OP or others want to come and vent here, work up their nerve, then (emboldened by their ire) dress as they would like in the face of that percieved pressure, I think it's pretty harmless.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> People do _feel _pressure, even when noboy else is trying to exert it.


Isn't that what I said when I said, "what many here see as pressure or criticism is more perception than reality." It seems that we are in agreement.



> But if the OP or others want to come and vent here, work up their nerve, then (emboldened by their ire) dress as they would like in the face of that percieved pressure, I think it's pretty harmless.


Of course it's harmless, but it's also fodder for discussion.

Cruiser


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Isn't that what I said when I said, "what many here see as pressure or criticism is more perception than reality." It seems that we are in agreement.


Not to get philosophical or anything, but, for each of us, our perception _is_ our reality. If they _feel _the pressure, the pressure is real. It may be accidental, inadvertent, etc., but it is nevertheless pressure. Now, if they start punching the poorly dressed slobs in the face for the percieved pressure, that's a problem...


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Of course it's harmless, but it's also fodder for discussion.


It is, indeed. And the (meta-)discussion began with you and P&P asking _why_ people get angry. I gave you theory... your response was, essentially, that the explanation didn't _justify_ the anger. Of course, I was never trying to justify it, just explain it.


----------



## ykurtz (Mar 7, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> It's just that my experience has taught me that when folks are passionate about something it is easy for them to be extremely sensitive to anything that is said regarding whatever it is that they are passionate about. Conversely folks who don't share that passion aren't usually paying much attention to the comments they make; therefore, what is a meaningless, innocent comment in their viewpoint can be taken much more personally by another.
> Cruiser


Nicely put. We can high five random strangers at a Super Bowl when your team wins, but if those same strangers made an uneducated comment about your brogues, you might be tempted to dismiss them as shoe idiots. Sharing values bring people together. The 'disconnect' happens because some people care far less about something you care about far more.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> Cruiser, you and P&P are taking "pressure" to mean some nefarious tactic, some coordinated conspiracy of repressors, some intentional bullying... *that's not what I'm talking about.*


Nor were we. Where'd you get that from?



> For some folks, particularly the young, overcoming that subjective feeling of peer pressure requires some agent to give them nerve. And *anger* is a common (and often effective) nerve tonic. .


Cuff, please. Get off this anger thing. Anger is good for nothing. It' s not good for the young, it's not good for you and it's not good for me and it's a cheesy and easy asignment of motivation. It won't work. Anger bad; thinking it through good.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

CuffDaddy said:


> Not to get philosophical or anything, but, for each of us, our perception _is_ our reality. *If they feel the pressure, the pressure is real. *




No it isn't. Stop this.

Lert's review what this thread is about. Kid from New Mexico starts thread by craping on the dress of his peers and beating his chest that he's not one of them. Ho hum. Then a whole mess of people of various ages jump in and say the same thing. Not so ho hum. I ask why they do this. Nonsensical, fumbling, unsatisfying answers ensue. Weird Welsh poems that really suck are posted. Then someone mentions rebellion against peer pressure. Maybe it was you. I say peer pressure is a chimera. You argue that it's not while actually admitting that it is. You post about anger. Cruiser enters off and on. He's with me on this except that I don't like him any more because he called me a filthy name. You get philosophical. I get bored. But I learned what a _crotch rocket_ is and that alone was worth the price of admission.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Peak and Pine said:


> [/B]
> Cruiser enters off and on. He's with me on this except that I don't like him any more because he called me a filthy name.


OK, I'm sorry I called you "old." :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Cruiser said:


> OK, I'm sorry I called you "old." :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Cruiser


I'm not. He had it coming.:devil:


----------



## gordgekko (Nov 12, 2004)

Peak and Pine said:


> So save your anger for the big stuff, tho there's very little in life that will ever require it.


Well said. I've never quite understood why monocles keep falling out of shock around here over the state of dress in the world. _No one wears ties anymore! How could anyone wear fused suits!!1!_

I say relax Francis. Life is too short to spend outrage on clothes and how people dress. Be happy in your own clothes and stop worrying about what everyone is wearing.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

I know this isn't a poll, but I sure don't want to take my wife out to a nice restaurant and be seated next to a guy in a wife-beater. The same goes for a play or a concert. For that matter, I don't want to go anywhere and see someone in his underwear. I think it ruins the occasion. Just saying.


----------



## camorristi (May 9, 2010)

amplifiedheat said:


> There have always been dumb but attractive women, and dumb but attractive men. They tend to sleep with each other.


Well said, but unfortunately if you dress well (not necessarily dress up) most young women think you're in the mob (especially if you're from northern NJ and living in Midwest :icon_smile_big and that could be a turn off. The mall-prep guy in A&F passes the screening though, but in the end it's all about personality and charisma. Although, many young women consider the guy in a sweatshirt and American Eagle jeans easier to talk to. No?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

P Hudson said:


> I know this isn't a poll, but I sure don't want to take my wife out to a nice restaurant and be seated next to a guy in a wife-beater. The same goes for a play or a concert. For that matter, I don't want to go anywhere and see someone in his underwear. I think it ruins the occasion. Just saying.


Snob!! Snob!!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

P Hudson said:


> I sure don't want to take my wife out to a nice restaurant and be seated next to a guy in a wife-beater.


I don't disagree with you on this point; however, I can honestly say that I don't think I've ever been in a "nice" restaurant in which someone was dressed this way. This is somewhat of an extreme example.

I expect that someone is going to now say that they observed just this thing, but that isn't my point. It is the rare exception. What is more likely is an untucked shirt or jeans, things which are much less offensive to most.

Having said that, isn't the responsibility here on the restaurant to control it's clientele? If I was in a truly nice restaurant and the management seated me next to someone dressed in the manner you describe, I would complain to the manager and find myself another restaurant.

Cruiser


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

Unfortunately in the UK you may have to suffer a whole family out for a special occasion in matching football team shirts in even good restaurants.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Douglas Brisbane Gray said:


> Unfortunately in the UK you may have to suffer a whole family out for a special occasion in matching football team shirts in even good restaurants.


So what? And you have just now reduced the currency of the once potent word_ suffer._


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

Trust me if you had ever experienced the loud mouthed rudeness and feral kids that this entails you would know the word is not being devalued.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Ooops, okay. I wasn't there. And you hadn't explained the feral part.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Douglas Brisbane Gray said:


> Unfortunately in the UK you may have to suffer a whole family out for a special occasion in matching football team shirts in even good restaurants.


Football Hooligans that eat together, stay together!!


----------



## amplifiedheat (Jun 9, 2008)

camorristi said:


> Well said, but unfortunately if you dress well (not necessarily dress up) most young women think you're in the mob (especially if you're from northern NJ and living in Midwest :icon_smile_big and that could be a turn off. The mall-prep guy in A&F passes the screening though, but in the end it's all about personality and charisma. Although, many young women consider the guy in a sweatshirt and American Eagle jeans easier to talk to. No?


I'm lucky both to spend my time in large cities and to have the "Southern Gentleman" card at my disposal. More to the point, I think you were right the first time--within normal circumstances, personality trumps clothing. (See Appendix B: "The Grinning Hobo" for an exception.) The mall-prep guy could doubtless move over a few stores to Brooks Brothers without impacting results.

Pro tip: Women ask about the pocket square.


----------



## Douglas Brisbane Gray (Jun 7, 2010)

Peak and Pine said:


> Ooops, okay. I wasn't there. And you hadn't explained the feral part.


Sorry my mistake, I realise you may not be familiar with the phenomenon. I have seen them in bistros in Italy and Spain as well, you see the other tourists looking at them in amazement. The amazing thing to me is they are blindly oblivious to the image they project.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Douglas Brisbane Gray said:


> Sorry my mistake, I realise you may not be familiar with the phenomenon. I have seen them in bistros in Italy and Spain as well, you see the other tourists looking at them in amazement. The amazing thing to me is they are blindly oblivious to the image they project.


Obviously I'm not about to defend the family in question, but it isn't really the clothes that are the problem in that instance. The situation I'm talking about is when you go to a special event and find people dressed in a way that IMO reduces the event. I've been to Manhatten on holiday only once, and so took my wife to a Broadway play--a revival of her favorite. I don't want people to show up in top hat and cape (unless they want to) but it did lessen the occasion when people, perhaps the majority, didn't go much past jeans and tees. Also diminishing the experience was the fact that I had repeatedly to ask the woman slouching in her seat behind me to remove her knee from my back. For me it once again emphasized the relationship between clothes and manners. But then I'm being called a snob on a forum devoted to classic dress.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

fat paul said:


> I have lived in Albuquerque for the past 20 years. It is, with very few exceptions a sartorial HELL. I went to dinner last saturday night at a upscale resturant. No one other than myself wore a tie.
> fat paul


I've always followed a simple rule: when I take my wife to dinner, if I won't be receiving change from a $100 bill when I pay for the meal, I'd better be wearing a tie and so had the waiter.


----------



## amplifiedheat (Jun 9, 2008)

Mr. Mac said:


> I've always followed a simple rule: when I take my wife to dinner, if I won't be receiving change from a $100 bill when I pay for the meal, I'd better be wearing a tie and so had the waiter.


I like this, although we should probably peg it to the CPI.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I think most of us wish we had the money to live like Mr. Mac!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Be patient, Jovan. Finish your education, get married, have your children, raise those children, educate your children, marry them off and kick them out. LOL. When the children have moved on, you will have more money to spend, than you might reasonably know what to do with! It is then that you will be able to buy all the clothes and shoes that you might desire.


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

Mr. Mac said:


> I've always followed a simple rule: when I take my wife to dinner, if I won't be receiving change from a $100 bill when I pay for the meal, I'd better be wearing a tie and so had the waiter.


Very odd. In the same situation my thoughts are "My money is as green as the next guy - If I'm paying for the meal, I'll wear whatever I damn well please. The server can do the same as long as the service is impeccable."

In other words, if I am going to a restaurant that does not have a specific dress code, I expect to be treated with the same respect and service regardless of what I'm wearing as long as I am polite, friendly, tip well, and pay the same as every other customer for my meal.

I frequently go out to dinners with my wife where only 1 $100 bill would not cover the ticket - sometimes I dress to the 9s, often we do not. If your clothing or the clothing of others is affecting your enjoyment of the meal, then your doing it wrong and need to find better restaurants where the food and wines keeps you more interested in your own table and your partners loving eyes.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

David_E said:


> I frequently go out to dinners with my wife where only 1 $100 bill would not cover the ticket - sometimes I dress to the 9s, often we do not. If your clothing or the clothing of others is affecting your enjoyment of the meal, then your doing it wrong and need to find better restaurants where the food and wines keeps you more interested in your own table and your partners loving eyes.


Sounds like I need to eat at more expensive restaurants.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

eagle2250 said:


> ^^
> Be patient, Jovan. Finish your education, get married, have your children, raise those children, educate your children, marry them off and kick them out. LOL. When the children have moved on, you will have more money to spend, than you might reasonably know what to do with! It is then that you will be able to buy all the clothes and shoes that you might desire.


Ah, but by then I won't be the cool young guy showing all the other "dudes" how to step it up a notch in their dress.


----------



## ykurtz (Mar 7, 2007)

Mr. Mac said:


> I've always followed a simple rule: when I take my wife to dinner, if I won't be receiving change from a $100 bill when I pay for the meal, I'd better be wearing a tie and so had the waiter.


The only way you could pay for a meal with a $100 bill and not receive change would be if the meal cost exactly $100. How often does that happen? Or it could be, say over $80 and less than $100 and you're leaving a tip? Just kidding. I know what you meant.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

Mr. Mac said:


> Sounds like I need to eat at more expensive restaurants.


I'd suggest private clubs. Anyone with a little cash can go to a restaurant, and, as many comments on this thread reveal, the kind of unspoken social pressure that formerly encouraged people to conform to higher standards of dress and behavior is now viewed as "snobby" and oppressive.

In the clubs, the relentless downward levelling seen in much of the rest of society is less apparent.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Mr. Mac said:


> I've always followed a simple rule: when I take my wife to dinner, if I won't be receiving change from a $100 bill when I pay for the meal, I'd better be wearing a tie and so had the waiter.


Are you saying that the other customers must also be wearing ties or do you let them slide? For example, here are some random photos taken at Flemings and Ruths Chris, both of which are difficult to get out of for less than $100 but both of which are often filled with folks dressed casually. I don't generally wear jeans to restaurants like these, but I don't wear a tie either. Just wondering and please keep in mind that I'm not being critical of your position on this but rather just having a little fun. :icon_smile_big:





































Cruiser


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

For example:



> Dress Code
> 
> Gentlemen are required to wear jackets and ties at all times (turtlenecks and ascots are not acceptable). Appropriate attire for ladies is dresses, skirts, dressy pant suits and business pant suits. Jeans, shorts, stirrup pants, leggings, stretch pants, tight pants, sweats and T-shirts are absolutely not acceptable.
> 
> Please be mindful when inviting guests to the Club, to advise them of this policy.


https://www.metropolitanclubnyc.org/default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=289140&ssid=168187&vnf=1


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Taliesin said:


> For example:
> 
> https://www.metropolitanclubnyc.org/default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=289140&ssid=168187&vnf=1


Members and their guest are reminded, that use of cellular phones and laptops are not permitted anywhere in the Club except in private meeting rooms and bedrooms.

Sign me up!!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Ruths Chris,


Is the newly monied cousin of Red Lobster!!


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

Mr. Mac said:


> Sounds like I need to eat at more expensive restaurants.


I believe you are (intentionally) missing the point. The cost of the restaurant has nothing to do with how the people eating there will be dressed. If you have ever visited Graceland you will never need a reminder that money does not buy taste. If anything money, fame, accidents of birth and power allow one to better ignore the "rules" that so many on this forum seem to believe are proper. While dressed in a suit and tie and looking down on neighboring tables thinking "What tasteless slobs I'm surrounded with! Why do they let the riff-raff in!" I hope you realize that there are other tables looking at you thinking "Whats with that ridiculous popinjay over there? What a wet blanket! He really needs to relax and learn to live a little. I bet he's gay*. Hmm no... not fashionable enough"

However I think the even bigger problem that some of the posts in this thread seem to show is a disturbing insecurity in the posters own sense of style and taste. So much so, that they are not only concerned with making sure they follow the "rules" themselves, but want others to conform to their own arbitrary sense of appropriate dress. This reflects far more poorly on the one who takes exception to another's dress than it does on the so-called "slob." One who is secure and confident in their own situation does not feel threatened or offended by others who's clothing choices differ - at most amused, or interested in case they might learn something new.

There is a saying in the U.S. that goes like this: "Your rights end where my nose begins" - the equally true inverse is: "My rights end where YOUR nose begins." Dress however it delights you - but don't presume to dictate their "proper" dress, or think someone else "wrong" just because they don't happen to share your sense of aesthetics. Don't believe that conformity to a specific mode of dress should offer any more rights and privileges than anyone else. Rights are inherent, and privileges are earned. Out side of a few select places like this, your not going to earn any worthwhile privileges just by assembling a quality wardrobe and wearing it well... and really would you want to live someplace where you could? Where something as superficial as garments is the primary decider of merit? That sounds more like a school girl clique of sycophants hovering around a queen bee to me than any sort of utopia.

That a man is well dressed, says nothing about that man except that they are well dressed. (and thats debatable as "well dressed" is entirely subjective) There is no moral, intellectual, spiritual, civil, or humanistic virtue inherent in wearing aesthetically pleasing clothing, and no crime against any of the same in dressing like a "slob." In fact a good many of the religions of the world would chide the dapper fellow for his vanity, wastefulness, pride, attachment to material things, and pursuit of worldly affectations over spiritual devotion.

I come to this forum because it has collectively some of the finest sartorial minds around. The knowledge collected here is just staggering. I happen to LIKE dressing well, and all of my playing devil's advocate aside, I am fond of the aesthetic sense that most posters here have in common. I am a mere neophyte at the feet of masters here when it comes to the art of dressing in accordance with classic Western European and American style. I watch and listen carefully as I generally find the advice good and the quality of expression, and the manners usually quite genteel compared to the internet norms. The only downside I see here is a certain level of presumption that knowledge of a particular style of dressing somehow provides the moral authority to pass judgment on others who choose to differ in any way from the posters view of the "right" way to dress and behave. To see masters of an art belittle themselves in such a fashion is just so frustrating I have to burst out with a tirade like this.

To the original poster:
If you like to dress in suits and jackets and slacks, and you have the resources to do it without compromising on other more important parts of you life- go for it! This is a great place to learn all about the subject. But do it because _you like the way you look dressing in that fashion_ - make sure it delights *you*, because it will probably not impress most of your peers, and will probably not help you get female companionship. If you are doing it in reaction to what they young men you speak so contemptuously of are doing and wearing, then you might as well just wear what they wear as you are simply succumbing to "peer pressure" in reverse. You are still letting them dictate your dress habits by wearing what they are *not wearing* or more specifically an _*opposite*_ of it.

So my point is - your young and have freedom. Make the best of it by wearing and acting in a fashion that makes you happy independently of what your peers are doing. Don't think that you have to "dress up" to dress well. Hopefully in time you will be very successful in your career - as you progress your costume will become more restricted by your role and you will lose some of the freedoms of dress that is allowed the youth. Enjoy all the options available to you now - but do it because you enjoy it and don't labor under any false pretense that it will make you a better person, or impart on you any special virtue besides the happiness you receive from dressing in a fashion that pleases you.

(Wow long winded SOB aren't I!! I'm putting the soapbox down raising my hands and slowly backing away.)

* no disrespect to any of our gay members - at least in the Midwest, there exists a stereotype of gay men being much better dressers, and more stylish in general.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

^^^^
Nice post! (however, It was way too long, so I only read to the half-way point, but I get what you mean)


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

ZachGranstrom said:


> ^^^^
> Nice post! (however, It was way too long, so I only read to the half-way point, but I get what you mean)


Not surprising since most young folks suffer from a certain amount of attention defecit disorder anyway. Us old folks just have memory loss and forget what we are doing about halfway through. I guess the end result is the same. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

ZachGranstrom said:


> ^^^^
> Nice post! (however, It was way too long, so I only read to the half-way point, but I get what you mean)


I'll do a TLDR recap later once I've distanced myself enough to summarize


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

David_E said:


> However I think the even bigger problem that some of the posts in this thread seem to show is a disturbing insecurity in the posters own sense of style and taste. So much so, that they are not only concerned with making sure they follow the "rules" themselves, but want others to conform to their own arbitrary sense of appropriate dress.


Tradition is more than arbitrary, but less than mandatory. Some prefer to follow tradition and would also prefer, especially during important events, that others do the same. This can't accurately be dismissed as mere "insecurity."


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Cruiser said:


> Not surprising since most young folks suffer from a certain amount of attention defecit disorder anyway. Us old folks just have memory loss and forget what we are doing about halfway through. I guess the end result is the same. :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Cruiser


Old guys have the attention, but not the retention!!

So goes the mind and the bladder


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

I must respectfully disagree with you, though you do have a point - there are other explanations for following tradition such as laziness.

To do something, or prefer something _just_ because it is traditional is evidence that one is either afraid to move outside what has already been done and risk either greater success or failure, or that one does not wish to expend the effort to examine how and why something has been done in the past and then run the risk of having to change.

So no, besides as a form of heuristic (a generally helpful form of cognitive laziness that allows people to get through the day without re-analyzing how to operate door knobs and other basic acts) I don't see tradition as a worthwhile reason to hold a view, opinion, aesthetic, or maintain a behavior.

Besides the fact that tradition is a really bad way of determining "right" you are presuming that everyone is using the same tradition - others might have traditions that are different from yours but equally "valid" in their minds.

Please allow me to introduce you to one of the basic logical fallacies:

Fallacy of appeal to tradition:
" 
Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" has the following form: 



[*]X is old or traditional
[*]Therefore X is correct or better.
 This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true. 
This sort of "reasoning" is appealing for a variety of reasons. First, people often prefer to stick with what is older or traditional. This is a fairly common psychological characteristic of people which may stem from the fact that people feel more comfortable about what has been around longer. Second, sticking with things that are older or traditional is often easier than testing new things. Hence, people often prefer older and traditional things out of laziness. Hence, Appeal to Tradition is a somewhat common fallacy. 
It should not be assumed that new things must be better than old things (see the fallacy Appeal to Novelty) any more than it should be assumed that old things are better than new things. The age of something does not, in general, have any bearing on its quality or correctness (in this context). In the case of tradition, assuming that something is correct just because it is considered a tradition is poor reasoning. For example, if the belief that 1+1 = 56 were a tradition of a group of people it would hardly follow that it is true. 
Obviously, age does have a bearing in some contexts. For example, if a person concluded that aged wine would be better than brand new wine, he would not be committing an Appeal to Tradition. This is because, in such cases the age of the thing is relevant to its quality. Thus, the fallacy is committed only when the age is not, in and of itself, relevant to the claim. 
One final issue that must be considered is the "test of time." In some cases people might be assuming that because something has lasted as a tradition or has been around a long time that it is true because it has "passed the test of time." If a person assumes that something must be correct or true simply because it has persisted a long time, then he has committed an Appeal to Tradition. After all, as history has shown people can persist in accepting false claims for centuries. 
However, if a person argues that the claim or thing in question has successfully stood up to challenges and tests for a long period of time then they would not be committing a fallacy. In such cases the claim would be backed by evidence. As an example, the theory that matter is made of subatomic particles has survived numerous tests and challenges over the years so there is a weight of evidence in its favor. The claim is reasonable to accept because of the weight of this evidence and not because the claim is old. Thus, a claim's surviving legitimate challenges and passing valid tests for a long period of time can justify the acceptance of a claim. But mere age or persistence does not warrant accepting a claim."

And here are a couple amusing quotes on the subject:
Tradition is a guide and not a jailer.*W. Somerset Maugham*
_English dramatist & novelist (1874 - 1965)

_Tradition is what you resort to when you don't have the time or the money to do it right.*
Kurt Herbert Alder*"

( born , , and , -)

""



Traditionalists are pessimists about the future and optimists about the past.
Lewis Mumford

Not that any of those quote *prove *anything of course. I can just as easily find 5 more from presidents, prime ministers, and pundits taking about how tradition is the foundation of nations and cultures. I just like the skeptical route better since it doesn't lead to stoning people, burning them, chopping of their hands, or enslaving them (all traditional activities) quite so easily.
​


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

Taliesin said:


> Tradition is more than arbitrary, but less than mandatory. Some prefer to follow tradition and would also prefer, especially during important events, that others do the same. This can't accurately be dismissed as mere "insecurity."


After thinking a bit, I did come up with a few caveats to my last post for circumstances where I do agree with you.

A situation such as the private club which you mentioned previously would be an excellent case. There you have a group of like minded individuals who have formed a private association based on their own set of rules. It is not public, and its not being forced on anyone who has not willingly subscribed. The following of the traditions provides a source of pleasure for the participants and does no harm. I would say nothing wrong there at all.

Graduations and other "ritual" occasions. The invocation of tradition in these cases again does no harm and is entirely voluntary. The tradition serves to reinforce the "special" or "magical" nature of the ritual space and ritual time providing a more significant impact on the participants. But again - this is not a public restaurant and all the attendees are in agreement to participate and the rules are officially stated in advance.

I don't even have a problem with a restaurant, theater, opera house, or other public venue posting a dress code and requiring those who want to patronize the establishment to follow the code. I wish more places did. I just think it beneath a gentleman to disdain his fellow man just because of what the other guy is wearing.


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

David_E said:


> I must respectfully disagree with you, though you do have a point - there are other explanations for following tradition such as laziness.
> 
> To do something, or prefer something _just_ because it is traditional is evidence that one is either afraid to move outside what has already been done and risk either greater success or failure, or that one does not wish to expend the effort to examine how and why something has been done in the past and then run the risk of having to change....Please allow me to introduce you to one of the basic logical fallacies:


I don't think that one "respectfully" disagrees by posting a long quotation "introducing" the "basic logical fallacies."

There are many reasons for following tradition. I'm not going to write some tiresome eight paragraph rant about it, though. This will have to suffice: contrary to your assumption, many people follow tradition after considering it and concluding that it is good. Or that it can be maintained with only minor modifications. Change for the sake of change is juvenile.


----------



## David_E (Apr 18, 2010)

Sir, I must unfortunatly again disagree. I showed my respect by providing actual logic arguments and providing them with supporting evidence - a far more respectful method than by responding with ad hominem attacks on the author or the argument itself - for example by describing it as "tiresome" or a "rant."

I'd post the Ad Hominem Fallacy for you but I somehow suspect that you would not read that one either as evidenced by your mistaken assumption that I was in some way suggesting "change for the sake of change" was a worthwhile argument. That is known as the fallacy of "Appeal to Novelty." It was mentioned in the quote about the Appeal to Tradition fallacy. I would certainly not indulge in it. Perhaps you should put aside your indignation that I suggested you might need an introduction to logical fallacies and read what I wrote? It might raise the level of conversation.

I agree with you that some people consider _a_ tradition and decide that it is good, I do so frequently myself. I often question - even in my own case- if there is true consideration going on, or just a bit of contemplation and reflection on the emotional response the tradition provokes rather than a real examination of the traditions continued validity.

However you are making a very unconvincing argument that tradition is a good enough reason for justifying your looking down on the clothing choices of others. As we are on a forum for the discussion of clothes and our choices of clothes, I quite justly objected since while your statements are eloquent and have a beautiful ring to the ear, they do not survive rational scrutiny - handwaving away inconvenient contradictions to your opinion does not count as supporting evidence.

I do not, well did not - your last post was rather rude - have anything against you personally, but I find high handedness and arrogance quite offensive. I think its nothing but the act of a friend to help another friend learn when they might be committing an error.

This argument however has probably strayed a bit too far off the original topic of this thread - perhaps we should take it to a private thread or conversation instead?


----------



## clotheshorse69 (Jun 4, 2010)

CuffDaddy said:


> I think you're on track to having your own sense of style. Revulsion at what one's peers are wearing is often the starting point.


Or the starting point of becoming an isolated weirdo...


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

1
2. X is old or traditional
3. Therefore X is correct or better

That is the logical fallacy of an undistributed middle, right? I get confused in my old age. Nobody here has said in my hearing that something is better because older and traditional. The argument tends to be that something that happens to be traditional is also, on its own merits, better. Big difference--to go with this big font. Where did it come from?


----------



## Taliesin (Sep 24, 2004)

David_E said:


> However you are making a very unconvincing argument that tradition is a good enough reason for justifying your looking down on the clothing choices of others. As we are on a forum for the discussion of clothes and our choices of clothes, I quite justly objected since while your statements are eloquent and have a beautiful ring to the ear, they do not survive rational scrutiny - handwaving away inconvenient contradictions to your opinion does not count as supporting evidence.
> 
> I do not, well did not - your last post was rather rude - have anything against you personally, but I find high handedness and arrogance quite offensive. I think its nothing but the act of a friend to help another friend learn when they might be committing an error.




Straw men. For example, I did not write or imply that "tradition is a good enough reason for justifying ... looking down on the clothing choices of others." I made the positive assertion that many people like to follow traditions, and that they often do so with their eyes wide open. This is the raison d'etre of this forum - to learn the living traditions and the reasons behind them, and even to discuss the discarded ones (e.g., frock coats, spats, etc.). It was not I who wrote that those who would like to see traditions followed are, to use your precise words, "insecure", "arbitrary," and "fallacious." And as far as your rant is concerned, you yourself accurately described it as a "tirade." Enough said.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> Are you saying that the other customers must also be wearing ties or do you let them slide? For example, here are some random photos taken at Flemings and Ruths Chris, both of which are difficult to get out of for less than $100 but both of which are often filled with folks dressed casually. I don't generally wear jeans to restaurants like these, but I don't wear a tie either. Just wondering and please keep in mind that I'm not being critical of your position on this but rather just having a little fun. :icon_smile_big:
> Cruiser


Just myself and the waiter.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

ykurtz said:


> The only way you could pay for a meal with a $100 bill and not receive change would be if the meal cost exactly $100. How often does that happen? Or it could be, say over $80 and less than $100 and you're leaving a tip? Just kidding. I know what you meant.


If you pay for a $150 meal with a $100 bill you would not receive change, but a bill for $50.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I can't believe no one's posted this yet but on the subject of "young men's style" it isn't all that bad... depending on when and where you look. :icon_smile_big:

https://thetrad.blogspot.com/2008/12/take-ivy-chapter-i.html


----------



## 3holic (Mar 6, 2008)

David_E said:


> I believe you are (intentionally) missing the point. The cost of the restaurant has nothing to do with how the people eating there will be dressed. If you have ever visited Graceland you will never need a reminder that money does not buy taste. If anything money, fame, accidents of birth and power allow one to better ignore the "rules" that so many on this forum seem to believe are proper. While dressed in a suit and tie and looking down on neighboring tables thinking "What tasteless slobs I'm surrounded with! Why do they let the riff-raff in!" I hope you realize that there are other tables looking at you thinking "Whats with that ridiculous popinjay over there? What a wet blanket! He really needs to relax and learn to live a little. I bet he's gay*. Hmm no... not fashionable enough"
> 
> However I think the even bigger problem that some of the posts in this thread seem to show is a disturbing insecurity in the posters own sense of style and taste. So much so, that they are not only concerned with making sure they follow the "rules" themselves, but want others to conform to their own arbitrary sense of appropriate dress. This reflects far more poorly on the one who takes exception to another's dress than it does on the so-called "slob." One who is secure and confident in their own situation does not feel threatened or offended by others who's clothing choices differ - at most amused, or interested in case they might learn something new.
> 
> ...


Pls elaborate.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Members and their guest are reminded, that use of cellular phones and laptops are not permitted anywhere in the Club except in private meeting rooms and bedrooms.
> 
> Sign me up!!


Absolutely fantastic, sign me up as well. I just wish more places would have similar rules.

BTW the place where I live and work, there is a total prohibition on all electronic devices. Except in dormitorys and apartments.


----------

