I only wear suits to funerals and weddings. My day to day clothing consists of tennis shoes, jeans and a t-shirt (usually something to do with zombies). And yet I can see the OP’s point. Some people are just fucking lazy when it comes to dressing. I saw a man shopping barefoot at the store the other day. Seriously? :rolleyes:
FWIW, I do have nice clothing (other than my wedding/funeral suit) that I do wear on special occasions.
Edit: and men should never, ever wear crocs. Egad.
Well, he wasn’t a real James Bond.
This is as good a place as any to note that pleated pants for men are allegedly making a comeback, which is a loathsome development.
Why are you capitalizing Steak Dinner?
That’s the current style.
because he’s a vain, preening asshole who hangs his entire identity on what other people think of him.
GQELITE33, here’s your chance. Merely explain to the rest of us what you’ve actually accomplished as a result of your “sense of style” (and to put this in context, recall that you badmouthed Bill Gates, formerly the wealthiest man in the world until he bequeathed most of his fortune to charity, for his lack of said style), and bear in mind that in order for you to present a credible argument to that effect you would need to demonstrate that you are more successful than “non suit wearers” such as Mr. Gates, as well as the equally poorly dressed Steve Jobs (RIP), and Mark Zuckerberg, to name a few. Throughout this thread, you’ve argued that your so called sense of style has made you superior to anyone who does not share your sense of style so by all means, please elaborate. And, by making ANY posts after the recorded date/time of this post, without addressing my challenge, you are admitting failure. C’mon pretty boy, we’re waiting.
Are you German by any chance? I’ve read elsewhere about this type of skirt being worn around that time in Germany.
As for dress codes, my old elementary school and middle school–which I attended from 1964 - 1972–now require their students to wear uniforms. And while in middle school and high school there always used to be one or more “hippie” teachers, I think now they’ve cracked down on them too. Sometimes it seems that only for a few years at university will some kids have complete sartorial freedom. (Full disclosure–not all schools here in L.A. require uniforms by any means.)
That’s why ya gotta get it tailored!
As for suits at funerals, I recall reading the obituaries in Hawaii, and you’d always see “Aloha attire requested” for the funeral.
Oh, do remind me to die in Hawaii.
By the way, I’ve been top dog at a small firm and middle dog at a large one, and never once wore a suit. I got more done by being comfortable, with the bonus that I didn’t look like a shallow, insecure douche who thinks more about himself than other people (and smells like “Men’s Fragrance”…ewww…)
Ok, I’m sorry… “Stuffy and behind-the-times” wasn’t accurate as a description of the impression you are giving off. “Clueless, trying too hard, and full of himself” is probably more on the mark.
There’s nothing objectively handsome or priggish about suits, and there’s nothing objectively stylish or tacky about men wearing necklaces, but fashion is not about objective qualities, it’s about people’s perceptions, influenced by ever-changing cultural trends, and you seem fairly out-of-tune with how most people perceive the signifiers you’re hitching your wagon to.
(And also, the importance of context, and so on… The same clothes can be sharp, sleek, and dashing in one context, and look absolutely ridiculous and out of place in another one. I don’t have anything against suits; I don’t think even the most ardent suit-haters here would begrudge you your right to wear them, and their continued fashionability in certain environments. But you seem bizarrely misaware of their scope in modern American (I assume) culture. And so on for all the rest of your complaints (which seem to have left “Why don’t people wear suits?” for something more broad but less coherent…).
I mean, you’re not wrong to say that a lot of men don’t put a lot of thought or effort into their dress choices. But why should they? That’s up to them; it’s their prerogative to choose their priorities for their limited time and energy. If they’re not fond of that game and don’t invest their self-image in it, that’s fine; people can do what they like. It’s just the same as how not everyone cares about music or muscles or math or what have you. And among the ones who do enjoy dressing up, they have a lot more options for how to do so than the narrow path you seem to demand. Though you yourself have already said that nice jeans and a t-shirt are fine, and there’s no drought of stylish kids working that angle… So what’re you complaining about? That they don’t all layer a jacket on top?)
It’s a brand of dog food.
Is this some sort of spammish attempt by GQ (the magazine) to roust up more business?
If so, might I suggest to the OP that he has seriously overestimated the give-a-fuck-demographic of this board.
We’re just way too cool to heed fashion.
NM
Stop taking thoughts out of my head before I have them! I would only add that the companies needed the nerdy people badly enough that they waived a lot of the usual rules, and it became the norm. I can remember a time when hiring perks included leased BMWs for kids straight off the street.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Mmm, not everyone can manage their time to both shower in the morning and have a decent nights sleep if they’re working a morning shift or have early classes.
You probably say that in jest, but Hugo Boss was responsible for producing the SS uniforms and Coco Chanel spied for the Nazis during the second world war. There is a certain authoritarian mindset obsessed with the aesthetic and superficial differences(such as phenotype). For these people, anything less than the Platonic ideal is worthy of only contempt - despite the necessity of their continued existence to accentuate their own quirks. My ex was a fashion designer and I found out she was a fascist when I mentioned the former facts about Chanel and Hugo Boss.
Don’t be facile. Uniform is defined by google as “The distinctive clothing worn by members of the same organization or body or by children attending certain schools”. If you aren’t capable of identifying the organisation someone belongs to given a description of their clothing (and you’d have to identify features which were held in common to all or almost all members of this set, which’d be damn near impossible to do), then to avoid tautology (if all clothes are part of a uniform, then “wearing a uniform” is essentially redundant) you’re mocking people for not being naked. Though, even there, I figure more people work naked now than because the sexual revolution.
Kevin Smith, Harmony Korine, Henry Rollins, Ethan Suplee.
It’s still the case as far as I know. My friend is a personal trainer to a doctor working in London and was invited to his engagement party. Turned up in a suit with black label Johnnie Walker and they had Bollinger on tap. Everyone suited up, Maseratis and Lamborghinis dotting the driveway. The one guy to enter in jeans and a T-shirt was a jeweller on the Sunday Times rich list.
Interesting fact: met a number of Advertising execs, and as I went up the food chain, the dress got sloppier. Almost comically so.
Account Weasels: Suits with pressed dress shirts, and ties
Art Directors: Jackets over unpressed untucked shirts and khakis
Creative Directors: Jackets over t-shirts and jeans
Marketing/Creative VP: “Die Yuppie Scum” t-shirt with fraying black jeans
and finally the owner: faded, paint-spattered polo shirt with wrinkliest cargo pants ever!
btw, the people above also got more powerful and brilliant as I went up. In a sense, they were earning the right to dress comfortably.
Doesn’t look like the “red carpet” to me. :rolleyes:
If people don’t like my Hawaiian shirts, fuck 'em. I got married in one, I went to my father’s funeral in one, and I’ll be cremated in one. I have yet to be turned away from any fancy restaurant because I was wearing one. My money is green, and that’s all that counts.
