# Button your jacket, and the tie bottom still shows: what the hey?!



## mark221 (Oct 3, 2007)

Have you gents noticed the recent trend in mens pictorial clothing ads, for showing jackets/suits cut so short/tight that the bottom of the tie still shows, as much as 4-5 inches of it, even AFTER buttoning it all up? This does not look fresh, smart or original, it just looks ill-fitted and sloppy. The constant craving for novelty in dress has gotten absurd, in this instance. It beggars credulity that some men think they look well dressed, when gotten up in this way. May we just banish them all to California now, and lock them all up? An ad currently running on this site, by Smart Turnout of London, shows a fellow buttoning up, and showing a like amount of tie, which hangs at least two inches below his belt. I am not sold!
Yours in dismay,
Mark Fowlkes


----------



## Dr. François (Sep 14, 2008)

Pictures/links?


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Is the unsightly condition you describe largely a result of the 'too closely fitted' suit/sport coat trend, some gentlemen are prone to opt for these days?


----------



## GBR (Aug 10, 2005)

Fashion knows no bounds and many support that.


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

It is nice to see that someone else has finally noticed this absurdity.
Most absurd is the fact that so many are gullible enough to believe ill-fitting clothing to be some sort of fashion statement. 

As for banishment, I would propose an out-of-the-way backwater, where fewer would have to bear seeing them.....

...someplace like Georgia ought to fit the bill well.


----------



## harvey_birdman (Mar 10, 2008)

I have seen this travesty in person. I was unable to take a pic of it, but I shall try to do so in the future should I spot it again.


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

It will pass....


----------



## cosmotoast (Oct 11, 2008)

I agree with thread starter, the too tight look with the tie hanging out is a rather sloppy look. It may well be in the majority of ads in mens fashion magazines but no, it does not bode well in georgia either


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Here's what's going on. Men's trousers have generally crept lower and lower over the years, but they really plunged over the last 2-3, to the point where a 9" rise is now abotu average for what's on retail racks. Tie lengths have generally followed, since few like the look of a tie that stops several inches short of the waistband. Now, when those short-rise pants and long ties are combined with jackets of a high-but-still-perfectly traditional button stance, _and_ a coat that is worn so close that the jacket skirt is always pulling, and tie beneath the button point is inevitable. High-stance jackets make some sense with high-waisted trousers, but those two are rarely worn together these days.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I dislike this trend even though I like slightly tapered trousers and trim fitting shirts. Don Draper's suits on Mad Men are a good example of how to make a suit fitted -- not tight -- to flatter the wearer. Jon Hamm certainly isn't a waifish fashion model, either. Anyways, I tend to think a guy who coordinates his stuff well and follows the "rules" (as vaguely defined as that is) will still look _better_ than many people, even if he is wearing the fashionable fits.

However, most people look _best_ with enough room to move around, adequate bum coverage, and a rise that keeps the shirt tucked in. Why they keep making shirt tails shorter and the rise even more so baffles me. If anything they need to make one of them longer to compensate. Same with the traditional-length waistcoats worn with low rise trousers.


----------



## 10gallonhat (Dec 13, 2009)

pictures?


----------



## jean-paul sartorial (Jul 28, 2010)




----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

I've always been taught that the point of my necktie should always just touch my belt buckle, so if the tie is tied correctly and still sticking out, I echo other sentiments here that the issue has three probable causes - trousers with too low a rise, ties that are too long, and a too-tight coat. At times I've see all three at once.

I also agree with Jovan's contention that the lower rise trouser can look awful combined with a normal-fitting waistcoat. Seeing shirts peeking out under a vest is a male version of a 'muffin-top'! :icon_pale:


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Grayson said:


> I've always been taught that the point of my necktie should always just touch my belt buckle,


Myth. Many of the best dressed men of the past 100 years have worn their ties at a materially different length than that.


----------



## mark221 (Oct 3, 2007)

*I think that is part of the issue.......*



eagle2250 said:


> Is the unsightly condition you describe largely a result of the 'too closely fitted' suit/sport coat trend, some gentlemen are prone to opt for these days?


 Eagle, no doubt the too short coats and jackets are part of the problem, but some guys are wearing the tie point almost in the middle of the trouser fly, and that is LOW! I don't resent low waisted trousers, per se, but they need a jacket with a matching low stance as well, and I'm not seeing much of that. I've even seen tuxedos with a band waist, no cummerbund, and a couple to 3 inches of white shirt showing below the bottom jacket button. I'm no sartorialist, but it just looks bad to me, a gut reaction.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

I remember the first time I noticed that was courtesy of John Edwards


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

mark221, see https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?102549-Tie-length&p=1060994#post1060994 for examples of well-dressed men wearing ties coming to the middle of the trouser fly. A long tie is not problematic in and of itself.


----------



## mark221 (Oct 3, 2007)

*Interesting post, CuffDaddy.......*



CuffDaddy said:


> mark221, see https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?102549-Tie-length&p=1060994#post1060994 for examples of well-dressed men wearing ties coming to the middle of the trouser fly. A long tie is not problematic in and of itself.


 I notice most of the Italian gents have long ties, but also have jackets that, if buttoned, would cover them up. I must stand in opinion with my fellow posters who dislike the long tie look. I might add, that if guys want very low waisted trousers, they could benefit from studying the early 60's mod styles, like the Beatles often wore. Very low waists were stylish then, and I remember seeing short jackets, still covering the trouser waist band, that had no curved cutaway but were straight like a Spencer jacket, and covered up the tie bottom and trouser waist both. If the low rise pants are going to stick around a while, that jacket, or something similar, would be sorely needed.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

mark, I'm in broad agreement with you. I see the problem, though, as related to the trouser/jacket relationship, not the tie. 

You are correct that another ingredient is the current preference for "open quarters" on jackets. If the jackets were cut to have very little open space below the buttons, that would fix one problem. But create another. Which is that "closed quartered" jackets are flattering on only a minority of men, for pretty much the same reason as DB jackets. They shorten the leg line. 

The jackets could stay as they are if people just pulled their pants up. With their trousers up a bit, they'd naturally tie their ties somewhat shorter (even if not as short as Grayson prefers).


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Grayson said:


> I've always been taught that the point of my necktie should always just touch my belt buckle, so if the tie is tied correctly and still sticking out, I echo other sentiments here that the issue has three probable causes - trousers with too low a rise, ties that are too long, and a too-tight coat. At times I've see all three at once.
> 
> I also agree with Jovan's contention that the lower rise trouser can look awful combined with a normal-fitting waistcoat. Seeing shirts peeking out under a vest is a male version of a 'muffin-top'! :icon_pale:


 Believe me, the male version of a muffin top is exactly the same as the female version and is a common sight here.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

So we've been dealing with this issue for a decade now! Some of us thought it would pass, but now it's the norm. Hopefully the fact that it's a new decade means that fashions will change.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Matt S said:


> By the end of the day the trouser will probably be torn, unless there is an elastic woven in the wool. Either way, trousers should not be worn so tight if they are intended to last more than one season. Current fashion not only looks unflattering, it wears out your clothes.





Matt S said:


> By the end of the day the trouser will probably be torn, unless there is an elastic woven in the wool. Either way, trousers should not be worn so tight if they are intended to last more than one season. Current fashion not only looks unflattering, it wears out your clothes.





CuffDaddy said:


> All the better for the fashion "designers." It's hard to imagine a more short-sighted bunch of fools, pushing clothes that make 95% of men look awful, and will leave the remaining 5% with a bad view of nice clothes' durability in a year or three. If they were *trying* to make sure that nobody will wear a suit in 15 years, they couldn't adopt a better strategy.





CuffDaddy said:


> No. Slim-fit suits look OK on model-fit men, and ghastly on the rest. I'm not arguing for bagginess or oversized clothing, just clothes that actually hang rather than cling, and allow a little movement.


All should read and heed Matt and The Great CuffDaddy! :beer:

_"Don't wear your pants like a girl!" _* - CuffDaddy circa 2010*


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

Flanderian said:


> All should read and heed Matt and The Great CuffDaddy! :beer:
> 
> _"Don't wear your pants like a girl!" _* - CuffDaddy circa 2010*


Now it's those girls who are wearing their pants high on the waist with a fair amount of fullness, and men are wearing them tight and low. I preferred it the old way...


----------



## JBierly (Jul 4, 2012)

Matt S said:


> Now it's those girls who are wearing their pants high on the waist with a fair amount of fullness, and men are wearing them tight and low. I preferred it the old way...


The girls look better and the guys are more comfortable the old way. Part of the gender neutral society.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Trousers are not the only garment with which men and women might have a meeting of the minds regarding the rise of the garment(s). I can wear a box pleat as well as the wife. That's my story and I am sticking to it! Now where the devil did I put my Kilt? Just this past we the wife and I were in a restaurant and witnessed a big fellow wearing a rather striking Kilt, with all the accouterments! Looking good.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

eagle2250 said:


> Trousers are not the only garment with which men and women might have a meeting of the minds regarding the rise of the garment(s). I can wear a box pleat as well as the wife. That's my story and I am sticking to it! Now where the devil did I put my Kilt? Just this past we the wife and I were in a restaurant and witnessed a big fellow wearing a rather striking Kilt, with all the accouterments! Looking good.


This guy?


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Flanderian said:


> This guy?
> 
> View attachment 39353


LOL. Perhaps, but he didn't have his bagpipe in hand. :laughing:


----------



## Color 8 (Sep 18, 2015)

I enjoyed wearing a kilt in my clan tartan in the Highland Games, many years ago.

. . . but there is a slippery-slope argument against mainstreaming it . . .







.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Oh my!


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Color 8 said:


> I enjoyed wearing a kilt in my clan tartan in the Highland Games, many years ago.
> 
> . . . but there is a slippery-slope argument against mainstreaming it . . .
> 
> ...


*OOF!!!*


----------

