Ambrosi Napoli

^^lol. Awesome.

In a room somewhere in NY, mafoofan is laughing at us all for taking the bait, and truly believing that he thought this outfit was in good taste when he put it on.

I wish that were true, but I'm sure mafoofan actually believes he's on a winner with that horrendous outfit.

It was and, sadly, sometimes still is very popular for Russian men in my community to wear a dress shirt, track suit pants, and dress shoes. Foo's outfit is right up there.

BTW, this thread sort of contradicts the SF meme that certain posters never get criticized by their friends, even when they do/wear something demonstrably wrong, no?

Originally Posted by quar

Click to expand...

In a room somewhere in NY, mafoofan is laughing at us all for taking the bait, and truly believing that he thought this outfit was in good taste when he put it on.

I wish that were true, but I'm sure mafoofan actually believes he's on a winner with that horrendous outfit.

me thinks you have all been 'had' by the Foo.

The heat that develops back and forth when Foo shakes things up a bit really is something to behold. Is the outfit that bad? I don't think so only because Foo seems to play it off well with a bit of attitude. Do the longwings start to make it a bit comical? Sure, but we all know that's the way Foo roles. Might as well accept it even if one wouldn't wear it.

I'm going to go back to more important things...like getting this spreadsheet taken care of for a client.

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Click to expand...

I think there's some cognitive circuity going on here: because Styleforum thinks dressing up is dressing better, and Styleforum prefers cuffs, it assumes cuffs signify dressing up. This is false, however. If anything, cuffs make trousers more casual. When wearing black tie, for example, one's trousers should not be cuffed.

You've taken a few shots at SF, but I think you are actually falling into a trap that is a classic SF problem: dressing properly for the occasion. I know I'm guilty of it sometimes. Style is also about finding the appropriate clothes for your age, you companions, your job, your situation, etc. A pair of flannel dress pants are just not the appropriate piece of clothing for whatever activity that also involves wearing a sweatshirt, at least not for a man of your age.

I mean, feel free to wear it based on whatever notions of dressing you have, but it will stand out as looking wrong, just as it looks wrong when college kids on this forum wear a coat and tie to class.

Originally Posted by Manton

Click to expand...

BTW, this thread sort of contradicts the SF meme that certain posters never get criticized by their friends, even when they do/wear something demonstrably wrong, no?

Not really. If Foo wears a gym sweatshirt in the forest with dress pants, OneShoe and ridiculous-looking shades, or if you wear a horrendous shirt/tie combo in the conservative business dress thread, even the most loyal sycophants around will very mildly/delicately/almost self-deprecatingly (really) let you know that you look like crap. But, generally, there is a whole lot of back-slapping and praise - you're too intelligent to not believe this to be the case.

Originally Posted by rnoldh

Click to expand...

Wookie indeed!

That's no wookie coat. It is without a doubt, a genuine Snuffaluffagus coat.


-LR

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Click to expand...

I can take the personal attacks and insults, but putting me into a Harvard sweater would truly make a piece of me die on the inside.

The rejection letters (both of them - college and law school) continue to sting, eh? Jkjk

Originally Posted by CaymanS

Click to expand...

Not really. If Foo wears a gym sweatshirt in the forest with dress pants, OneShoe and ridiculous-looking shades, or if you wear a horrendous shirt/tie combo in the conservative business dress thread, even the most loyal sycophants around will very mildly/delicately/almost self-deprecatingly (really) let you know that you look like crap. But, generally, there is a whole lot of back-slapping and praise - you're too intelligent to not believe this to be the case.
Wow, thanks for sharing.

^ Who could dislike this coat. Seriously, now. This thing is beyond legendary. It's sort of like what would happen if Vox hired Spoo as a personal shopper for a day...

Originally Posted by Manton

Click to expand...

Come on, foo.

By leaving out the second part of my comment, you mischaracterized me. I am aware of what people mean by "dress pants" and "office pants." I just happen to find the underlying notions repugnant. So, I would never call my flannel trousers "dress pants" unless speaking to someone who I wouldn't want to take the time to explain anything further to. The only thing I wouldn't wear them with is a t-shirt. Polo shirts, OCBDs, sweaters, college sweatshirts--all game. At the end, you can call them whatever you like, but I don't treat them as anything particularly special.

Originally Posted by teddieriley

Click to expand...

Your Ambrosi pants. Those are dress pants.

Nope.

Originally Posted by teddieriley

Click to expand...

I mean you have jeans - you don't think it would be significantly more appropriate to pair your sweatshirt with jeans?

Jeans are never 'appropriate'. I wear them when appropriateness isn't an issue--but then, I might also put on my grey flannels.

Originally Posted by Eustace Tilley

Click to expand...

Its not like you don't understand the basis for all the criticism here.

I understand the basis, but it's wrong.

Originally Posted by alliswell

Click to expand...

I think I see the problem. Foo's taken it to the next level - wool pants that work with everything. Not "dress pants". Not "office pants".

In jest or not, this is closest to what I'm getting at. Not perfectly on target, but in the same ballpark.

Originally Posted by zbromer

Click to expand...

You've taken a few shots at SF, but I think you are actually falling into a trap that is a classic SF problem: dressing properly for the occasion. I know I'm guilty of it sometimes. Style is also about finding the appropriate clothes for your age, you companions, your job, your situation, etc. A pair of flannel dress pants are just not the appropriate piece of clothing for whatever activity that also involves wearing a sweatshirt, at least not for a man of your age.

Why aren't they appropriate for a picnic? They are comfortable enough (more so than jeans) and there is no meaningful dress code in Central Park. My age and job, etc., are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that they are my pants, they match or exceed what is minimally required for social appropriateness, and they aesthetically complement my other clothes. You are hung up on formality when: (1) you are, to begin with, assuming that flannel trousers express a narrow and rigid degree of formality, and (2) there is some sort of applicable standard of formality at all times.

Originally Posted by zbromer

Click to expand...

. . . just as it looks wrong when college kids on this forum wear a coat and tie to class.

If it looks wrong when they do that, it's more likely that they didn't do it well enough, not that they were inappropriately dressed for a social context that lacks any real dress code to begin with.

Originally Posted by CaymanS

Click to expand...

The rejection letters (both of them - college and law school) continue to sting, eh? Jkjk

The bitterness is my fuel.

Do not quote spam.