Pet peeves with clothing?

[GQgeek]

Big shoes. Why is it north americans insist on wearing these huge oversized clunkers? Walkby aldo or stoneridge and every single pair has a sole that's an inch thick and looks like it would be more appropriate ona construction worker than as a "dress" or even "dress casual" shoe.

And I was in montreal yesterday, this guy had nothing but logos showing and it looked unbelievably tacky. He was wearing dress pants, a muscle shirt, had a belt with a huge G, and what were either ferragamo or gucci bridle bit loafers along with what looked from a distance like it might be a gold rolex; all black of course ;p

 

[Joe G]

My biggest pet peeves are logos, shoddily-made expensive clothing, and, like many here, people who don't know their size.

By contrast, I like loafers (albeit not of the low-vamp variety), and will wear suits with trainers (well, bowling shoes).

Peace,

JG

 

[pstoller]

All the shorts I own are khaki and I like to wear heather grey and darker grey. Would I be wrong to put these two together? I see khaki as being close to brown and grey being close to black, and I always believed not to mix black and brown. Am I being too picky, or should a steer clear from doing this?

There's nothing wrong with mixing brown and black. The specific admonition mentioned above was brown shoes with a black belt: ideally, your shoes and belt should match, although if your shoes are an unusual color, it's OK if the belt isn't. You can wear brown shoes and belt with black pants, and look pretty slick, actually.

Grey and khaki are a different thing. Although you can wear them together, it's best if the shades aren't too close"”that is, light khaki pants with a light grey shirt. What I dislike about the combo"”even when it works"”is that both gray and khaki are sort of "almost not a color." It's a "please, don't notice me" choice, unless the shades are close enough together that people notice you because of the clash. Either khaki or grey is good for offsetting a more distinctive color. I'd suggest giving that a whirl.

 

[davei]

Big shoes. Why is it north americans insist on wearing these huge oversized clunkers? Walkby aldo or stoneridge and every single pair has a sole that's an inch thick and looks like it would be more appropriate ona construction worker than as a "dress" or even "dress casual" shoe.

Short men want to be taller

 

[European Interloper]

I like my Gucci. I do. I'm an unabashed Tom Ford lover. LA Guy, I know he's not your favorite, but he's done a great job in my eyes. And you know what? I like baggy clothing. Not any kind of baggy clothing, not the JINCOs hanging-off-pimply-teenage-backside clothing, but the clean cut stuff. The straight leg, tuxedo pant Gucci jeans, in clear indigo. They look fabulous. And, if you know what you're doing, you pair that clean bagginess with a tighter, shorter shirt? You look like a power house. A mighty male. The samurai did it for a reason, and, by god, I'm going to do it to. Take that, muscle heads, clothed in tight this and that: I can wear baggy clothes and look ten times as good as you.
Sorry for the rhetorical tirade nature of this piece. I love my baggy jeans.
European Interloper

 

[LA Guy]

Tom Ford's not my favorite, I think that he relies overly on revisited looks, and is perhaps too commercial0, but I definitely don't hate his stuff. Maybe you misinterpreted something I said, or have me confused with someone else.

I like my jeans rather full-legged too. In fact, except for a pair of Seven jeans (which are merciless to the full thighed), my jeans are generally a full-cut bootleg, and I often pair them up with a fitted shirt. The silhouette you describe is one I like quite well (I think that the opposite, on the other hand (looser shirt with tighter trousers, looks pretty bad on most guys).