If you meet me outside of work, church or a special occasion, you’ll most likely see me in my sweats or shorts and a t-shirt. If you knock on my door most days, you’ll find folded clothes on the couch and shoes scattered wherever they fell when I took them off. If that offends you, then you’re going to have to stew in private because I sincerely lack the energy or inclination to care that you’re offended.
Is it a choice for me to be sloppy? Sure. I could certainly devote more time to my appearance. I choose not to. Right now I could be vacuuming. I’m not. It’s a choice. In an hour I’ll leave to play two hours of tennis. Then I’ll go out to lunch with my opponent, and we’ll both be sweaty, with our hair in pony tails, and donning sweats. If someone is judging me for it, then all I can say is that we all have character flaws, and one day when they evolve, they, too, can live a non-externally focused life.
Life is about experiencing things; What you’re wearing while experiencing life is completely, utterly inconsequential. The most cosmic experiences of my life happened while I was wearing sweats, or pajamas, or, better yet, nothing at all.
I haven’t found one that fits me but then again, I won’t fork over $50 for a pair of jeans, so I can look appropriately casual, either. If I can’t find it at Marshall’s, Ross, TJ Maxx or Cato, I’m probably not buying it!
Simply; I wear sweats in public. Will continue whenever I feel like it. So far everyone around me is too polite to tell me I look awful, or they don’t care, I’m ok either way.
Out of touch from what? The Fashionistas? Reality? That’s probably the question the others are asking too.
Jeans are acceptable attire for my workplace, so I bought jeans that I felt very comfortable in. They just don’t happen to meet any of DianaG’s requirements for acceptable attire. However, they’re certainly denim, and you couldn’t tell the difference between them and the jeans I have on today, which are much less comfortable, and do have snaps, etc.
If that means I’m out of touch with something, I’m happy to let you know that being out of touch seems a helluva lot more relaxing than being in touch.
And I did notice the difference between the tourist and the lifer, I’m a lifer. I value my personal comfort over the aesthetic comfort of others. I guess I’m a selfish bastard that way. And please don’t get me wrong, sweats and comfy clothes are what I prefer, but I know that there are times I have to dress up to make other people feel better about me. Job interviews, funerals, marriages, nights out to the theater, meeting a real estate client - all of these times I’m in a shirt and tie.
I have, however, been known to bring sweats and a t-shirt to change into immediately afterwards.
And there’s tons of things that you can’t experience in sweats. If they’re things that don’t matter to you, that’s great. But that doesn’t make you especially evolved.
Arnold Winkelreid raised the excellent point that when I leave the house in my normal attire, I’m prepared to go get a drink or a nice lunch, but I’m not prepared to go for a hike. He’s entirely correct. I’m a city dweller, so a hike is much more likely to be a “planned” activity for me. Clearly, our lifestyles are very different. I do take issue with his statement that my self-esteem is tied up in my appearance, whereas others’ is in things they do. First of all, these things are not mutually exclusive. Secondly, my self-esteem is *reflected *in my appearance. I don’t dress well *to *feel good about myself, I dress well *because *I feel good about myself.
DocCathode says that there’s nowhere he can’t go in jeans that he wants to go, and if that works for him, fine. But again, it doesn’t make a person enlightened. It makes them someone unwilling to step outside of their comfort zone, and in general, we are not rewarded for that. Really, if in any other context a person says “You know, I’m just not really interested in new experiences”, people don’t pump a fist and say “Yeah!!! Stay strong, brother!!!”
I gently suggest that what rewards we get are going to be valued differently among different people. (I do note that you said “in general”.) A person who stays in their comfort zone is rewarded with stability. Some people value stability. Some people value spontaneity. Neither one is superior to the other, IMO.
I’m usually not crazy about most of what Lane Bryant stocks (plus I’m with HolyFreakingMoly on price), though I do order stuff from Woman Within, their catalog division. I could take a look, though, the next time I’m near one.
Of course, once I drop 20-25 pounds, I’ll have a bunch of jeans I can wear again.
I generally find it handy to have jeans on hand that will fit me comfortably and I’ll look good in that cover the 30-40 pounds I’ll vary during the course of the year. (I gain and lose weight very easily, though they tend to average out over time.) Your money and storage space may vary, though.
I think I know what Superorganism was getting at, though I’m not quite sure “out of touch” is the right way to say it. More like…different definitions?
Personally, I don’t think those qualities (the four things welby listed to describe his “jeans”) meet most people’s definition of jeans. The size is irrelevant, but, at least in my mind, jeans have some sort of fasteners like a zipper and snap/button, or sometimes all buttons. Sure, there can be “slip-on” pants with a drawstring and elastic to hold them up, but the ones I’ve seen are made out of a denim-like material (usually a thinner/lighter-weight version), and not what I would consider traditional jeans. I’d say they are just fine to wear in public if you find them more comfortable than regular jeans.
As for the OP, I only have one pair of what I’d call traditional sweatpants. I don’t wear them often because I have several pairs of athletic pants that are more comfortable and stylish, but I don’t think I’d be too worried if I wore them down to get gas or a paper or some other quick errand. Even better if I don’t actually have to get out of the car. I usually do that kind of stuff early on a Saturday or Sunday morning, though, and for some reason it seems maybe more acceptable to see someone out in loungewear if it’s early (or really late). I would never wear them shopping. I have worn athletic pants a couple times to the grocery store, but I think those are more acceptable than sweatpants.
Unless you’re with me and it’s completely out of place, I don’t care what other people are wearing.
I go to charity balls every year where I wear a long dress and 4 inch heels and get my hair done and a manicure. A few times a year, I’ll attend concerts and parties where I’ll spend hours picking out just the right outfit and doing my hair and nails because it’s fun to occasionally knock the socks off people who only see me in my sweats and t-shirt. (One couple whom I played sand volleyball with every Thursday night this past summer didn’t even recognize me at a Christmas party because I’d done my Cinderella act. The guy, who’d been completely chummy with me on the court, got all stuttery and said he couldn’t even talk to me because me “putting on the sexy” was freaking him out. )
So I do get that there are occasions where more formality, more attention to my appearance, is appropriate. However, that occasion is not running to the supermarket. If YOU want to spend hours each day ironing your clothes, putting on makeup, and doing your hair so that you can run errands, then more power to you. I, personally, have other priorities in my life. And I gotta tell you, it’s kind of a shame that you went to all that effort because a lot of people like me don’t even notice you. Not because you’re not important or unattractive, but because we’re focused on picking out a ripe avocado. You know?
It’s more like fifteen minutes, (if it took *hours *to make me presentable, I suppose I might skip it too) and I do it because it makes me happy, which is a huge priority for me. Your notice is no more important to me than my opinion is to you, so that works out.
And there it is in a nutshell. We all have different priorities. Hence, “Is it okay to wear sweatpants in public” is kind of a silly question. Because if you don’t think it’s okay, you don’t wear them. If you do think it’s okay, you do! As long as neither of us tries to impose our will on the rest of the world because we believe we have a corner on the truth, it all works out.
Yes, because if I appear in public in sweats EVEN ONCE, it means that I never ever dress up, I hate fine dining and concerts, etc. :rolleyes:
Sorry, but most of us don’t go to the grocery store for a gallon of milk and then stop off at the opera on the way home. Doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy opera EVER.
And it sure as heck doesn’t say anything about how “evolved” we are. Sheesh.
I wear sweats to run in the morning. That’s about it. I almost never wear jeans - I think they look sloppy and don’t find them comfortable at all. If I’m going to the store to do groceries I’ll wear chinos and a t-shrit or sweater or something.
On our second date Walter Lang showed up wearing sweats like these:http://stores.cbsames.net/catalog/Red%20sweat%20pant.JPG (that colour and everything), with a matching sweat top and a…beret. He had an actual beret on his head. He’s not french. He’s not an artist. He’s not a french artist. We’re getting married.
Just because I don’t wear sweats and think the look sloppy doesn’t mean I have anything against people who do wear them. It’s just not my thing.
There is no real classic or contemporary reference point for that sort of clothing, and it is not worn by people who I would generally consider serious actors in public. That’s harsh and condemnatory and will surely be met with rolling eyes, but it’s a more “normal” perspective on things that is probably lost in the clamor and anti-“conformity” groupthink that undercuts most every discussion of aesthetic matters on this forum (not that I don’t think there’s a positive correlation between that and some other positive traits, but it seems like a negative in this regard).
)
