or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Slim Suits: The Attraction Is Physical
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Slim Suits: The Attraction Is Physical - Page 2

post #16 of 27
Another example of poor journalism.
post #17 of 27
Why is a "slender" man necessarily "more body-conscious?"

It seems to me that the writer's perpetuating this idea that skinny people are more body conscious than fat people, a theory I find problematic.

EVERYONE's body-conscious. In my experience as a skinny guy, I've just had to spend a lot more time trying to figure out how to look good in huge boxes and bags that people describe as clothing nowadays.

Cheap and sneaky editorializing.
post #18 of 27
Many people work to become slender, while few people work to become fat. Built or bulky maybe, but you don't often see people trying to fill out their love handles a little more.
post #19 of 27
I hope this new trend would provide numerous hillarity on the streets of North American towns.

Short, flat-front pants., oh shit I can't wait.
post #20 of 27
Here's what I see as the problem: The pictures in the slideshow, particularly the ones of the Black Label and the Richard James suits, aren't "slim suits" at all. Rather, they should simply be described as "well fitting." Perhaps the pants could be described as slim fitting, with their lower rises (which I don't particularly like for suit pants) and flat fronts, but the coats just look well fitting to me.

Why is this a problem? Because all of the sudden these coats set the standard for "slim," and the "average fitting" suit coat has more fabric. If these suit were just considered "average," then the typical coat would be well fitting.

Also, I don't think that cutting the jacket shorter has anything to do with being "slim fitting."
post #21 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkzzzz
I hope this new trend would provide numerous hillarity on the streets of North American towns.

Short, flat-front pants., oh shit I can't wait.

post #22 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by j
Many people work to become slender, while few people work to become fat. Built or bulky maybe, but you don't often see people trying to fill out their love handles a little more.

1. I think a larger percentage of us slender people actually work a good deal harder with lackluster results. Fat or muscle, it doesn't really matter. If you're one of those who wants to gain weight, then you tend not to care how. Most people just don't realize this, because they spend their time telling us we need to gain weight. Do you know how pathologically defensive people are towards thinner people? It's always the most ridiculous argument when people say stuff like, 'eat more,' as if our thinness insults their sense of proper humanity.

2. From what I've heard, a lot of overweight men have body image issues, too. They just tend to keep it to themselves and act nonchalant about it. I know my near-300-lb. dad is like that. How does he deal with his stress and insecurity? He pigs out.

Sorry, but the basic assumption that men who wear slimmer clothes are more body-conscious is stupid. If anything, the fact of this trend only says to me that a lot of men have come to the inevitable conclusion that clothes just look better when they fit.


I'm younger, and I like plain-front pants and think cuffs aren't always necessary. There's something to said for a minimalist look. 60s-chic has been in for a while, and this only represents a continuation of that. I also prefer shorter pants--provided they hang well and don't flare.

To each his own.
post #23 of 27
Quote:
low-waist, slim-cut pants with hems that never quite touch the top of the shoes, daring to bare (just as women first did a century ago) a bit of sock or skin.
I want a man-skort-suit!
post #24 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connemara


The sad part is that 95% of people reading that article will believe that Helmut Lang really did invent high armholes.

I doubt that's so, although the percentage may have more applicability to this thread. The New York Times article never said that Lang invented high armholes, or even came close to saying that.

This thread reminds me eerily of a recent discussion -- of should I say fanatasy -- about an article in Esquire about khakis. There, members were soon talking about cashmere tan pants and agonizing over the difference between khakis and chinos.
post #25 of 27
You needn't credit Helmut Lang with inventing the high armholes, just recognize that he has a huge part in making them more the norm. Compare pre-Lang fashion to current fashion.. Not much has changed in the way he cuts his suits, but everyone else sure has.
post #26 of 27
This horseshit about 3-button suits and 2-buttons suits has got to stop. It's fucking stupid. Are people that fucking stupid? Oh, better get 2-button suit! Oh, better not get 3-button suit! Oh, SUV = good. Better get it. Oh.
post #27 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnapril
This horseshit about 3-button suits and 2-buttons suits has got to stop. It's fucking stupid. Are people that fucking stupid? Oh, better get 2-button suit! Oh, better not get 3-button suit!

QFT
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Slim Suits: The Attraction Is Physical