or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › interesting WSJ article about dressing up(or not)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

interesting WSJ article about dressing up(or not) - Page 8

post #106 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder View Post
One of the things that is funniest about all this is that wearing a suit, especially a decent, well-fitting one, really does get you better treatment almost everywhere. I can see how this might be particular true for you but it applies across the board.

Of course, you have to couple this with the right attitude. You can't come across as a demanding jerk. But it is amazing to me how with a little bit of humor and assertiveness, you can get people to eat out of your hand when you are well-dressed. The ragged masses don't know what they're missing.
Using this for a first post after months of lurking I have to say, this is perfectly true and I'm astonished at that every time I'm gaining this experience. I'm wearing suits five to six days a week and I noticed this is not only the case with sartorially interested people (which wouldn't be surprising at all) but with casually-clad fellows, too.

There has to be a reason for that, but what is it? Is it the unconscious impact of a fresh and well-chosen outfit combined with some friendly personality or is it - spoken like a true cynic - only some variation of business-like behaviour around some people assumed to be solvent?
post #107 of 142
^I think it could be a pavlovian response. The man in the well-fitting suit in movies and on the teevee is usually the debonaire man or the man in power.
post #108 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reevolving View Post
Sweat pants & yoga pants look amazing on women.
You guys must be smoking crack.

Sweat, but not sweat pants, are hot on hotties.
post #109 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Percy Blakeney View Post
Not that my first post opinion carries any weight, but I'm inclined to agree with this. If you don't have a good role model or mentor, then knowledge of what constitutes appropriate attire in context (or just dressing well in general) is acquired by social osmosis... with predictable results. On the other hand, having a good role model or mentor does not guarantee that one will acquire that knowledge or, having it, that one will choose to exercise it.

Perhaps some of you do not recall your own sartorial infancy. Speaking for myself, it has been a frustrating and challenging endeavor, for a myriad of reasons. First and foremost, however, is the "drinking from the firehose" feeling that results after visiting SF, or trying to put the pieces together from the books I've purchased; a feeling that could have been very much mitigated had I grown up, or even if I now knew, someone capable of, and willing to, teach me the fundamentals or proper dressing, care, as well as the less obvious nuances.

this is so true. i will have to teach my brother these things.
post #110 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder View Post
Look, let's face it, the real reason guys don't start dressing well in their forties is that they are irrational and stupid. Think about it. Your only real chance to pull some woman 20+ years younger is if she has serious daddy issues. So you really have to model yourself after that old guy who's always in the Brooks Brothers catalog. You've got no chance at all with cargo shorts, an Ed Hardy t-shirt and flip-flops. There just aren't that many woman with slacker older brother issues.
You know, that makes dressing well after 40 sound rational and smart, not irrational and stupid.
post #111 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadcammer View Post
do you actually believe this crap? One, most women couldn't care less unless the guy is a super slob. Further, most women have awful taste in mens clothes. In addition, I'd argue that most women would think some of the outfits the dandies on here wear are effeminate, gay, or just plain weird, and I'd agree about 50% of the time. Finally, most people don't want to dress well, and given that we've already determined that most women aren't rushing to the guy in the oxxford suit and Edward greens, there is no reason for them to be jealous. In my years of dressing more nicely than required, I've never found anyone appear to be even the least bit jealous.
.........
post #112 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmolken View Post
You know, that makes dressing well after 40 sound rational and smart, not irrational and stupid.
Yes, I think that is the point that Bounder is making - you should dress well as, if you just keep on wearing cargo pants, t-shirts and flip-flops, you won't have any chance of attracting nice women...
post #113 of 142
About the only issues argued about more on SF in the seven or so years I've been here have been the appropriateness of black suits (and we're about due for a new thread on that) and brown shoes (I think we've settled that one). And over the years some have argued we can blame it on the Boomers, economic factors, designers, retailers, Silicon Valley, Bill Clinton's loose WH dress code (and now Obama I suppose), the death of bespoke, an increasingly casual culture, and a multitude of other reasons I can't even remember. And none of it is new. I remember reading a novel published in the early 1970s where one of the economically poor protagonists noted that the rich kids dressed like they were poor, only their clothes cost a fortune. The reality, IMO and worth what you paid for it, is that people like easy and dressing up has always been considered a pain in the rear. It takes work to dress well. For every Cary Grant we had one hundred characters in movies noting that they were pleased to take off "the penguin suit", for every Fred Astaire we had one hundred others loosening their ties because they felt constrained. Yeah, everyone likes a sharp dressed man except the men who feel forced to wear a suit and tie and every woman who feels threatened that she's no longer the sartorial queenpin in a relationship. Me? I don't give a rat's behind anymore. Guy wants to sit in a nice restaurant beside me wearing cut-off cargos and a t-shirt? Rock on brother. Show up to a wedding in your best polo shirt and chinos? Have a drink! Made it to the wake in your clean running shoes, jeans, denim shirt and tie? Make sure to sign the book. Just remember to put your iPhone (and it's always an iPhone) on silent, please. I dress for me. I don't do it for the birds or blokes. I show up dressed for the situation as the old rules dictate but I expect nothing from anyone else. And I don't let it worry me. Why bother? Life is too short and I have other things to worry about. You showed up dressed like crap? Man, my reality doesn't even include you so why kvetch about it? Besides, I don't want any competition for the limited amount of good stuff I can lay my hands on.
post #114 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorgekko View Post
About the only issues argued about more on SF in the seven or so years I've been here have been the appropriateness of black suits (and we're about due for a new thread on that) and brown shoes (I think we've settled that one).

And over the years some have argued we can blame it on the Boomers, economic factors, designers, retailers, Silicon Valley, Bill Clinton's loose WH dress code (and now Obama I suppose), the death of bespoke, an increasingly casual culture, and a multitude of other reasons I can't even remember.

And none of it is new. I remember reading a novel published in the early 1970s where one of the economically poor protagonists noted that the rich kids dressed like they were poor, only their clothes cost a fortune. The reality, IMO and worth what you paid for it, is that people like easy and dressing up has always been considered a pain in the rear. It takes work to dress well. For every Cary Grant we had one hundred characters in movies noting that they were pleased to take off "the penguin suit", for every Fred Astaire we had one hundred others loosening their ties because they felt constrained.

Yeah, everyone likes a sharp dressed man except the men who feel forced to wear a suit and tie and every woman who feels threatened that she's no longer the sartorial queenpin in a relationship.

Me? I don't give a rat's behind anymore. Guy wants to sit in a nice restaurant beside me wearing cut-off cargos and a t-shirt? Rock on brother. Show up to a wedding in your best polo shirt and chinos? Have a drink! Made it to the wake in your clean running shoes, jeans, denim shirt and tie? Make sure to sign the book. Just remember to put your iPhone (and it's always an iPhone) on silent, please.

I dress for me. I don't do it for the birds or blokes. I show up dressed for the situation as the old rules dictate but I expect nothing from anyone else. And I don't let it worry me. Why bother? Life is too short and I have other things to worry about. You showed up dressed like crap? Man, my reality doesn't even include you so why kvetch about it? Besides, I don't want any competition for the limited amount of good stuff I can lay my hands on.

I'm glad you typed that all out so that I won't have to. I can just say that I feel the same way. I dress for me and no one else.
post #115 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorgekko View Post
I dress for me. I don't do it for the birds or blokes. I show up dressed for the situation as the old rules dictate but I expect nothing from anyone else. And I don't let it worry me. Why bother? Life is too short and I have other things to worry about. You showed up dressed like crap? Man, my reality doesn't even include you so why kvetch about it? Besides, I don't want any competition for the limited amount of good stuff I can lay my hands on.

+1 Well said, brother (particularly the bolded, which I could easily apply to other threads on this board).
post #116 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorgekko View Post
About the only issues argued about more on SF in the seven or so years I've been here have been the appropriateness of black suits (and we're about due for a new thread on that) and brown shoes (I think we've settled that one).

And over the years some have argued we can blame it on the Boomers, economic factors, designers, retailers, Silicon Valley, Bill Clinton's loose WH dress code (and now Obama I suppose), the death of bespoke, an increasingly casual culture, and a multitude of other reasons I can't even remember.

And none of it is new. I remember reading a novel published in the early 1970s where one of the economically poor protagonists noted that the rich kids dressed like they were poor, only their clothes cost a fortune. The reality, IMO and worth what you paid for it, is that people like easy and dressing up has always been considered a pain in the rear. It takes work to dress well. For every Cary Grant we had one hundred characters in movies noting that they were pleased to take off "the penguin suit", for every Fred Astaire we had one hundred others loosening their ties because they felt constrained.

Yeah, everyone likes a sharp dressed man except the men who feel forced to wear a suit and tie and every woman who feels threatened that she's no longer the sartorial queenpin in a relationship.

Me? I don't give a rat's behind anymore. Guy wants to sit in a nice restaurant beside me wearing cut-off cargos and a t-shirt? Rock on brother. Show up to a wedding in your best polo shirt and chinos? Have a drink! Made it to the wake in your clean running shoes, jeans, denim shirt and tie? Make sure to sign the book. Just remember to put your iPhone (and it's always an iPhone) on silent, please.

I dress for me. I don't do it for the birds or blokes. I show up dressed for the situation as the old rules dictate but I expect nothing from anyone else. And I don't let it worry me. Why bother? Life is too short and I have other things to worry about. You showed up dressed like crap? Man, my reality doesn't even include you so why kvetch about it? Besides, I don't want any competition for the limited amount of good stuff I can lay my hands on.

I think the overall point is that sloppiness is indicative of poor character: that's why a man in the early 20th century wouldn't be seen dead in a scruffy t-shirt and some old chinos; there are appearances, there are expectations, and there's pride as evinced in your choice of clothing.
post #117 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder View Post
One of the things that is funniest about all this is that wearing a suit, especially a decent, well-fitting one, really does get you better treatment almost everywhere.

There's a flip side. When I see a person who is blatantly overdressed (wearing a suit to the grocery store), I assume he's a poor. I assume he's a salesman at the mall or something. It really depends on the context and geography.
post #118 of 142
^or that dude that looks like parick bateman and married to a kardashian
post #119 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth Cole Haan View Post
Sweat, but not sweat pants, are hot on hotties.

Wrong. Thin, tight sweat pants (and yoga pants) can be teh hawt on a hawt chick.
post #120 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by smthorpe View Post

I am wondering if there is some stigma about shopping that gets men to stick to comfort rather than style.

The problem is the modern attitude where all that matters is MY comfort, MY pleasure, and sod everybody else.

The only pleasure in being well dressed is being so in the presence of other well dressed people.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › interesting WSJ article about dressing up(or not)