# On Being Told Not To Dress Up.



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

Much has been written here regarding the decline in how American men dress these days. We see it every day. However, has anyone else here been asked not to dress up for an occasion? Now what is being dressed up exactly? This of course differs among everyone. For me, being dressed up means a suit and tie since my job does not require this, so with the exception of the occasional wedding or company holiday party, I rarely wear suits. Instead, I often wear sport coats, wool (in winter) or linen (in summer) trousers, and button up shirts. Most of the time I nix the sport coat and just wear a dress shirt and trousers. AE lace ups or slip on loafers complete my style. This for LA so needless to say, this is considered to be dressed up by most people here although I consider it to be casual. 

So imagine my reaction when my 41st birthday rolled around recently and a lady friend, whom I dated for a short while about 10 years ago and has expressed interest in rekindling this romance offered to take me out to dinner but asked that I not dress up. Here's how it went down. "Nancy" has always told me that I dress nice and have great style. We've remained friends all this time. So when I took her up on her offer for dinner on my birthday I picked a causal middle of the road restaurant I've been to many times before. I chose to wear a tan colored linen sport coat, white dress shirt, navy linen pants and brown AE slip on loafers. Casual for the occasion I figured. About an hour before I was to pick up Nancy, she sends me a text. She writes: "I'm wearing jeans and a regular shirt. I hope you are not dressing up." So I text her back describing my outfit and she just replies with an "OK".

Now I understand that my 41st birthday is not the milestone that 40 is, but it's still a special day to me and I would think that anyone who wants to celebrate it with me would think enough of me to put a little effort into dressing up a notch. This is especially true of a woman who not only admired the way I dress before, but wants to resume a romance. So as I drove to her place I thought that perhaps she would like to come over to my place and pick out a outfit that she would be comfortable with my wearing around her. Heaven forbid that she should walk into a crowded restaurant with guy who actually is not wearing a T-shirt, cargo shorts and a baseball cap. I thought some women liked to be seen with a good looking well dressed man. Then I wondered if she would make any changes to her own choice of clothes for our dinner. Then I decided right then and there that we would remain friends but that would be the extent. I took her request as meaning that I am not allowed to be who I am when I am with her. I have to be who she wants me to be and this my friends is simply unacceptable.

I pick up Nancy and she is wearing black jeans, grey T-shirt and white basketball shoes. So much for her putting in the effort. Now I really don't care what other people wear, especially women. I'm not someone who thinks I'm better then someone else just because I put a little thought into my clothes each morning. Furthermore, when going out on a date, I'm not to particular on what a woman chooses to wear. Sure Nancy would have scored some points with me if she had bothered to put on a dress perhaps, I mean it's my birthday for Pete's sake. However, it was really her asking me not to dress up that not only killed her chances of a romantic rerun with me, but it also made me glad that although I may be 41 and still looking for my Ms Right, I'm glad I don't have to compromise. I'm a quality guy and I'll wait until I meet a quality woman.


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

b&f, I'm going out on a misogynistic limb here and guessing that "don't dress up", in her case, meant "don't dress like someone over 25 years old". Hey, if she dresses that way, she must be a kid, right? Not a woman into or at least approaching middle age.


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

Good point Phyrpowr, I should have mentioned in my post that she's actually older then me by several years. She's 45 or 46.


----------



## Regillus (Mar 15, 2011)

Just my two cents but I'd forget her. If she's going to tell you every little thing to do then I'd find another woman. Right from the start; if you like dressing well and she doesn't want you to "dress up" then IMO the two of you aren't a good fit.


----------



## fullwindsor (Jul 11, 2011)

Just some thoughts...

This is difficult because a lot has to do with social norms of the day. Overdressing can often be as much as a social stigma as underdressing. 

As much as all of us may want to see the return of etiquette of the 40's and 50's, or the brief renaissance in the 80's when guys took pride in wearing ties and Armani jackets, the majority of most typical working,middle class, and even professional male's idea of a wardrobe is jeans, t-shirt and a hoodie. To them, they think Dockers and a polo shirt is dressing up. Sadly, these are the same people who ruined "Casual Fridays" in workplaces. 

I know, I know. It may not be right in our eyes, but then they may find it stuffy or even interpret it as pompous to see someone in a suit and tie at a casual birthday party hosted at a bar and grill, just as we may find it offensive to see sneakers and denim at a wedding. Unfortunately, these are just the times and most males just do not wear Brioni suits and ties 24/7 despite what is portrayed in GQ and Esquire.

I think common sense comes into play and the best dress code is to "dress appropriately" -- ie. at the same level as most of the other guests. When all else fails, you can't go wrong with a nice dark sport coat in a Super 150 wool.


----------



## mommatook1 (Apr 17, 2008)

My 2 cents, from the perspective of someone in a long term relationship, it is always advisable to avoid underdressing or overdressing the woman. Any time my wife and I go out together, we always bounce our clothing selections off each other. Granted, interpreting the corresponding level of male "dressiness" to match the myriad of possible women's fashion options can be a headache. Often if an adjustment is needed, three times out of four I'm the one who changes. But you do it, because ultimately she is more important than the opinions of others.

In your situation, it sounds like she made it pretty clear she intended to dress casual, and wanted you to do the same. Regardless of different interpretations of the word "casual," she even told you what she was wearing. Because you still chose to dress slightly above her, I'm guessing she's not that important to you.

Don't get me wrong, the fact that she chose not to even attempt to dress nicely for your birthday is a definite turn off. Sounds like the LA girl mentality for sure...


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

Personally, I dress for the venue. If necessary (nice place) I will gently advise my companions the same. The idea of going to the theater or a really nice restaurant in a t-shirt makes me far more uncomfortable than going to a movie or sports bar wearing a blazer.

If you feel the same... and the lady in question doesn't understand or respect that... it tells you something.


----------



## Preu Pummel (Feb 5, 2008)

phyrpowr said:


> Hey, if she dresses that way, she must be a kid, right? Not a woman into or at least approaching middle age.


Nailed that one right out of the box. Need more be said?

Dump her. She's an immature wanna-be-boy. Bleh. Get a real woman on your arm.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

You hit the nail on the head with your analysis. While you might have some interests in common, it is not "dress". This was "your" day not hers, if she really cared, she would have asked you what she should be wearing for you. At this point she is looking to change you, hopefully it won't happen.


----------



## YoungClayB (Nov 16, 2009)

My wife tells me occasionally to not "dress up". She doesn't mean "don't dress nice"...she just means to say: don't dress like a dandy, don't dress in a way that calls undue attention to yourself, don't dress in a way that makes the people you are going out uncomfortable. 

Personally, I think that this is a fair request. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

While I enjoy "dressing up", I find that "dressing the part" is even more important. Dressing well is something that can be done in any setting, be it wearing a suit, nice casual pants and well cut polo, or even stylish sneakers and t-shirt that is fits well. 

I think overdressing can be as much of an issue as under dressing, but in the case of the OP and his story - I think he is 100% in his concern and comments. I also agree with the comments that this seems to be a mismatch in personalities.

My girlfriend is very casual by nature&#8230;wearing flip flops and jeans a lot of the time. But when we head out to dinner or a bar or club, we talk about what we are going to wear - so we are in balance. Sometimes I tone down my outfit, sometimes she steps hers up a bit - but it is a simple conversation and a level of give and take the is necessary in all aspects of a successful relationship.

Sounds like the OP and the woman in question have a mismatch on many levels.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

burnedandfrozen;1225953.....
......
I pick up Nancy and she is wearing black jeans said:


> As one who is at least two decades older than the OP, allow me to observe that Nancy sounds to be a very pleasant woman and in this instance seems to be quite a lucky one as well. There are times in which our passions in one aspect of our lives affect our judgments and decisions in other areas. Certainly discounting a friendship, perhaps even a relationship, based on such superficial considerations seems to be an example of such an ill advised decision. While it might be argued that a difference in sartorial inclinations could justifiably preclude a long term relationship, it would seem to me that a person thoughtful enough to remember your birthday by taking you to lunch, is a pretty considerate friend...perhaps even a "quality woman!" It is not wise to discount relationships so frivolously!


----------



## YoungClayB (Nov 16, 2009)

Eagle, well put. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

What eagle said. My wife has excellent taste in many matters, but with a 3-year-old daughter and 4 dogs to manage, no formal outside-the-home job, and a gardening hobby, she's often dressed pretty sloppily. Many of my best friends give me grief about my dress - and I give them holy hell about their foibles/interests/quirks, _and_ their lousy clothes to boot. I pay attention to my clothes, first and foremost, because *I* enjoy it. If others don't enjoy clothes, then I only ask that they dress appropriately for the situation. In today's world, that's a pretty low bar, so it generally gets met.


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

Thanks for the insightful replies. I once read somewhere that if people in ones social circle disapprove of the clothes one wears then they should dress up to that persons level rather then that person dress down to theirs. I hope I wrote this correctly and it's coherent. I guess this was in the back of my mind when she sent me the text asking me not to dress up. I just thought this whole thing was strange because this is a woman who I have a history with and who knows and has approved of my style of clothes before. Plus, she also directly mentioned her desire to be romantically involved again. I would have thought this alone would have been enough reason to dress up a bit. One of the biggest concerns among women in their 40's who are single is being attractive to men, or so I recently read. The fact that she didn't dress up more doesn't bother me as much as her telling me not to dress up since she had already chosen not to. In fact, if she hadn't brought the issue up, I probably wouldn't have paid too much attention to what either of us were wearing that evening.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

She probably just didn't want to seem wildly out of step with what you were wearing. Maybe she was interested in presenting herself to you as she is on a day-to-day basis and seeing if you would find her attractive in the absence of stilleto heels, little black dress, full makeup, hair up, etc.


----------



## jwa_jwa_jwa (Jul 13, 2010)

I suppose I don't believe a potential love interest should be dropped simply on the basis of them not wanting me to dress up for an occasion.
After all as others have said, choosing to dress nicely is a choice I have made for myself and certainly it would be nice if my better half would choose to do the exact same thing but it's certainly not a requirement.
There have been several times when my wife and I will go out and having gotten used to me going places wearing jeans, sneakers and a t-shirt in the past, she is still getting used to me wearing polos and casual shoes most of the time. There will be the occasional "why are you going to dress up today?" comment but my answer typically is (I love to take pictures) "in case we take pictures I want to look nice". This usually works!


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

I think for me the issue was more of acceptance. Like I mentioned, when she sent me the text asking me not to dress up, I took that to mean that she cannot accept me the way that I am. While I understand that by LA standards, my choice would be considered "dressed up". Like all of us here though, this is who we are. Our choices are part of what makes us the people we are. I really don't care that she wore jeans and a T for my birthday dinner. I was put off that she asked me to do the same. I guess I just cannot see the point in "being in step" with someone I happen to be out on a date with. If we were going to hit some garage sales, or go miniature golfing or something like that, then I would ditch the sport coat and maybe don a pair of shorts and a polo. Although I do push the eccentric envelope at times by wearing spectators, I guess I've just been naive to think that my style of dress is perhaps considered eccentric by the population as a whole. Besides, if the shoe were on the other foot (no pun intended) and it were Nancy's birthday or some other important lady friend of mine, I might actually break out a suit and tie for a special birthday dinner. This would be another way I could prove to them that I appreciate them and value their presence in my life. I guess as a society, we've become too lazy or too hardened or both to make this minimum effort. This is just so sad I think.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

You're trying to make others fit your ideal.

We have to deal with the world as it is.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> You're trying to make others fit your ideal.
> 
> We have to deal with the world as it is.


This is kind of true. The OP is old school in thinking that "dressing up" always means "dressing better."

I think it would be nice to find a lady who sees things the same way, at least to some extent. They're out there.


----------



## Hanzo (Sep 9, 2009)

There are plenty of fish in the sea. If I'm running into an issue (in this case, her discomfort with with the way I prefer to dress) before the first date even starts, forget her and move on to one of the other 3.something billion women in the world. 

I can't imagine ever TELLING my date how to dress prior to our first date. And before someone says "they're rekindling, this isn't a first date", yes, it is. Whatever relationship there was before, didn't work out, so they're starting over. 

Why she felt she could dictate what he wears is beyond me. Asking what someone is wearing is one thing so you can dress to match, but telling someone that you're not comfortable with the way they normally dress is not an issue that will magically go away down the road. This will clearly become a problem down the road, and why anyone would want to go into something knowing there are obvious problems to overcome rather than looking at new opportunities, I'll never know.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I would have opted for a fitted OCBD and khakis with loafers, personally. Just casual enough if you pair it with a ribbon or surcingle belt.


----------



## sirchandler (May 28, 2010)

Stop reading into it. She probably simply wanted to give you dinner and a quick shag for your birthday....relax dude.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

:icon_headagainstwal


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Revised advice: you should have arrived in full-on white tie/tails, and explained that you left the silk topper at home at her request. If she thinks that's funny and will sit with you through dinner while you're dressed like an opera singer, then you know you've really got something.


----------



## Fraser Tartan (May 12, 2010)

burnedandfrozen, women don't always say what they think. My hunch here is that there's something else going on with her other than a significant issue with how you or her dress. She knew that your birthday meant a lot to you and that you were dressing a certain way. You even went out of your way to text her about what you were going to wear. Yet, she appeared with basketball shoes?!? Even if lazy or rushed, if she had an opportunity to change she could have swapped out her shoes, accessories, etc. for a "dressed up" jeans look which is fine for women here in California even at pretty nice places and would have been more compatible with how you were dressed. I think the basketball shoes were worn on this occasion to send a message to you. You might want to check in with her to see if there's something else going on in her head about the relationship that made her do that.


----------



## harvey_birdman (Mar 10, 2008)

I dress well for myself. If someone has a problem with my clothing that is their problem, not mine. I'm sure not wearing Ed Hardy has cost me a few dates but it's almost certainly for the best.

I certainly wouldn't judge another's character based on how he or she dresses but I must admit that women in heels are leaps and bounds sexier than women in sandals or sneakers.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> Revised advice: you should have arrived in full-on white tie/tails, and explained that you left the silk topper at home at her request. If she thinks that's funny and will sit with you through dinner while you're dressed like an opera singer, then you know you've really got something.


 I like this idea. :thumbs-up:


----------



## sirchandler (May 28, 2010)

Fraser Tartan said:


> burnedandfrozen, women don't always say what they think. My hunch here is that there's something else going on with her other than a significant issue with how you or her dress. She knew that your birthday meant a lot to you and that you were dressing a certain way. You even went out of your way to text her about what you were going to wear. Yet, she appeared with basketball shoes?!? Even if lazy or rushed, if she had an opportunity to change she could have swapped out her shoes, accessories, etc. for a "dressed up" jeans look which is fine for women here in California even at pretty nice places and would have been more compatible with how you were dressed. I think the basketball shoes were worn on this occasion to send a message to you. You might want to check in with her to see if there's something else going on in her head about the relationship that made her do that.


in other words, she probably simply wanted to take you out to dinner followed by a quick roll in the hay.

or perhaps, it's just my 30 year old imagination.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

burnedandfrozen,
How'd the rest of the dinner go? Did she comment that you were over dressed? If she was happy with what you had on and you were ok with what she had on, great. If she felt made a comment that you were overdressed, she blew it.


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

Three things:

First off, how did the date go? Was she put off by the fact that you outdressed her?

Second, don't write her off just because she wore jeans and sneakers. That's like her writing you off because you wore a jacket.

Third, why did you break up the first time around? I'm a few years younger than you, but I've found that relationships that didn't work out the first time seldom work out the second time.


----------



## ArtVandalay (Apr 29, 2010)

jwa_jwa_jwa said:


> I suppose I don't believe a potential love interest should be dropped simply on the basis of them not wanting me to dress up for an occasion.


It's indicitive of a bigger problem, however.



triklops55 said:


> Second, don't write her off just because she wore jeans and sneakers. That's like her writing you off because you wore a jacket.


No, it really isn't the same at all.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> You're trying to make others fit your ideal.
> 
> We have to deal with the world as it is.


 Or move on to someone who is more in tune with you. I vote for #2


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

ArtVandalay said:


> It's indicitive of a bigger problem, however.
> 
> No, it really isn't the same at all.


How is it not the same thing? Writing someone off because of the way they dress -- in either direction -- seems a bit superficial to me. People have their own logic for dressing the way they do; it's not always lazyness or a need to show off.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Many years ago, I took a woman with who I was passionately involved out for her birthday to a fairly upscale restaurant. She was definitely underdressed for the occasion. (She was wearing a rather scruffy looking sweater, as best I recall.) At the restaurant, her behavior was also somewhat embarrassing. She actually stood up to flag down a passing waiter (who was not even our waiter). I realized then and there it was not going to work out, and the relationship commenced a downhill slide to be terminated a month or two later.

One of my best friends, an old schoolmate from my prep school days, had a similar experience: He had been going with a woman for a couple of years--she was sweet and sexy, and they seemed to have a great chemistry. My friend's mother was married to a very wealthy man. They lived in Rancho Mirage, California. On one occasion, my friend's mother and stepfather invited the two of them for lunch at the posh El Dorado Club there. My friend's inamorata showed up in a tiger-skin print mini-skirt. My friend also had an on-the-spot epiphany that she was not going to be the right girl for him, and the relationship slip-slid downward thenceforth. He and I have commented that had it been a movie, the audience's sympathy would unquestionably have been with the girl--a sweet, sexy free spirit, as opposed to the stuffy, snobby, prep school/country club set represented by my pal and his mother and stepfather. However, I think my friend made the right decision. As my uncle always used to say to me, "You've got to stick with your own kind."


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

You should have dressed like a chap for the occasion. Why not wear a monocle and ride a unicycle on the next date? :drunken_smilie:

https://www.thechap.net/


----------



## Regillus (Mar 15, 2011)

sirchandler said:


> Stop reading into it. She probably simply wanted to give you dinner and a quick shag for your birthday....relax dude.


Non, Non. She wanted to check him out after some years to see if he had added zeros to his income since the last time she'd seen him.



CuffDaddy said:


> Revised advice: you should have arrived in full-on white tie/tails, and explained that you left the silk topper at home at her request. If she thinks that's funny and will sit with you through dinner while you're dressed like an opera singer, then you know you've really got something.


+1. Second that. Motion carried.


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

Again, thanks for the amusing replies. Look, I decided not to embark on a romantic relationship with Nancy for various reasons such as I'm just not feeling the chemistry for her among other things. However, this incident was what really made me go in that direction. I'm not so shallow that I would not give someone a chance just because they don't dress in a way I approve. It's the fact that she told (she didn't ask she demanded) that I not dress up because she was going to wear jeans and a T. OK so no big deal but maybe it is? She already demonstrated that she can think of herself just fine without regard to others. A big red flag in my book. It's the principle behind her telling me not to dress up. Like I said above, this whole thing would not have been an issue if she didn't make it so. By doing this, she made me think about how she may treat me later down the road (can't listen to my favorite music in the car because she doesn't like it? Check. No visiting art museums because she doesn't like it? Check again) and she also made me think more deep about what she was wearing for what was a special occasion to me. Apparently it wasn't enough for her to put on a dress or at least a blouse or something else other then a T. So it's just the principle of the matter and the thought of what else about me will she find intolerable.

As to how our dinner went. Well, as two battle hardened veterans of the dating pool, (I'm never married, she's been divorced for some time) we tried not to explain too much of why we are both single.


----------



## J.Marko (Apr 14, 2009)

You could have talked to her about it. If you try to guess what people are feeling or thinking, you will likely guess wrong!


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

burnedandfrozen said:


> Again, thanks for the amusing replies.
> . . .
> As to how our dinner went. Well, as two battle hardened veterans of the dating pool, (I'm never married, she's been divorced for some time) we tried not to explain too much of why we are both single.


I stand by my first response, you made the right call.
Hope you find the one with the little black dress, that will compliment your own attire.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

Allow me to weigh on the converse of this:

I've recently had the great fortune to begin dating a lovely young woman who went to college for a fashion degree, and has spent her entire career at a thoroughly upscale women's boutique. She attends fashion events around the world, and being involved in that 'world', her dress is, as you would assume, impeccable, situational, and always up to snuff. She greatly appreciates my daily dress, yet is the first to ask me to loosen my tie or remove my jacket. When I politely decline, she knows why (a man won't remove his jacket in the presence of a lady; I tell her the jacket comes off in two places: the car and the bedroom). It is also refreshing to have a conversation with someone who shares similar interests. Recently, we went out late one night after work, and another young woman with whom she works joined us, and my head spun when girl #2 (quite young, not more than 23-24) referenced bespoke Lobbs. Seriously? 

I, for one, am at a point in my life where I'd be unhappy with someone who didn't at least make the attempt to dress for the occasion. 

Would it have killed her to wear even a sundress?


----------



## Blakewho (May 16, 2008)

The choice of clothes isn't the issue here. It was the OPs birthday so the whole shebang should have been to his taste not hers.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

She was treating and hosting. It was up to her to make the invitation and up to him to accept or decline.


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> (a man won't remove his jacket in the presence of a lady; I tell her the jacket comes off in two places: the car and the bedroom).


Umm... just checking... do I read this phrase correctly? I assume there is an infinitely long list of exceptions to that rule? You do use the word "situational" in describing the dress of your young lady.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

PTB in San Diego said:


> Umm... just checking... do I read this phrase correctly? I assume there is an infinitely long list of exceptions to that rule? You do use the word "situational" in describing the dress of your young lady.


Yes, you read that correctly: A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady, PERIOD. There is no long list of exceptions to that rule. Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Yes, you read that correctly: A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady, PERIOD. There is no long list of exceptions to that rule. Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


Wow. Saturday morning at the nursery, picking up a few geraniums for the back patio? Sunday morning brunch at the beach? (I'm sure I must be misunderstanding something somewhere.)

I think I'll stick with shorts and a polo and loafers in those settings, but I respect you for your commitment.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Yes, you read that correctly: A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady, PERIOD. There is no long list of exceptions to that rule. Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


I thought there was an exception for summer-season rides on a penny-farthing, as depicted in this new-fangled daguerreotype:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Yes, you read that correctly: A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady, PERIOD. There is no long list of exceptions to that rule. Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


So, are you trolling or do you live in 1923?


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

PTB & CD - you pose examples of when a man isn't wearing a jacket. If you choose to not wear a jacket, fine; that's your choice. However, if you do don a jacket, it shouldn't be removed. 

forsber, I think my non-trolling nature on this forum is already established. I'm perfectly serious about my statement.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

1923 then. OK.

I just wonder how people who are trying to dress better and then read this nonsense are really influenced.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Yes, you read that correctly: A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady, PERIOD. There is no long list of exceptions to that rule. Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


Be honest, did you make up this rule? It's OK if you did, I don't judge.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

TGW, setting aside the question of how you got H. G. Wells to lend you his time machine, I ask what the difference is between men who "isn't wearing a jacket" and a man who has "removed" his jacket?


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> 1923 then. OK.
> 
> I just wonder how people who are trying to dress better and then read this nonsense are really influenced.


Keep in mind I was born after the bi-centennial.

What does such a statement have to do with folks reading the forum?


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

ZachGranstrom said:


> Be honest, did you make up this rule? It's OK if you did, I don't judge.


Nope. This has been long standing and I'm sure you will find it in etiquette guides.



CuffDaddy said:


> TGW, setting aside the question of how you got H. G. Wells to lend you his time machine, I ask what the difference is between men who "isn't wearing a jacket" and a man who has "removed" his jacket?


Easy: the guy who removed his jacket has it in his hand or on his chair; the guy who 'isn't wearing a jacket' hasn't one in sight.

Since you all decide to flame over a (what I though to be) commonly regarded rule, my point is this: don't put a jacket on in the morning, then take it off at the first opportunity while beating your chest at how 'well dressed' you are. If you're well dressed, then you got dressed and stayed dressed till the time came to be undressed. Otherwise, you're like every other commoner in their rubber sole shoes and polyester suit.

Unbutton your collar and loosen your tie at the bar for drinks after work? Why? If your shirt is that uncomfortable, buy a shirt in the proper size or use an extender. What purpose does that serve other than to say 'hey, look at me, I worked so hard I have to half-undress after work'? Seriously. If you're going to call yourself a gentleman, act like one ALL THE TIME, not just when you find it convenient.

I'm curious to see how many folks, who wear a suit and tie daily for more than a few hours, disagree with my sentiments.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Nope. This has been long standing and I'm sure you will find it in etiquette guides.


Can you give examples? (Note: I'm honestly asking)


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> I'm curious to see how many folks, who wear a suit and tie daily for more than a few hours, disagree with my sentiments.


You can start your count with this one (me). The jacket "rule" hasn't been a rule since WWI if it ever was one, hasn't been a convention since WWII, and hasn't even been a easily-found preference since the 50's. When working quietly in my office, or going to the restroom, or preparing a cup of coffee or tea, I simply don't see the need for a jacket, unless I'm cool. Nor do ANY of the many, many well-dressed gentlemen I've worked with over the years.

As for the matter of the tie, I think we've exchanged views on this before. Some men, including this one, grow whiskers by 7:00, and a closed collar begins to pull at them quite painfully. A loosening of the collar and removal of the tie in the evening is absolute necessity, unless I have a chance to shave again (which I will happily do if going to a venue where a closed collar is needed).

If that causes me to be diminished in the eyes of The Great Twizz, more's the pity, but I'll have to carry on.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Nope. This has been long standing and I'm sure you will find it in etiquette guides.
> 
> Easy: the guy who removed his jacket has it in his hand or on his chair; the guy who 'isn't wearing a jacket' hasn't one in sight.
> 
> ...


Probably almost everyone who is not trying to get attention on a clothing message board.

What I meant by my comment is that these are clearly rules that were for another generation and another century. "A gentleman never removes his jacket in the presence of a lady???" Many people work in their shirtsleeves at their desk, and in my world, women are actually permitted to work in offices; some even have executive positions. You may really actually have these ideas about wearing ties after work. (For what it's worth, I rarely loosen my tie if I'm out; my shirts fit. I make no judgements about how others wear theirs. Spending time and energy worrying about stuff like this will not advance many people forward.)

What I mean is that 98% of the people who live know that statements like "a gentleman never removes his coat in the presence of a lady" is clearly a bunch of hogwash in 2011 and this makes those people wonder whether any of the advice is worth reading.

I'm the first to admit that you look better in your jacket; I leave that for others to decide what to do with theirs unless you are at a funeral or wedding or in the middle of a business presentation, etc. I also never specially dress to go to the grocery store, etc.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

ZachGranstrom said:


> Can you give examples? (Note: I'm honestly asking)


My pleasure. I think I needn't go any further than this post, but I will:


Andy said:


> Gentlemen never take off their suit or sport jacket in public!


From the thread: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...ghlight=Taking+suit+jacket+wedding+receptions

A cursory google search will reveal the following:

From SF: 
From BTG: https://www.blacktieguide.com/Classic/Classic_Accessories.htm


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> My pleasure. I think I needn't go any further than this post, but I will:
> 
> From the thread: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...ghlight=Taking+suit+jacket+wedding+receptions
> 
> ...


Interesting.... I still don't agree with this, but to each his own. (Thanks for the links)

Edit: I just realized that all these links refer to black tie occasions, which I would think call for a certain set of rules.(including the one you're talking about)


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

TGW, note that the context of all those is black-tie affairs. I would certainly agree that taking off a dinner jacket in an environment where a DJ is called for would be uncouth. I don't think anyone here disputes that. But you seemed to be making a much broader claim, first that men could not be in shirtsleeves in front of women (unless in a bedroom or a car), and then, perhaps, a more limited claim that those rules only applied if you _started_ with a jacket. Do I misread?


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

Jacket?

Lady?

What the heck is everybody talking about?


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Additional web references supporting Twizz 







Of course most references are in books off line.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

CuffDaddy said:


> If that causes me to be diminished in the eyes of The Great Twizz, more's the pity, but I'll have to carry on.


The slovenly nature of your personal appearance leaves me with nothing more to say :icon_smile_big:

All kidding aside, I understand the discomfort of late stubble, and if you REMOVE your tie and unbutton your collar, so be it. That, however, is rarely the reason for most men. Being in your own private office, using the restroom, or a quick trip to the lunchroom sans jacket; I'm in, and I wholly agree. None of those are places I would consider 'public'. You mention that you will REMOVE the tie, and unbutton the collar. Excellent. Most will loosen and unbutton, and I personally find that to be messy and a call for attention. Again, my opinion.



forsbergacct2000 said:


> Probably almost everyone who is not trying to get attention on a clothing message board.
> 
> What I meant by my comment is that these are clearly rules that were for another generation and another century. "A gentleman never removes his jacket in the presence of a lady???" Many people work in their shirtsleeves at their desk, and in my world, women are actually permitted to work in offices; some even have executive positions. You may really actually have these ideas about wearing ties after work. (For what it's worth, I rarely loosen my tie if I'm out; my shirts fit. I make no judgements about how others wear theirs. Spending time and energy worrying about stuff like this will not advance many people forward.)
> 
> ...


I'll disregard the first part of your post as not being directed towards me, but should that be an improper assumption, please correct me.

We'll simply agree to disagree. Saying that 'a gentleman never removes his coat in the presence of a lady' is hogwash simply lends credence to the downward trend of clothing standards. It is (was) the simple rules like this that kept standards high, and we, as a society, have let them lapse yet sit here and complain about the mass of poorly dressed people around us.

I can be found at my desk in shirtsleeves under one scenario: 1. No women are in my office at that time. My desk is in the corner of a large office where others work, and if there are women here, I keep my jacket on. I'm also in and out of my office regularly, but if I'm hunkered down at my desk doing some actual work, and no women are present, I'll take my jacket off. Otherwise, it's on all the time.

I don't spend my time and energy worrying about others, I'm simply offering my own observations of the general populous (like another member's from the courthouse).


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

ZachGranstrom said:


> Interesting.... I still don't agree with this, but to each his own. (Thanks for the links)
> 
> Edit: I just realized that all these links refer to black tie occasions, which I would think call for a certain set of rules.(including the one you're talking about)


Andy's quote was not directed exclusively for formal wear; lounge suits were part of that discussion



CuffDaddy said:


> TGW, note that the context of all those is black-tie affairs. I would certainly agree that taking off a dinner jacket in an environment where a DJ is called for would be uncouth. I don't think anyone here disputes that. But you seemed to be making a much broader claim, first that men could not be in shirtsleeves in front of women (unless in a bedroom or a car), and then, perhaps, a more limited claim that those rules only applied if you _started_ with a jacket. Do I misread?


No, you have my statement correct. I see your 'removing the DJ is uncouth' and raise you 'removing your suit jacket is uncouth' as well. :icon_cheers:



arkirshner said:


> Additional web references supporting Twizz
> 
> Of course most references are in books off line.


Finally, a bit of sanity around here...


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

I intend to change my AAAC nickname to "The Unwashed Rabble".

Or maybe "Hoi Polloi". You may call me "Hoi".


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Saying that 'a gentleman never removes his coat in the presence of a lady' is hogwash simply lends credence to the *downward trend of clothing standards.* It is (was) the simple rules like this that kept standards high, and we, as a society, have let them lapse yet sit here and complain about the mass of poorly dressed people around us.


[Off topic thought] Do you think the french aristocrats in the Baroque era ever made these statements when the make-up and high-heeled shoes became unpopular for men to wear?

(Sorry! Sometimes I have these weird thoughts pop up in my head)


----------



## mdh (May 10, 2011)

It seems to me that this discussion is just highlighting the different purposes that different members have for this forum. I think I'm one of the people whose reactions Forsberg was asking about. I have spent the last decade in academia, and find my self suddenly needing to know how to dress correctly in a business/government environment. So I come to AAAC to learn, and along with a lot of great and useful information, there are a lot of amusing attitudes, and a fair number of not-so-amusing, baldly offensive ones (I'm certainly not saying that the jacket debate falls under the last category).


----------



## williamson (Jan 15, 2005)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> A man does not remove his jacket in the presence of a lady...Your jacket should not come off in public, it is improper and poor etiquette.


Without wishing to join in the argument concerning this point, I nonetheless must say that I have NEVER come across this stated as an unbreakable sartorial rule - but we live in different parts of the world.
To return to the original topic: I believe that some women suspect that when a man takes time to dress up and exhibit gentlemanly behaviour, he expects "ladylike"(_i.e._ submissive) behaviour in return, so a man who is polite and well-dressed wants to be dominant. While I believe that this is nonsense, I can recall walking behind two young women in a busy street of a large city, hearing one say to the other that she liked to see young men in suits or uniform, to which the other retorted "that's because you like being dominated by men".


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

williamson said:


> While I believe that this is nonsense, I can recall walking behind two young women in a busy street of a large city, hearing one say to the other that she liked to see young men in suits or uniform, to which the other retorted "that's because you like being dominated by men".


IMO this goes to show that, just like some men, some women are not hesitant to jump to superficial conclusions about someone else's psychology.


----------



## triklops55 (May 14, 2010)

I sometimes remove my jacket in public. Why not? It can become uncomfortable to wear a jacket sometimes.
I'll also remove my tie and unbutton my shirt in public if I've been wearing them more than a few hours. Why not? Tie and top button done becomes uncomfortable after a few hours.

I also remove my shoes, socks and pants in public. Why the heck not? After all, I figure that I've already begun undressing in public, so why not finish the job.

I just take all of the clothes I removed and place them in a neat pile in a corner of the room. That way, the clothes are in no ones way, and I'm as comfortable as a baby in it's mother's arms.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

triklops55 said:


> I also remove my shoes, socks and pants in public.


Hey, me too!!!:crazy::tongue2:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

From TheGreatTwizz:

"I'll disregard the first part of your post as not being directed towards me, but should that be an improper assumption, please correct me."

It was.

As far as the decline of clothing standards, if it is that, I'm sorry, I think we need to deal with the world as it is.

I wear jacket and tie to work about 40 to 50% of the time even though I'm not required to. I enjoy dressing up and wear my jacket as long as it is not too hot. (I don't think twice about taking it off before going outside for a half hour or so at lunch.) But the "gentleman never removes his jacket in the presence of a lady" carries a tone that has been out of touch since about 1970. 

Putting the advice in terms like the way you chose to do it is offputting to a lot of people and contributes a lot more to the "decline of Sartorial Standards" than anything I have written. There is an unfair supposition by at least a sizeable minority out there that people who wear ties and jackets are "stuffy" and even "out of touch." I roll my eyes at those suppositions, but the opinions expressed the way they are expressed by at least some posters here do nothing to rebut that supposition (to put it mildly.)

I wish people dressed better; if we want to encourage that, we need to be more accessable and understanding. We also probably need to realize that the .0001% of the world's population that posts on clothing websites will probably not succeed in keeping people dressed in tailored clothing in the future. Behaving like stereotypical "igents" (as a couple other sites put it) does little to help getting people to see that you can wear a suit and/or sport coat and/or tie and still be happy and human.


----------



## mommatook1 (Apr 17, 2008)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Nope. This has been long standing and I'm sure you will find it in etiquette guides.


I had a friend and coworker who once read in a gentleman's guide that "a gentleman always tucks his undershirts into his underwear." Not really sure what the intent of that rule was; pants tend to work fine for most of us. Anyways, despite how ridiculous he looked walking around the locker room, or how much we made fun of him, called him a pantywaist, etc, he refused to stop tucking his undershirts into his underwear. All because he read it in a guide somewhere. (no offense to any of you who may also do this.)



TheGreatTwizz said:


> I'm curious to see how many folks, who wear a suit and tie daily for more than a few hours, disagree with my sentiments.


+1. I am far more productive at my desk without a jacket on. If I leave the office for more than a restroom or coffee run, it goes back on. This is because I want to look presentable to anyone I come across. However I am certainly not going to jump across the room to put my jacket on if one of the many ladies I work with comes into my office; if they were to pick up on it, it would border on inappropriate and might make them uncomfortable.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

For what it's worth, I agree that you should probably not remove your jacket if you went into the restaurant wearing it for a business lunch or dinner. I don't understand the need for it. The same goes for a funeral or a wedding, at least for the first few hours. 

(Although, I just went through a wedding reception without a jacket because 99% of the people had removed theirs. Not being "stuffy and weird" and enjoying my relatives' company was far more important than worrying about being criticized here.)

There is a way to convince people, but too many people here harden the hearts of the "non clothes people."


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> enjoying my relatives' company was far more important than worrying about being criticized here.


Say what?

You got your priorities bass-ackwards, fella.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

That's probably true at least from the points of view of some of our posters.


----------



## JerseyJohn (Oct 26, 2007)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Unbutton your collar and loosen your tie at the bar for drinks after work? Why? ... What purpose does that serve other than to say 'hey, look at me, I worked so hard I have to half-undress after work'?


Without jumping into a whole battle with everyone, I'm sorry to say that that is exactly what many people *are *trying to say. Or rather, they're trying to say: "Whew! I just got done with my high-paying, high-status job and - OK, I had neither the time nor really sweated enough about how I'm dressed for the plebes to run home and change from hob-nobbing with billionaires - but now I can take off the uniform, because I don't want you to think I'm one of those gamma-male retail dorks who_ has _to wear a suit and tie". The loosened tie and untucked dress shirt is the social equivalent of casually leaving your Porsche key lying on the bar.


----------



## Mute (Apr 3, 2005)

Maybe I'm just reading too much in between the line, but I'm really not surprised that the OP is still 41 and single. You're worse than a woman. She cared enough to actually take you out to dinner. Instead of over-analyzing how she chose to dress, you should have just been thankful. In my opinion, she's not the one losing out.


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

Mute said:


> Maybe I'm just reading too much in between the line, but I'm really not surprised that the OP is still 41 and single. You're worse than a woman. She cared enough to actually take you out to dinner. Instead of over-analyzing how she chose to dress, you should have just be thankful. In my opinion, she's not the one losing out.


Zowie! Wam-bam! 75 posts into the thread, it heats back up again!

I'm gonna throw my Porsche key on the bar, loosen my Brioni tie and unbotton the top button of my Turnbull and Asser shirt, pour myself some Woodford Reserve, and watch things unwind. (Or perhaps I'll tug up my wife-beater, scratch my belly, and take a pull off a can of warm Pabst.)


----------



## DcJeff (May 23, 2011)

I think it's interesting how far it seems people let dressing define who they are. I joined this forum to learn how to dress better in situations that call for it. It's been wildly succesful and I'm very grateful. In the OP's situation though I wouldn't even notice the request. I'd listen and dress how I felt appropriate and get a good nights sleep. At the end of the day we all sleep with ourselves and as long as you like that person then you'll seldom have cause for complaint.


----------



## PTB in San Diego (Jan 2, 2010)

Another clueless Philistine:


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

As for the matter of removing the jacket, I would tender the pragmatic reason for not doing so--at least when the weather is warm and the temptation to do so is greatest--is that under that jacket you could well be getting little raunchy and sweaty. I'm obviously not a woman, but were I one, I should think sweaty armpits would be a major turn-off on a date! I am of the school that if you put a (dressy) jacket on, you keep it on, period!

So far from showing you are not a "gamma" male, the removed jacket, the unbuttoned collar and loosened tie always suggest to me "white collar doofus at Happy Hour at TGIF's"...and a man who is not comfortable wearing proper business attire, a man wearing cheap, ill-fitting clothing because he is constrained to do so by the cruel pinch of want or because he too cheap to buy good apparel.

Conversely--and perhaps paradoxically--I quite like an open-necked shirt worn with a casual suit, rather better than I do with a sport coat, although I can't give you a really coherent reason why, just gut instinct, I guess.

Frank Sinatra could get away with a lot of things and still look cool because he was Frank Sinatra. None of us is Frank Sinatra.


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

Well, this thread sure took a turn. For what it's worth, I was never aware that it was considered gauche for a man to remove his jacket in public. However, I agree that this seems a bit antiquated due to the fact that so few men wear jackets anymore, at least in casual circumstances. I kept my jacket on the entire evening as I always do. I've always known that men were to remove their hats as they enter indoors. How many men wear hats these days? Not many which is why this rule also seems out of date. Baseball caps are hats of course, I know, but I still think the young guys should remove them indoors but so very few do.

As for Mute, well apparently you didn't read my posts close enough, so yet again I will repeat myself. I don't care what women wear when I date them. This was the one exception because Nancy brought the issue up which made me think more about it then I would have. She told me "don't dress up because I'm not". Being that she has known me for over ten years, she was saying to me "don't be who you are because I've lowered my standards in men and your style of dress no longer fits in with this choice". Now if this was any other occasion I might not have thought about it too much, but since she brought it up and it was my birthday, and she wants to get back together with me, her request struck me as odd and lazy. Who knows, maybe the last guy she dated took her out on her birthday while wearing cargo shorts, flip-flops, and T shirt with some kind of logo on it and for some insane reason, she felt like she was getting the princess treatment. I don't care what other people wear. I do care though when others tell me what to wear or not to wear, and when they use the excuse that they are too lazy to put in an little effort and therefore expect the same from me, well, it just rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## williamson (Jan 15, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I think we need to deal with the world as it is...I wear jacket and tie to work about 40 to 50% of the time even though I'm not required to. I enjoy dressing up and wear my jacket as long as it is not too hot. (I don't think twice about taking it off before going outside for a half hour or so at lunch.) But the "gentleman never removes his jacket in the presence of a lady" carries a tone that has been out of touch since about 1970. Putting the advice in terms like the way you chose to do it is offputting to a lot of people and contributes a lot more to the "decline of Sartorial Standards" than anything I have written. There is an unfair supposition by at least a sizeable minority out there that people who wear ties and jackets are "stuffy" and even "out of touch." I roll my eyes at those suppositions, but the opinions expressed the way they are expressed by at least some posters here do nothing to rebut that supposition (to put it mildly.)...I wish people dressed better; if we want to encourage that, we need to be more accessable and understanding...Behaving like stereotypical "igents" (as a couple other sites put it) does little to help getting people to see that you can wear a suit and/or sport coat and/or tie and still be happy and human.


 Thank you for these very sensible comments courteously expressed.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

Mute said:


> Maybe I'm just reading too much in between the line, but I'm really not surprised that the OP is still 41 and single. You're worse than a woman. She cared enough to actually take you out to dinner. Instead of over-analyzing how she chose to dress, you should have just been thankful. In my opinion, she's not the one losing out.


Overanalysing? It's bad enough that men don't generally dress up any to go to a nice dinner, but when a woman doesn't, that's a warning bell. It's good the OP has standards.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

JLibourel said:


> As for the matter of removing the jacket, I would tender the pragmatic reason for not doing so--at least when the weather is warm and the temptation to do so is greatest--is that under that jacket you could well be getting little raunchy and sweaty. I'm obviously not a woman, but were I one, I should think sweaty armpits would be a major turn-off on a date! I am of the school that if you put a (dressy) jacket on, you keep it on, period!
> 
> So far from showing you are not a "gamma" male, the removed jacket, the unbuttoned collar and loosened tie always suggest to me "white collar doofus at Happy Hour at TGIF's"...and a man who is not comfortable wearing proper business attire, a man wearing cheap, ill-fitting clothing because he is constrained to do so by the cruel pinch of want or because he too cheap to buy good apparel.
> 
> ...


+1. If you can't make her see your not a gamma male (no matter your profession) without taking your jacket off, you need to shopping for some confidence.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> From TheGreatTwizz:
> "I'll disregard the first part of your post as not being directed towards me, but should that be an improper assumption, please correct me."
> 
> It was.


At no time did I tender a personal attack on anyone, but you found the need to there. We're having an adult, gentlemanly discussion about a 'rule' I mentioned, which carries enough support among our members as has already been evidenced by more than a few posts, and you find the need to act like a schoolboy. I wasn't aware that posting on an internet forum about a relevant topic, with a pseudonym, was 'drawing attention to myself'. Good thing that moderators like yourself are here to keep those attention-getters like me in check; thank you for all of your hard work.

While I haven't heard the 'igent' term before, I'd care to propose a new, similar term just for you, but refuse to lower myself to your level. I conduct myself as a gentleman thoroughly in my daily life, and if that leaves me in a dying minority, so be it. It would do you no harm to do the same, but if I were to tell you what to do, acting like a gentleman wouldn't be at the top of the list. We obviously have nothing more to converse about.



mommatook1 said:


> +1. I am far more productive at my desk without a jacket on. If I leave the office for more than a restroom or coffee run, it goes back on. This is because I want to look presentable to anyone I come across. However I am certainly not going to jump across the room to put my jacket on if one of the many ladies I work with comes into my office; if they were to pick up on it, it would border on inappropriate and might make them uncomfortable.


Agreed, and I'd do the same.



JerseyJohn said:


> The loosened tie and untucked dress shirt is the social equivalent of casually leaving your Porsche key lying on the bar.


Don't forget the large Porsche keychain that is larger than the key itself. They emblem they put on the key is a bit small and might not be noticed more than two or three chairs away.



JLibourel said:


> As for the matter of removing the jacket, I would tender the pragmatic reason for not doing so--at least when the weather is warm and the temptation to do so is greatest--is that under that jacket you could well be getting little raunchy and sweaty. I'm obviously not a woman, but were I one, I should think sweaty armpits would be a major turn-off on a date! I am of the school that if you put a (dressy) jacket on, you keep it on, period!
> 
> So far from showing you are not a "gamma" male, the removed jacket, the unbuttoned collar and loosened tie always suggest to me "white collar doofus at Happy Hour at TGIF's"...and a man who is not comfortable wearing proper business attire, a man wearing cheap, ill-fitting clothing because he is constrained to do so by the cruel pinch of want or because he too cheap to buy good apparel.
> 
> ...


I'd have to agree on the open collar shirt with a casual suit; one of my favorite looks.


----------



## williamson (Jan 15, 2005)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> I'd have to agree on the open collar shirt with a casual suit; one of my favorite looks.


 But, as I've said many times (perhaps too many times on these fora) to me that is FAR worse than taking off one's jacket. This may mean that by expressing these dislikes we get nowhere.


----------



## Yodan731 (Jan 23, 2011)

I think the important thing here is that someone took the opportunity to lash out at those of us who proudly tuck their undershirts into their undershorts. The nerve! 

But seriously, you should try it. It keeps your undershirts tucked in more securely and is quite comfortable. I started doing it in the Marine Corps by the way, where it is standard practice at OCS/boot camp. If you pick up nerdy habits in a manly/rugged environment then by extension those habits are both manly and rugged. Either way, and despite my wife's not so gentle mockery, I will continue tucking my undershirts into my undershorts.

Cheers!


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

williamson said:


> But, as I've said many times (perhaps too many times on these fora) to me that is FAR worse than taking off one's jacket. This may mean that by expressing these dislikes we get nowhere.


I am afraid, my good friend, that that is one area where we will have to agree to disagree. Perhaps it is a British vs. American thing, but I noticed the Duke of Cambridge was gadding about much of the time during his recent visit to Southern California wearing an open-necked shirt with a jacket or blazer. However, perhaps HRH was merely deigning to conform to the degraded sartorial mores regnant hereabouts..."When in Rome"...and all that.

On a separate note, without having served in so formidable an outfit as the USMC, I've always had the habit of tucking in my undershirts when wearing boxers, not sure where I picked it up. Briefs make the practice impracticable, I find.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

Re: tucked in undershirts....

What kind of undershirts are you using? I could see this being a worthwhile venture with a Haines or FOTL that is cut shorter, but my RibbedTees stay in place wonderfully.


----------



## ykurtz (Mar 7, 2007)

JLibourel said:


> ... a man wearing cheap, ill-fitting clothing because he is constrained to do so by the cruel pinch of want or because he is too cheap to buy good apparel.


Nice turn of phrase.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

^Truth be told, I cribbed the phrase "the cruel pinch of want" from something by Jack O'Connor, whose writings will probably be familiar to the many forumites here who are partial to guns.


----------



## Mute (Apr 3, 2005)

Bjorn said:


> Overanalysing? It's bad enough that men don't generally dress up any to go to a nice dinner, but when a woman doesn't, that's a warning bell. It's good the OP has standards.


Yes, over analyzing. She could have had a number of reasons to dress casually but it was the OP who chose to blow it out of proportion. All he had to do was ask if it was ok to dress as he normally does if it was _that_ important. Instead he chose to ***** about it because he "has standards."

Instead of acting like a woman and making a bunch of assumptions, he should have just told her what he thought. Maybe then, he can find out if he was correct or just making a mountain out of a molehill.


----------



## J.Marko (Apr 14, 2009)

There has traditionally been a difference not only in the dress of people of different classes, but also in their behavior. Removing one's hat indoors, not removing one's coat or rising from a chair when in the presence of the gentler sex, table manners, etc., are all behaviors which distinguished the upper classes. 

In these United States, we have (I believe correctly) rejected the idea of class distinction, or more accurately the immutability of class and its connection to station. As a result, anyone can read about proper behavior and clothing and imitate the behavior of the upper classes and not be jailed as an impostor. This is what I believe 'iGent" refers to, and in the U.S. context, I am all for it. You can be "upper class" if you choose to, and no one can say you nay. Unfortunately though, often people from the working classes when trying to imitate the upper classes make the mistake of only imitating the clothes of the upper class, and not their manner. Those "to the manor born" will quickly spot the impostor in the expensive, often ostentatious suit, casually picking his teeth over an expensive steak dinner with elbows on the table and legs crossed. This is why "iGent" is often used as a pejorative. 

Personally, I do not view myself a Gentleman, despite the "esquire" that appears after my name in official correspondence. As an American, I view myself rather as a proud Citizen and Commoner. That doesn't mean I don't know how to behave; it does mean that I don't always follow the rules. For example, I was raised to never remove my suit jacket in public, but sometimes I do. 

People often become hot when issues of class are raised, so I realize I am likely going to get flamed for even mentioning class, but i think it needed to be said.

On a side note, I also learned in the military to tuck my undershirt into my underpants, although in my case it was the Army (I was an enlisted fella, by the way). I continue to do so, and can't imagine letting my t-shirts climb up the way they used to when just tucked into my trousers. I also always wear a t-shirt under a button down shirt, also likely because of military experience. 

Another note - I find it very amusing someone would bring a working class, mob connected entertainer and high school drop out into a discussion of what is proper in matters of dress! A great entertainer, I should add, and fashionable fellow though he was, let's not go confusing looking cool with proper behavior. They are, by definition, usually at odds.

Oh, and I forgot to ask the most important question of the OP - but is she hot?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Twizz, 

I was not posting as a moderator. I just made a point that that statement is the sort of thing that makes people who are not consumed by clothing wonder about the things posted here. I honestly think that sort of quote sets apart people who wear sport coats, suits and ties as stuffy in the eyes of some of the people who we wish would read and take our advice.

I have the right to post. You have the right to see insult where it probably was at least somewhat intended, but to make a certain point. I have seen far more vicious attacks on people here than that.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

In the privacy of my office I take my jacket off sometimes. If I leave it, I do tend to put it on. Sometimes I forget, but that is a failing. 

A jacket is not outerwear like a ski parka, it's not supposed to come on and off while in the company of my workbuddies. It's just not tidy to walk around with a shirt and tie and no jacket. If wearing braces it's not polite to take the jacket off. If the shirt is a tad transparent, also not polite. 

Also, if I wear a nice jacket, tie, pocket square etc, that works well with my trousers and tie and shoes, why should I take it off? It's air-conditioned inside. 

The worst argument is doing it as a nod to mediocrity, to the kind of (disparaging) people who say that anyone who dresses properly, in the traditional sense of the word, is stuffy and patronising. I mean, we are, but that's because they look like they are trying not to care, which is slovenly and dull, while I look like I do care, which is a form of respect. 

I don't think I have ever lost an argument with a man who dressed casual. That (!) is in fact the way the world works.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

Mute said:


> Yes, over analyzing. She could have had a number of reasons to dress casually but it was the OP who chose to blow it out of proportion. All he had to do was ask if it was ok to dress as he normally does if it was _that_ important. Instead he chose to ***** about it because he "has standards."
> 
> Instead of acting like a woman and making a bunch of assumptions, he should have just told her what he thought. Maybe then, he can find out if he was correct or just making a mountain out of a molehill.


Actually, 'just telling women what you think' is not a more manly, polite or, for that matter, successful approach IMO.

As for making assumptions (drawing conclusions?) being 'acting like woman', I'll just take that as a statement normally found in the forum discussing how to fix synch on a 4WD transmission on a monster truck, and disparage it. Not that guys who discuss monster trucks can't have a healthy view on their own masculinity. I just don't see how that comment is relevant here.

Could she really have had 'a number of [valid] reasons' for dressing like that for a birthday dinner in a restaurant and telling him not to dress up? I can think of none.


----------



## blue suede shoes (Mar 22, 2010)

Bjorn said:


> In the privacy of my office I take my jacket off sometimes. If I leave it, I do tend to put it on. Sometimes I forget, but that is a failing.
> 
> A jacket is not outerwear like a ski parka, it's not supposed to come on and off while in the company of my workbuddies. It's just not tidy to walk around with a shirt and tie and no jacket. If wearing braces it's not polite to take the jacket off. If the shirt is a tad transparent, also not polite.
> 
> ...


The best advice that I have heard in a long time!


----------



## williamson (Jan 15, 2005)

Bjorn said:


> A jacket is not outerwear like a ski parka, it's not supposed to come on and off while in the company of my workbuddies. It's just not tidy to walk around with a shirt and tie and no jacket. If wearing braces it's not polite to take the jacket off. If the shirt is a tad transparent, also not polite.


Though we may deplore it, many would say that a jacket has indeed become outerwear during warm weather (an odd jacket more so than a suit jacket). I agree with you in respect of braces and transparent shirts.


> Also, if I wear a nice jacket, tie, pocket square etc, that works well with my trousers and tie and shoes, why should I take it off? It's air-conditioned inside.


 Then you are living, or working, in luxurious conditions - and control of thermal comfort by artificial means consumes more energy and fuel than control by adding or removing a jacket.


> The worst argument is doing it as a nod to mediocrity, to the kind of (disparaging) people who say that anyone who dresses properly, in the traditional sense of the word, is stuffy and patronising. I mean, we are, but that's because they look like they are trying not to care, which is slovenly and dull, while I look like I do care, which is a form of respect.


 Most of us would agree wholeheartedly with this.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I have the right to post. You have the right to see insult where it probably was at least somewhat intended, but to make a certain point. I have seen far more vicious attacks on people here than that.


I don't consider my membership here and ability to post as a right; it is a privilege and I regard it as such. This must be the distinction were you consider it proper to insult me to make a point, then offer me the right to view it as you originally meant it.

Yes, as others have led more vicious attacks, that makes your mild jab that much more permissible. Exceptional behavior sir.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Regarding mediocrity: Technically everything we wear now -- business attire, black tie, or white tie -- all comes from a pretty mediocre stock. It all has roots in sports or work wear. Form follows function. Just look at the origin of herringbone weave.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

Jovan said:


> Regarding mediocrity: Technically everything we wear now -- business attire, black tie, or white tie -- all comes from a pretty mediocre stock. It all has roots in sports or work wear. Form follows function. Just look at the origin of herringbone weave.


True, though it often has a basis in handmade quality bespoke, which means that it can actually be had in a piece of clothing that both fits the wearear and adheres to a certain standard of dress code. Other items have military background, which means that although being utilitaristic they are very much presentable. I'll be the first to pair my blue jeans with a sports jacket, but I won't take it off just because the other lads are wearing sweaters.


----------



## mommatook1 (Apr 17, 2008)

Yodan731 said:


> I think the important thing here is that someone took the opportunity to lash out at those of us who proudly tuck their undershirts into their undershorts. The nerve!
> 
> But seriously, you should try it. It keeps your undershirts tucked in more securely and is quite comfortable. I started doing it in the Marine Corps by the way, where it is standard practice at OCS/boot camp. If you pick up nerdy habits in a manly/rugged environment then by extension those habits are both manly and rugged. Either way, and despite my wife's not so gentle mockery, I will continue tucking my undershirts into my undershorts.
> 
> Cheers!


Ha, I knew there would be at least one  Your reason for doing it is much more understandable than my friend's reasoning. That's one thing my DI never hammered into us... of course, we were made to wear shirt garters on the outer shirt, so I doubt the underwear tuck would have made much difference.

I still always find myself reaching behind on my dress shirts to make the side tucks, even though I know the garters aren't there to hold it tight. I suspect one could make a substantial thread on the topic of such habits that carry over.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> I don't consider my membership here and ability to post as a right; it is a privilege and I regard it as such. This must be the distinction were you consider it proper to insult me to make a point, then offer me the right to view it as you originally meant it.
> 
> Yes, as others have led more vicious attacks, that makes your mild jab that much more permissible. Exceptional behavior sir.


Our membership with AAAC is a privilege, of which posting, as long as it conforms to the forum rules of use, is a right. Now might we all just ease up an bit on our ever so narrow perceptions of personal insult, press those pesky wrinkles out of our 'Tightie-Whities' and move on with the topic of this thread! Enough said. :crazy:


----------



## Avers (Feb 28, 2006)

I am in somehow similar situation. 

When I first met my wife - she was very impressed by my wearing a suit/tie, but years later she often tells me not to dress up. She calls my dress shirts too conservative, my Allen Edmonds shoes as old fashioned and all looking the same, and nice polo shirts with slacks as geeky. 

Her current definition of nice attire is CK shirt / sweater with a zipper and logos prominently displayed, and jeans. 

Go figure...


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

Avers said:


> I am in somehow similar situation.
> 
> When I first met my wife - she was very impressed by my wearing a suit/tie, but years later she often tells me not to dress up. She calls my dress shirts too conservative, my Allen Edmonds shoes as old fashioned and all looking the same, and nice polo shirts with slacks as geeky.
> 
> ...


And let me guess, gucci horsebit loafers?


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> Our membership with AAAC is a privilege, of which posting, as long as it conforms to the forum rules of use, is a right. Now might we all just ease up an bit on our ever so narrow perceptions of personal insult, press those pesky wrinkles out of our 'Tightie-Whities' and move on with the topic of this thread! Enough said. :crazy:


Yes, it is best to "ease up". However, contained in your call to ease up is another "personal insult" thrown at Twizz.
Yes, claiming he has an "ever so narrow perception of personal insult", is another insult.

I am not aware of a specific job description for moderator, or regulations covering posts by the moderator.

It may be that your conception is one of dual participation, some posts as a participant, and some posts as a 
moderator. It is true, participants here sometimes throw sharp elbows.

Still, the function of a moderator includes stopping fights, not starting them. Moreover, when the referee breaks a clinch, the Marquis of Queensburry Rules, forbids hitting on the break.

It seems to me, when one assumes the title and job responsibilities of a moderator when posting as a participant the better practice is to not throw elbows.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Avers said:


> I am in somehow similar situation.
> 
> When I first met my wife - she was very impressed by my wearing a suit/tie, but years later she often tells me not to dress up. She calls my dress shirts too conservative, my Allen Edmonds shoes as old fashioned and all looking the same, and nice polo shirts with slacks as geeky.
> 
> ...


Perhaps she sees you as a trophy husband and wants to impress other women with a man who is thin enough for jeans with a wallet thick enough to accumulate labels.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Kind of late on this topic, but I've never heard of anyone getting teased for tucking their undershirt into their boxers before now.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

eagle2250 said:


> Our membership with AAAC is a privilege, of which posting, as long as it conforms to the forum rules of use, is a right. Now might we all just ease up an bit on our ever so narrow perceptions of personal insult, press those pesky wrinkles out of our 'Tightie-Whities' and move on with the topic of this thread! Enough said. :crazy:





arkirshner said:


> Yes, it is best to "ease up". However, contained in your call to ease up is another "personal insult" thrown at Twizz.
> Yes, claiming he has an "ever so narrow perception of personal insult", is another insult.


Let's be clear about this: I initially did not perceive the original statement made by another member as an insult; the member made it clear to identify the statement as such. There is no 'narrow perception of personal insult' when it is expressly stated that was the intention. I will, however, agree with arkirshner that your statement did contain another one. Prior bad behavior doesn't justify future bad behavior, by anyone.

And I wear boxers, thank you. They are not pressed as I deplore ironing and haven't a valet at this point in my life. I do not, however, tuck my undershirt into them. My RibbedTees are long and stay in place regardless of activity.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Wow. Whadda thread huh?

The following may be a sign of my complete obtuseness, but I can sincerely say I don't think I've ever been insulted in my whole life. So bully for me, but what's going on here with a few of you?

(Wikipedia, talk to me.)

*"Situations also exist in which a person erroneously believes he or she has been insulted. For example, terms such as "Asian", "incorrect", "drunk", or "full-cheeked" are often interpreted as derogatory, when in fact they may be neutral descriptive terms..."
*
Ah, so now I get why when once I innocently referred to Eagle as an incorrect, drunk, full-cheeked Asian, he didn't speak to me for a full six years.


----------



## Avers (Feb 28, 2006)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> And let me guess, gucci horsebit loafers?


How did you guess? She actually suggested them, but I held my ground and resisted...


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Let's be clear about this: I initially did not perceive the original statement made by another member as an insult; the member made it clear to identify the statement as such. There is no 'narrow perception of personal insult' when it is expressly stated that was the intention. I will, however, agree with arkirshner that your statement did contain another one. Prior bad behavior doesn't justify future bad behavior, by anyone.
> 
> And I wear boxers, thank you. They are not pressed as I deplore ironing and haven't a valet at this point in my life. I do not, however, tuck my undershirt into them. My RibbedTees are long and stay in place regardless of activity.


My intent was to highlight the statement as one that many who do not post on these boards would find weird if not a tad offensive. If you try hard enough to find an insult, you can. Whatever.

There has been far worse posted on these boards.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

arkirshner said:


> Yes, it is best to "ease up". However, contained in your call to ease up is another "personal insult" thrown at Twizz.
> Yes, claiming he has an "ever so narrow perception of personal insult", is another insult.
> 
> I am not aware of a specific job description for moderator, or regulations covering posts by the moderator.
> ...


We are all entitled to our opinions and you are welcome to yours. However, for almost thirty-two years of my adult life under the guise of doing the peoples business, I was paid to throw a lot of elbows in the course of carrying out work assignments. LOL, at this point in my life, working my way through my sixties, I suspect I am too set in my ways to change my approach as a moderator or even as just one more a**hole in the community in which I live! So sorry to disappoint yourself and the Great Twizz.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

TheGreatTwizz said:


> Let's be clear about this: I initially did not perceive the original statement made by another member as an insult; the member made it clear to identify the statement as such. There is no 'narrow perception of personal insult' when it is expressly stated that was the intention. I will, however, agree with arkirshner that your statement did contain another one. Prior bad behavior doesn't justify future bad behavior, by anyone.
> 
> And I wear boxers, thank you. They are not pressed as I deplore ironing and haven't a valet at this point in my life. I do not, however, tuck my undershirt into them. My RibbedTees are long and stay in place regardless of activity.


As to your first comment, please note my response to arkirshner, above! As to your second comment, so glad to hear you wear Ribbed Tees. In my estimation there are no better undershirts to be had. I wear Ribbed Tees exclusively and also do not tuck them in my shorts. It seems to be the Army and the USMC that teaches their boys to do that. I was one of those manly men whom the USAF taught to wear 'Big Mama' pantyhose during certain field operations, to protect us from the ticks and leaches that seemed to 'oh so love' our sweet cheeks! :crazy:


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

eagle2250 said:


> I was one of those manly men whom the USAF taught to wear 'Big Mama' pantyhose during certain field operations, to protect us from the ticks and leaches that seemed to 'oh so love' our sweet cheeks! :crazy:


Do they still do this? A childhood friend is currently serving out time in rank as Major before making light bird and I'd love to have something to rib him about.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
TheGreatTwizz: I retired from the USAF back in 1999 so I am not sure if current lesson plans for those completing training related to service in "force protection/air base ground defense" units feature such operational techniques. However, I can assure you that we were doing such back in the late 1980's and early 1990's. You might ask your friend if they are still issuing 'rubbers' to pull over the business end of their 'thunder sticks,' to keep the rain and other debris out. Congratulations to your friend on his pending promotion to Lieutenant Colonel! :thumbs-up:


----------



## MrBook (Oct 2, 2009)

> I guess this was in the back of my mind when she sent me the text asking me not to dress up. I just thought this whole thing was strange because this is a woman who I have a history with and who knows and has approved of my style of clothes before. Plus, she also directly mentioned her desire to be romantically involved again.


I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious: That was a test to see if she could control you if the two of you got involved again. It didn't really have much to do with clothing. Be prepared for that to be a regular thing if you ever do decide to go for it, but it sounds like you're way ahead of me.


----------



## MrBook (Oct 2, 2009)

Sorry, let's all please get back to never taking your jacket off.



TheGreatTwizz said:


> commoner


LOL


----------



## MicTester (Oct 8, 2009)

I don't think the problem is with a girlfriend or a wife telling a man what he should do. The key is whether she can live with it when the man goes ahead and does what he deems appropriate from his perspective. Many women complain, but then it is just fine with some of them when the man chooses to dress in his "boring" AE shoes, BB slacks, and a shirt with no logos or text. The problem arises when she insists that a 40-year old should dress like a misguided teenager.


----------



## Jonny (Oct 9, 2010)

I think thetrend is the same in most countries, at least in the Western World.


----------



## Lord Byron (Nov 23, 2005)

Burned & Frozen, I also live in LA and feel your pain. Luckily, my wife grew up in Boston and appreciated the fact that I wore a suit and tie on our first date. Happy Birthday, by the way. If you care to celebrate, I'll buy you a drink, and we can discuss all things sartorial. (L'Hermitage, Beverly Hills?) There won't be any romance, but at least I won't show up wearing a T shirt.

https://lordbyronsrevenge.blogspot.com/


----------

