GQ Business Casual Article

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by Unrefinery

Frank The J.Crew Dork has become a parody of himself.
He may not know where he's going, but he's always on the move.

 

[chrisb0109]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

Why is exclusion on the grounds of body shape bad? Why is exclusion on the grounds of skin color bad?

So they should make every size and shape that anyone could ever need whether it matched their aesthetic vision or not? Thats not how things work.

 

[Mal]

I have gained a lot of knowledge about what looks good over the years from GQ. I worked at a gas station during my undergrad, so I often read it while at work. It started my journey towards better fitting, and hopefully towards better styled clothing.

There are people who are thin, and new enough to gain value from GQ. The high price tag means that 99.9% of the population will be unable to afford it at a young age, of course. But to dismiss a magazine because it has a target seems odd.

The styleforum ideal is not tenable for everyone either, and it requires a patience that most men do not possess. While I have certainly gained a lot more in the months of reading style forum than in the years of reading GQ, I would have never been as interested in how I look without it.

I continue to make mistakes, and am glad I do. I enjoy improving myself through clothes despite being unable to drastically improve it financially.

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by chrisb0109

So they should make every size and shape that anyone could ever need whether it matched their aesthetic vision or not? Thats not how things work.

No. But there's a word for an obsessively narrow and discriminatory vision. It's "fascist."

 

[chrisb0109]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

No. But there's a word for an obsessively narrow and discriminatory vision. It's "fascist."

Get off the high horse.

Since when has art not been obsessive and narrow? Its personal, individual, and yes, rather discriminatory, as it should be.

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by chrisb0109

Since when has art not been obsessive and narrow?

I forgot that you guys called it "art."

 

[chrisb0109]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

I forgot that you guys called it "art."

Always the first sign that someone hasn't a creative bone in their body.

 

[Threadbearer]

Originally Posted by Mal

I have gained a lot of knowledge about what looks good over the years from GQ. I worked at a gas station during my undergrad, so I often read it while at work. It started my journey towards better fitting, and hopefully towards better styled clothing.

There are people who are thin, and new enough to gain value from GQ. The high price tag means that 99.9% of the population will be unable to afford it at a young age, of course. But to dismiss a magazine because it has a target seems odd.

The styleforum ideal is not tenable for everyone either, and it requires a patience that most men do not possess. While I have certainly gained a lot more in the months of reading style forum than in the years of reading GQ, I would have never been as interested in how I look without it.

I continue to make mistakes, and am glad I do. I enjoy improving myself through clothes despite being unable to drastically improve it financially.
+1 Very nicely put.

 

[yodawg]

also some of those products will trickle down to more affordable stores some time or another. i've finally been able to buy those drop crotch pants i've been lusting for since spring 09.

 

[ryewo[i dmfsOZI490w]

I personally wouldn't use GQ, or SF for that matter, to create a laundry list of all the stuff I need to buy, frankly because I don't think I'd ever drop $2k on a bespoke suit or more than $100 on a single shirt (plus I can't afford it haha). For those who can afford it, and those who aren't content with with being in the 95th percentile of well-dressed men, but want to be in the 99th, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and we all benefit from their expertise. What I would definitely use SF (and one or two things about GQ) for is to get a great idea of style in general and some specifics in terms of how clothes should fit, and what's acceptable and what isn't. I probably would drop up to $400 on some AEs though, those are some awesome shoes.

 

[SkinnyGoomba]

^Please leave.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[Dressed2the9s]

The article looks good!

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

No. But there's a word for an obsessively narrow and discriminatory vision. It's "fascist."

Well in fashion it is called "body fascism" and a brand like Dior Homme certainly engaged in it (during Slimane's era). JCrew doesn't, even though their ads will certainly display young, good/interesting looking people wearing a slimmed down version of their offerings, I mean who doesn't do that in the fashion world. Well actually designer brands often don't do the slimming part but stuff like Ralph Lauren or Jcrew does because the cuts aren't very nice on young and slim dudes.

 

[ryewo[i dmfsOZI490w]

Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba

^Please leave.

Thanks in Advance.

If that was directed at me perhaps you could tell me what you found so offensive in what I said, before I make any assumptions.

 

[whiteslashasian]

I thought the article took some ideas a bit too far, such as the incredibly slim fits, but overall I think it should help to point men in the right direction for conservative business dress.