Rant: Modern Burberry is Crap

[TheIronDandy]

Like this stud muffin?

View attachment 1565640

a more recent example:

View attachment 1565641

This shows that horny testosterone-soaked male aggression can co-exist peacefully with tribal tattoos, fluffy hats and wearing lots of make-up. Maybe there's hope after all!

 

[Phileas Fogg]

I'm glad this thread is now developing with the true seriousness that it deserved.

I never joke about leather or animal skins!

 

[DrapeCut]

Well go to someone else, Aquascutum, DAKS etc ...

Yeah, Aquascutum seems to make a solid but dull trench. I like older Burberry models, which are easily found on eBay for $200-500 depending on condition. Timeless!

 

[DrapeCut]

The homophobia really added that extra something to this rant, apparently from someone who has been living under a rock for the entirety of this century and possibly longer.

Like it or not, Burberry would now be long gone if this reinvention hadn't happened - because few people wanted what it was selling, however high the quality.

I was trying to be tongue and cheek, not homophobic, but the label couldn't be more accurate. High fashion 'men's' clothes are now often androgynous looking. And, yes, I understand the economic necessity for moving in this direction.

 

[DrapeCut]

I think you're searching for something offensive or to be offended by.
It's not homophobia to state the fact that vulgar and/or feminine clothes have distorted the menswear industry. Also, the models on the runway are feminine, thin and androgynous in appearance. This is the main reason many of us on this forum buy from specialty stores and tailors.

If there was any "phobia" to point out in the fashion industry it would be masculinity-phobia.

Thank you, sir! Absolutely. I'm not even a rugged, uber masculine type, but can't wear this **** lol.

 

[JFWR]

I was trying to be tongue and cheek, not homophobic, but the label couldn't be more accurate. High fashion 'men's' clothes are now often androgynous looking. And, yes, I understand the economic necessity for moving in this direction.

I'd also say that everyone understood that what you were getting at was the effete nonsense that passes as fashion in many venerable brands nowadays.

It might be impolite nowadays, but let's be real: no man wants to dress like a sissy.

 

[BPL Esq]

It might be impolite nowadays, but let's be real: no man wants to dress like a sissy.

Apparently, a lot of them do. Happily, we can vote with our wallets against the trend.

 

[DrapeCut]

I'd also say that everyone understood that what you were getting at was the effete nonsense that passes as fashion in many venerable brands nowadays.

It might be impolite nowadays, but let's be real: no man wants to dress like a sissy.

For sure! I'd even go one step further and say that most men would do better to avoid many of the accessories that #menswear encouraged. It takes a certain level of of effortless cool in order to pull off pocket squares, collar pins, boutonnieres etc. without looking like an affected jackass. Guys would do better to nail the basics starting with perfecting fit. Get a luxurious tie, good shoes, and an heirloom-grade wristwatch. Save the foppish **** for movies and tv. Everyday style isn't about emulating Jay Gatsby or adhering to a list of antiquated rules on menswear etiquette, which is what some YouTube 'gurus' would seemingly have you think...

 

[dieworkwear]

It might be impolite nowadays, but let's be real: no man wants to dress like a sissy.

Don't you own green oxfords? How is that masculine? Not that I care if people dress masculine or not, but this seems at odds with your dressing practices.

For sure! I'd even go one step further and say that most men would do better to avoid many of the accessories that #menswear encouraged. It takes a certain level of of effortless cool in order to pull off pocket squares, collar pins, boutonnieres etc. without looking like an affected jackass. Guys would do better to nail the basics starting with perfecting fit. Get a luxurious tie, good shoes, and an heirloom-grade wristwatch. Save the foppish **** for movies and tv. Everyday style isn't about emulating Jay Gatsby or adhering to a list of antiquated rules on menswear etiquette, which is what some YouTube 'gurus' would seemingly have you think...

This is a really ahistorical view, as expressions of masculinity are 1) complex and 2) change over time. The Duke of Windsor was a colorful dresser and, while foppish, still considered masculine in his day. Pre-Oscar Wilde, many men dressed colorfully and were considered masculine (e.g. d’Orsay, Disraeli, and Balzac). This intersection between masculinity and dress, as you've expressed it, mainly came to the fore after the trial of Oscar Wilde, where any deviation from a narrow way of dressing was then associated with homosexuality. And, at the time and still to some degree today, people widely associated homosexuality with being "less than a man" or "more as a woman." And so, many gender-anxious men were afraid to deviate.

For a time pointy suede shoes were considered "unmanly." (See how many here now wear them). There were also green cravats and light blue socks. Solid red ties, like the one Trump wears, was once considered an unmanly and homosexual thing to wear in NYC.

You can wear "feminine" or "androgenous" things and somehow look even more manly because of it. Gender expression is much more complex than just piling gendered things on top of yourself. Some people are naturally very masculine looking, so wearing something slightly feminine heightens their masculine look, just as some very feminine people look more feminine by wearing masculine things.

Anyway, I can't imagine someone in 2021 is worried about a "man purse." That seems so weird to me.

 

[dieworkwear]

Apparently, a lot of them do. Happily, we can vote with our wallets against the trend.

I appreciate that this came from a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle

 

[DrapeCut]

Don't you own green oxfords? How is that masculine? Not that I care if people dress masculine or not, but this seems at odds with your dressing practices.



This is a really ahistorical view, as expressions of masculinity are 1) complex and 2) change over time. The Duke of Windsor was a colorful dresser and, while foppish, still considered masculine in his day. Pre-Oscar Wilde, many men dressed colorfully and were considered masculine. This intersection between masculinity and dress, as you've expressed it, mainly came to the fore after the trial of Oscar Wilde, where any deviation from a narrow way of dressing was then associated with homosexuality. And, at the time and still to some degree today, people widely associated homosexuality with being "less than a man" or "more as a woman." And so, many gender-anxious men were afraid to deviate.

For a time pointy suede shoes were considered "unmanly." (See how many here now wear them). There were also green cravats and light blue socks.

You can wear "feminine" or "androgenous" things and somehow look even more manly because of it. Gender expression is much more complex than just piling gendered things on top of yourself. Some people are naturally very masculine looking, so wearing something slightly feminine heightens their masculine look, just as some very feminine people look more feminine by wearing masculine things.

Anyway, I can't imagine someone in 2021 is worried about a "man purse." That seems so weird to me.

Interesting read, but I'm not sure how useful this academic understanding of gender norms and clothing is. Most guys want to feel good in what they're wearing and to be taken seriously in a business setting [when at work]. I don't care what Oscar Wilde or Edward wore. This isn't the 19th century or 1930s.

 

[dieworkwear]

Interesting read, but I'm not sure how useful this academic understanding of gender norms and clothing is. Most guys want to feel good in what they're wearing and to be taken seriously in a business setting [when at work]. I don't care what Oscar Wilde or Edward wore. This isn't the 19th century or 1930s.

I have some clothes that are traditionally masculine, and some clothes that lean "androgynous." I haven't had a problem in my career and I work in a pretty conservative environment.

 

[BPL Esq]

I have some clothes that are traditionally masculine, and some clothes that lean "androgynous." I haven't had a problem in my career and I work in a pretty conservative environment.

Things skew heavily toward durable and traditionally masculine workwear down here in the sewers. Lots of shell too.

 

[dieworkwear]

If people are worried about looking unmanly, just draw penises all over yourself. The penis is a centuries-old symbol of masculinity.

 

[dieworkwear]

Interesting read, but I'm not sure how useful this academic understanding of gender norms and clothing is. Most guys want to feel good in what they're wearing and to be taken seriously in a business setting [when at work]. I don't care what Oscar Wilde or Edward wore. This isn't the 19th century or 1930s.

You don't even have to go that far back to find examples of previously "unmanly" things now becoming the norm. Twenty years ago, slim fit clothes and tailoring -- including things widely worn on this board -- were considered metrosexual, which is to say "unmanly." The silhouettes at many of the more affordable clothing suppliers today (again, without naming names, but it includes many of the ones on this board) would have been considered "gay." Lots of affordable tailoring is slim-fit-ish because it has to appeal to a wider market, and mass taste generally lags behind cutting-edge trends.

Now that everyone is wearing that kind of slim-fit tailoring, the pendulum is swinging the other way. A lot of what's considered "androgenous" clothing today is just stuff that's fashionable or influenced by womenswear, so you have silhouettes such a wider pants worn with a topcoat. That's not to say that all wide pants are considered feminine or "sissy," as you put it. But it's very clear even to casual observers when a man is dressed in a more fashion-forward way.

Give it ten years, and you will see the same conversion. The same type of person who twenty years ago wouldn't get into slim fits because it was "gay" or "metrosexual" will later convert to wider silhouettes. It's has little to do with gender aesthetics and more to do with men's anxiety with having an interest in clothes, as fashion is a gendered area of interest.

There are such things as feminine and masculine looks, and I think it's fine if someone wants to dress in a more masculine way. My taste in tailored clothing leans very masculine. I dislike slim-fit suits and clean tailoring. I really dislike non-conservative dress shoes. But when people bring this stuff up, it's often not because they have a particularly strong view on gender aesthetics. It's that they're just new to clothes and they're thus unsure of their own taste and habits. Rather than develop a sense of taste, they use concepts like "classicness," "quality," and "gender" as a crutch. Such and such thing is OK to wear because it's masculine, classic, and high quality. This seems like such a sad way of dressing -- almost dressing in a way to avoid ridicule, rather than dressing for joy (or having a strong personal view of aesthetics). It's like a deep desire to not stand out in any way or make the "wrong" choices, lest one be bullied.