# Gay Trads



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Can we do this?
I am aware that it could be tricky...
(I'm still hung up on what clothes _mean_.)

We *are* all grown up & Trad here, & not going to mess about on this thread, *aren't* we?

I want to put forward the point of view that a 'Gay Trad' isn't using the style to 'pass' for straight, but using it to subvert the style...

Making that pink BD just that bit more pink.

Points of view please.
Especially I welcome my old friend *MCPSB* (hope I got your name right). MCPSB is cool & a _player_, as far as I'm concerned.

A subversive U.S. Trad is very close to an ordinary U.K. Trad in my book.

David James Frost Mellor

I'm doing this one for *Jim & Paddy* who have bought me more drinks than I can remember, not wanting anything in return, except that I should sing 'Nobody knows you when you're down & out' at their parties when Nina comes on the Hi-Fi.

Enough vodka and I'm always happy to join in.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Come on...

Have a drink...

Use a phoney name...

Play if you want.

David


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

I got into trouble when this topic was last broached, not sure why.

I'll just say I'm in favor of gay trads.

If anyone had the misfortune of seeing the Stepford Wives remake of a few years ago, there is one mildly amusing sequence in which a flamboyantly gay character is "Stepfordized" into a Brooks Brothers-clad stiff.

His friends are utterly horrified.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

https://imageshack.us


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

*Rich* says a lot to those who can read. Thanks R.
*Brownshoe* - You're cool, thanks.
*Trip* - Good to hear from you. All I want on this thread is wit or insight, but thanks for joining in.

This one was always going to be sensitive.

I'd rather see nothing here than something written which means nothing.

Happy to let the thread die.

If I'm here in ten years we can try again.

All I'm doing right now is testing the water...

Wish it was cooler.

David


----------



## RickStacy (Sep 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> I want to put forward the point of view that a 'Gay Trad' isn't using the style to 'pass' for straight, but using it to subvert the style...
> 
> Making that pink BD just that bit more pink.


Sorry, I don't understand the question. Could you elaborate?


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Whoever knows what I'm on about?

Trad in The U.S.A. is an 'Establishment' look.
If you are an 'outsider' (and _don't_ play games - If you're known to be Gay, you _do_ have to work that bit harder, agreed?), ... ... ...

...

Where was I?

...

OK, if you are Gay & dress Trad you could be accused of assuming a disguise to blend in.
In England a Queen doing the English orthodox equivalent of Trad, say 'Sloane Ranger Man', would get the same criticism.

My point is that a Gay in Trad isn't a Gay in disguise. 
He's just wearing what the *F.* he wants, and if he plays with the conventions at the same time (I look straight, but I act otherwise) then what could be more fun?
The irony.
The meaning upon ironic meaning.

Etc.

No more explanations!

Either you get my point or not.
I'm not recruiting here.
Just want to talk to those who 'get it'.
Always happy that no one 'gets it' & my threads die.
Life goes on...

David


----------



## Chris H (Oct 30, 2004)

Are there any openly gay men in the public eye who dress in a trad manner purely because that is their chosen style?

Or perhaps wear it in an 'ironic' manner as has been suggested that Miles Davis did.

I've seen pics posted on AA of a trad dresser in 'camp' company at CBGBs, Studio 54 or a similar club. I'm not insinuating that he was gay, merely that he chose some exotic companions for someone dressed in such a straight manner.


----------



## 16128 (Feb 8, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> In England a Queen doing the English orthodox equivalent of Trad, say 'Sloane Ranger Man', would get the same criticism.


Okay, David, but what if you're a gay Sloane Ranger? [?]

They're out there. Just sayin'.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

If he is a real trad, you won't see any difference - regardless of his sexual orientiation.

Just my two pence.


----------



## RickStacy (Sep 20, 2005)

I've dressed traditionally all my life, and continue to do so (though I'm not overly fond of the word "trad"). Are you saying that because a man is gay he's expected to dress differently? Most of us dress the same as everyone else. Honestly, we don't have a special uniform that enables us to identify one another.


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

> quote:"I want to put forward the point of view that a 'Gay Trad' isn't using the style to 'pass' for straight, but using it to subvert the style..."


Isn't it more likely that, just like the straight man, it's simply what he's always worn and what he's comfortable wearing? One could get the impression that you think gay men never do anything without seizing the opportunity to turn it into an ironic twist, wry commentary, or subtle parody. Sometimes they just get dressed and go to work like everybody else.


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

Roy Cohn was gay:

As was J.Edgar Hoover:










*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by RickStacy_
> 
> I've dressed traditionally all my life, and continue to do so (though I'm not overly fond of the word "trad"). Are you saying that because a man is gay he's expected to dress differently? Most of us dress the same as everyone else. Honestly, we don't have a special uniform that enables us to identify one another.


_What??_ You don't?[8D]

Based on the previous discussion -- where I don't recall Brownshoe getting into trouble -- it seems that most of the gay members of AAAC dress the way they dress (trad or otherwise) because they enjoy dressing that way. Sure, some people dress in ways to forward their ow agendas, but I don't think there are too many of those here. Not that I think there'd be anything wrong with that; it's just that most people here primarily enjoy clothing and stylishness and dress for themselves.


----------



## capnpyro (Feb 8, 2006)

I think I see what the original poster means, not necessarily being trad in manner (the old money thurston howell way) but dressing in the trad fashion and then giving it a good twist. Maybe a pocket square that's a bit garish and to far exposed. Or pink socks to match the pinker shirt. God forbid (lightly) bleached hair. That sort of thing?

I think it'd be a great look if pulled off correctly, maybe it'd be called a trad dandy.


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by capnpyro_
> 
> I think I see what the original poster means, not necessarily being trad in manner (the old money thurston howell way) but dressing in the trad fashion and then giving it a good twist. Maybe a pocket square that's a bit garish and to far exposed. Or pink socks to match the pinker shirt. God forbid (lightly) bleached hair. That sort of thing?


Well, I don't see it. Where do you get these ideas? Did you ever consider that plenty of gay men dress just like everybody else in their family, in their fraternity, at their office, or at their club? And if anything might be _more_ restrained than average so as _not_ to draw attention to their clothes? Garish pocket squares and bleached hair???


----------



## Horace (Jan 7, 2004)

I would've liked to have partied with Roy Cohn. Studio 54 was very Trad.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

I've no agenda on this one, just really enjoy the debate.
All our choices are for a reason aren't they?
I like the idea of subversion - That's just me.
I always thought that the worst thing about Punks was that they looked like Punks.
Someone with a Punk sensibility dressed as a bank manager is, to me, much more interesting.
And my imagined bank manager Punk will be able to 'get away' with so much more...

David


----------



## insuranceguy (Jan 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by RickStacy_
> 
> I've dressed traditionally all my life, and continue to do so (though I'm not overly fond of the word "trad"). Are you saying that because a man is gay he's expected to dress differently? Most of us dress the same as everyone else. Honestly, we don't have a special uniform that enables us to identify one another.


Well said. I guess I'll weigh-in on this one. While the original question was clearly - and I mean this in a totally positive way - intended to "tweak the tiger's tail" on a sensitive subject, it has brought out some common misconceptions about how putatively straight men assume that gay men act/walk/dress/live, etc.

At some point in their lives, I think that every gay man has met some sweet old lady (usually someone's great aunt), who upon hearing that one is gay says, "oh, I have a gay nephew - maybe you know him?" somehow assuming - totally innocently in great aunt Grizelda's case - that we are all on each other's Christmas card list, IM buddy list, etc. - or that there is some huge directory that we all share.

Likewise, many folks assume that it is easy to tell who is gay by virtue of mannerisms, dress, job (the old hairdresser/florist cliche), etc. As is the case with ALL sterotypes, it seems plausible on the surface because it is historically TRUE - but NOT anywhere even close to exclusively true! And this is where some of the AAAC posters seem to trip up - along with all of the other AAAC members who have been lurking on this thread, but haven't (yet?) had the nerve (balls, maybe?) to post.

I dress "trad" (sorry, I just hate that term!) because I do. I was raised that way, and while I detoured in my youth into various areas of fashion, I ultimately returned to where I started. Why? Because I like it; it's comfortable; and maybe most importantly the clothes I bought years ago are still wearable today (except, maybe, for expanding waistlines), and those that I buy today will continue to be "correct" for years to come. I never have to worry about whether my lapels are too wide, or the toes of my shoes are too square, etc. etc. etc.

Do I take liberties? Of course I do! I have a huge collection of ties - both FIH & bow - with varying colors, patterns, etc. I am often remembered for my ties - not because they are over-the-line gaudy or flashy, but because I do not hesitate to use and have fun with colors on the one piece of clothing that a man can have fun with. I also have some fun socks, though when in "business drag" I generally keep the socks relatively conservative, and save the fun ones for casual/weekend wear. I wore my checked-flag socks while watching the Daytona 500 (yes, I've been a NASCAR fan since I was knee-high-to-a-grasshopper, and have been known to wear a bow tie to races).

Now, by this point you may have asked yourself, "what has all of this got to do with sexual orientation?" Excellent question, and the answer is the very point of this whole thread . . . NOTHING!

Ain't the world a fun place these days? 

BRS
New York, NY


----------



## shuman (Dec 12, 2004)

Great post. Thanks for sharing your views.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by LabelKing_
> 
> Roy Cohn was gay:
> 
> ...


There is no historical evidence that Hoover was gay.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

*Insuranceguy* is completely cool (old fashioned expression by now, I guess) and in tune with what I was up to here.

Thanks.

David


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

https://imageshack.us
https://imageshack.us
https://imageshack.us
https://imageshack.us


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Rich !!!!

Just brilliant.

D.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

> quote:Studio 54 was very Trad.


 No. Sorry. This is wrong. Period.

Great post, InsuranceGuy.

Trolling again, Russell Street? 

Doesn't seem to have worked. [B)]

Fine job, fellow members! 

*https://www.CustomShirt1.com

Kabbaz-Kelly & Sons Fine Custom Clothiers
* Bespoke Shirts & Furnishings * Zimmerli Swiss Underwear **
* Alex Begg Cashmere * Pantherella Socks **​


----------



## RickStacy (Sep 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by rojo_
> Where do you get these ideas? Did you ever consider that plenty of gay men dress just like everybody else in their family, in their fraternity, at their office, or at their club? And if anything might be _more_ restrained than average so as _not_ to draw attention to their clothes? Garish pocket squares and bleached hair???


Well said, rojo, and it made me chuckle because sometimes while my partner and I are clothes shopping, one of us will briefly consider something, then decide it looks "too gay." Not in a negative way at all, but just because if one is gay, that doesn't necessarily mean one wants to look like the stereotype.


----------



## RickStacy (Sep 20, 2005)

Forgive my ignorance, *Rich*, but who are the guys in the pictures? Check out the lapels on the third one down: you could put an eye out if you weren't careful


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Mr Hoover may well have not been gay, but he almost certainly was a homosexual.

Here he is with his companion, Tyle Dolson:








,







,









'They rode to and from work together, ate lunches together, and vacationed together...When Hoover traveled on official business, Tolson traveled with him...The relationship was so close [over forty years], so enduring, and so affectionate that it took the place of marriage for both [lifelong] bachelors.'








,


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by RickStacy_
> 
> Forgive my ignorance, *Rich*, but who are the guys in the pictures? Check out the lapels on the third one down: you could put an eye out if you weren't careful


Top to bottom:

NoÃ«l Coward 
NoÃ«l Coward again
Cecil Beaton
T.E. Lawrence

The one I posted earlier was John Gielgud

Cecil's lapel peak does look devilish - it's the light falling behind it on the shoulder that brings it out.

Here are W Somerset Maugham:
https://imageshack.us
and Francis Bacon:
https://imageshack.us


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Alexander Kabbaz_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> Top to bottom:


Is that a literal progression? If so, it would seem as though T.E. Lawrence, at least, is properly sequenced. [}]

For more of Somerset Maugham, here is a link to an old thread of mine:


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


[:0] Oooh, you're awful!


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

(German Trad. Max Raabe. Great guy.)


----------



## Chris H (Oct 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Alexander Kabbaz_
> [Trolling again, Russell Street?


What troll?

A very ineresting thread developing.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Thanks for the support Chris.
'Trolling' is all in the eye of the beholder maybe, but I *am* sensitive to that.
To be clear: My interest is in *debate* not argument.
I am, however, relaxed about how I make a debate happen.
I'd never 'flame' though.
(Would you believe I had to ask my nephew what all these terms mean?
This being a gay thread, 'Trolling' is quite something else in England... and maybe in the U.S. too?)

David


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

I'm sorry, but what do Sir John Gielgud, Clyde Tolson, J. Edgar Hoover, Somerset Maugham, Noel Coward, and Col. Lawrence have to do with this discussion?


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

A bit of history.

There was a hallowed British (or English) tradition of what I would call â€œcultured male companionshipâ€ among the upper classes, fostered by the sexual segregation of the boarding school, sports team, gentlemanâ€™s club, officerâ€™s mess, political Ã©lite, diplomatic corps, etc. Homosexuality was illegal in the UK until the late 60s - one of the reasons put forward (in private) in support of Lord Annanâ€™s reform was that homosexual politicians were vulnerable to blackmail.

The homoerotic character of the companionship ranged widely, from mild to predatory. Many of the more predatory upper class homosexuals were active in the colonial administrations â€“ the Arab world exerted an especially powerful fascination, probably in part because of the ready availability there of young male prostitutes â€“ there are allusions to this in Waughâ€™s Brideshead (some French intellectuals and colonials had similar tastes). Cottaging was dangerous in those days â€“ the young John Gielgud himself had a narrow escape. Anyway, such things, so long as a certain decorum was observed, were an accepted part of upper class life. In London, the discreetly promiscuous well-dressed homosexual was a feature of every party, and every theatre and out-of-hours drinking club.

These gentlemanly homosexuals (the term â€œgayâ€ would be anachronistic), because of their backgrounds, dressed as the upper classes dressed, but often with a slight flamboyance â€“ not particularly to attract attention to their homosexuality, but by taste, giving rise to what was called the â€œcampâ€ look. There was a continuum from the very slightly camp to the outrageously camp. The slightly camp merged seamlessly into mainstream, just as the sexual preferences did. In those days the separation between homosexual and heterosexual was less visible. For example, Cecil Beaton, though an avowed homosexual, was married. This was not unusual. The underground nature of homosexuality meant that social conventions often had to serve as a cover. 

Camp features in male dress are thus part of the English tradition. I submit that to be really Anglo-Trad you should be ever-so-slightly camp. 

I realise of course that all I have said here is highly debatableâ€¦


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

> quote:*Rich* I realise of course that all I have said here is highly debatableâ€¦


 Perhaps. But a highly informative and well-written assemblage of a group of diverse trivia into an utterly logical, believable, and interesting tome. Thank you.



> quote:*Chris *What troll?


 Oh, please. Did you even read the opening post? If not, won't the author's admission suffice?


> quote:A very ineresting thread developing.


 Yes. In spite thereof.

*https://www.CustomShirt1.com

Kabbaz-Kelly & Sons Fine Custom Clothiers
* Bespoke Shirts & Furnishings * Zimmerli Swiss Underwear **
* Alex Begg Cashmere * Pantherella Socks **​


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Hi A.K.

'Troll' is maybe your word more than mine.
I wanted to stimulate debate.
I wanted the debate to happen...
And now it *is*, and jolly good it is too.

Would you be doing this thread without a little poke?

Sometimes poking can be good.

David


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

David/Russell

Poke or provoke?


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

But we *are* having a good debate - 
Let's get on with it!

D.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Would Barney Frank's style be considered trad? 

(I honestly don't know; I still have not put a finger on "trad." I am one that does not mind a little change now and then. I know I'm not trad; I just don't know how to recognize it.)


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by forsbergacct2000_
> 
> Would Barney Frank's style be considered trad?
> 
> (I honestly don't know; I still have not put a finger on "trad." I am one that does not mind a little change now and then. I know I'm not trad; I just don't know how to recognize it.)


I think so. A big part of being "trad" is to not be too fastidious or studied in one's look, and Barney Frank certainly fits that bill.

As an aside, despite appearances, most scholars on T.E. Lawrence that I've referenced don't believe that he was gay. In fact, before his military days, he'd been madly in love with a young girl who ultimately rejected him; this rejection, according to friends (and I believe his own diary), threw him into a deep depression. He never married, in part, because he had an extreme aversion to any sort of skin-to-skin contact...he even usually refused to shake hands. Much of this fear/aversion probably came from his brutal treatment at the hands of the Turks, but certainly he was a socially maladjusted person from the outset of his life.

The only credible evidence that Lawrence may have been gay or bisexual was the testimonies of a few fellow military men who claimed he'd made advances towards them. However, it was not claimed that he actually solicited them for sex, and in fact these circumstances -- whatever they were -- happened after his rapes (1916, I think), which would be in character for someone as brutalized and as disturbed as Lawrence likely was. The interviews also took place years after Lawrence died, and hence decades after they were supposed to have taken place. Therefore, most scholars cast serious doubt on them.


----------



## RickStacy (Sep 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> But we *are* having a good debate -
> Let's get on with it!


I must be quite obtuse. Exactly what are we debating?


----------



## malinda (Aug 25, 2002)

> quote:I wanted to stimulate debate.
> I wanted the debate to happen...
> And now it is, and jolly good it is too.


 You may now have your debate where it belongs. And I warn you that you are a millimeter from having the thread locked.

What you are doing, Russell Street, is trolling. If the thread gets locked, so do you. So now, seeing as how you're so good at controlling the debate, control it for your own ability to remain a poster.

Malinda


----------



## jmorgan32 (Apr 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by malinda_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


THANK YOU MALINDA!!!!!!!!!!!! GOD BLESS..................


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

"Love the sinner, hate the sin"
Lesson learned.
Apologies.

David


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

Wasn't there also some controversy over whether Cary Grant was gay?

J.Edgar Hoover also had an excess of nude Greek sculptures in his garden in addition to his life partner.

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by LabelKing_
> 
> Wasn't there also some controversy over whether Cary Grant was gay?


There was indeed, but I think someone was being mischievous, cashing in on the wave of retrospective celebrity outings - I don't think there's any evidence. My mother would be devastated.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by malinda_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Teacher_
> 
> As an aside, despite appearances, most scholars on T.E. Lawrence that I've referenced don't believe that he was gay. .... but certainly he was a socially maladjusted person from the outset of his life.


You're right, there is no concrete proof that he was gay, but a lot of circumstancial evidence, particularly in his own writings, that he was at least confused and probably tormented by his sexual leanings. He certainly very much enjoyed close male companionship. There are plenty of other examples during that period of what certainly looks like repressed homosexuality - J M Barrie comes immediately to mind.

There must have been a lot of repressed homosexuals then, given the moral climate of the times. Many homosexuals were tormented by guilt because their proclivities were condemned by society, the law and the Church, and struggled to be "normal", at least outwardly, with varying degress of success.

The gay community certainly take T E Lawrence as one of theirs -wishful thinking?


----------



## Chris H (Oct 30, 2004)

Does a lot of this rumour and inuendo about Lawrence stem from the film 'Lawrence of Arabia'? There was also the inference of homosexual torture of Lawrence by the Turks.


----------



## RJman (Nov 11, 2003)

L of A is my favorite movie. I think the inference suggested in the post above is backwards. David Lean suggested certain indices without actually portraying any overt homosexuality or homosexual identity of Lawrence. Hence the cavorting in Wildsmith boots for the photographer, the two young "assistants" and the complete lack of a female figure who is not veiled or otherwise hidden. 

The inference of homosexuality had existed well before the film.

I believe that after WWI, while serving incognito in the RAF, Lawrence on occasion asked his fellow servicemen to beat him. This may have been influenced by the treatment he may or may not have received from the Turks.

One of the lasting impressions I took away from reading Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom was that of a rather deep-seated misogyny and what appeared to be allusions to a greater companionship between men in the desert. Lawrence did write that certain men lost it completely and buggered their camels.

*************
RJman. Accept no imitations.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

I've asked Malinda to close this fascinating thread, I'm afraid.
I love the 'debate', the playing with ideas, the random nature of it.
But maybe it's too much of a 'loose cannon' at the present.
I think this thread has revealed a lot - and that was the point - to start a conversation & see what would be said.
Some people haven't liked it & that's fine.
Mine is only *one* voice on Ask Andy.
I'm always happy to hear from the majority.

David


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> I've asked Malinda to close this fascinating thread, I'm afraid.
> I love the 'debate', the playing with ideas, the random nature of it.
> ...


What, you mean someone who starts a thread can have it stopped whenever it suits them?


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

I'm sure not.
But if I'm to be kicked off if this unpopular thread gets locked...
Then I'll save myself & loose the thread.
*Loved* the thread, though...
Ask Andy is bigger than the sum of its parts & I respect that.
If I'm to be a forum member then the price I pay is to abide by the forum rules.
That's the deal.
Seems fair to me.
Yes, I might have pushed it - 
But I'm not a fool.
Ask Andy is too much fun to loose out on.
So...
I compromise,
I conform,
I behave,

The FORUM counts, not the individual.

David


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Teacher_
> 
> Based on the previous discussion -- where I don't recall Brownshoe getting into trouble --


Teacher--

I received a warning from Malinda in the previous thread after I posted something to the effect of "That post made me sick to my stomach." The post in question stated that the thought of gay sex made "[the poster] sick to [his] stomach."

To my horror, the author of the homophobic statement took my remark as support for his point of view, as did Malinda, and, apparently, others.

I emailed Malinda explaining my position, and she (?) suggested I clarify my position. Below is an excerpt from that email to Malinda:

"I responded to an offensive, homophobic post by
> saying it made me sick to my stomach. I was careful
> not to attack the poster, and planned to leave it at
> that.
> 
> I was dismayed to see that the poster misinterpreted
> my remark, believing I was supporting him. I find
> the attitude expressed in his statement truly 
> offensive, and if one of AAAC's gay members thought
> I was in agreement with it, I would feel terrible."


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> The FORUM counts, not the individual.


Ah, a trad sentiment at last - LOL

I don't know what 'gay trad' is. I know trads who are gay. I also know trads who are conservative, liberal, neo-cons, socialists (well only one or two), straight, Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian. Trads are legion, and not being noticed is something aspired to, ingrained, and possibly genetic. I actually never knew serious people (i.e. not in the fashion/clothing industry) discussed clothing/lifestyle until I visited this forum for the first time. I was amazed that there were people who could articulate such things. I'm still amazed.

Regarding this particular thread, my sentiments tend to agree with Malinda's.


----------



## Chris H (Oct 30, 2004)

While Russell Street's earlier comments on this thread may have appeared frivolous, I don't believe any malice was intended. There was no homophobic intent in his post, quite the opposite.

I think to punish him for other people's distasteful comments would be unfair, particularly as he has appologised and asked for the thread to be locked. He has no history of abusive or off-colour posts, to the contrary his posts have been both light-hearted and interesting.

It would be a shame to lose him, I'd like to see this thread locked.

Just my two cents worth.
Chris


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

If I can just get a word in before the thread's locked, I don't think any discussion of traditional English style is quite complete without some reference to many gay Brits such as Cecil Beaton, NoÃ«l Coward, John Gielgud,etc. who were shining examples of classic style always with a little extra. The little extra affectation - call it camp, kitsch, eccentricity, playfulness or what you will - is to my mind an essential part of true English traditional style. I'm thinking of the Duke of Devonshire's yellow socks, the Duke of Kent's high collars and enormous tie knots, fancy braces, loud coat linings, striped shirts, spotted handkerchiefs, etc. I think this is where American Trad, where all affectation is banned, is quite different. The slight foppishness, or rather the temptation of foppishness gives English style its unique charm. 

This appraisal is probably coloured by a French viewpoint. We don't always see the same things.


----------



## Long Way of Drums (Feb 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Long Way of Drums_
> Are you saying that no one with involvement in the fashion/clothing industry is a serious person/can be taken seriously/is involved in a serious or worthwhile pursuit?
> 
> I don't intend this as implicitly pejorative. I mean it as a sincere question.


Sorry, I may not have phrased that very well. While I understand there is a lot of money involved with fashion design and related retailing, marketing, advertising, etc., I do not think of the fashion industry as a serious pursuit. I do not mean this to be pejorative either. I am reminded of a quote I heard a long time ago regarding the French (whom I love and highest respect for) "The French take serious things frivolously, and frivolous things seriously."(sp?) Serious pursuits are not about making money. Don't get me wrong, the world is a better place because there are people who take frivolous things seriously, like fashion, if nothing else, it is fun to watch.
Cheers


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Just to mention - 
The thread can stay if we *all* behave,
and I can stay if I behave.
Deal?
This is *entirely* due to the generosity of Malinda.
I really don't want to push her forbearance.

David


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Just to say (with some caution) - 
We *can* still kick this one around.
I was very pleased to hear mention of Montgomery Clift. Always looked good in a button-down and wore a lot of Brooks when young (So the books say).
If we just post up Gay icons wearing Trad etc.
There's little harm in that.
Forget about what it all _means_ (If anything!).
Good looking Guys in Trad (And who doesn't look good in Trad?) are always inspiring & good to see.

David


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote
Catherine Keener as Nelle Harper Lee


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Nice Pic MPSCB! - Thanks,

I've a lot of time for Mr. Capote, no matter what Gore Vidal used to say about him. Then again I've a lot of time for Mr. Vidal...

Truman Capote looked wonderful in his '20's too - Kinda dirty blond hair & that _bruised _ look under the eyes that that a good night out often leaves you with.

Glad we are continuing with this here, despite me being so clumsy.

David


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Christopher Isherwood and W.H.Auden


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote
> Catherine Keener as Nelle Harper Lee


I have the same glasses PSH wears in the movie.

So rad, so trad. Love 'em.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Love the hair parted on different sides - 
A trick I think they used in the TV Brideshead for Charles & Sebastian. Am I right?

David


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> Love the hair parted on different sides -
> A trick I think they used in the TV Brideshead for Charles & Sebastian. Am I right?
> David


When I was small I was told not to part my hair on the left as that meant you were gay (although that word was not used then). LOL 
Today I part my hair on the left on purpose , even though I don't think anyone has heard of this.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Nice touch, mpscb!
Trying to remember out of Charles & Sebastian who parted their hair on which side...
Could it be the key to their relationship?

David


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Do you think Toto counts as a Gay Trad dog?
Now _there's_ a thread I'd never dare start.

David


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> Do you think Toto counts as a Gay Trad dog?
> Now _there's_ a thread I'd never dare start.
> ...


There is a Trad Dog thread, but I don't think sexual orientation was ever discussed. [:0]


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Missed a trick there!
But is Toto a Trad dog who's Gay,
Or a Gay dog who's Trad?

And why don't I dig my own grave while I'm at it !

David


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow...new one for me. Where was this? Now that I think of it, just about every old man in my extended family parts his hair on the left side, _a la_ early Ronald Regan. Maybe I should run this by them.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

I part my hair on the left, and so does the House of Windsor.


----------



## Connemara (Sep 16, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> I part my hair on the left, and so does the House of Windsor.


Truthfully? I had no idea.

-----------------------------
"In summer I sleep under a white ermine cover and in winter, under sable."--Karl Lagerfeld, the one and only.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

&c &c


----------



## 15159 (Oct 18, 2004)

https://www.styleforum.net


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

I love the unspoken language of clothes etc, and of how things look & what they _might_ or might not mean...
Once upon a time a Green Carnation was invested with meaning.
Later there was the Handkerchief 'code'...

Just plain interesting!

David


----------



## mack11211 (Oct 14, 2004)

Getting to this debate late, but still not understanding what it is.

Sticking to the US for a moment, because it's what I know:

Do WASP families produce gay guys? Yes. Do some want to dress just as their daddies did? I suppose. Do some want to do the trad wardrobe in a more "colorful" way? I suppose that too. But so may their straight brethren.

May some gay folk, regardless of to which manner they were born, want to 'tweak' or 'reinvent' the look? Yes. I recall as a teenager visiting All American Boy, a store on Christopher Street in NYC that was recommended by a Flusser book in the early eighties. Lots of alligator shirts, white Tretorns, etc. I don't recall what was specifically gay about it, but gay it was.

The one advantage gay people may have in reinventing this look or any other, is that the outsider status may lead one to take nothing, be it a social relation or a style of dress, as a given. But others may share this outsider status as well, regardless of their sexuality. Recall that great work of satire The Preppy Handbook, which was co-edited by a Jewish woman and gay WASP.

In sum: assume nothing.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> I part my hair on the left, and so does the House of Windsor.


So did I when I had enough to part. I thought most people did, though I always noticed that Cary Grant parted his on the right, which I thought was the "wrong side".


----------



## Old Brompton (Jan 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by mack11211_
> 
> But others may share this outsider status as well, regardless of their sexuality. Recall that great work of satire The Preppy Handbook, which was co-edited by a Jewish woman and gay WASP.


Quite right. The same now could be said of WASPs themselves, whose people founded, developed, and civilized this very country, and who are being shunted aside, or cleansed, in favour of a 'New America' in which it's not clear they have a place.

In any event, to return to the topic at hand, I wonder if anyone has heard of Stephen Tennant. Trad, or not?


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Old Brompton_
> In any event, to return to the topic at hand, I wonder if anyone has heard of Stephen Tennant. Trad, or not?


Lover of Siegfried Sassoon? I think of trad as American, no slight intended to our British friends.


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Old Brompton_
> Quite right. The same now could be said of WASPs themselves, whose people founded, developed, and civilized this very country, and who are being shunted aside, or cleansed, in favour of a 'New America' in which it's not clear they have a place.
> 
> In any event, to return to the topic at hand, I wonder if anyone has heard of Stephen Tennant. Trad, or not?


Wow, a lot has happened since I was last in the US. Where are the mass WASP graves being found? More importantly, where can I get in on the fun? There must have been quite a coup if _the group represented by every single president other than JFK_ no longer has a voice?


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Old Brompton_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Hey MACK11211 !

Welcome to the debate that isn't a debate!

Just messing around - popping out ideas, seeing what happens.
If we're not offensive we can do this - 
GOD BLESS ASK ANDY !!!

David


----------



## Old Brompton (Jan 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by tiger02_
> There must have been quite a coup if _the group represented by every single president other than JFK_ no longer has a voice?


Ah, yes, I _completely _ forgot about LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush II, those well-known advocates of WASP solidarity. Silly me.


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Brownshoe_
> I'm a WASP and still waiting for my magical passport to wealth and influence...
> Maybe it got lost in the mail.


You're supposed to get it at birth - or so I'm told 

PS All I've got is a WASP green card! (or is it blue?)


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm rather surprised at this feeling that WASPs are being somehow sidelined - surely they are the ones who are really in charge (I mean their representatives). American values are WASP values aren't they? What is being alluded to here? Affirmative action? Multiculturalism?


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> I'm rather surprised at this feeling that WASPs are being somehow sidelined - surely they are the ones who are really in charge (I mean their representatives). American values are WASP values aren't they? What is being alluded to here? Affirmative action? Multiculturalism?


Rich, the impression I'm getting is that WASPs, who as a voting bloc deplore feelings of 'entitlement' in the lower classes, feel that unless they are rich and famous and possibly President, they have been marginalized.
Tom


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just kidding around.

WASPs do that sort of thing!


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Brownshoe_
> Just kidding around.
> 
> WASPs do that sort of thing!


Wasn't directed at you man. OB has made many, many racist comments in the last couple of weeks. If he's just joking around, it's getting old.

edit--this was a good thread for a while, I apologize for my part in derailing it. I promised Andy I'd stop doing that, but this is the Interchange [}]

Tom


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Brownshoe_
> Just kidding around.
> WASPs do that sort of thing!


Theeey doo? LOL [8D]

Maybe we should have a listing of WASP humor, which is most appropriate and when: satire; irony, bad puns - well Ok maybe not bad puns, but you get the idea, Cheers


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by tiger02_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I remember a few instances. Gross.

Sorry, I jumped in late and posted as a goof--my self-hatred as a WASP was so well ingrained during my time at Wesleyan that self-deprecating comments are sort of a reflex action at this point.


----------



## Brownshoe (Mar 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's probably pretty dry, in the main--think Spalding Gray.


----------



## insuranceguy (Jan 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by mack11211_
> 
> I recall as a teenager visiting All American Boy, a store on Christopher Street in NYC that was recommended by a Flusser book in the early eighties. Lots of alligator shirts, white Tretorns, etc. I don't recall what was specifically gay about it, but gay it was.


WOW! All American Boy (and Tretorns, for that matter) - brings back memories of Christopher Street, when it still WAS Christopher Street.

BRS
New York, NY

"Never speak poorly of a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. This ensures that when you DO speak poorly of him you'll be a mile away - AND you'll have his shoes!"


----------



## RJman (Nov 11, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by insuranceguy_
> WOW! All American Boy (and Tretorns, for that matter) - brings back memories of Christopher Street, when it still WAS Christopher Street.


RJ has collaborated on some Tretorn special editions. www.richardjames.co.uk

*************
RJman. Accept no imitations.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

What does WASP mean? White American Straight Preps?


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> What does WASP mean? White American Straight Preps?


Guess that would make me a WAGP White American Gay Prep -


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

MPCSB -

Please educate me - 
What is the Tradly LL Bean's stance on Gay issues?
_Very_ interested to know.

David


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> MPCSB -
> 
> ...


Opps, my response is in the other thread. [:I]


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> What does WASP mean? White American Straight Preps?


White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. Keeps us riffraff Mediterranean popers out.

Tom


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Not a problem, I'm on to Google now as advised.
You're right though - You never hear about the end of a boycott, do you?

David


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by tiger02_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Who says it doesn't mean White Anglo-Saxon Papists?


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> Anglo-Saxon Papists


Not many pasty papists [}]


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by tiger02_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 But isn't the Pope a rather Pasty Papist?


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

You, my friend, are not the Pope.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Why are we speaking of our popular, prim, proper, patently papist pope?


----------



## Old Brompton (Jan 15, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by tiger02_
> OB has made many, many *racist* comments in the last couple of weeks.


A 'Racist' is just someone whoâ€™s winning an argument with a liberal (or a Neocon).


----------



## tiger02 (Dec 12, 2004)

That, or someone who would say


> quote:_Originally posted by Old Brompton_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Old Brompton_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Hear, hear, Mr Brompton. And I also second you regarding higher education. This is an international trend.


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's nothing wrong with elietism in education as long as it's merit based. Not everyone was meant to go to college, but everyone deserves a right to fail.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Anyone got any nice pictures of Montgomery Clift to post up?
Just fancy looking at him today...

David


----------



## Chris H (Oct 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> Anyone got any nice pictures of Montgomery Clift to post up?
> Just fancy looking at him today...
> ...


Hello David, here's a link:

https://images.google.com/images?q=...R,GGLR:2005-38,GGLR:en&sa=N&tab=ii&oi=imagest


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Thanks Chris - Nice pics!

D.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Thinking of Monty (Never time wasted)...
If you Google *'Monty Clift Shrine'*, you get all sorts of good stuff from a chap called (I think) Stephen.

D.


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Well the Oscars were certainly 'gay' lat night, not perhaps winning best picture, but everywhere else.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

You take that back, Mark! [:0]
Showbusiness... Gay? [:0]
Next you'll be spreading slurs about Liberace... [:0]
... Can if you like - He's not a Trad so I don't care...! 

(Look who's doing funny faces all of a sudden on his posts? My nephew thinks it will make me easier to understand...)

D.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Just to kick some life into this rapidly dying dog - 
How about some Trads with Gay appeal?
They can be happily married fathers of five, but how about some pics of Trads with 'that certain something' which speaks to the 'other side of the church'?
Maybe Cary Grant was or wasn't (and we've all been stuck in clubs listening to unending conversations on the 'was he or wasn't he' theme) - But I'll vote for him as a Trad dresser with gay appeal.
Just to get the ball rolling.
So to speak.
As it were.
(And now I've gone all Sandra Bernhardt...)- sp?

D.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

This 'Tucker' boy...
How about him?

D.


----------



## Tiff_Bradley (Dec 7, 2005)

Are you seriously suggesting Tucker Carlson is a gay icon?[:0]

His pics sure seem to be popular over on the trad forum though.


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Hi Tiff - 
Tucker?
Well... He's not too ugly is he?
Let the boy have a little attention, that's what I say.

D.


----------



## Tiff_Bradley (Dec 7, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Russell Street_
> 
> Hi Tiff -
> Tucker?
> ...


Hi Russ,

Well he's sure got something that tickles those trad boys fancies.

Tiff


----------



## Russell Street (Nov 28, 2004)

Of course I'm not implying that he actually _"plays the trombone"_, I'm just saying he's Trad and looks alright.

D.


----------



## Keith McKenzie (Mar 13, 2006)

Look at how disgusting this all is, and with no other motive than to harm the forum. The sooner the internet is regulated by international law that can be meaningfully enforced the better.
There is nothing wrong with homosexuals but there is much that is wrong with this sort of propaganda. There is no age limit here at Ask Andy unlike other internet sites. Would you like your son to see this thread and to emulate the men photographed here? Let us be "liberal" by all means but let us not be fools to ourselves.

Keith.

LOCK THIS THREAD.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I wish it had not been resurrected in the first place.

Malinda has done the right thing with Russell.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

I would be deeply surprised with the person resurrecting this thread was not another incarnation of a certain troll. 

Warmest regards


----------



## Intrepid (Feb 20, 2005)

Do what you want guys, but this psychopath is surely monitoring the board. 

When he was here, he continually kept it alive by posting, when it was nearing a well deserved death.

We are doing it for him if we continue to post.

Carpe Diem


----------

