# Is it possible to reverse the decline in men's dress especially young men ?



## silverporsche (Nov 3, 2005)

We have seen a decline in men's dress for over three decades. Can it be reversed ? An example is the James Bond character , The
Fictional Bond was a man of sophisticated taste , dress , foods , wines and travel .He enjoyed women , fast cars , champagne , and risk.
Bond characterized men in the forties he was a product of World War Two.

That fictionalized character had a life span of almost 60 years. That is amazing. The glamours days of Hollywood and the days of 
beautiful music has been long gone. 
Men's dress though a struggle has been hanging on , young men today have little interest in continuing that history.
There are many of us that are appalled by the manner of the way young men dress today. 
The question , can any thing be done ? Can we as older men reverse the trend ? In the metro area of St.Louis all of the men's 
stores that sell quality men's clothing has closed except one. Can this be reversed ? 
Again can we reverse this decline ? If so how ?


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Just read this book and leave us alone.










https://www.amazon.com/Enjoy-Decline-Accepting-Living-United/dp/1480284769


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I think the existence of this website suggests that it is not in decline. Things change, life moves on and quite frankly, I could care less how young people dress. 

I dress for me and to feel good, not as to set an example. If I do set an example in the process, great!


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

1. It is imperative that elderly people in t-shirts, elastic-waisted pants, and sneakers be taken to task for setting a bad example.
2. If you wear open collar, wear an ascot. No excuses.
3. Institute dress codes whenever and wherever possible. 
4. The elderly must openly praise young people that dress poorly. Admire and coo over their Crocs and cargo shorts and graphic tees. Ask where you can get some_ just_ like that.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

I've been setting a (reasonably) good example for many years now, and I don't see it making a damned bit of difference. So my answer is, no, it's not possible.


----------



## Style&Pace (May 31, 2014)

Why would you want to?

Nothing you can do will ever make you look as good as standing next to a bunch of badly dressed people. 

There will always be someone willing to make good clothes for you.


----------



## silverporsche (Nov 3, 2005)

L-feld said:


> Just read this book and leave us alone.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Us ? to whom are you referring to ? I am sure there are other books that might take a different position. It is only one topic that addresses
men's dress. Would you prefer censoring all men clothing topics that you disagree with ?


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

I think it's just a symptom of the bonds between people growing weaker over the past century. If you don't know your neighbors, the people you pass on the street, etc. why care what they think? We are more isolated than ever before.

Second, we are getting lazy as a culture. I think the proof is too ample to bother citing some examples.

The decline in dress standards is one of the lesser evils that has come out of these two problems. It's a minor symptom. We really need to fix the first two, and each of us can only tend his own garden, so to speak.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

silverporsche said:


> Us ? to whom are you referring to ? I am sure there are other books that might take a different position. It is only one topic that addresses
> men's dress. Would you prefer censoring all men clothing topics that you disagree with ?


I just think rants about the degeneracy of youth, women, society, etc. should be reserved for the interchange.


----------



## AFCForever (Sep 26, 2013)

It's not the youth I am worried about - they actually dress pretty well compared to most people of their age in the last 50 years. Certainly much better than we did in the late 80s/ early 90s.

The really bad dressers around here are the older guys. When we get past the Boom and Gen X (which I am a member of) I think you will be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

I don't think it's reserved for any particular age group. I see horrible dressers of all ages wherever I go. It is, like Natty Beau says, symptomatic. 

It used to be that "bad dressing" meant somebody wore a cheap shirt instead of a more expensive one, or didn't know how to tuck in his shirt, or something like that. These days it's going out in the most awful looking clothes imaginable. 

Stealing someone else's quote, but if we're all supposedly made in God's image, why do we want to run around in an XXL Stealers jersey?

I also think part of it--oddly enough, given our thoughts about a less interactive society--some of the awful things we see people wearing now are attention seeking. Loud football jerseys, obnoxious graphic t-shirts... aren't these things that proclaim something about you, the team you're a fan of and your beliefs, etc.? It's like, look at me, I'm a Stealers fan, maybe I'm of you, or not one of you. Or, hey, look at me, I believe in this position, etc.


----------



## shadoman (Jun 8, 2014)

silverporsche said:


> We have seen a decline in men's dress for over three decades. Can it be reversed ? An example is the James Bond character , The
> Fictional Bond was a man of sophisticated taste , dress , foods , wines and travel .He enjoyed women , fast cars , champagne , and risk.
> Bond characterized men in the forties he was a product of World War Two.
> 
> ...


The "older" generation has ALWAYS been appalled by the dress of "younger" one. The point one must realize, is that THEY (in many cases,) think they ARE dressing well, or at the very least, stylishly.
Trying to "reverse the trend" I believe would be a lesson in futility. The most we can do is dress well, and hope to effect at least one protégé.

I suppose you are referring to Woody's in Frontenac ? Ah, if only Knickerbocker's, The Tartan Corner, BOYD's and Imber's were still around...
.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Style&Pace said:


> Why would you want to?


Because I have to see them?


----------



## red_shift (Aug 8, 2013)

I didn't start taking my appearance seriously until I landed my first 'real' job and by then I had some means to buy a nicer wardrobe to match. Looking over at the 'other forum' and /r/mfa shows younger gents that are trying to dress well on the budget of a college student. I read on this forum that most adherents to the suit and tie set are older and of greater means which is why the clothes tend to be more forgiving in the belly and waist area that tends to swell as we age. 

Seeing gentlemen over 30 dressing like children is annoying because if they took some time to learn about traditional dress they could be presenting a better version of themselves to the world. For young folks I give them more leeway since some of them are dressing well, just on their own terms. They just happen to be terms I don't agree with and that don't seem to flatter them.


----------



## StylePurgatory (Jun 3, 2013)

There are those that see dressing up as a chore. There always have been, and nothing will make them dress up, if they can get away without doing it. A few of my friends, however, have been inspired by my example. Partly, they have some example to follow, and they see me wearing suits, blazers, and formal wear comfortably, and naturally. When I hold parties - of any sort of serious nature - they have dress codes. My wife's and my Christmas party, for example, is Black Tie Optional. We had about 16 guests this year, and that included four Tuxedos, which represents half of the men. These friends include an Englishman from a tradition of wearing such clothing, and a Canadian who works as a labourer, and is going back to school to become an HVAC technician.

I think we, that are younger, and have the inclination, need to do away with self consciousness about being overdressed, and wear our clothes and enjoy them. I was recently at a karaoke night and, having been filming a promotional video that day, was wearing a three piece steel blue suit, white shirt, burgundy striped tie, and black cap toe Oxfords. I got as much attention, from both sexes, as I ever had. I've always found that a trend. When I was 23 and went out to clubs in Thunder Bay, one of my go-to outfits was the top half of a tailored brown 3-piece suit from the 70's, and a pair of fashionable (yes, weathered and whatnot) jeans, with a charcoal, or black shirt, one of two beige ties, and a grey fedora (a real fur felt one, not a cheap trilby). Now, that's hardly a classic outfit, but I did (unkowingly, really) use classic principles fused with fashion. And, a suit would have been ridiculous. Other nights I'd wear a shirt, tie, and jeans, and people always noticed, and liked my ties, and the fact that I had put in some effort.

Let us also not forget that fashion is cyclical. A resurgence in 1960's fashions has led to a return to formality. I find my cohort tends to like the sense of occasion created by a dress code, or a more formal party. Just that, for most of us, it doesn't occur to create the occasions ourselves. The hipsters are also growing up, and most will leave behind their ill-devised ideologies of being other, and will stop needing to put so much "expression of individuality" and retain the renewed understanding that quality, and craftsmanship, are of the greatest value. People my age, up to around 10-15 years older, tend to be "buy cheaper things and replace them" consumers, while millenials are trending toward quality. That is fuelled both by, as I said, a rediscovery of the virtues of quality, and also by the desire for greater sustainability, and responsible consumption. I also think that, at some point, they will start to realize that they can take their clothing a little more seriously, and themselves a bit less seriously. At the moment, I don't think they get how seriously they're taking themselves.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

StylePurgatory said:


> When I was 23 and went out to clubs in Thunder Bay, one of my go-to outfits was the top half of a tailored brown 3-piece suit from the 70's, and a pair of fashionable (yes, weathered and whatnot) jeans, with a charcoal, or black shirt, one of two beige ties, and a grey fedora (a real fur felt one, not a cheap trilby).


Wow, that's quite a visual. I have no doubt that people noticed you....not sure it was the kind of attention I would personally seek out.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Possible?

Nah, down the tubes!


----------



## StylePurgatory (Jun 3, 2013)

FLCracka said:


> Wow, that's quite a visual. I have no doubt that people noticed you....not sure it was the kind of attention I would personally seek out.


They were attractive young women, for the most part, so it was quite a fine type of attention. One must write to one's audience  Plus it was a bar/night club. I'm not saying I recommend the look, nor would I wear it today, but it fit the time and place, and is an example of shadoman's point of; I generally wore my DB navy blazer to the symphony. I also sometimes wore an ill fitting black suit at night, but I preferred to work in the brown jacket as it fit exceptionally well. The pants are bell bottoms, and I have worn them publicly exactly once. (Annoyingly, my department head, and her partner, had the season seats directly in front of ours) That jacket still makes quite a good sport coat today - mid brown, large weave, shank buttons, patch pockets.


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

I am content to light my single candle rather than curse the darkness.


----------



## StylePurgatory (Jun 3, 2013)

Grayson said:


> I am content to light my single candle rather than curse the darkness.


Well fine, if you're going to be all reasonable, and philosophical about it.


----------



## FJW (Jan 25, 2012)

I think it was 'Shaver' who posted a picture of himself that will illustrate the point that in our lives we all, sooner or later, come to our senses.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Yes. It is possible. They just need to learn by example, from their very smartly attired father, for example......


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Short answer, no.

Longer answer:

We have seen the progressive erosion of formality in dress over several centuries. I suspect the lounge suit will come to occupy the position that formal day dress and white and black tie did - a special get up for special occasions save in the most conservative / traditional environments.

Without the professional and social pressure to adopt it, a critical mass will give up / has given up wearing tailored clothing regularly.

Tailored clothing is perceived by many as uncomfortable, expensive and a hassle. To some degree it is:


Comfort: Some will be uncomfortable for psychological reasons. Some will also be genuinely uncomfortable (people just buying a 'work uniform' may not invest in seasonally appropriate fabrics, in proper fit, etc.).
Expense: It is undoubtedly more expensive than jeans and a fleece.
Hassle: It takes more effort and expense to care for than jeans and a fleece.

James Bond doesn't work as an argument in favour of it. Most people in workplaces who wear tailored clothing dress like the people in _The Office _not James Bond.

Just being brutally realistic.

The question is perhaps where it leaves those who like classical tailored clothing who do not inhabit the last bastions that cleave to it. Ditch the suits to fit in, or stick out like a sore thumb? What say you?


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Balfour said:


> The question is perhaps where it leaves those who like classical tailored clothing who do not inhabit the last bastions that cleave to it. Ditch the suits to fit in, or stick out like a sore thumb? What say you?


Play it safe with a foot in both camps?
I could never get away with wearing a suit on a daily basis, and the same for wearing a tie. I'm just not in that environment, but I do try to do my bit and dress smartly. 
So much so that when picking up my daughters from school yesterday while wearing a T-shirt, one of the mothers there asked why I was dressed "so casual". 
"Where are your shirts?", as if a regular dress shirt with buttons down the front is wildly out of sync with everyday life.

The male uniform around here in this summer weather is flip-flops, cargo shorts and a T-shirt. Something even my wife would prefer me to wear, although with Birkenstocks. 
She says it makes me look younger, but now I've discovered style I just couldn't join the herd.


----------



## 3piece (Jan 22, 2014)

When I was badly dressed, well dressed people I came across didn't convince me to change. "Why bother?" what I said in my head when I saw what they wore. 

1. So, drag these people to the store, outfit them well, and let them stand before the mirror, because nothing is like seeing something with their own eyes.
2. And then we still have to deal with this problem where people don't want to stand out and get attention.

Is this possible? Well, I'm not doing LOL and nobody is. So our only chance is, like someone said above, to make sure our kids dress how we want them to dress.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

StylePurgatory said:


> When I hold parties - of any sort of serious nature - they have dress codes. My wife's and my Christmas party, for example, is Black Tie Optional. We had about 16 guests this year, and that included four Tuxedos, which represents half of the men. These friends include an Englishman from a tradition of wearing such clothing, and a Canadian who works as a labourer, and is going back to school to become an HVAC technician...millenials are trending toward quality. That is fuelled both by, as I said, a rediscovery of the virtues of quality, and also by the desire for greater sustainability, and responsible consumption. I also think that, at some point, they will start to realize that they can take their clothing a little more seriously, and themselves a bit less seriously. At the moment, I don't think they get how seriously they're taking themselves.


I think you're on to something. Also, I agree that their is a renewed interest in having "dress up" occasions among my sister's hipster crowd. Among my friend, too. I always wear a blazer and tie when we host parties, and the one time we requested cocktail attire, most people happily complied.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Odradek said:


> Play it safe with a foot in both camps?
> I could never get away with wearing a suit on a daily basis, and the same for wearing a tie. I'm just not in that environment, but I do try to do my bit and dress smartly.
> So much so that when picking up my daughters from school yesterday while wearing a T-shirt, one of the mothers there asked why I was dressed "so casual".
> "Where are your shirts?", as if a regular dress shirt with buttons down the front is wildly out of sync with everyday life.
> ...


^ Yes, I think a middle way is the right approach. I get very bemused by threads started by people saying something like 'I want to wear a suit every day, but people take the Mickey out of me / rip the p$ss out of me / mock me at work'. It usually turns out that suits are far too formal for their working environment, and they've allowed their hobby to get in the way of workplace effectiveness and have completely missed all the social cues in their environment.

Some have a natural élan or confidence that allows them to ignore the social cues, but still fit in. (To give example in a different arena, whatever you may think of Boris Johnson, no other politician in a senior role could get away with 10% of his public utterances without being hounded from office.) But they are few and far between.

What I think people can do is stay within the broad ballpark of formality for environment, but at the higher end. For example, if people wear sloppy chinos and polos, it would be much easier to get away with wearing neatly pressed khakis and a button-up shirt with a nice pair of calf leather shoes than a suit.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> The question is perhaps where it leaves those who like classical tailored clothing who do not inhabit the last bastions that cleave to it. Ditch the suits to fit in, or stick out like a sore thumb? What say you?


I say: aspire to be a well-dressed man, whose taste is informed by taking cues from the impeccably dressed, living either now or in the past, even if that means "sticking out" when among the rabble.

Ironically, the slovenly often preen themselves on being "non-conformist", when they are in fact the very picture of conformity. Whereas, over time, the well-dressed man finds a very distinct individuality that is his alone.

Draw people into your realm and they too will aspire to learn from you, and teach you; and, in turn, they will draw other people into their realm. And so on.

The world can be changed; but only by reorienting one person at a time.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> The question is perhaps where it leaves those who like classical tailored clothing who do not inhabit the last bastions that cleave to it. Ditch the suits to fit in, or stick out like a sore thumb? What say you?


Good points all, Balfour.

I have continued to wear a suit and tie daily at my "come as you are" job since I started here last year.

Obviously, if I felt it was hurting my career I would have stopped, but my boss has since given me enough praise and bonuses to dispel those fears.

With co-workers, I just don't act like dressing well makes me superior in any way--financially, culturally, you name it--and I don't talk about clothes or anything. I find being myself is enough to make friends.

So it can be done. Granted, if your boss takes a stand against it, what can you do? Me, I would start looking for another job. But that's just me. As it is, I feel very blessed.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Natty Beau said:


> I think you're on to something. Also, I agree that their is a renewed interest in having "dress up" occasions among my sister's hipster crowd. Among my friend, too. I always wear a blazer and tie when we host parties, and the one time we requested cocktail attire, most people happily complied.


I grew up getting dressed up every morning - only on Saturdays did we "dress down" and even then we were pretty well dressed (chinos, shetlands, boat shoes, etc). Now, as an adult, I am a member of quite a few private clubs that have all kinds of dress codes depending upon the occasion.

All this^ creates expectations - unsaid, both in me and in the minds of others - that echo throughout the rest of my life.

When people invite me to a dinner party they know I'm going to come well dressed. When I have a dinner party, they expect that *I expect* them to come well dressed. I don't even have to say anything. Of course, when I am among intimate friends it's far more complex - then it's about who can play against expectations in the most subtle way. It's a bit of a game. lol.

And so, by degrees, the tone of these dinners is a bit higher; and people actually enjoy themselves a great deal more. Why? Because being well dressed is a kind of mask that reveals. That's a bit of a paradox but it's true.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

SammyH said:


> I say: aspire to be a well-dressed man, whose taste is informed by taking cues from the impeccably dressed, living either now or in the past, even if that means "sticking out" when among the rabble.
> 
> Ironically, the slovenly often preen themselves on being "non-conformist", when they are in fact the very picture of conformity. Whereas, over time, the well-dressed man finds a very distinct individuality that is his alone.
> 
> ...


Just to be clear, I wear a lounge suit to work every day (to one of those traditional CBD environments), so simply posing the question for debate.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

SammyH said:


> Draw people into your realm and they too will aspire to learn from you, and teach you; and, in turn, they will draw other people into their realm. And so on.


I can say this is true. I have a new-ish friend who wears suits occasionally at work and always on Sundays, but since we've become good friends, he's started wearing a sportcoat and tie off duty and suits more often at work.

It turns out he's always valued the tradition of dressing but didn't know how to do it right, and needed some encouragement to buck the norm. I don't take credit for his becoming a good dresser, but some people need to see someone else doing it right before they'll try. You never know who you're encouraging.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> Just to be clear, I wear a lounge suit to work every day (to one of those traditional CBD environments), so simply posing the question for debate.


Oh, of course. I was just answering your question - broadly, how I think about it.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Natty Beau said:


> Obviously, if I felt it was hurting my career I would have stopped, but my boss has since given me enough praise and bonuses to dispel those fears.
> 
> With co-workers, I just don't act like dressing well makes me superior in any way--financially, culturally, you name it--and I don't talk about clothes or anything. I find being myself is enough to make friends.


Likewise, good points. Certainly some workplaces tolerate a range of styles. As you say, even there not putting on airs would be pretty crucial to fitting in well I would have thought, if dressing significantly above the norm.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Natty Beau said:


> You never know who you're encouraging.


THIS should be engraved in gold. I can say for myself that many times I have seen someone really well dressed - and just seeing him (how he moved, how he wore his clothes) inspired me, instructed me, emboldened me, etc. And neither of us knew the other. Sometimes just the glimpse of something can change a life.

So, I agree emphatically: scatter seed liberally, even recklessly, heedless of what sort of ground they might fall upon.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

SammyH said:


> Ironically, the slovenly often preen themselves on being "non-conformist", when they are in fact the very picture of conformity. Whereas, over time, the well-dressed man finds a very distinct individuality that is his alone.


I think this would have predominated more when there was a strong expectation to dress up. I've discussed this with some people, and it's not a non-conformity vibe I get at all - it's much more about not seeing the point - no pressure to dress up, being more comfortable and practical, having more money for holidays and to spend on the children, etc.



SammyH said:


> Draw people into your realm and they too will aspire to learn from you, and teach you; and, in turn, they will draw other people into their realm. And so on.
> 
> The world can be changed; but only by reorienting one person at a time.


Don't buy this. Don't think these trends will be reversed and I find there are very few people who choose to dress down who have much interest in dressing up.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> Don't buy this. Don't think these trends will be reversed and I find there are very few people who choose to dress down who have much interest in dressing up.


Well, I suppose I mean people who are at the margins. I don't think that a mall rat who wears concert t-shirts is even going to be attracted to "my realm." Probably afraid and maybe even repulsed, lol.


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

BTW, anyone else have a sense of deja vu about this thread?


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

SammyH said:


> Well, I suppose I mean people who are at the margins. I don't think that a mall rat who wears concert t-shirts is even going to be attracted to "my realm." Probably afraid and maybe even repulsed, lol.


I'm sure that one or two people can be turned around - it was more that I don't think it would lead to the "world being changed". Canute-ish to hope that the tide can stopped - the shortish-to-medium-term future of classical dress is, I'm afraid, in my view the hobby of a small minority and special occasion wear for (some of) the rest.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Grayson said:


> BTW, anyone else have a sense of deja vu about this thread?


Hah! Quite.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Balfour said:


> To give example in a different arena, whatever you may think of Boris Johnson, no other politician in a senior role could get away with 10% of his public utterances without being hounded from office.


Boris used to be my MP and I've met him once or twice. Now replaced by some faceless party apparatchik, (at least by comparison).
As the only politician who is instantly known throughout the UK and beyond by his first name, he can get away with pretty much anything.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Grayson said:


> I am content to light my single candle rather than curse the darkness.


I would rather light my Havana, and **** the darkness!


----------



## silverporsche (Nov 3, 2005)

shadoman said:


> The "older" generation has ALWAYS been appalled by the dress of "younger" one. The point one must realize, is that THEY (in many cases,) think they ARE dressing well, or at the very least, stylishly.
> Trying to "reverse the trend" I believe would be a lesson in futility. The most we can do is dress well, and hope to effect at least one protégé.
> 
> I suppose you are referring to Woody's in Frontenac ? Ah, if only Knickerbocker's, The Tartan Corner, BOYD's and Imber's were still around...
> .


No , Woody's is no longer in Plaza Frontenac , Sam Cavato is the only high end men's clothier in the metro St.Louis area. John Carl , Wolffs , Wilkenson , John Marsh etc., and the one's you listed are all gone. Ralph Lauren, Gucci , and Ferragamo have also left.
I hope you are wrong that maybe just maybe the trend can be reversed.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

> I dress for me and to feel good, not as to set an example. If I do set an example in the process, great!


Exactly, I dress to feel good about myself, I don't need to impress others.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

AFCForever said:


> It's not the youth I am worried about - they actually dress pretty well compared to most people of their age in the last 50 years. Certainly much better than we did in the late 80s/ early 90s.
> 
> The really bad dressers around here are the older guys. When we get past the Boom and Gen X (which I am a member of) I think you will be pleasantly surprised.


would this include other cultures as well?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Is it because we don't have lack of income that us as guys can't afford good clothes to wear?


----------



## shadoman (Jun 8, 2014)

silverporsche said:


> No , Woody's is no longer in Plaza Frontenac , Sam Cavato is the only high end men's clothier in the metro St.Louis area. John Carl , Wolffs , Wilkenson , John Marsh etc., and the one's you listed are all gone. Ralph Lauren, Gucci , and Ferragamo have also left.
> I hope you are wrong that maybe just maybe the trend can be reversed.


Woody's is still in Frontenac, just not in the Plaza.
https://woodyseclub.com/

Have you ever checked out Don Rodgers in Belleville ?
Small store/small inventory, but nice product.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Howard said:


> Exactly, I dress to feel good about myself, I don't need to impress others.


Just to be clear, these^ two options are not exhaustive. Personally, I don't (attempt to) dress well for either one of those reasons.


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

Howard said:


> Exactly, I dress to feel good about myself, I don't need to impress others.


That is exactly how I feel unless it is required. Who cares what other people think about how a person dresses, again, unless it is required.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

Audi S5 TC said:


> That is exactly how I feel unless it is required. Who cares what other people think about how a person dresses, again, unless it is required.


The risk is that a sufficient number of slobs serve to overwhelm society's "sartorial immune system" and soon, rather than being lone slobs, they organize and team up and actually target the well dressed for mocking ridicule even to the point of forcing rules upon us forbidding us to be well dressed! We have seen examples of this on this board. Wasn't it Grayson who had to actually fight to wear a tie for a company photo because the other slobs didn't want to look bad by comparison? I was once asked not to wear a tie, or even a jacket to a wedding! They prefer to drag us down rather than rise to our standards. Yet somewhere deep inside, a little voice tells them that we are right, and that we do, in fact look better and, in fact seem superior in other ways. And their solution to that nagging reality is not to better themselves, but to drag us down.

For that reason, I am always open to ways to hold back the night and rage, rage against the gathering storm of proles. While we, as gentlemen, graciously tolerate them, they are trying to destroy us!!!! It always starts with the benign, "Take that jacket off, aren't you hot?" Or, "What to you need that tie for? Do you have to go into work?"

This all recalls one of my favorite passages from "Shibumi," by Trevanian which I feel compelled to paste below:

"Your scorn for mediocrity blinds you to its vast primitive power. You stand in the glare of your own brilliance, unable to see into the dim corners of the room, to dilate your eyes and see the potential dangers of the mass, the wad of humanity. Even as I tell you this, dear student, you cannot quite believe that lesser men, in whatever numbers, can really defeat you. But we are in the age of the mediocre man. He is dull, colorless, boring - but inevitably victorious. The amoeba outlives the tiger because it divides and continues in its immortal monotony. The masses are the final tyrants. See how, in the arts, Kabuki wanes and withers while popular novels of violence and mindless action swamp the mind of the mass reader. And even in that timid genre, no author dares to produce a genuinely superior man as his hero, for in his rage of shame the mass man will send his yojimbo, the critic, to defend him. The roar of the plodders is inarticulate, but deafening. They have no brain, but they have a thousand arms to grasp and clutch at you, drag you down." 
― Trevanian, Shibumi


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Preach on Liberty Ship!

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Such snobbery. What ever happened to live and let live? Kinda creepy.:icon_headagainstwal


----------



## borgse (Nov 16, 2011)

Young men are inclined to make mistakes when they are young. However, I do not think it is in decline, I believe young men have more options now than ever before and have more freedom to choose what they want than before.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> I'm sure that one or two people can be turned around - it was more that I don't think it would lead to the "world being changed". Canute-ish to hope that the tide can stopped - the shortish-to-medium-term future of classical dress is, I'm afraid, in my view the hobby of a small minority and special occasion wear for (some of) the rest.


Yes, Canute-ish indeed, lol 

I suppose what I REALLY meant by "changing the world" is changing the people in my immediate milieu.

And this^ gets me thinking about something germane to this thread. Perhaps some of us - me included - are working from erroneous assumptions. Perhaps for most of history, only a very, very small percentage of people dressed "well." After all, most people in the world until very recently were peasants toiling away at farming and the like.


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

Liberty Ship said:


> ...Wasn't it Grayson who had to actually fight to wear a tie for a company photo because the other slobs didn't want to look bad by comparison?...


Pretty much, though I temper my criticism as this policy originated from company management who are completely out of touch with what constitutes a mature professional male image. They attempted through "style guidelines" to create a caste system - and thus a windmill I felt compelled to tilt at. :cool2:

As Hanlon's Razor dictates, _"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."_


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

momsdoc said:


> Such snobbery. What ever happened to live and let live? Kinda creepy.:icon_headagainstwal


When I was young and my heart was an open book, I used to say live and let live. But this ever changin' world in which we live in makes me give in and cry "live and let die."


Grayson said:


> As Hanlon's Razor dictates, _"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."_


This is a saying wise and true.


----------



## silverporsche (Nov 3, 2005)

Audi S5 TC said:


> That is exactly how I feel unless it is required. Who cares what other people think about how a person dresses, again, unless it is required.


People will judge you by the way you dress. " You never get a second chance to make a first impression " Will Rogers.
Dress is important and plays a very important part in the way others view and treat us. The President of the United States when making 
a major policy speech always wears a blue suit , why ?


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

I know there are two very similar threads on this subject running in parallel at the moment, and this article might go in either.

Well worth a read.

Slobbery as Snobbery



> Beyond the fact that clothes are now mass-produced rather than made individually, there is an act of will involved.
> Practically everyone now dresses not merely in a casual way, but with studied slovenliness for fear of being thought elegant,
> as elegance is a metonym for undemocratic sentiment or belief. You can dress as expensively as you like, indeed expensive
> scruffiness is a form of chic, but on no account must you dress with taste and discrimination. To do so might be to draw
> hostile attention to yourself. Who on Earth do you think you are to dress like that?


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Haha, that's excellent Odradek! 

Everyone must pay homage to and cultivate "self esteem". LOL. 

I've listened to and met Mr. Daniels on quite a few occasions - he's a pleasure to listen to and speak with.


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

Odradek said:


> I know there are two very similar threads on this subject running in parallel at the moment, and this article might go in either.
> 
> Well worth a read.
> 
> ...


The below is a cut and paste from two post I made under the "Why Do Young Men Dress so Poorly Ages 50 and Under" thread as I believe they directly address your very interesting post and linked article:

I think you are very much on theme with this thread [this is responding to a post by a gentleman whose in-laws denounced him for wearing a blazer as they are "left-wing environmentalists" and saw his blazer wearing as class snobbery] and hit on part of the explanation to the thread's opening question. There is a stand of leftism (and I am not lumping all the left together - just saying there is a strand - there are extreme strands on the right also) in the USA as well that views any achievement, any self improvement, any individualism at all as a threat to the belief / premise / idea that the greatest virtue in the world is that no individual should ever feel better / superior / more successful than any other individual and this takes on even more meaning when we compare individual across race or gender lines. 

This belief, which at its core has a good intention - don't belittle others, don't look down on others, don't put on airs - has warped into a debilitating absolutism in which any attempt to enjoy traditional Western (pre-1960s) culture or show outward success or achievement in a traditional sense is arrogant and wrong. Hence, wearing a blazer is lording it over those who don't wear blazers. While your in-laws seem to be the extreme, the extremes move the center and this extreme is part of the reason why younger people - who don't hold the extreme view - still don't want to dress well. They have been taught explicitly and implicitly not to be, act or feel superior and view dressing well as wrong because it would be a way to mark oneself as special.

...I did not know this [he further explained that his in-laws are Irish and that dressing well was considered, by them, as "assimilating" or becoming like a West Brit - i.e. selling out your roots], but it is consistent philosophically with the warped belief that dressing well is insulting to those who don't; that somehow by dressing well you are guilty by correlation to some ongoing or past class warfare (elites versus the "regular" people or Brits vs. Irish or whatever past or present social injustice dominates one's thinking) as opposed to just wanting to dress nicely for its inherent pleasure and, maybe, the desire to present yourself nicely to others. 

What's amazing is that only forty or so years ago, it was an axiom of our culture (at least in the USA) that you would want to dress better if you could (no explanation needed as it was understood that people wanted to improve their lot and present the best of themselves in public). Wow, it's stunning how that has changed - an axiom that seemed part of the cultural bedrock has given way.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Very well said Fading Fast. 

I suppose I would expand on that by saying that beneath the phenomena you describe there exist a great many confusions that people have either been directly taught or they have absorbed osmotically from the surrounding chaotic non-culture. 

These include: confusions about the meaning of words ("equality" is one of countless code words that has been thoroughly de-racinated and is now more or less incoherent, others would be "rights" etc.) - and, as well, a strongly held - though little examined - belief that "everything is relative", from which people conclude that nothing can be said to be superior or inferior to anything else.


----------



## espressocycle (Apr 14, 2014)

I dunno, a few months ago I was annoyed at my cemented business casual shoes always falling apart and research led me here. I bought a pair of Allen Edmonds. Now, thanks to eBay, I have 10 pairs of leather-soled shoes and have replaced all my work shirts with Zegna, Billy Reid and Tyrwhit, bought inexpensive, but stylish and well-fitted dress pants in place of my old thrifted relaxed fit khakis, and invested in buying and tailoring an excellent suit. I'm 35, so it took this long for me.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Tempest said:


> When I was young and my heart was an open book, I used to say live and let live. But this ever changin' world in which we live in makes me give in and cry "live and let die."


You must have missed my sarcasm, re: Earl and FLCracka. We really do need a sarcasm emoticon.


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

SammyH said:


> Very well said Fading Fast.
> 
> I suppose I would expand on that by saying that beneath the phenomena you describe there exist a great many confusions that people have either been directly taught or they have absorbed osmotically from the surrounding chaotic non-culture.
> 
> These include: confusions about the meaning of words ("equality" is one of countless code words that has been thoroughly de-racinated and is now more or less incoherent, others would be "rights" etc.) - and, as well, a strongly held - though little examined - belief that "everything is relative", from which people conclude that nothing can be said to be superior or inferior to anything else.


Clearly we are of like minds. The understanding of "rights" could be greatly improved if the distinction between rights that require nothing other than for people to leave you alone (free speech or the pursuit [not guarantee] of happiness are examples) versus rights that require others to give you something (healthcare or housing are examples) was clearly made and discussed. The same can be said for "equality" in that we should distinguish between equality of opportunity (you can try, you can fail) and equality of outcome (all get the same regardless of effort). And as to "everything is relative," taken as a core premise it means that nothing has value, nothing is bad, nothing is good - it is a nihilistic rebuke to civilization. To be consistent to this view, one must not be angry at the person who kills your child, the burglar who takes your possession or the drunk driver that runs over your wife. They all might have had life experiences that you couldn't understand.

To tie this to the thread, if equality, in one's personal philosophy, means equality of outcome, then wearing a blazer is lording it over those who don't / can't afford to wear one. If your view of rights is the right to have things provided by someone (many turn to the state), then those who live well are living on money that could be taxed to support others who don't have, say, a blazer - hence, again, the blazer as symbol of selfishness and superiority. And if you believe everything is relative, then the person wearing the blazer didn't work hard to earn it, they just got it by luck as an unfair system picks winners and losers. The blazer - and all nice clothes - are just symbols of oppression, your rights being stolen and the inequality of an unfair systems.

So the question is: what philosophical premises did our young men of today learn? If we can answer that, we might have a better understanding of the question that is the title of this thread.

All that said, I feel bad for the poor blue blazer just trying to make someone look a little sharper.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Fading Fast said:


> Clearly we are of like minds. The understanding of "rights" could be greatly improved if the distinction between rights that require nothing other than for people to leave you alone (free speech or the pursuit [not guarantee] of happiness are examples) versus rights that require others to give you something (healthcare or housing are examples) was clearly made and discussed. The same can be said for "equality" in that we should distinguish between equality of opportunity (you can try, you can fail) and equality of outcome (all get the same regardless of effort). And as to "everything is relative," taken as a core premise it means that nothing has value, nothing is bad, nothing is good - it is a nihilistic rebuke to civilization. To be consistent to this view, one must not be angry at the person who kills your child, the burglar who takes your possession or the drunk driver that runs over your wife. They all might have had life experiences that you couldn't understand.
> 
> To tie this to the thread, if equality, in one's personal philosophy, means equality of outcome, then wearing a blazer is lording it over those who don't / can't afford to wear one. If your view of rights is the right to have things provided by someone (many turn to the state), then those who live well are living on money that could be taxed to support others who don't have, say, a blazer - hence, again, the blazer as symbol of selfishness and superiority. And if you believe everything is relative, then the person wearing the blazer didn't work hard to earn it, they just got it by luck as an unfair system picks winners and losers. The blazer - and all nice clothes - are just symbols of oppression, your rights being stolen and the inequality of an unfair systems.
> 
> ...


If this thread isn't going to get moved to the interchange, could would at least institute a policy of trigger warnings on the main forum page?


----------



## alkydrinker (Apr 24, 2012)

Fading Fast said:


> What's amazing is that only forty or so years ago, it was an axiom of our culture (at least in the USA) that you would want to dress better if you could (no explanation needed as it was understood that people wanted to improve their lot and present the best of themselves in public). Wow, it's stunning how that has changed - an axiom that seemed part of the cultural bedrock has given way.


Yup, and it is interesting how this attitude is really manifested mostly among more upper-middle class people. In poorer countries that old axiom still exists much more so.

Living in Baltimore, as a generality, I would also say the black community (a statistically-less-wealthy group) has much less of this mental derangement where nice/elegant things are thought bad. Sure there is room for criticism with certain street/hip hop styles etc, but I find the lack of mental derangement in regard to "nice things" refreshing within this community.

I am not sure if this could be described as irony or what - but it seems everybody is trying to run away from their position in society and be something else. The wealthy want to appear unwealthy and the non-wealthy want to look wealthy. Though before we entered this demented, post-modern, nihilistic, hellish era everyone just wanted to simply do better and rise in society as much as possible from wherever they started from. I think that old attitude is what most people on this board relate to and it is mystifying to us how it is that this attitude would ever erode.



SammyH said:


> These include: confusions about the meaning of words ("equality" is one of countless code words that has been thoroughly de-racinated and is now more or less incoherent, others would be "rights" etc.) - and, as well, a strongly held - though little examined - belief that "everything is relative", from which people conclude that nothing can be said to be superior or inferior to anything else.


Tell me about it. I write for a living and am very sensitive to word usage. I can not stand it when people try to fudge word meanings to perform some sort of intellectual slight-of-hand. Re-defining words is a calling card of tyrannical governments and other wannabe thought-controllers.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Fading Fast said:


> Clearly we are of like minds. The understanding of "rights" could be greatly improved if the distinction between rights that require nothing other than for people to leave you alone (free speech or the pursuit [not guarantee] of happiness are examples) versus rights that require others to give you something (healthcare or housing are examples) was clearly made and discussed. The same can be said for "equality" in that we should distinguish between equality of opportunity (you can try, you can fail) and equality of outcome (all get the same regardless of effort). And as to "everything is relative," taken as a core premise it means that nothing has value, nothing is bad, nothing is good - it is a nihilistic rebuke to civilization. To be consistent to this view, one must not be angry at the person who kills your child, the burglar who takes your possession or the drunk driver that runs over your wife. They all might have had life experiences that you couldn't understand.
> 
> To tie this to the thread, if equality, in one's personal philosophy, means equality of outcome, then wearing a blazer is lording it over those who don't / can't afford to wear one. If your view of rights is the right to have things provided by someone (many turn to the state), then those who live well are living on money that could be taxed to support others who don't have, say, a blazer - hence, again, the blazer as symbol of selfishness and superiority. And if you believe everything is relative, then the person wearing the blazer didn't work hard to earn it, they just got it by luck as an unfair system picks winners and losers. The blazer - and all nice clothes - are just symbols of oppression, your rights being stolen and the inequality of an unfair systems.


Are you me or something - or I you? lol. 



Fading Fast said:


> So the question is: what philosophical premises did our young men of today learn? If we can answer that, we might have a better understanding of the question that is the title of this thread.


Postmodernism? Which is actuated by a heavy reliance on relativism/nominalism?



Fading Fast said:


> All that said, I feel bad for the poor blue blazer just trying to make someone look a little sharper.


I feel sorry for the young men who feel they need to apologize for looking good and standing out among their peers. How utterly de-masculating. I really try to help them, especially the ones who I observe are chafing under this pervasive social disorder.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

L-feld said:


> If this thread isn't going to get moved to the interchange, could would at least institute a policy of trigger warnings on the main forum page?


I am simply brimming with questions. What is the "interchange"? And why would it be moved there? And what are "trigger warnings"?


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

alkydrinker said:


> Yup, and it is interesting how this attitude is really manifested mostly among more upper-middle class people. In poorer countries that old axiom still exists much more so.
> 
> Living in Baltimore, as a generality, I would also say the black community (a statistically-less-wealthy group) has much less of this mental derangement where nice/elegant things are thought bad. Sure there is room for criticism with certain street/hip hop styles etc, but I find the lack of mental derangement in regard to "nice things" refreshing within this community.
> 
> I am not sure if this could be described as irony or what - but it seems everybody is trying to run away from their position in society and be something else. The wealthy want to appear unwealthy and the non-wealthy want to look wealthy. Though before we entered this demented, post-modern, nihilistic, hellish era everyone just wanted to simply do better and rise in society as much as possible from wherever they started from. I think that old attitude is what most people on this board relate to and it is mystifying to us how it is that this attitude would ever erode.


I've observed this as well. I think we can look, at least in part, to the pervasive influence of postmodernist academics in upper middle class of America. I also think there's a wealth component: "I am so wealthy I don't have to dress well and can flaunt (ostentatiously) an affected disdain for elegance/quality/formality."



alkydrinker said:


> Tell me about it. I write for a living and am very sensitive to word usage. I can not stand it when people try to fudge word meanings to perform some sort of intellectual slight-of-hand. Re-defining words is a calling card of tyrannical governments and other wannabe thought-controllers.


Glad to find a kindred spirit. I could write a book about all of this. Wait, I AM writing one, lol. Well, trying.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

alkydrinker said:


> Yup, and it is interesting how this attitude is really manifested mostly among more upper-middle class people. In poorer countries that old axiom still exists much more so.
> 
> Living in Baltimore, as a generality, I would also say the black community (a statistically-less-wealthy group) has much less of this mental derangement where nice/elegant things are thought bad. Sure there is room for criticism with certain street/hip hop styles etc, but I find the lack of mental derangement in regard to "nice things" refreshing within this community.


Having lived in the District of Columbia and now from working in South Baltimore, I have to say I agree with this on the basis of my own experience. The older guys and women my age especially like my fedoras.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Audi S5 TC said:


> That is exactly how I feel unless it is required. Who cares what other people think about how a person dresses, again, unless it is required.


Why should they care? Are they going to critique your clothing?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

> "What to you need that tie for? Do you have to go into work?"


Just say "I feel like wearing a tie" Is that going to be a problem"?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

silverporsche said:


> People will judge you by the way you dress. " You never get a second chance to make a first impression " Will Rogers.
> Dress is important and plays a very important part in the way others view and treat us. The President of the United States when making
> a major policy speech always wears a blue suit , why ?


That's quite true.


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

Howard said:


> Why should they care? Are they going to critique your clothing?


That's exactly what I'm saying. However, if it is required for people to care (such as bosses having dress codes for the workplace), then that's a different story.


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

Howard said:


> That's quite true.


I completely agree with you and silverporsche, Howard. However, there are exceptions to every rule (including dress being important and playing a very important part in the way others view and treat us). I have also seen all world leaders (including Presidents of the United States) wear suits that are gray (and even black) when making public speeches, not just dark blue. Other than Ronald Reagan, I have never seen any world leaders wear any suit colors other than gray, black (though this one is pretty rare) and dark blue.


----------



## Tim Correll (Jul 18, 2005)

silverporsche said:


> People will judge you by the way you dress. " You never get a second chance to make a first impression " Will Rogers.
> Dress is important and plays a very important part in the way others view and treat us. The President of the United States when making
> a major policy speech always wears a blue suit , why ?


I completely agree with you, silverporsche. However, there are exceptions to every rule (including dress being important and playing a very important part in the way others view and treat us). I have also seen all world leaders (including Presidents of the United States) wear suits that are gray (and even black) when making public speeches, not just dark blue. Other than Ronald Reagan, I have never seen any world leaders wear any suit colors other than gray, black (though this one is pretty rare) and dark blue.


----------



## SlideGuitarist (Apr 23, 2013)

Plenty of world leaders don't wear suits, most pointedly Evo Morales: https://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/09/12/world.leaders.style.signals/


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

L-feld said:


> If this thread isn't going to get moved to the interchange, could would at least institute a policy of trigger warnings on the main forum page?


It probably does belong in the Interchange now, but I too am mystified by "trigger warnings".
Great thread though.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Odradek said:


> It probably does belong in the Interchange now, but I too am mystified by "trigger warnings".
> Great thread though.


I've heard the term used for PTSD, eating disorders, and a few other severe psychiatric disorders when referencing particular circumstances that "trigger" certain behavior (ie fireworks, body image, ect).


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

I do wonder at times whether we put certain former ages on a pedestal. 

Admittedly, I was not in the professional workplace in the 50s or 60s. But even at the times in my career when a lounge suit would have been regarded as de rigueur in any white collar job, I remember seeing a lot of poorly fitted suits made out of visibly low-quality materials (i.e. shiny polyester) with scuffed shoes and 'novelty' ties. Twas not a sartorial shangri-la! 

Frankly, I find 'good' casual clothes (e.g. what used to be oxford cloth button down's uniform in the trad WAYWT thread - pressed cotton drills, OCBD, good shoes, etc.) far more aesthetically appealing than a lot of what passed for 'business dress' when suits were mandated. People who don't care still showed they didn't care even when dress codes were stricter.


----------



## SammyH (Jan 29, 2014)

Balfour said:


> I do wonder at times whether we put certain former ages on a pedestal.
> 
> Admittedly, I was not in the professional workplace in the 50s or 60s. But even at the times in my career when a lounge suit would have been regarded as de rigueur in any white collar job, I remember seeing a lot of poorly fitted suits made out of visibly low-quality materials (i.e. shiny polyester) with scuffed shoes and 'novelty' ties. Twas not a sartorial shangri-la!
> 
> Frankly, I find 'good' casual clothes (e.g. what used to be oxford cloth button down's uniform in the trad WAYWT thread - pressed cotton drills, OCBD, good shoes, etc.) far more aesthetically appealing than a lot of what passed for 'business dress' when suits were mandated. People who don't care still showed they didn't care even when dress codes were stricter.


To my way of thinking, there is a great deal of truth to this actually. I've always thought that suits can sometimes have a cheap, utilitarian look to them; it's a rare person I see who is wearing a really high quality, well-tailored/fitted suit and knows how to wear it. Mostly it's a kind of uniform straight off the rack, almost like a mechanic's overalls.

For my own part, I normally wear very traddy sport jackets with season-appropriate wool trousers or chinos, an ever-present bow tie, ocbd, and aldens or rancourts or boat shoes, etc.

I wear suits when it's clearly appropriate. Actually, I wear a tuxedo far more than I do a suit.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

I agree with Balfour....especially this part:



Balfour said:


> Frankly, I find 'good' casual clothes (e.g. what used to be oxford cloth button down's uniform in the trad WAYWT thread - pressed cotton drills, OCBD, good shoes, etc.) far more aesthetically appealing than a lot of what passed for 'business dress' when suits were mandated. People who don't care still showed they didn't care even when dress codes were stricter.


----------



## gyasih (Aug 3, 2011)

I believe they need examples of how to dress. We are living in a society where you see less people who believe in the need to "dress up".


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Audi S5 TC said:


> That's exactly what I'm saying. However, if it is required for people to care (such as bosses having dress codes for the workplace), then that's a different story.


If you want to dress with a shirt and tie, "so be it" as I always say.


----------



## Question (Jun 18, 2014)

Heres a potentially controversial view.

Whos to say that our perception of what qualifies as well dressed is true?

If there are, for example, 100 people in a room. 99 are in a t-shirt and think suits look silly. 1 is in a suit and thinks that t-shirts look silly. Whos in the right and whos in the wrong?

We might very well be in a time when society as a whole considers t-shirts and shorts to be well dressed...


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

Question said:


> Heres a potentially controversial view.
> 
> Whos to say that our perception of what qualifies as well dressed is true?
> 
> ...


That would be to argue "aesthetic relativism." Unfortunately, we know, thanks to the Greeks and, subsequently da Vinci and Rembrandt, that aesthetics is rooted in geometry and science and presents as beauty and health. We know, for example, that the Greek "golden section" can almost always be discovered in beautiful art and architecture, as it is reflected in healthy biological and natural development. This converges in "The Vitruvian Man."

Clothing that compliments this understanding is what those of us schooled in classic dress consider "good." Clothing that does not, "pants on the ground," for example, we consider "bad." And we can prove this.

For a long time I thought i was the only one who fundamentally understood this. Then, one day, one of our members made what I consider to be a brilliant, succinct post on the subject on his blog. A post the further enlightened me and reinforced my notions. Here is a link to it:

https://mrlapel.blogspot.com/2012/10/back-to-basics-proportionality.html

From this study of proportion, one can quickly derive how color, texture, print, etc., properly applied serve to compliment the overall aesthetic.

So, what you suggest, while an interesting discussion, is really a rehashing of various other discussions about how "social relativism" conflicts with classic art, science, law, and ethics.

To return to the original premise of the thread, the break down in clothing and dress is a symptom of the general relativism that society has embraced. The reason for this turn is a whole other subject, but we know from other, recent scientific studies that by changing the way one dresses, one can change one's self-perception as well as the way one is perceived by others. So there is much to be gained, individually and collectively, for them to rise to our level; and much to be lost if we allow them to drag us down to theirs. The war for civilization is on!


----------



## Question (Jun 18, 2014)

Interesting link, but i have to question whether the golden ratio thing is true. When i was growing up, i was frequently told not to wear my jeans/pants/etc "so high" because it looked really weird...i had to explain to skeptical classmates and teachers that they were at my waist like everyone else. That was because i have very long legs and a relatively short torso. I was also told that only "old people" wore their pants up that high.

And then the blog goes on to say that high waisted pants look good...personally the guy on the left looks weird, the guy on the right looks normal. Guy on the left looks to have unbalanced body proportions while the one on the right seems to have normal proportions. I think most people would agree with this.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Question said:


> And then the blog goes on to say that high waisted pants look good...personally the guy on the left looks weird, the guy on the right looks normal. Guy on the left looks to have unbalanced body proportions while the one on the right seems to have normal proportions. I think most people would agree with this.


Disagree.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

But why are we dressing sloppy these days? Could it be the income and coming home with bad paychecks that we can't afford good clothes? What are your thoughts?


----------



## AFCForever (Sep 26, 2013)

Howard said:


> But why are we dressing sloppy these days? Could it be the income and coming home with bad paychecks that we can't afford good clothes? What are your thoughts?


 I suspect it is the extension of an earlier rebellion against the establishment. People who dressed well were of the old order, people who did not were of the new. What is interesting to me is as mentioned above traditionally disenfranchised people such as women, minorities and immigrants tend to have a fair number of good dressers among them. Those of us who would have traditionally been the benefactors of the old order seem to rail against it more.

Case in point my Asian, immigrant, female boss is one of the best dressers in the building.


----------



## Question (Jun 18, 2014)

Howard said:


> But why are we dressing sloppy these days? Could it be the income and coming home with bad paychecks that we can't afford good clothes? What are your thoughts?


Its hard for people to tell what qualifies as well dressed unless someone shows it to them i suppose. It doesnt help that young people are often on a budget, and when fashion forums talk about $100+ shirts as the basic, people's eyes glaze over...


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Question said:


> Its hard for people to tell what qualifies as well dressed unless someone shows it to them i suppose. It doesnt help that young people are often on a budget, and when fashion forums talk about $100+ shirts as the basic, people's eyes glaze over...


But for the most part, classic clothes that are discussed here are much less expensive than the fashionista's offerings. We also go to great lengths to share information about low priced sources, sales and deals. Except for some of the higher end shoes, and suits, most of our stuff can be had new for moderate prices, or thrifted for next to nothing. Additionally since our clothing choices are timeless, we can take advantage of last years closeouts. So I don't buy the argument that income makes a big difference in clothing choices.

I remember going to get my son a pair of sneakers when he was about 14 years old. The Air Jordans he wanted were over $200. a similar Air Jordan was on sale for $55. He complained that it was last years, so there was no way he could wear them. I told him if he worked and earned the extra $145, I'd buy them for him. He quickly concluded that last years $55 sneakers were just fine.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

momsdoc said:


> I remember going to get my son a pair of sneakers when he was about 14 years old. The Air Jordans he wanted were over $200. a similar Air Jordan was on sale for $55. He complained that it was last years, so there was no way he could wear them. I told him if he worked and earned the extra $145, I'd buy them for him. He quickly concluded that last years $55 sneakers were just fine.


That's a good, albeit tough, lesson to impart to one's child. Teaching a teenager the value of a dollar is important....and not always easy, I've found.


----------



## Question (Jun 18, 2014)

momsdoc said:


> But for the most part, classic clothes that are discussed here are much less expensive than the fashionista's offerings. We also go to great lengths to share information about low priced sources, sales and deals. Except for some of the higher end shoes, and suits, most of our stuff can be had new for moderate prices, or thrifted for next to nothing. Additionally since our clothing choices are timeless, we can take advantage of last years closeouts. So I don't buy the argument that income makes a big difference in clothing choices.
> 
> I remember going to get my son a pair of sneakers when he was about 14 years old. The Air Jordans he wanted were over $200. a similar Air Jordan was on sale for $55. He complained that it was last years, so there was no way he could wear them. I told him if he worked and earned the extra $145, I'd buy them for him. He quickly concluded that last years $55 sneakers were just fine.


Im not sure what you are referring to exactly, but in regards to thrifting...most people dont like the idea of that, and its often impractical. The nearest thrift store to me is about 30 mins walk away, one way, and i usually only go in that direction once a month for a haircut. Ive been there close to 10 times now, and ive only seen something decent for sale there once....and i couldnt buy it as it was closing time and the store wouldnt sell to me, and when i went back at 10 am next morning, it was already sold. Thats a lot of time investment for someone to make unless your local thrift store just happens to get good stuff in all the time. I thought about it, if i had a good pair of shoes, like C&Js or whatever, why would i ever give it away to a thrift store? I would be using it for 10+ years at bare minimum and resoling it obviously, possibly recrafting it from scratch. The same goes for pretty much any quality piece of clothing i would have. The only reason i would be giving this stuff away is if i had more money than i knew what to do with and was just buying big brand names and replacing them every couple of years, or if it was so badly worn out that i couldnt wear it...at which point it wouldnt be sold in the thrift store either.

I was referirng more to blogs and other forums where you can go and ask for advice, and start getting told to spend a lot and a lot of money. $100+ shirts, $150+ pants/jeans, $500+ suits. You tell this to a high school or college student, and they are going to look at you like you are crazy. Not talking bad about this forum, which i have to admit is much more helpful than most places.

Have to agree on the air jordans though. I would never buy something at $200+ just because it was new season stock. In this case you have two similar sneakers and one is way cheaper just because its a clearance sale...hell yea get that one. I would gladly do that for everything i wear if i could find a place that does it consistently. Problem with living in a place like Australia is that almost none of the recommended sites or brands on the net will apply to you...like people were telling me to get factory seconds Allen Edmonds for $150 and below, but that only works if you are in the US because otherwise, you get charged $40-50 for shipping at which point you may as well start looking at buying something brand new and which doesn't cost that much to ship...

But given the choice between some tailor made shirt at $100+ and the local mall offering a $25 shirt marked down from $50, most young people are going to choose the latter, if for nothing else because of their budget. It doesnt help that if he goes onto the net and askes which one to get *and why*, hes going to get mostly unhelpful responses ranging from "google it" to "one is cheap **** made in china" (again, not referring to this forum). Hes not going to know what makes a quality shirt, retail assistants are probably not going to know (or tell him to get him to buy their cheap shirts) and hes just going to settle for the cheap shirts forever or until he gets the money and decides, hey, lets try this one out.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I have to admit that in my small city (Lansing, MI) I have never seen even a tie in a thrift store that I would consider buying; khakis or jeans are about the only things I would wear that I have seen in a thrift store. (I have never seen a sport coat or suit either. If you have absolutely nothing, they might work.)

Maybe in bigger cities the thrift stores have nicer stuff. I'm not a trad, nor do very many business people here dress in what I would consider trad clothes other than khakis and polos for casual, though. The stuff I see fits more into that. (I also do not buy "fashionable" stuff; I'm 58 and would look ridiculous in slim-fit anything.)


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Question said:


> Im not sure what you are referring to exactly, but in regards to thrifting...most people dont like the idea of that, and its often impractical. The nearest thrift store to me is about 30 mins walk away, one way, and i usually only go in that direction once a month for a haircut. Ive been there close to 10 times now, and ive only seen something decent ufor sale there once....and i couldnt buy it as it was closing time and the store wouldnt sell to me, and when i went back at 10 am next morning, it was already sold. Thats a lot of time investment for someone to make unless your local thrift store just happens to get good stuff in all the time. I thought about it, if i had a good pair of shoes, like C&Js or whatever, why would i ever give it away to a thrift store? I would be using it for 10+ years at bare minimum and resoling it obviously, possibly recrafting it from scratch. The same goes for pretty much any quality piece of clothing i would have. The only reason i would be giving this stuff away is if i had more money than i knew what to do with and was just buying big brand names and replacing them every couple of years, or if it was so badly worn out that i couldnt wear it...at which point it wouldnt be sold in the thrift store either.
> 
> I was referirng more to blogs and other forums where you can go and ask for advice, and start getting told to spend a lot and a lot of money. $100+ shirts, $150+ pants/jeans, $500+ suits. You tell this to a high school or college student, and they are going to look at you like you are crazy. Not talking bad about this forum, which i have to admit is much more helpful than most places.
> 
> ...


For shirt, try pickashirt. They are made by William Teddington in Thailand. Very large selection of MTM shirts around $35 - $65 and made in Thailand, so I imagine shipping is no problem. They are very well made of good quality Egyptian cotton,and have low introductory prices for your first trial. Made in China does not necessarily mean poorly made. There are some manufacturers with good quality control it's just a bit of hit and miss and trial and error. Members here can help guide you. Same with sports coats, trousers, and suits. Even with the exorbitant shipping down under you can do OK. Myself, I personally do not thrift, so if that's absent in Australia, you can work around it to some degree. it's just unfortunate that youlive so far away that it creates such difficulties.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Question said:


> Its hard for people to tell what qualifies as well dressed unless someone shows it to them i suppose. It doesnt help that young people are often on a budget, and when fashion forums talk about $100+ shirts as the basic, people's eyes glaze over...


I have a part time job and still I can afford good clothes, I don't make a lot but it's enough to go to a department store or outlets.


----------



## johwal (Apr 21, 2010)

I think that dressing well is of particular importance to a geezer, like myself, as dressing well has a compensatory effect on the unsightliness of old age. I've persuaded myself of this, anyway. One does, however, often see young men who could benefit from this palliative effect.


----------



## Carguy (Nov 29, 2012)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I have to admit that in my small city (Lansing, MI) I have never seen even a tie in a thrift store that I would consider buying; khakis or jeans are about the only things I would wear that I have seen in a thrift store. (I have never seen a sport coat or suit either. If you have absolutely nothing, they might work.)
> 
> Maybe in bigger cities the thrift stores have nicer stuff. I'm not a trad, nor do very many business people here dress in what I would consider trad clothes other than khakis and polos for casual, though. The stuff I see fits more into that. (I also do not buy "fashionable" stuff; I'm 58 and would look ridiculous in slim-fit anything.)


I went "thrifting" last weekend in Houston for the first time and I was really disappointed. Not only didn't I find anything I would wear, but the one resale shop I found was WAY too high on their prices. I figure it was due to the fact that they were located in a fairly upscale area. Whatever the reason, I won't pay 50-60% of retail for ANYTHING that's "pre-owned"! I have better luck on eBay.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

Carguy said:


> I went "thrifting" last weekend in Houston for the first time and I was really disappointed. Not only didn't I find anything I would wear, but the one resale shop I found was WAY too high on their prices. I figure it was due to the fact that they were located in a fairly upscale area. Whatever the reason, I won't pay 50-60% of retail for ANYTHING that's "pre-owned"! I have better luck on eBay.


The only thrifting I do is on ebay or the Trad Thrift Exchange on this forum.


----------



## silverporsche (Nov 3, 2005)

Howard said:


> But why are we dressing sloppy these days? Could it be the income and coming home with bad paychecks that we can't afford good clothes? What are your thoughts?


I would agree , the American economy is in the doldrums , half of the jobs created over the last six years are either part time or low
paying full time jobs. Men clothing on the other hand has remain expensive especially quality men's clothing. It's not only men's clothing but 
many quality items , cars , watches , vacations , housing , etc., etc. 
Ebay be careful and re-sell it shops are the only hope for young men who wishes to wear quality men's clothing. Unless the American economy improves especially for young people there is little chance that the decline in young men's dress will improve , maybe after 
the 2016 election.


----------



## Question (Jun 18, 2014)

momsdoc said:


> For shirt, try pickashirt. They are made by William Teddington in Thailand. Very large selection of MTM shirts around $35 - $65 and made in Thailand, so I imagine shipping is no problem. They are very well made of good quality Egyptian cotton,and have low introductory prices for your first trial. Made in China does not necessarily mean poorly made. There are some manufacturers with good quality control it's just a bit of hit and miss and trial and error. Members here can help guide you. Same with sports coats, trousers, and suits. Even with the exorbitant shipping down under you can do OK. Myself, I personally do not thrift, so if that's absent in Australia, you can work around it to some degree. it's just unfortunate that youlive so far away that it creates such difficulties.


Wow, thanks a lot! Their shirts seem to start at $45 which isnt bad at all, but i dont see any mention of introductory prices. Gonna have to take a closer look at this one...


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Question said:


> Wow, thanks a lot! Their shirts seem to start at $45 which isnt bad at all, but i dont see any mention of introductory prices. Gonna have to take a closer look at this one...


It may have been a temporary deal they had going when I purchased my first shirts from them over a year ago. Regardless, they are a great quality shirt at a very good price. I especially am fond of their luxury collars and cuffs, very thick and firm, no puckering.....yet.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

silverporsche said:


> I would agree , the American economy is in the doldrums , half of the jobs created over the last six years are either part time or low
> paying full time jobs. Men clothing on the other hand has remain expensive especially quality men's clothing. It's not only men's clothing but
> many quality items , cars , watches , vacations , housing , etc., etc.
> Ebay be careful and re-sell it shops are the only hope for young men who wishes to wear quality men's clothing. Unless the American economy improves especially for young people there is little chance that the decline in young men's dress will improve , maybe after
> the 2016 election.


Sp, Maybe it also can refer to a person of what kind of housing he's living in.


----------



## Traser (Jan 10, 2013)

There is some hope provided by that universal bugbear: television.

Television shows such as 'Mad Men' and 'Boardwalk Empire' demonstrate some sharply dressed modes. 

Although my line of work would lead me to dress more like Don Draper than Nucky Thompson! It doesn't stop me from admiring Chalky White's suits!


----------



## Travel57 (Apr 23, 2014)

I've been watching this thread and I've seen a lot of good responses. I'm almost 30 and I could safely say I am the only person in my group of friends, and larger group of co-workers, acquaintances, etc. that dresses "nice". I put that in quotes because I recently took an interest in trying to dress up, etc. Work is a casual environment, and it's an investment bank. Anytime I go out with people they wear jeans, button shirts, and sneakers and I am the only one wearing a blazer, etc. 

While I don't have anything of importance to add, this is just an observation. I couldn't say how to reverse this trend or why it keep happening but I certainly hope it would one day reverse.


----------



## JakeGittes (Jul 13, 2011)

Hello, mine is very much Travel57's case, both at work and out of it, hence I felt like I had to show support , although at 46 I'm older (and over my co-workers average, it being about 30+). I wear bow ties most days, so I am pushing the envelope even more... 

Mostly, it is a matter of putting comfort (their perceived idea of comfort) above anything else. A few days ago, one of them asked why I was keeping with my chosen style even in the height of summer - specifically, why I did not switch to short sleeved shirts. I replied short sleveed shirts were not appropriate for ties (bows or straight). Of course, then he asked why I did not just ditch the ties, and the jacket, too. I retorted that if I chose a specific profesional image, then I had to mantain it in summer, too - with the sensible recourse to ligther weight materials. He did not understand it, anyway.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Traser said:


> ...
> Although my line of work would lead me to dress more like Don Draper than Nucky Thompson! It doesn't stop me from admiring Chalky White's suits!





JakeGittes said:


> Mostly, it is a matter of putting comfort (their perceived idea of comfort) above anything else. A few days ago, one of them asked why I was keeping with my chosen style even in the height of summer ...


Comfort is an interesting point in these discussions. I don't find a modern business suit uncomfortable. But I would find the Boardwalk Empire rig uncomfortable in the summer (suits were typically much heavier, starched collars, no aircon, etc.). And in extreme heat (think DC in the Summer - 100 degrees, 95% humidity), no business-appropriate dress is likely to be that comfortable (even a 8-9 fresco suit, with a cotton-linen shirt and linen tie).

Given that dressing well should not involve self-mortification, when does comfort start to be a relevant factor for people?


----------



## Jman9599 (Dec 23, 2013)

I started trying to figure out mens dress prior to my retirement from the military. I'm 38 and for most of my youth I wore a uniform and then changed into jeans and a T shirt when home Now I have a son who I hope to lead by example. My peers all dress in jeans and a t shirt...even in winter. Some will throw on the occasional polo that is too big. No one cares about their appearance. I don't wear a blazer everyday, but when I casual attend events I always wear pressed chinos with a long sleeve shirt. The rumor from my wife is that the other wives were telling their husbands to ask me for advice on how to dress. Apparently I'm the best dressed among my peers  I thank this site for that.


----------



## racebannon (Aug 17, 2014)

The older generation will always complain about what the younger generation is wearing. That's the way it goes.


----------



## Quetzal (Jul 25, 2014)

The history of men's clothing has shown decline; from the long coats of the 18th Century to the shorter coats of the Victorian period to the disposal of the vest and starched collar in the 1930s-1950s to the disposal of the suit as "nice clothes". But the "older generation" started the decline; The majority of Baby-Boomers and those born in the early 1940s purchased whatever was fashionable, then garbage became the fashion and eventually the norm in the 1960s beginning with T-shirts and jeans (not to mention that basic stores the Average Joe would buy from like Sears and Penney's began to sell many cheap synthetics), mostly in part to "break away" from their parents' "uptight" norms. Eventually, basic quality became too expensive for people to buy, and the younger crowds continued to buy the now-common trash in the 1970s and 1980s, with the parents of the time (now in the 21st Century the "old crowd", though to me they aren't really that old) continuing to buy the fashionable garbage for them. The surviving parents of the Baby-Boomers and those born from the Post-Great War period, still occasionally wear what we call regular clothing (shirt and slacks, suit and tie), though the majority of the clothes that they wear is cheap, easy-to-put-on clothing, most likely given to them by their children. Now, the pendulum is swinging and some people are starting and trying to reverse everything that the Baby-Boomers have done, socially and sartorially.

To answer the original post, yes, but not to the extent of the days of yore. Society and its norms will need to change first.

-Quetzal


----------



## Tori (Mar 8, 2012)

You know it's a conscious effort to want to dress well so when I heard about Napoli Tailors through a colleague I took the plunge and decided to try them out. I have tried other tailors and I like trying out new products so this was a pleasant experience for me. I met their tailor Mr. Andy Mariani a few months ago and he was nice to deal with. As for my purchase, I ended up getting their package of 3 suits: 2 grey slim-fitting wool suits and 1 blue cashmere wool suit. By the way the suits fit very well and I'm quite happy with my purchase. It's never too late for young men to look their best just get a good tailor.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

I don't think there is a decline. On the contrary I think youngsters, hipsters, dandies are taking old skool style and improving on it, because far too many men dress in a far too old fashioned, fuddy duddy manner. I want to be seen as a 53 year old in 2014, so I don't wear the clothes of 1954 because I don't want people to view me as a 60 year old from 1954.


----------



## Snow Hill Pond (Aug 10, 2011)

silverporsche said:


> Can this be reversed ?
> Again can we reverse this decline ? If so how ?


Reinstitute the military draft.


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

Snow Hill Pond said:


> Reinstitute the military draft.


+1. With no exemptions for any reason.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> I don't think there is a decline. On the contrary I think youngsters, hipsters, dandies are taking old skool style and improving on it, because *far too many men dress in a far too old fashioned, fuddy duddy manner.* I want to be seen as a 53 year old in 2014, so I don't wear the clothes of 1954 because I don't want people to view me as a 60 year old from 1954.


This is not the American experience. The typical badly dressed American man dressed exactly like a 6 year old on the play ground, scaled up of course.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

godan said:


> +1. With no exemptions for any reason.


Not to get political, but we can't afford it.

It would not help with men's style in any case. Where did you guys get that idea? Have you seen how servicemen dress in their free time?


----------



## jcp7701 (Aug 23, 2014)

I'm a relatively young-looking 37 year-old, and I've enjoyed vintage ties, suspenders, and three-piece suits since I was about nineteen, which is long before this supposed Renaissance for younger men wearing three-piece suits occurred. I've gotten "dapper" many times in the course of my life, but you get the 30+ guys who think it's ok to wear a dress shirt hanging out like some little kid, or worse, wearing a tie with the aforesaid untucked shirt, and they are more usually viewed as the "cool kids" in my area. So much for an understated and classic look. 

It may sound like sour grapes, but those of us who had a look long before it was supposedly popular (I guess in more urban areas nowadays?) and stuck to it never get the credit that some newbie youngling with his vest above his waistline and the affectation of rolled up shirtsleeves to show off one's tattoos gets these days.


----------



## AMProfessor (Sep 9, 2011)

Wow. I've been away from this forum for a while. But really, this place has just turned into a really bad parody of internet menswear forums.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Natty Beau said:


> This is not the American experience.


I never claimed it was. I'm in Europe. The OP made a general statement without specifying geographical locations & it is that which I am responding to.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

AMProfessor said:


> Wow. I've been away from this forum for a while. But really, this place has just turned into a really bad parody of internet menswear forums.


Welcome back. With luck it will turn out to be only a summer mosquito infestation.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> I never claimed it was. I'm in Europe. The OP made a general statement without specifying geographical locations & it is that which I am responding to.


I'm in Europe too, and there's a hell of a lot of men in their 30's & 40's _"__dressed exactly like a 6 year old on the play ground, scaled up of course"_.
Worn out T-shirts, cargo shorts and flip flops are common, as are nondescript sweatshirts with bogus chainstore logos and battered old shoes of no particular style.

Joe Ferraro over at An Affordable Wardrobe nails in in one of his blog posts...



> _Let's not forget, though we'd like to believe that a well appointed gent is at home anywhere, in any situation, most people think a guy in a blazer and tie that he isn't required to wear is (more than) a little strange._


----------



## AMProfessor (Sep 9, 2011)

arkirshner said:


> Welcome back. With luck it will turn out to be only a summer mosquito infestation.


Doubtful. Sadly it has been going this way for a while. I say sadly because it was the first internet clothing related resource that I found useful.  But no more.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

AMProfessor said:


> Doubtful. Sadly it has been going this way for a while. I say sadly because it was the first internet clothing related resource that I found useful. But no more.


Let me take my rose colored glasses off for a moment. What do you think? Entropy? Gresham's Law? Something else?


----------



## Starting Late (Apr 26, 2010)

It can be a bit much at times. I attended a wake and a funeral shortly after Labor Day. I wore a sports coat for the wake and a suit for the funeral. Nothing special, just dark colors, a white shirt, a tie and dress shoes. Not only did my dress stand out, but I received quite a few comments from people about how "formal" I was dressed. I am usually of the "live and let live" variety, but this made me upset. I don't expect a fashion show at a thing like this, but is it too much to expect a little respect for the dead? I guess so.


----------



## KWissen (Mar 12, 2014)

Odradek said:


> I'm in Europe too, and there's a hell of a lot of men in their 30's & 40's _"__dressed exactly like a 6 year old on the play ground, scaled up of course"_.
> Worn out T-shirts, cargo shorts and flip flops are common, as are nondescript sweatshirts with bogus chainstore logos and battered old shoes of no particular style.
> 
> Joe Ferraro over at An Affordable Wardrobe nails in in one of his blog posts...


Not to mention the fallen of the waistcoat into obscurity...but, well, at least one does not find in Europe so many nouveau riche with shiny sport coats and, by George, baseball caps!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Odradek said:


> I'm in Europe too,


No, mo chara, you're in England


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Odradek said:


> I'm in Europe too, and there's a hell of a lot of men in their 30's & 40's _"__dressed exactly like a 6 year old on the play ground, scaled up of course"_.
> Worn out T-shirts, cargo shorts and flip flops are common, as are nondescript sweatshirts with bogus chainstore logos and battered old shoes of no particular style.


Exactly. I find myself thinking almost constantly "dress your age, for God's sake". Worse, to me, are middle aged blokes wearing "Superdry" (or whichever "now" brand is apparently fashionable) sweatshirts, tee shirts or whatever, as if they still see themselves as teenagers....


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

During the time this thread has floated around, I've begun to change my view. I had an epiphany last night. I showed my wife the link from the Gothamite that was on my Navy Gingham thread, illustrating the ubiquitousnness of navy gingham shirts in NYC. She responded that, "As fashion forward as I am, amybe I should pick up some more gingham shirts.":icon_headagainstwal

So despite living with me through this metamorphosis, and participating in noticing classical men's clothing in the movies (BTW, We just saw "Magic in the Moonlight" last night. What wonderful clothing. My wife picked out 2 tweed jackets she wants me to find) She still comes at things with a Woman's perspective toward men's clothing. That makes me believe that in the absence of male role models to train adolescents, the mother's influence prevents young men from developing a sartorial sense. The only male adult influence they have is in advertisement and popular culture. We may be able to change an attitude here or there, but without a trained cadre of fathers willing to participate, I fear it is a losing battle.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ that's very funny. Is Superdry big in the UK? It's available here stateside but I've only seen it at selective retailers. My understanding is that it's mostly technical gear, but I've not seen the full range of what they offer. 

Here it's a toss up between Tommy Bahama and Robert Graham.


----------



## Fading Fast (Aug 22, 2012)

momsdoc said:


> During the time this thread has floated around, I've begun to change my view. I had an epiphany last night. I showed my wife the link from the Gothamite that was on my Navy Gingham thread, illustrating the ubiquitousnness of navy gingham shirts in NYC. She responded that, "As fashion forward as I am, amybe I should pick up some more gingham shirts.":icon_headagainstwal
> 
> So despite living with me through this metamorphosis, and participating in noticing classical men's clothing in the movies (BTW, We just saw "Magic in the Moonlight" last night. What wonderful clothing. My wife picked out 2 tweed jackets she wants me to find) She still comes at things with a Woman's perspective toward men's clothing. That makes me believe that in the absence of male role models to train adolescents, the mother's influence prevents young men from developing a sartorial sense. The only male adult influence they have is in advertisement and popular culture. We may be able to change an attitude here or there, but without a trained cadre of fathers willing to participate, I fear it is a losing battle.


My girlfriend being the rare exception (probably because she is an old-line Wasp that can trace her relatives back to the Mayflower and they tend to appreciate tradition over change) - women are programed to think interns of fashion not style. For example, "Fashion Week" is currently going on in NYC, and while I don't really know what it is about (I assume the designers show off their fall lines or something), from the news coverage that breaks into my bubble, it seems all about women's clothes not at all about men's. There is not - to my knowledge - men's fashion week - or if there is, it gets much, much less coverage.

I really agree with your second point as well about traditional dressing needs to be passed down from father to son. I didn't get this and it took the better part of my twenties to learn how to dress from others at work (and now from AAAC). And a lot of those others were men who had been taught by their fathers when they were boys - taken to Brooks Brothers for their first suit at age 8, shown how to tie a tie, when to wear what, etc. - how to dress.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Sorry, but I can't get behind all this "dress your age" nonsense at all.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

SG_67 said:


> ^ that's very funny. Is Superdry big in the UK? It's available here stateside but I've only seen it at selective retailers. My understanding is that it's mostly technical gear, but I've not seen the full range of what they offer.
> 
> Here it's a toss up between Tommy Bahama and Robert Graham.


"Superdry" exploded out of nowhere about 2 or 3 years ago. Before that I had never heard of it, but suddenly it was everywhere. Shoes, shirts, coats, you name it.
I think the teenagers seem to have ditched it because it's so ubiquitous on the 30-something's now.

People just buying something because everyone else has it. What's possibly worse are the ones wearing cheap, no name, or Primark clothes with some sort of made up logo on them. Shirts from non-existant universities, or advertising companies that don't exist.

And these are the very people who'd give me an odd look because I might be wearing a long-sleeved shirt with buttons down the front.


----------



## cbh23 (Jun 12, 2014)

I'm 24 and have always cared about the image I project. It upsets me to see men put more value into a car or the more normal "lady killer" douche bag approach associated with my age group. I dress well for the sake of being taken seriously when I'm working. I have found that the way I dress actually attracts a higher caliber of women anyway.

Anyway, I hope the younger men see that a good self image and taking care of your appearance are important aspects of moving up in the real world.


----------



## AFCForever (Sep 26, 2013)

Odradek said:


> People just buying something because everyone else has it. What's possibly worse are the ones wearing cheap, no name, or Primark clothes with some sort of made up logo on them. Shirts from non-existant universities, or advertising companies that don't exist.


My father in law asked me if I want anything from Primark everytime he goes back to the UK. We did get some fun pajamas from the kids there however (which have since disintegrated). It doesn't make the point that horrible versions of otherwise dressy clothes are pretty much as bad as the casual ones.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Sorry, but I can't get behind all this "dress your age" nonsense at all.


How it is nonsense?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Sorry, but I can't get behind all this "dress your age" nonsense at all.


Why is it nonsense?


----------

