# Guys, Wear Socks!



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

OK, if you're in your 20's, you get a semi-pass, and don't worry about it at the beach, or camp, or something. But I see guys in their 40's, and 50's, and beyond, proudly sporting their pale, yellowing ankles under otherwise, really nice clothes. I've just been browsing this excellent Tumbler -

https://maturestyle.tumblr.com/archive

authored by an otherwise superbly dressed gent, who insists upon this mode with some of his tailored ensembles. We've all witnessed this desecration at Pitti Uomo en mass. Well fellas, it ain't cool, it ain't styish, and it sure as He*l ain't pretty! In my 7th decade, no one wants to see my ankles! Heck, *I* don't want to see my ankles! And no one wants to see yours either.


----------



## Larry Poppins (Jan 14, 2014)

No. I will* not!  *Not when I have to look at every threadbare T-shirt and pair of shorts any 40-50 year old cares to wear everywhere I go. My shirts fit. My chinos are pressed. My feet are clean and my beard is trimmed. And no, I will not wear socks with my mocs. Not in the summer. Not when it's hot. Sneer at my ankles if you must. Roll your eyes or make snide remarks as I pass. But I will not wear socks in hot weather. Let the sweat ruin the leather. See if I care. At least I'm not wearing flip-flops or worse...white socks with Birkinstocks.


----------



## immanuelrx (Dec 7, 2013)

Larry Poppins said:


> No. I will* not!  *Not when I have to look at every threadbare T-shirt and pair of shorts any 40-50 year old cares to wear everywhere I go. My shirts fit. My chinos are pressed. My feet are clean and my beard is trimmed. And no, I will not wear socks with my mocs. Not in the summer. Not when it's hot. Sneer at my ankles if you must. Roll your eyes or make snide remarks as I pass. But I will not wear socks in hot weather. Let the sweat ruin the leather. See if I care. At least I'm not wearing flip-flops or worse...white socks with Birkinstocks.


will you wear them in a box?
will you wear them with a fox?
Will you wear them in the house?
will you wear them with a mouse?


----------



## orange fury (Dec 8, 2013)

immanuelrx said:


> will you wear them in a box?
> will you wear them with a fox?
> Will you wear them in the house?
> will you wear them with a mouse?


:biggrin: Bahahaha thank you for this


----------



## Larry Poppins (Jan 14, 2014)

I will wear socks with shoes that lace up, with suits and boots and tweed sport coats. But madras calls for different rules, and backyard gatherings around pools, and so for deck shoes and driving mocs there is no call for wearing socks.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Beyond the white socks and Birkenstocks, and all the variations on that theme, little looks more odd and grating on the senses than socks and Topsiders. Enjoying a stroll in the park or a city street on a beautiful Spring/ Summer day in sock less Weguns is one of the pleasures of the season. Walking along a quaint New England village street in Espadrilles san socks wearing pastel cotton trousers, picnicking in the park in madras shorts with bare feet in unlined penny loafers, enjoying a sidewalk bistro dinner in a navy blazer with white pants and sock free canvas boat-shoes, these are the things summer is made for.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

Larry Poppins said:


> I will wear socks with shoes that lace up, with suits and boots and tweed sport coats. But madras calls for different rules, and backyard gatherings around pools, and so for deck shoes and driving mocs there is no call for wearing socks.


YES!! I love this, and agree with it except for the driving mocs just because I do not wear them.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

We read different source material.
"There is no doubt that any man's outfit will be vastly improved by going sockless."
https://sexyankles.tumblr.com/


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

With casual shoes, I really don't care that much either way.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I used to wear every shoe I owned sockless, except those in black. I've changed my tune a bit lately. Unlined loafers, novelty/GTH shoes, boat shoes, and canvas sneakers are getting sockless wear this year but absolutely nothing else so far.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

My most often worn summer footwear:
Birkenstocks-----------------no socks
Alden LHS--------------------socks
Tods Espadrilles-------------no socks
T&J Bison Loafers-----------socks
T&J Calf Loafers-------------no socks
WalkOver White Bucs-------socks
E.T. Wright Nomads---------no socks
Cole Haan or Polo drivers---either way
AE Boulder-------------------either way


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.

*THIS!

*









Just dreadful!

Older guys trying to look hip by wearing inappropriate clothing are little different than the dowager who attempts to recapture her youth by wearing a skin-tight mini-skirt. While it might flatter the wearers' vanity, it does little for the eyes of beholders.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Okay, the otherwise well dressed geezer is fine right down to the cuffs. Then he not only goes sockless but is wearing house slippers? Puh-leeze! Now, at the present time, in a southern California summer, I am wearing a polo shirt, shorts with 9" inseams and fisherman's sandals . . . and no sox. Wearing socks with sandals is an even greater crime than the above mentioned 'gent'. However, if you are going to wear shoes without socks, for pity's sake ditch the tweed coat and necktie!


----------



## Matey (Jan 22, 2013)

+10. Couldn't agree more!


----------



## Skyjumper (Apr 27, 2014)

If I'm wearing shorts, I'm not wearing socks. Except, no-show socks so my boat shoes don't start to stink. My ankles are not white after one afternoon in the sun.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Flanderian said:


> Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.
> 
> *THIS!
> 
> ...


Looks fine to me. And those aren't house slippers nor is that a tweed coat.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

Flanderian said:


> Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.
> 
> *THIS!
> 
> ...


 Dreadful is a bit harsh. How about silly? Likewise the people in the photos with business clothes and no socks looked a bit silly to me, but it seems an innocent silliness. In certain parts of the country, and in certain circles, wearing loafers without socks seems to be a well established fashion.

I do not object, on the grounds of style to wearing boat shoes or other informal shoes sockless. I wear espadrills sockless. As a practical matter, however, leather shoes worn without socks smell bad.

Gurdon


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

Flanderian said:


> OK, if you're in your 20's, you get a semi-pass, and don't worry about it at the beach, or camp, or something. But I see guys in their 40's, and 50's, and beyond, proudly sporting their pale, yellowing ankles under otherwise, really nice clothes. I've just been browsing this excellent Tumbler -
> 
> https://maturestyle.tumblr.com/archive
> 
> authored by an otherwise superbly dressed gent, who insists upon this mode with some of his tailored ensembles. We've all witnessed this desecration at Pitti Uomo en mass. Well fellas, it ain't cool, it ain't styish, and it sure as He*l ain't pretty! In my 7th decade, no one wants to see my ankles! Heck, *I* don't want to see my ankles! And no one wants to see yours either.


No, you don't even get a pass when you're in your 20's.
Socks are one of the first thing I put on in the morning and one of the last things I take off in the evening.

The sockless look doesn't look good and, most importantly, it's not even comfortable!


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

I am overwhelmingly in support of socks being worn anywhere but the beach. I would be delighted if I never again have to view a set of hairy cankles protruding from beneath a pair of trousers. Gentlemen. Please.


----------



## commandlinegamer (Jun 6, 2013)

Where possible I go without. Barefoot in the house, sockless in sandals in high summer. Try it: your feet will thank you for it.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

RogerP said:


> I am overwhelmingly in support of socks being worn anywhere but the beach. I would be delighted if I never again have to view a set of hairy cankles protruding from beneath a pair of trousers. Gentlemen. Please.


Agreed.

Socklessness is a symptom of the decline of Western civilisation.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Maybe you naysayers don't have pretty ankles.


----------



## StephenRG (Apr 7, 2005)

Flanderian said:


> Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.
> 
> *THIS!
> 
> ...


His taste in furniture is pretty dire as well.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

momsdoc said:


> Maybe you naysayers don't have pretty ankles.


No one with a y chromosome in their DNA does


----------



## Chillburgher (Mar 19, 2014)

I'll cast another vote for "must wear socks." I would agree with those who say socks look silly with shorts, but the answer to that is to wear full length trousers. I don't want to see men's ankles and I don't want to see any other portion of their legs either.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

GWW said:


> No one with a y chromosome in their DNA does


It depends on your perspective. My wife thinks I do.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

I have to agree with the few who think going sockless is not comfortable. I perspire, and without cotton or wool there to wick it away, my shoes feel like a swamp in five minutes. I tried it a couple of times and gave up.

I also agree with whoever said that socks below shorts isn't a flattering look.

But I couldn't give up the comfort of socks, so I gave up shorts.


----------



## red_shift (Aug 8, 2013)

Skyjumper said:


> If I'm wearing shorts, I'm not wearing socks. Except, no-show socks so my boat shoes don't start to stink. My ankles are not white after one afternoon in the sun.


I don't mind showing some ankle but I don't need to prematurely age my shoes with sweat. No-shows are my compromise position.


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

Aren't those the Epaulet guys?



Tempest said:


> We read different source material.
> "There is no doubt that any man's outfit will be vastly improved by going sockless."
> https://sexyankles.tumblr.com/


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

When my boat shoes arrive from Russell, I'll go looking for no-shows. Where I live, anyone who doesn't like looking at bare male legs is forced to stay in the basement . . . and we don't have basements.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Chillburgher said:


> I'll cast another vote for "must wear socks." I would agree with those who say socks look silly with shorts, but the answer to that is to wear full length trousers. I don't want to see men's ankles and I don't want to see any other portion of their legs either.


I didn't realize this was the 19th century. Please, rejoin us in the 21st century when you're ready.


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

^ +1. I can get on board with the don't walk around with sandals all the time but no ankles?!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

I'm in agreement with Fanderian on this one...guys, be real men and put on some socks! LOL.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

Eh, Eagle, I don't get the sockless craze but I don't mind it on others.

Maybe sometimes it doesn't look right, but then I just look better by comparison.


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

I feel like this is a generational thing - and I want to strike a compromise. 

We the younger generation will wear socks when the older generation starts covering up in the locker room!


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

Jovan said:


> I didn't realize this was the 19th century. Please, rejoin us in the 21st century when you're ready.


But my biggest problem with shorts is that they, like sockless feet, do not even serve a purpose.
You won't be hotter with a pair of lightweight trousers than with shorts, why would you wear something that doesn't look good but yet doesn't provide more function than the good looking counterpart?


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

GWW said:


> But my biggest problem with shorts is that they, like sockless feet, do not even serve a purpose.
> *You won't be hotter with a pair of lightweight trousers than with shorts*, why would you wear something that doesn't look good but yet doesn't provide more function than the good looking counterpart?


That is easy to say for a guy in Switzerland... Come on down to my latitude and try it.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Unless I'm wearing sandals, I wear socks. My feet blister, etc. otherwise.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

GWW said:


> But my biggest problem with shorts is that they, like sockless feet, do not even serve a purpose.
> You won't be hotter with a pair of lightweight trousers than with shorts, why would you wear something that doesn't look good but yet doesn't provide more function than the good looking counterpart?


As a man who no longer owns shorts (except swimming trunks, I guess) I still have to disagree with you.

When it's hot and humid outside, shorts are more comfortable.

I just don't think the level of increased comfort outweighs the loss of style--just my opinion.


----------



## Greenshirt (May 22, 2013)

Going sockless on a cordovan loafers, anyone? I heard it is a recipe for foot blisters.

I stay with my socks all the time.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

drlivingston said:


> That is easy to say for a guy in Switzerland... Come on down to my latitude and try it.


I was born and raised in Jamaica. Lightweight cotton trousers are cooler than shorts. They are breathable and importantly, keep you skin shielded from the sun.

I shake my head at golfers I see wearing shorts because they think they are cooler. Meanwhile, their legs are turning red from sunburn by the end of the round.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

RogerP said:


> I was born and raised in Jamaica. Lightweight cotton trousers are cooler than shorts. They are breathable and importantly, keep you skin shielded from the sun.


Thanks Roger, I already thought I said something really stupid, but with you saying the same thing it can't be too far off... I hope.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

^^^ Same reason you are cooler in the hot sun when wearing a breathable wide-brimmed hat than you would be with an uncovered head.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

RogerP said:


> I was born and raised in Jamaica. Lightweight cotton trousers are cooler than shorts. They are breathable and importantly, keep you skin shielded from the sun.
> 
> I shake my head at golfers I see wearing shorts because they think they are cooler. Meanwhile, their legs are turning red from sunburn by the end of the round.


This is also good advice for summer sailing, in my experience.


----------



## mhdena (Jan 4, 2008)

Flanderian said:


> Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.
> 
> *THIS!
> 
> ...


Whats wrong with this Old Coot! he needs to lose the necktie and unbutton his shirt and loosen up!

He looks Uptight wearing the tie!


----------



## Chillburgher (Mar 19, 2014)

I just saw a gentleman moments ago, mid thirties I'd guess, in the lobby of my office building with his pants cuffs rolled up to expose not only his bare ankles but also two nasty blisters. His shoes were also purposefully untied. 

Can we all at least agree to tie our laces?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

You are not the boss of me.

Next thing, you'll be telling me to wear underwear.

Fascist!!


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

RogerP said:


> I was born and raised in Jamaica. Lightweight cotton trousers are cooler than shorts. They are breathable and importantly, keep you skin shielded from the sun.
> 
> I shake my head at golfers I see wearing shorts because they think they are cooler. Meanwhile, their legs are turning red from sunburn by the end of the round.


I will concede to your logic in regards to the sun. However, it's the 100% humidity that forces me into shorts.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

WouldaShoulda said:


> You are not the boss of me.
> 
> Next thing, you'll be telling me to wear underwear.
> 
> Fascist!!


Thanks for that, it made my day a bit better.


----------



## Skyjumper (Apr 27, 2014)

Natty Beau said:


> This is also good advice for summer sailing, in my experience.


I was thinking just the opposite. Feeling the cool breeze is one of the best parts of sailing, and sometimes, when sailing, you actually get wet. On the boat, I'll stick with shorts. However, I admit, off the boat I'm leaning toward pants this summer. At the marina, though, I would stick out not wearing shorts.


----------



## UnivStripe (Mar 6, 2013)

I spent many of my summers in the 1970's at camp in a Boy Scout Uniform. The uniform then was shorts with long cotton OTC socks that were kept up with an elastic garter adorned with either green or red tassels. Very stylish, NOT.

I have seen photographs of men wearing shorts with long OTC socks on the island of Bermuda. Is this style limited to the island or have any AAAC members adopted this style in other locations?


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

Skyjumper said:


> I was thinking just the opposite. Feeling the cool breeze is one of the best parts of sailing, and sometimes, when sailing, you actually get wet. On the boat, I'll stick with shorts. However, I admit, off the boat I'm leaning toward pants this summer. At the marina, though, I would stick out not wearing shorts.


In college I just rolled my khakis to the knee. Unfortunately, when you fall aboard they unroll and make swimming a bit harder!


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

drlivingston said:


> I will concede to your logic in regards to the sun. However, it's the 100% humidity that forces me into shorts.


Amen. With high humidity and little to no breeze, trousers and long-sleeved shirts end up wet, sodden messes. Even the breeziest of weaves is suffocating.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

All those who say shorts are useless have never actually been in a hot and/or humid climate as far as I can tell.

So, no offence, but please don't talk out of your rear end.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

It's a Euro-Eastern thing, Jovan. Out west we know better.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I'm from Michigan and I totally understand shorts being cooler than pants, especially in the evening.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Gurdon said:


> How about silly?


Yes! Maturity should confer the ability to distinguish between sexy and pathetic.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Jovan said:


> All those who say shorts are useless have never actually been in a hot and/or humid climate as far as I can tell.
> 
> So, no offence, but please don't talk out of your rear end.


What about those who have lived in a hot and / or humid climate and still have no real use for shorts?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

So because _you_ don't find it sexy, no one else should? My girlfriend (pretty much fiancée by this point) finds my occasional socklessness relaxed looking and, in her words, "cool". _Within reason_, it's not always a terrible thing to defer to what one's significant other likes!

But I'd argue it's not even about that. Most people really just don't care whether or not someone's ankles are showing, regardless of age or gender. If someone can handle the sight of my horrid, hairy arms in a short sleeved shirt, surely my horrid, hairy ankles will not offend. And they haven't as far as I know. Even my conservative grandparents have not had a bad thing to say.

Let's just call it a day and say it's personal preference... within reason. Wear socks with business suits and tuxedos for sure.



Gurdon said:


> Dreadful is a bit harsh. How about silly? Likewise the people in the photos with business clothes and no socks looked a bit silly to me, but it seems an innocent silliness. In certain parts of the country, and in certain circles, wearing loafers without socks seems to be a well established fashion.
> 
> I do not object, on the grounds of style to wearing boat shoes or other informal shoes sockless. I wear espadrills sockless. As a practical matter, however, leather shoes worn without socks smell bad.
> 
> Gurdon


I often compromise and wear those little footie socks that Trip English seemed to detest.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Jovan said:


> So because _you_ don't find it sexy, no one else should? My girlfriend (pretty much fiancée by this point) finds my occasional socklessness relaxed looking and, in her words, "cool". _Within reason_, it's not always a terrible thing to defer to what one's significant other likes!
> 
> But I'd argue it's not even about that. *Most people really just don't care whether or not someone's ankles are showing*, regardless of age or gender. If someone can handle the sight of my horrid, hairy arms in a short sleeved shirt, surely my horrid, hairy ankles will not offend. And they haven't as far as I know. Even my conservative grandparents have not had a bad thing to say.
> 
> ...


Jovan, surely you of all people are not going to hold forth what "most people" care about or notice as a meaningful barometer of appropriate sartorial choices?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Within reason, yes, I damn well am Roger. We really need to get back on planet earth sometimes. Shorts are not horrible. Neither is showing ankles. End of story.

There is only so much we can say about our preferences without sounding like we're completely out of touch with reality.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Tucking your tie into your pants is, however. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Maybe not. But it's _his_ choice and _his_ taste, which we all know is well above the norm. As stated, let's call it a day and say it's a matter of personal choice . . . within reason.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Reuben said:


> Tucking your tie into your pants is, however.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:eek2:

:biggrin:


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

There are worlds of difference between a 20-something and a 50-ish, 60-ish man foregoing socks. As there is between not wearing socks with shorts and a polo shirt, and not wearing them with otherwise more formal tailored clothing.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Can you wear a cape with shorts?


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

To wear shorts, or not to wear shorts?
To wear socks or not to wear socks?
Regardless of choice, the final measure of any sartorial defense we might proffer
is going to be a healthy sense of humor!

Remember, it's only clothes and clothes are supposed to be fun. :teacha:


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Jovan said:


> Within reason, yes, I damn well am Roger. We really need to get back on planet earth sometimes. Shorts are not horrible. Neither is showing ankles. End of story.
> 
> There is only so much we can say about our preferences without sounding like we're completely out of touch with reality.


Well I damn well hope you will accept "most people don't care" as an excuse for any future transgressions of sartorial precepts that you hold dear. I'll be sure to check from time to time. :cool2: It seems clear to me from observing my fellow inhabitants of the downtown Toronto business / financial core that "most people" don't notice or care what kind of crap footwear they pair with their suits. There begins and ends my interest in dressing according to what most people value.

Socklessness does look horrible. And shorts (outside of sports and swimwear) look slightly ridiculous on an adult male. That's the end of MY story -assuming that you will allow that I am entitled to write my own tale.


----------



## Natty Beau (Apr 29, 2014)

drlivingston said:


> Can you wear a cape with shorts?


I'm fairly sure there is a picture of me doing this in my younger years somewhere on the Internet. Thankfully my face is covered by a mask because it was Halloween.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Roger, I'm afraid you think I'm more worked up about this than I really am.

My main trouble here is that we're debating the merits, both functionally and aesthetically, of shorts in the 21st century.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

Y'all do understand that 20 somethings turn into 60 somethings, but timeless styles can stay the same, right?

I personally don't like to go sockless, but a lot of people down south do (and consider it timeless) and I don't see the fuss.

Try to take my shorts away and I'll cut you.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

drlivingston said:


> Can you wear a cape with shorts?


Always!


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

drlivingston said:


> Can you wear a cape with shorts?


----------



## pleasehelp (Sep 8, 2005)

For the sockless folks out there - how do you avoid your shoes becoming moldy, smelly, etc.? The only time I don't wear socks is with flip flops or when going to the beach, but it's functional decision rather than a style decision.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

pleasehelp said:


> For the sockless folks out there - how do you avoid your shoes becoming moldy, smelly, etc.? The only time I don't wear socks is with flip flops or when going to the beach, but it's functional decision rather than a style decision.


I am not a complete heathen... Even my sockless shoes (other than Birks) get the benefit of cedar shoe trees when not being worn. Plus, allow your shoes time to dry.


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

Roger I respect you a huge amount, sincerely, but I find it hard to agree with the notion that shorts are ridiculous! I get if you don't like them but ridiculous?!


----------



## Shoe City Thinker (Oct 8, 2012)

NO! NO! NO! Never! It is a Bostonian birth right to be able to wear loafers without socks.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

RogerP said:


> Socklessness does look horrible. And shorts (outside of sports and swimwear) look slightly ridiculous on an adult male. That's the end of MY story -assuming that you will allow that I am entitled to write my own tale.


Yes, yes and yes. Finally someone who shares my viewpoints.

I do realize that we'll probably never find a common ground in this discussion and that it would be the best thing to stay abstinent from this thread.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

How about man-pris?


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

drlivingston said:


> How about man-pris?


You mean those currently fashionable crossings between shorts and trousers?
Please, let's forget that you mentioned them so we can continue living in peace.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Flanderian said:


> Yeah, Topsiders, etc. . . . whatever.
> 
> *THIS!
> 
> ...


How could that guy not wear socks?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I wear socks with slippers.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Howard said:


> How could that guy not wear socks?


It's become fashionable, Howard, and I guess he likes it, believing it makes him look hip. But being an old guy myself, I agree with Gurdon that it looks silly.

Were he not as old, or otherwise so beautifully dressed, I wouldn't find it so objectionable.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Either he just doesn't get it or I don't. Shoes without socks is supposed to be a casual look, isn't it? So just howtheheck are you supposed to have a 'casual' look with necktie on a spread collar shirt with neatly pressed pocket square? Complete disconnect. If he was wearing an open collar shirt or a polo under a blazer (not a very square pale plaid sport coat) that would be a fine look. As it is he looks . . . clueless.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

He always worn a cape with shorts


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Flanderian said:


> It's become fashionable, Howard, and I guess he likes it, believing it makes him look hip. But being an old guy myself, I agree with Gurdon that it looks silly.
> 
> Were he not as old, or otherwise so beautifully dressed, I wouldn't find it so objectionable.


Isn't he afraid of blisters?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Flanderian said:


> It's become fashionable, Howard, and I guess he likes it, believing it makes him look hip. But being an old guy myself, I agree with Gurdon that it looks silly.
> 
> Were he not as old, or otherwise so beautifully dressed, I wouldn't find it so objectionable.


You all are really overthinking his motives behind it. It's as silly as saying 60+ men are trying to be rebels by wearing jeans. Maybe... they just want to go sockless because they like the look? Or wear jeans because they always have? :idea:


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Howard said:


> He always worn a cape with shorts


Proving that it can be done. But, is it a good idea?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Jovan said:


> All those who say shorts are useless have never actually been in a hot and/or humid climate as far as I can tell.
> 
> So, no offence, but please don't talk out of your rear end.


Can I just check that I am not misunderstanding you Jovan, dear fellow? You hate short sleeve shirts but you approve of short leg trousers? :icon_scratch:


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

4 pages in this thread and neither side has moved the other.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Shaver said:


> Can I just check that I am not misunderstanding you Jovan, dear fellow? You hate short sleeve shirts but you approve of short leg trousers? :icon_scratch:


When did I ever say that I hate short sleeved shirts? I was defending the hell out of them in that other infamous thread! :biggrin:


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Jovan said:


> When did I ever say that I hate short sleeved shirts? I was defending the hell out of them in that other infamous thread! :biggrin:


Oops! In which case please accept my sincere apologies and forgive me the calcification of cerebral process that the decrepitude of age engenders. :redface:


----------



## VaEagle (Oct 15, 2013)

immanuelrx said:


> will you wear them in a box?
> will you wear them with a fox?
> Will you wear them in the house?
> will you wear them with a mouse?


Sometimes you just come to a post late, and its not worth commenting on the topic at that point, but the Dr. Seuss tie-in ... that was great.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Fair warning.... rant incoming......

*** Rant on: ***

Yesterday evening I attended the opening of a musical production being put on by my daughter's school. While the crowd of (predominantly) parents filed in, I could not help but take notice of the standards of dress among the men in attendance. Now this was an event put on in a school gymnasium - I was not expecting tuxedoes, nor would such have been appropriate. I'd say the median was reflected in the chinos-with-a-golf-shirt level that has come to define summer business casual wear. Next up would be chinos or dress trousers with a long sleeve shirt - which was my choice for the evening. One or two gents wore a casual sport coat, trousers and open-collar shirt, which would reflect the upper end of the spectrum.

Which brings me to the depressingly large group of absolute slobs who had one single element of attire in common: SHORTS. :crazy: For the most part, these were truly ghastly garments regardless of occasion: rumpled, baggy cargo shorts with pockets stuffed to bursting with who-knows-what. Two were camo-patterned. Seriously. Invariably, those who willingly chose such horrid bottoms did no better with the tops - well worn and faded t-shirts were the rule among this set. And of course, most displays of hairy legs were complemented by crusty cankles and more than occasionally by the grody toenails of the sandals-wearing subset.

There was ONE fellow whose shorts in and of themselves did not look bad at all. They were a plaid affair of crisply-pressed cotton - heck, there was even a crease. But this chap had to dumb it down big time with a _tank top_ and _flip-flops _for crying out loud. :icon_headagainstwal I was tempted to ask whether his backpack contained a beach towel and snorkel. :icon_scratch: And suggest that he should get that large mole on his shoulder checked out. And yes, I'm sure he was least bothered by the humidity than anyone else in attendance. Bully for him.

Oddly enough, there were no jeans on display among the men. Except for - _sigh_ - one chap in cutoff denim. (Hey buddy, the 1970's called - they need those shorts back...)

By way of contrast, the ladies in attendance generally looked quite smart and collectively MILES ahead of the men.

No doubt most of the slobs simply don't know better. Which is no excuse for an adult male. But surely it is even less of an excuse among those who _do_ know better.

*** Rant off. ***

As you were. :biggrin:


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

What kind of sunglasses does one wear with crisply-pressed cotton shorts?


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

^^That story isn't helping my impression of Canadian fashion.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

The tank top is over the top, but neat shorts worn with appropriate shoes are not a disaster. I would probably have worn long pants unless I knew the gym would be sweltering.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

RogerP said:


> Oddly enough, there were no jeans on display among the men. *Except for - sigh - one chap in cutoff denim. *(Hey buddy, the 1970's called - they need those shorts back...)


Ahh, good ole "jorts". It sounds like a Florida Gator student or grad took a wrong turn and ended up in Canada....at your daughter's school production.


----------



## tigerpac (Jan 23, 2014)

^+1 on the Gator hating


----------



## orange fury (Dec 8, 2013)

drlivingston said:


> What kind of sunglasses does wear with crisply-pressed cotton shorts?


I just choked on coffee laughing, thank you for that.

i think the comment about "women being miles ahead of the men" is in line with the current trend of women gradually passing men in education, salaries, and positions in the workplace. I'll freely admit that I wear shorts (and, yes, flip flops occasionally) on the weekends and in the evening when on my patio. It's just more comfortable down here in the oppressive summer heat. The problem is where most men have stopped drawing the distinction between casual events and dressier occasions. Good heavens, I was asked why I was dressed up one time she. I was wearing a polo and flat front khaki shorts one time and was asked why I was so dressed up lol


----------



## sskim3 (Jul 2, 2013)

this thread is amaze-balls....... from socks to shorts....

at least none of us dress like this:









I am indifferent to the sock conversation. Sockless has it's place. And as long as the clothes fit well, I will not complain.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

RogerP said:


> Fair warning.... rant incoming......
> 
> []
> 
> As you were. :biggrin:


I'd like to express my condolences for you having to live through this, may not many others of us have to share this horrible fortune.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Just for y'all:




Sent from 1955 using 1.21 jigawatts.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Reuben said:


> Just for y'all:
> 
> Sent from 1955 using 1.21 jigawatts.


This poor man stepped on a dead possum!

Oh, wait, that's his ankle.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Orsini said:


> Proving that it can be done. But, is it a good idea?


only when he's with Batman.


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

Shaver said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Socklessness is a symptom of the decline of Western civilisation.


I imagine Shaver wearing a pair of these whilst reading Aristotle in the bath :biggrin: : https://www.google.com/search?q=vib...GUyATXqYDADA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAg&biw=1440&bih=802


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

Would a pair of these be acceptable to wear with boat shoes ? Do tell...

https://www.sperrytopsider.com/en/s...color=STS30227#cgid=men-apparel-socks&start=2


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

RogerP said:


> Fair warning.... rant incoming......
> 
> *** Rant on: ***
> 
> ...


Here we go Roger, this will ease the pain. :thumbs-up:


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

I find footies, or whatever the invisible socks are called, a particularly unmasculine article of clothing. Moreover, the sockless look is supposed to be casual and unstudied. Wearing invisible socks seems at odds with this aesthetic. It turns a fashion preference into costume.

Gurdon


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Shaver - thank you - that's just the ticket.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Leave it to the English chap and the Canadian to rub a Cuban in our face. (stupid embargo)


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

^ How keen are U.S customs for inspecting packages? If I were to post you a Cuban, would you receive it?


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Interesting proposition... I used to bring them home when I went on cruises or trips to Toronto. Now, they are a bit more savvy in their searches. Plus, traveling with a family now, I find it necessary to avoid breaking the rules.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

I've been told that they are more keen now than ever - bummer. But hey - at least you folks don't have 18% import duties on shoes!


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Well... I'm thinking a de-banded Cuban, perhaps even in a generic tube.......?


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

Gurdon said:


> I find footies, or whatever the invisible socks are called, a particularly unmasculine article of clothing. Moreover, the sockless look is supposed to be casual and unstudied. Wearing invisible socks seems at odds with this aesthetic. It turns a fashion preference into costume.
> 
> Gurdon


This from a man that refers to a " fashion preference" !? You must really be a " man's man" . :confused2: However, I do sincerely respect your sense of integrity about the matter and, furthermore, this would be solely for the utility of absorbing perspiration. :cool2:


----------



## UnivStripe (Mar 6, 2013)

A few days of warm sunny weather have finally found their way to western Pennsylvania. According to one source the Pittsburgh SMSA is fifth in the country with an average of 151 wet weather days per year. So, many men are 'out and about' wearing shorts. S-o m-a-n-y l-a-r-g-e m-e-n in shorts and no socks or worse yet, long white socks and tennis shoes. Darn this thread, I never paid any attention to any of them for all the years I have lived here. But not after reading this thread. Darn! :crazy:


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

UnivStripe said:


> A few days of warm sunny weather have finally found their way to western Pennsylvania. According to one source the Pittsburgh SMSA is fifth in the country with an average of 151 wet weather days per year. So, many men are 'out and about' wearing shorts. S-o m-a-n-y l-a-r-g-e m-e-n in shorts and no socks or worse yet, long white socks and tennis shoes. Darn this thread, I never paid any attention to any of them for all the years I have lived here. But not after reading this thread. Darn! :crazy:


My family will be invading the Johnstown area pretty soon. Get ready for lots of fashion nightmares! Let's just say, if Johnstown has another flood, none of our pants will get wet.


----------



## UnivStripe (Mar 6, 2013)

Have a good time. The Laurel Highlands area is beautiful in the spring. I must remember to look away when you pass by.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Long white socks with shorts and sneakers beats the Hell out mid calf _black_ socks with sneakers, which seems to be the current _horreur de la journée._


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Oldsarge said:


> Long white socks with shorts and sneakers beats the Hell out mid calf _black_ socks with sneakers, which seems to be the current _horreur de la journée._


Come down Sorority Row in Athens between 7 and 8 am or pm and you'll see me committing that exact same sacrilege: synthetics or synthetic blends everywhere, black socks pulled over my calves, sneakers, and elastic shorts.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Holy cow! It's a polyester party in Athens!


----------



## Grumpton (May 22, 2014)

ok - fine if you all want to wear socks because it's a warm day or whatever. I have no issues with the appearance of sockless men.

However, if it has been a warm day, and you're not wearing socks, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE NOT NOT TAKE YOUR SHOES OFF IN AN ENCLOSED PUBLIC SPACE! This means not at the theater, not on an airplane, certainly not at the restaurant.

The number of sockless men with stinky feet that take their shoes off on the plane in the summer is terrible.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Grumpton said:


> ok - fine if you all want to wear socks because it's a warm day or whatever. I have no issues with the appearance of sockless men.
> 
> However, if it has been a warm day, and you're not wearing socks, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE NOT NOT TAKE YOUR SHOES OFF IN AN ENCLOSED PUBLIC SPACE! This means not at the theater, not on an airplane, certainly not at the restaurant.
> 
> The number of sockless men with stinky feet that take their shoes off on the plane in the summer is terrible.


they have bad manners and I don't need to smell fetid foot odor.


----------



## GWW (Jan 3, 2014)

Grumpton said:


> ok - fine if you all want to wear socks because it's a warm day or whatever. I have no issues with the appearance of sockless men.
> 
> However, if it has been a warm day, and you're not wearing socks, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE NOT NOT TAKE YOUR SHOES OFF IN AN ENCLOSED PUBLIC SPACE! This means not at the theater, not on an airplane, certainly not at the restaurant.
> 
> The number of sockless men with stinky feet that take their shoes off on the plane in the summer is terrible.


You do not take off your shoes in public unless you're swimming or something like that anyway, sockless or otherwise.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Couldn't you just enjoy looking at this all day long? :biggrin:


----------



## UnivStripe (Mar 6, 2013)

I was out and about on a beautiful spring day today. My wife and I went to a local garden festival where I was awash in a sea of denim, camo, and cargo shorts. For one moment, I thought that I saw in the distance a kindred spirit as I was sure that someone there was wearing a pair of patchwork madras shorts. As I drew closer, I started to think that it was a pattern that I had never seen before. When I came close enough to clearly see the fabric, I realized that it was patchwork camo fabric. I am hoping that this does not become popular.


----------



## Brio1 (May 13, 2010)

GWW said:


> You do not take off your shoes in public unless you're swimming or something like that anyway, sockless or otherwise.


I've noticed that this phenomenon seems to exist mostly among Liberals here in the States , albeit mostly of the crackpot variety. (And this from a man that tends to tack to the left.) I was out and about town here in Washington, DC yesterday, and I spotted the culprits in restaurants, bookshops, etc. while they happened to be wearing ugly sport sandals or even no shoes at all. Coincidentally, it rained most of the day and I spotted an abundance of showers shoes as well. Perhaps this is their sole method ( a pun!:icon_jokercolor of washing the feet? :icon_pale:


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Flanderian said:


> Couldn't you just enjoy looking at this all day long? :biggrin:
> 
> View attachment 11666


You seem to harbor an almost pathological aversion to feet. I don't know what the problem is with your's or those other's who c/o of stinky feet. I examine many feet all day long, and few healthy ones are odiferous, with or sans socks. Disformed, infirm feet may be not what one likes to look at, but a healthy well groomed male foot is no more offensive than the female counterpart. I have seen way too many women in sandles, or open toed shoes who should be covering up. We all like the look of a well groomed, well turned ankle in opentoe heels or sandles. What makes a healthy man's foot offensive, aside from the fact that it is not a sexual fixation to us as a woman's is.

If feet were so stinky in bare shoes, I seriously douby the cliche of drinking champagne from a lovel'y girls slipper would have gained as much traction in Hollywood as it has.

Get over it. Unless there is something seriously wrong with your feet, the summer tradition of casual sockless footwear is not the horror you seem to think it is.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

^ This. What I've basically been trying to say throughout this entire thread.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

I'm on my way to the boardwalk now. I have a university striped pink OCBD on with the sleeves rolled up. A pair of light blue RLP cotton trousers, midnight blue Equus belt, and Soludos navy espadrilles. How on earth can I be wearing socks? I am going to dinner at a nice restaurant with my wife and friends afterward. *Tell me **I will be the one offensively** dressed.*


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

momsdoc said:


> You seem to harbor an almost pathological aversion to feet. I don't know what the problem is with your's or those other's who c/o of stinky feet. * I examine many feet all day long,* and few healthy ones are odiferous, with or sans socks. Disformed, infirm feet may be not what one likes to look at, but a healthy well groomed male foot is no more offensive than the female counterpart. I have seen way too many women in sandles, or open toed shoes who should be covering up. We all like the look of a well groomed, well turned ankle in opentoe heels or sandles. What makes a healthy man's foot offensive, aside from the fact that it is not a sexual fixation to us as a woman's is.
> 
> If feet were so stinky in bare shoes, I seriously douby the cliche of drinking champagne from a lovel'y girls slipper would have gained as much traction in Hollywood as it has.
> 
> Get over it. Unless there is something seriously wrong with your feet, the summer tradition of casual sockless footwear is not the horror you seem to think it is.


And all along I thought you were OBGYN! :biggrin:

I don't believe I ever made an argument concerning objectionable foot odor resulting from socklessness. It may, or may not, but I've never found it to be a problem. My objection is entirely aesthetic.

People's body parts range widely in aesthetic appeal, and the unfortunate in the photo wound up way on the short end of the stick. Particularly unsightly, and reason enough to wear socks. Certainly, there's no need to flaunt our least attractive aspects.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Flanderian said:


> And all along I thought you were OBGYN! :biggrin:
> 
> I don't believe I ever made an argument concerning objectionable foot odor resulting from socklessness. It may, or may not, but I've never found it to be a problem. My objection is entirely aesthetic.
> 
> People's body parts range widely in aesthetic appeal, and the unfortunate in the photo wound up way on the short end of the stick. Particularly unsightly, and reason enough to wear socks. Certainly, there's no need to flaunt our least attractive aspects.


I'm in the camp that men have ugly, disgusting feet/ankles that should be covered at all times, so it's purely aesthetic. Women, however, tend to take better care of their feet which is why I don't find them objectionable. I've seen too many guys with gargoyle feet wearing flip flops. You know, long yellowed toenails that look like they should be perched on a building ledge. Hairy ankles are no better. I guess I don't think it's out of place when wearing a polo, boat shoes and madras shorts during the summer, but that's the exception

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Flanderian said:


> And all along I thought you were OBGYN! :biggrin:
> 
> I don't believe I ever made an argument concerning objectionable foot odor resulting from socklessness. It may, or may not, but I've never found it to be a problem. My objection is entirely aesthetic.
> 
> People's body parts range widely in aesthetic appeal, and the unfortunate in the photo wound up way on the short end of the stick. Particularly unsightly, and reason enough to wear socks. Certainly, there's no need to flaunt our least attractive aspects.


According to you. Let's just be straight here.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Flanderian said:


> My objection is entirely aesthetic.
> 
> People's body parts range widely in aesthetic appeal, and the unfortunate in the photo wound up way on the short end of the stick. Particularly unsightly, and reason enough to wear socks. Certainly, there's no need to flaunt our least attractive aspects.


Agreed.



gaseousclay said:


> I'm in the camp that men have ugly, disgusting feet/ankles that should be covered at all times, so it's purely aesthetic. Women, however, tend to take better care of their feet which is why I don't find them objectionable. I've seen too many guys with gargoyle feet wearing flip flops. You know, long yellowed toenails that look like they should be perched on a building ledge. Hairy ankles are no better. I guess I don't think it's out of place when wearing a polo, boat shoes and madras shorts during the summer, but that's the exception


And this, too.

I have no pathological aversion to feet. They just fall into the category of male body parts that when displayed in public invariably create an aesthetic dissonance with the concept of being well dressed. I have no pathological aversion to hairy chests, either. But I likewise can't reconcile the display of one's chest with being well dressed.

And yes, you may assume that the opinion I express is indeed my own.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

There are much less attractive body parts than ankles. Elbows, for example. All knobby and dry, blech.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Flanderian said:


> And all along I thought you were OBGYN! :biggrin:
> 
> I have completed 2 residencies, OB/GYN and Internal Medicine. In my OB job I care for women with diabetes, a foot exam is integral to their good care. In my GYN/Internist role I am their primary care physician, and again, diabetes and it's foot care are an integral part of my daily practice. The ever fattening of America, as we have discussed ad nauseum causes this to consume a large portion of my day.
> 
> ...


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

When I read Flanderian's post, all I could conjure up was women with their feet up in stirrups. You can't avoid them. The feet are the first thing you see.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

drlivingston said:


> When I read Flanderian's post, all I could conjure up was women with their feet up in stirrups. You can't avoid them. The feet are the first thing you see.


And if they smelled they would easily be more offensive than other parts one does not get smacked in the face by. Not that any of those parts if healthy and clean are any less than the ambrosia of the gods.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

momsdoc said:


> And if they smelled they would easily be more offensive than other parts one does not get smacked in the face by. Not that any of those parts if healthy and clean are any less than the ambrosia of the gods.


Egads... Talk about gross anatomy.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

drlivingston said:


> Egads... Talk about gross anatomy.


Assuming you're not referencing feet, I was under the impression that after birth, men spend the rest of their livess obsessing about makeing a return trip.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

momsdoc said:


> And if they smelled they would easily be more offensive than other parts


I was just concentrating on this aspect of your post. Unfortunately, for every bit of ambrosia that you get to experience, you have to wade through a sea of limburger.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Thank god for selective memory.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Flanderian said:


> Couldn't you just enjoy looking at this all day long? :biggrin:
> 
> View attachment 11666


He needs socks.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

momsdoc said:


> You seem to harbor an almost pathological aversion to feet. I don't know what the problem is with your's or those other's who c/o of stinky feet. I examine many feet all day long, and few healthy ones are odiferous, with or sans socks. Disformed, infirm feet may be not what one likes to look at, but a healthy well groomed male foot is no more offensive than the female counterpart. I have seen way too many women in sandles, or open toed shoes who should be covering up. We all like the look of a well groomed, well turned ankle in opentoe heels or sandles. What makes a healthy man's foot offensive, aside from the fact that it is not a sexual fixation to us as a woman's is.
> 
> If feet were so stinky in bare shoes, I seriously douby the cliche of drinking champagne from a lovel'y girls slipper would have gained as much traction in Hollywood as it has.
> 
> Get over it. Unless there is something seriously wrong with your feet, the summer tradition of casual sockless footwear is not the horror you seem to think it is.


you're a podiatrist?


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

momsdoc said:


> Assuming you're not referencing feet, I was under the impression that after birth, men spend the rest of their livess obsessing about makeing a return trip.


That reminds me of Robin Williams' joke: "Men spend the first nine months of their existence preparing to leave the womb, and the rest of their lives trying to get back in."

On the sockless thing, I'm with momsdoc and Jovan--context is everything. I don't see anything inappropriate about going sans socks when you're hanging out at, say, a seaside resort or if you're moseying around a street fair on a muggy summer day. What's the big deal? The problem comes when you don't exercise good judgment and end up wearing a sportcoat, dress shirt, dress trousers, loafers and no socks in a business casual setting. In that case, you don't look cool, you look silly.


----------

