• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Outside of designated casual periods (e.g. casual Friday), my job requires a jacket and tie?

  • Yes

    Votes: 103 27.9%
  • No

    Votes: 266 72.1%

  • Total voters
    369

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
Please touch on what does it have to do with gender fluidity? Also, what is it that you are referring to as gender fluidity?

By gender fluidity, I mean queer culture.

Anyway, I feel bad posting things I've written on this board because it feels self-promotional and thus very gross, but it was easier for me to post that link than write out a long post about liberalism and the death of the suit.

Here's something I wrote about how queer culture often gets mainstreamed


Your look is basically a shrunken silhouette, which comes out of two things:

1. Three designers: Raf, Hedi, and Thom Browne. Their gender and sexuality aside, all three challenged traditional masculine norms. Raf's collections are often about adolescence. Hedi is about challenging that macho jock archetype (because, as he said, he felt alienated because of his body type in high school). Browne is about subverting a 1960s Man in the Gray Flannel suit, making the cut boyish.

2. The reinvention of the Castroid look, which I talk about in that PTO post. Your pants are, frankly, kinda gay. I don't mean that as an insult, I'm just saying that silhouette comes out of the queer community.

I've been meaning to write a post about how, actually, almost everyone who's into suits nowadays in the StyleForum way owes a debt to the queer community because fashion has, traditionally, been a feminine thing. Ever wonder why CM guys obscure their face, but women posting on the internet don't? It's because we still know this is kinda gay.

It's Pride month and frankly, I'm kind of tired of seeing all sorts of super macho guys online wear skinny clothes talk **** about queer people, not recognizing that their whole look was pioneered by people who challenged traditional gender norms.
 

am55

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
4,948
Reaction score
4,658
By gender fluidity, I mean queer culture.

Anyway, I feel bad posting things I've written on this board because it feels self-promotional and thus very gross, but it was easier for me to post that link than write out a long post about liberalism and the death of the suit.

Here's something I wrote about how queer culture often gets mainstreamed


Your look is basically a shrunken silhouette, which comes out of two things:

1. Three designers: Raf, Hedi, and Thom Browne. Their gender and sexuality aside, all three challenged traditional masculine norms. Raf's collections are often about adolescence. Hedi is about challenging that macho jock archetype (because, as he said, he felt alienated because of his body type in high school). Browne is about subverting a 1960s Man in the Gray Flannel suit, making the cut boyish.

2. The reinvention of the Castroid look, which I talk about in that PTO post. Your pants are, frankly, kinda gay. I don't mean that as an insult, I'm just saying that silhouette comes out of the queer community.

I've been meaning to write a post about how, actually, almost everyone who's into suits nowadays in the StyleForum way owes a debt to the queer community because fashion has, traditionally, been a feminine thing. Ever wonder why CM guys obscure their face, but women posting on the internet don't? It's because we still know this is kinda gay.

It's Pride month and frankly, I'm kind of tired of seeing all sorts of super macho guys online wear skinny clothes talk **** about queer people, not recognizing that their whole look was pioneered by people who challenged traditional gender norms.
This is exactly what many here mean with the American centric worldview. You might not be wrong, but you're missing part of the picture by asserting confidently that the 1960s LBGT+ were the pioneers.

For example, post-WWI, fashion in Paris especially but Europe generally preferred a thinner silhouette, with a high buttoning point, narrow unstructured shoulders, slender wispy accessories, etc. The point? Neoteny. Because the young males returning from watching millions of their peers get butchered by a senseless, industrial scale war did not want to think about serious things, they wanted to drink and have fun and enjoy the enormous luck they felt they had not being in pieces in the Somme or coughing out their lungs in a military hospital in the countryside (and members of my family were victims both of these things). WWI completely changed European culture and politics all the way until today. You can read it in contemporary writers like Drieu de la Rochelle (who describes a politician dressed in a very SF style of hobo chic in Gilles), he even argued for fascism as a reaction to the lack of direction of the popular communist/leftist movements of the time (which he had initially followed).
 

gs77

Distinguished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
1,929
Reaction score
951
By gender fluidity, I mean queer culture.

Anyway, I feel bad posting things I've written on this board because it feels self-promotional and thus very gross, but it was easier for me to post that link than write out a long post about liberalism and the death of the suit.

Here's something I wrote about how queer culture often gets mainstreamed


Your look is basically a shrunken silhouette, which comes out of two things:

1. Three designers: Raf, Hedi, and Thom Browne. Their gender and sexuality aside, all three challenged traditional masculine norms. Raf's collections are often about adolescence. Hedi is about challenging that macho jock archetype (because, as he said, he felt alienated because of his body type in high school). Browne is about subverting a 1960s Man in the Gray Flannel suit, making the cut boyish.

2. The reinvention of the Castroid look, which I talk about in that PTO post. Your pants are, frankly, kinda gay. I don't mean that as an insult, I'm just saying that silhouette comes out of the queer community.

I've been meaning to write a post about how, actually, almost everyone who's into suits nowadays in the StyleForum way owes a debt to the queer community because fashion has, traditionally, been a feminine thing. Ever wonder why CM guys obscure their face, but women posting on the internet don't? It's because we still know this is kinda gay.

It's Pride month and frankly, I'm kind of tired of seeing all sorts of super macho guys online wear skinny clothes talk **** about queer people, not recognizing that their whole look was pioneered by people who challenged traditional gender norms.

Ok, so, did the legging of Robin Hood have to do with the same thing? Were LGBTQ rights part of Magna Carta?

The conclusions of the first article you linked are frankly full of ideological bullshit and virtue signaling. The real gem is the part where you say something like, selling super expensive designer clothes that are inspired by workwear is the ultimate win of the working class (who could never afford it, btw)... lol. Paraphrasing, so sorry if I didn't get it right.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
Ok, so, did the legging of Robin Hood have to do with the same thing? Were LGBTQ rights part of Magna Carta?

The conclusions of the first article you linked are frankly full of ideological bullshit and virtue signaling. The real gem is the part where you say something like, selling super expensive designer clothes that are inspired by workwear is the ultimate win of the working class (who could never afford it, btw)... lol. Paraphrasing, so sorry if I didn't get it right.

Just because you can find examples of skinny pants throughout history -- which is possible because people have been wearing clothes for thousands of years -- doesn't mean that you're wearing a look because of George Washington. Just like how today's double rider trend is about Hedi and Kanye, it's not about Marlon Brando.

Anyway, I guess my entire argument was shot down by "you're virtue signaling," so u win ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Thomson

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
181
Reaction score
126
I don't have a reference off the top of my head, but it's something you can read about in any book about men's fashion

Lounge suits have been around longer than any other men's garment, but it's a relatively new invention. People on this board act like people have been wearing this forever, but lounge suits didn't really become popular until the interwar years -- sport coats started making it into men's closets as regular wear in the mid 1920s

Before lounge suits, men wore long coats. This was considered the acceptable business dress in London. The end of WWI coincides with the end of Britain's imperial century. Lounge suits during this time was like beachwear (this was discussed ad naseum in that thread about the death of the suit). After WWI, lounge suits started becoming more popular partly because of the Duke of Windsor, and partly because of fashionable Americans who wear willing to wear something less formal in business settings (the Duke didn't do business).

Even as late as the 1920s, older and more traditional English men still wore long coats.

By the 1940s, Americans had pushed casualization so far that even vests were considered outdated in business settings. A lot of this has to do with the rise of Hollywood.

And anyway, all this about "no one has ever been impressed by American dress," don't you wear penny loafers and tassel loafers? And weren't you in a thread about small balls, recommending the poster try your favorite brand of five pocket jeans?

I find this kind of unlikely. It’s not like everyone in Europe or the continent wore frock coats until the end of the Second World War. Only to be shown the virtue of a modern suit by the arriving GIs.
 

Encathol Epistemia

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2019
Messages
289
Reaction score
578
A suit?!? I'm the only man in my office who always wears a necktie!

My division is majority female, but among the men, my sense of dress stands out as conservative. (N.b. Said conservativism is strictly aesthetic, I'm a monster raving lefty on most social issues, which befits the son of a Cleaver voter) There is one man in the division who has been around long enough to remember when all of the men wore suits and ties. He even mentioned how he liked them, although he wears just a dress shirt and dress-ish trousers these days. He's also set to retire in a few weeks.

Oddly enough, I'm more likely by far to wear a suit outside of work. It's less a requisite professional uniform than sort of self-expression. The thing about myself that I want to express being that in all but age I should be collecting social security checks and complaining about 'kids these days'.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
I find this kind of unlikely. It’s not like everyone in Europe or the continent wore frock coats until the end of the Second World War. Only to be shown the virtue of a modern suit by the arriving GIs.

It wasn't until the end of WWII, it was roughly until the end of WWI.

The issue isn't whether people wore lounge suits -- they did. Lounge suits were worn way before WWI.

The issue is how the meaning of lounge suits changed from about the end of the 19th century to about the middle of the 20th. Basically, around the end of the 19th century, the lounge suit was considered workwear. It's hard to appreciate this today because we think of it so much as a formal business suit, but there was a time when only people like clerks wore it. This is why it was such a big deal when Kier Hardie showed up to Parliament in a lounge suit. It would be like someone today showing up to Congress in cargo pants.

Even the Duke caused a minor controversy when he showed up to inspect troops in a glen plaid lounge suit and cuffed trousers. Again, proper "business" attire at the time was a frock coat.

Older, more traditional British men continued to wear long coats up until about 1914, which was the end of the British imperial century.

The question is how did something that was once considered beachwear eventually get accepted into boardrooms? It's not that people didn't wear suits for work -- they did, but they were low-level workers. It's a question of how did the lounge suit -- and eventually the vest-less two-piece -- eventually become the acceptable dress for the boardroom, the upper-most levels of management?

Part of that story is about how the emergence of the lounge suit coincided with the rise of the Golden Age of Hollywood and how the lounge suit took on a different meaning in America (and also, later, the invention of ready-to-wear in America, something Michael Zakim writes about in Ready Made Democracy).

It wasn't the returning GIs who showed people how to wear the lounge suit, it was Hollywood movie stars and newly minted American businessmen in the 1920s/ 30s. In the US, the lounge suit became a sign of snappy progress. Back in the UK, it was still drab clothing worn by clerks and administrators -- plebian, lower-rung clothes. In the US, it was part of a uniform of optimism and modernity. In the UK, it was not.
 
Last edited:

Alan Bee

Distinguished Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
5,728
It wasn't until the end of WWII, it was roughly until the end of WWI.

The issue isn't whether people wore lounge suits -- they did. Lounge suits were worn way before WWI.

The issue is how the meaning of lounge suits changed from about the end of the 19th century to about the middle of the 20th. Basically, around the end of the 19th century, the lounge suit was considered workwear. It's hard to appreciate this today because we think of it so much as a formal business suit, but there was a time when only people like clerks wore it. This is why it was such a big deal when Kier Hardie showed up to Parliament in a lounge suit. It would be like someone today showing up to Congress in cargo pants.

Even the Duke caused a minor controversy when he showed up to inspect troops in a glen plaid lounge suit and cuffed trousers. Again, proper "business" attire at the time was a frock coat.

Older, more traditional British men continued to wear long coats up until about 1914, which was the end of the British imperial century.

The question is how did something that was once considered beachwear eventually get accepted into boardrooms? It's not that people didn't wear suits for work -- they did, but they were low-level workers. It's a question of how did the lounge suit -- and eventually the vest-less two-piece -- eventually become the acceptable dress for the boardroom, the upper-most levels of management?

Part of that story is about how the emergence of the lounge suit coincided with the rise of the Golden Age of Hollywood and how the lounge suit took on a different meaning in America (and also, later, the invention of ready-to-wear in America, something Michael Zakim writes about in Ready Made Democracy).

It wasn't the returning GIs who showed people how to wear the lounge suit, it was Hollywood movie stars and newly minted American businessmen in the 1930s. In the US, the lounge suit became a sign of snappy progress. Back in the UK, it was still drab clothing worn by clerks and administrators -- plebian, lower-rung clothes. In the US, it was part of a uniform of optimism and modernity. In the UK, it was not.

So we must then all donate our tailored clothing (suits) to the local museum, run out and acquire cargo pants and fleece vests Derek? Is this your logical conclusion?

So we don’t “miss the philistinic boat” about to sail ...

Alan Bee
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
So we must then all donate our tailored clothing (suits) to the local museum, run out and acquire cargo pants and fleece vests Derek? Is this your logical conclusion?

So we don’t “miss the philistinic boat” about to sail ...

Alan Bee

For the millionth time, I don't care what anyone wears. I was only commenting on how you said lounge suits are still necessary for business, and then poo-poo'd Americans saying no one has ever been impressed with their dress. This, to me, missed, the whole history of how a piece of workwear became part of a boardroom uniform in the first place.

This is like that time you said a sack suit is a suit cut like a sack. I don't care if you wear a sack suit or not, but a sack suit isn't called a sack suit because it's cut like a sack. I was only commenting on your comment. I don't care what you buy or wear.
 

Thomson

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
181
Reaction score
126
I remember being on the way to a major client in a small provincial town ca. 2002. somewhere in Northern Germany. Had a coffee in bakery in the local pedestrian zone and remember people glancing at me because even then the only people wearing suits were the local bank manager and maybe the lawyer. Other than maybe the finance people at that said client. I was also on my blackberry before smartphones were common so maybe that was a factor as well. :)

As to who influenced whom etc. I think it is all a bit of a mishmash really. I am currently wearing a Fred Perry M12, chinos and Adidas sambas. Might be right at home in an American office (maybe not Fred Perry) but is it American? The ingredients certainly aren‘t (even chinos were not confined to one particular army, I would have thought, even if they have been popularised in the US).
 

Alan Bee

Distinguished Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
5,728
Oh come off it. The average European dresses as ****** as the average American, maybe worse. Look at Germany. Jeezus.

I regularly deal with financial and tech industry professionals from all over Europe and travel there regularly. They’ve been copying our example for years. Business casual everywhere. The only thing you’re missing is the Patagonia vests.

@TheFoo

And what exactly is this “business casual” you repeatedly refer to? Can you articulate precisely what constitutes it in the same way you can a suit or tailored country (sport) dress?

I find it strange that none of the “suit antagonists” have been able to properly define what replaces the suit. Besides of course the narrow odd midtown Manhattan fleece vest which I’m fairly sure is a passing plague contained to midtown Manhattan.

It is much like being in opposition politics just for the sake of flame throwing without having any practical ideas to replace the status quo.

Alan Bee
 
Last edited:

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
As to who influenced whom etc. I think it is all a bit of a mishmash really. I am currently wearing a Fred Perry M12, chinos and Adidas sambas. Might be right at home in an American office (maybe not Fred Perry) but is it American? The ingredients certainly aren‘t (even chinos were not confined to one particular army, I would have thought, even if they have been popularised in the US).

I agree, it's a mishmash. I just think the popular narrative -- that everyone started wearing the suit because of the Duke of Windsor -- is fun and easy to repeat, but ultimately oversimplified and not totally correct. The suit emerged out of a very specific period that involves things such as liberalization, industrialization, the rise of Hollywood, and the varying influences of Europe and the US.
 

Alan Bee

Distinguished Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
5,728
For the millionth time, I don't care what anyone wears. I was only commenting on how you said lounge suits are still necessary for business, and then poo-poo'd Americans saying no one has ever been impressed with their dress. This, to me, missed, the whole history of how a piece of workwear became part of a boardroom uniform in the first place.

This is like that time you said a sack suit is a suit cut like a sack. I don't care if you wear a sack suit or not, but a sack suit isn't called a sack suit because it's cut like a sack. I was only commenting on your comment. I don't care what you buy or wear.

You do have the memory of an elephant Derek, don’t you? Unlike @TheFoo I don’t consider myself important enough to be stalked LOL

Alan Bee
 

Thomson

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
181
Reaction score
126
It wasn't until the end of WWII, it was roughly until the end of WWI.

The issue isn't whether people wore lounge suits -- they did. Lounge suits were worn way before WWI.

The issue is how the meaning of lounge suits changed from about the end of the 19th century to about the middle of the 20th. Basically, around the end of the 19th century, the lounge suit was considered workwear. It's hard to appreciate this today because we think of it so much as a formal business suit, but there was a time when only people like clerks wore it. This is why it was such a big deal when Kier Hardie showed up to Parliament in a lounge suit. It would be like someone today showing up to Congress in cargo pants.

Even the Duke caused a minor controversy when he showed up to inspect troops in a glen plaid lounge suit and cuffed trousers. Again, proper "business" attire at the time was a frock coat.

Older, more traditional British men continued to wear long coats up until about 1914, which was the end of the British imperial century.

The question is how did something that was once considered beachwear eventually get accepted into boardrooms? It's not that people didn't wear suits for work -- they did, but they were low-level workers. It's a question of how did the lounge suit -- and eventually the vest-less two-piece -- eventually become the acceptable dress for the boardroom, the upper-most levels of management?

Part of that story is about how the emergence of the lounge suit coincided with the rise of the Golden Age of Hollywood and how the lounge suit took on a different meaning in America (and also, later, the invention of ready-to-wear in America, something Michael Zakim writes about in Ready Made Democracy).

It wasn't the returning GIs who showed people how to wear the lounge suit, it was Hollywood movie stars and newly minted American businessmen in the 1920s/ 30s. In the US, the lounge suit became a sign of snappy progress. Back in the UK, it was still drab clothing worn by clerks and administrators -- plebian, lower-rung clothes. In the US, it was part of a uniform of optimism and modernity. In the UK, it was not.

Ok, understood. You are referring to an earlier period. Still, I kind of suspect that the influence of Hollywood cinema on European fashion of the, say 20ies, is much smaller than you think. English language music, to take an example only made a major impact with the Beatles, maybe Elvis Presley, if you are looking for an earlier example and even when it comes to Rock’n’Roll, what the vast majority of people tended to listen to were local versions.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
Ok, understood. You are referring to an earlier period. Still, I kind of suspect that the influence of Hollywood cinema on European fashion of the, say 20ies, is much smaller than you think. English language music, to take an example only made a major impact with the Beatles, maybe Elvis Presley, if you are looking for an earlier example and even when it comes to Rock’n’Roll, what the vast majority of people tended to listen to were local versions.

It's impossible to prove causality in history, so ... yeah. I mean, there's no way to prove the effect because we can't have alternative worlds where we can switch an event on and off, like a test variable. But I will say, my interpretation isn't a fringe one. If you read men's fashion books, this is pretty much the popular narrative.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 36.7%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 59 39.3%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 15 10.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 26 17.3%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 26 17.3%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,131
Messages
10,578,706
Members
223,885
Latest member
Garyypangburn
Top