It's very easy (and decidedly discourteous) to make such an accusation. Surely such uncharitable remarks are more deserving of the term "troll" than is a request for the correct use of clothing terminology?
Though I do not post frequently, I am hardly a "noob" (anyone can see when I first joined SF), and I do know what I am talking about! Many people inaccurately use the term "trench-coat" for any raincoat, but while all trench-coats are raincoats, all raincoats are NOT trench-coats. The use of inaccurate terminology doesn't help anyone.
I don't think this is true at all. American business dress appears far more conventional to me than what I see in our citiesOne has to be persistent, and I also wanted Roger to know that he is not alone.
No, you're not alone - I've been saying the same thing for a long time on this forum. The pocket square, to me, is a degree MORE dressed-up than the tieAs I loathe the jacket-without-tie look, thinking that, as Roger says, it's a mixed message, adding a pocket square compounds the incongruity.On a somewhat separate issue, pocket squares, except plain white ones on occasions like weddings and funerals, are much rarer in the UK than in the USA.
Indeed they do, and one of the functions of a raincoat/trenchcoat is as a topcoat for cool but not cold weather (Quadcammer's "55 degree weather" and some degrees below that.)Underlines my point above.