The Well-Dressed Man

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ayn_Randian
Posts: 10727
Joined: 08 May 2010, 14:58

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Ayn_Randian » 20 Jan 2012, 01:49

JD wrote:
Ayn_Randian wrote:Lord knows that's the truth. I wear a sweater vest, a tie, and a wool fedora and suddenly it's "Woah Mr. Bigshot got a big date with the PRESIDENT or something?" Freaking trogs, I swear.
A wool fedora? A man who would wear a wool fedora would probably iron his dungarees as well. ;-)
Indeed he would, and he would be a better man for it!
It has the effect of making me want desperately to do the opposite of what Green Day is suggesting I should want to do. Billy Joe Whassname may have created a generation of war mongers. - Jason L

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21849
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Warren » 20 Jan 2012, 10:13

I only smoke a cigar on very special occasions, so I very rarely wear cuffs.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9406
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Sandy » 20 Jan 2012, 10:20

Pleated-front trousers are almost always simply wrong.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21849
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Warren » 20 Jan 2012, 11:16

Sandy wrote:Pleated-front trousers are almost always simply wrong.
Piffle
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 21001
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by JasonL » 20 Jan 2012, 12:41

Sandy wrote:Pleated-front trousers are almost always simply wrong.
I didn't use to believe this. But I do now. You can't get a tailored look with pleats involved for the most part. I've seen teeny pleat concepts that aren't so bad, but in general stay away.

Note: I have older pants that do not adhere to this rule and it always makes me sad to put them on. I need to do a full refresh.

User avatar
Ayn_Randian
Posts: 10727
Joined: 08 May 2010, 14:58

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Ayn_Randian » 20 Jan 2012, 16:30

JasonL wrote:
Sandy wrote:Pleated-front trousers are almost always simply wrong.
I didn't use to believe this. But I do now. You can't get a tailored look with pleats involved for the most part. I've seen teeny pleat concepts that aren't so bad, but in general stay away.

Note: I have older pants that do not adhere to this rule and it always makes me sad to put them on. I need to do a full refresh.
Pleats serve a useful purpose...um...*ahem*...to ensure that certain bulges aren't "front and center", so to speak. I am trying to figure out how to say this without sounding like I am bragging...
It has the effect of making me want desperately to do the opposite of what Green Day is suggesting I should want to do. Billy Joe Whassname may have created a generation of war mongers. - Jason L

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17463
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 20 Jan 2012, 16:40

If your pleats are noticeable after four hours contact a physician immediately.

Pleated pants are of some value concealing mild obesity. Obviously, all sartorial matters are matters merely of aesthetics, so even though I'm right and those who disagree with me are wrong, I won't press the point. (Get it? "Press"?) I prefer plain front khakis and dress slacks because I've been wearing pants that way for, well, a long time. Same with cuffs on dress trousers (but, no, not formal wear). And I wish to continue to dress that way or, at the very least, be able to purchase such clothing without undue difficulty.

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9406
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Sandy » 20 Jan 2012, 16:54

D.A. Ridgely wrote:If your pleats are noticeable after four hours contact a physician immediately.

Pleated pants are of some value concealing mild obesity. Obviously, all sartorial matters are matters merely of aesthetics, so even though I'm right and those who disagree with me are wrong, I won't press the point. (Get it? "Press"?) I prefer plain front khakis and dress slacks because I've been wearing pants that way for, well, a long time. Same with cuffs on dress trousers (but, no, not formal wear). And I wish to continue to dress that way or, at the very least, be able to purchase such clothing without undue difficulty.
Except they puff out that area and make you look like you have groin fat as well. And not in a good way. And they make you look like Hippy The Hippo.

Also: pockets along the seam: bad.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 9877
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Ellie » 20 Jan 2012, 18:10

I think cuffed, pleated pants look quite natty on the right gentleman.

Why doesn't anybody wear suspenders these days? I've seen some early episodes of Frasier where David Hyde Pierce is running around in suspenders and I could just crawl into the television and eat him up with a spoon (I do too have great taste in imaginary TV boyfriends, shut up).
I should have listened to Warren. He was right again as usual.

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21098
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Mo » 20 Jan 2012, 18:19

I wear suspenders with my suit and tuxedo.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11754
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by the innominate one » 20 Jan 2012, 18:20

I wear suspenders with my socks.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 17001
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Hugh Akston » 20 Jan 2012, 18:24

the innominate one wrote:I wear suspenders with my socks.
Wait, like sock garters?

I just don't know what to say to that, noname.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Inexplicably cockfighting monsters that live in your pants" ~Jadagul

User avatar
dbcooper
Posts: 17750
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:40

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by dbcooper » 20 Jan 2012, 18:27

Hugh Akston wrote:
the innominate one wrote:I wear suspenders with my socks.
Wait, like sock garters?

I just don't know what to say to that, noname.
We had to wear them at high school.
Slip inside a sleeping bag.

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12169
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by Highway » 20 Jan 2012, 19:04

I've never gone for the suspenders look, mostly because I never tuck in shirts. My nearly every day attire is khaki-style pants with a polo-style shirt. Non-work days sometimes I'll go with a t-shirt with something interesting printed on it.

Plus, I've never been a fan of the 'suspenders you can only see in profile' look that I'd have with my belly (this is better now, but still not great).
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6297
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Not petty yet not misery

Post by Jadagul » 20 Jan 2012, 19:26

Ayn_Randian wrote:
JasonL wrote:
Sandy wrote:Pleated-front trousers are almost always simply wrong.
I didn't use to believe this. But I do now. You can't get a tailored look with pleats involved for the most part. I've seen teeny pleat concepts that aren't so bad, but in general stay away.

Note: I have older pants that do not adhere to this rule and it always makes me sad to put them on. I need to do a full refresh.
Pleats serve a useful purpose...um...*ahem*...to ensure that certain bulges aren't "front and center", so to speak. I am trying to figure out how to say this without sounding like I am bragging...
Nah, you just gotta get pants that are tight enough that they hold everything in and no one can see it. Or run stuff down a leg.

(aside: over New Year's weekend I got a completely random text from a (female) friend: "is there such a thing as erection-concealing pants?" I suggested tight jeans).
Ellie wrote:I think cuffed, pleated pants look quite natty on the right gentleman.

Why doesn't anybody wear suspenders these days? I've seen some early episodes of Frasier where David Hyde Pierce is running around in suspenders and I could just crawl into the television and eat him up with a spoon (I do too have great taste in imaginary TV boyfriends, shut up).
I wear suspenders every chance I get. Unfortunately the girlfriend hates them.
dbcooper wrote:
Hugh Akston wrote:
the innominate one wrote:I wear suspenders with my socks.
Wait, like sock garters?

I just don't know what to say to that, noname.
We had to wear them at high school.
Where do you find them? I periodically want these but have never figured out where to get them. Are we talking about the kind that clip your socks to your shirt tails?

User avatar
dbcooper
Posts: 17750
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:40

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by dbcooper » 20 Jan 2012, 19:34

Nah, just elasticated leg garters.

No idea where to buy them now - I do not wear long socks with shorts as an adult. :)
Slip inside a sleeping bag.

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11754
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by the innominate one » 20 Jan 2012, 19:37

You'll be pleasantly surprised by what you find by just googling the phrase sock garters, J.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17463
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 20 Jan 2012, 19:44

Sock suspenders are pointless for all but pure silk socks because they do no more than the elastic band at the top of socks does quite handily until it's time to throw the socks away. And pure silk socks are an affectation.

Note that "suspenders" is what, I'm reliably informed, the English call a garter belt. However sexy garter belts are on women (and as between them and panty hose it's a no-brainer in favor of the garter belt), sock suspenders do the nearly impossible; they make a naked man wearing socks look even more ridiculous.

Suspenders of the sort the English call braces have the dubious distinction of being an article of clothing that simultaneously calls to mind the Wall Street banker and an extra from Deliverance. They are, to be sure, more comfortable if one has a girth problem. But belts give belt loops their raison d'être and trousers without belt loops are, how to put this as kindly as possible, the sort of thing I imagine Jadagul wearing.
Last edited by D.A. Ridgely on 20 Jan 2012, 20:01, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11754
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by the innominate one » 20 Jan 2012, 19:48

But belts give belt loops their raison d'être
...

Very Panglossian of you.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
dbcooper
Posts: 17750
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:40

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by dbcooper » 20 Jan 2012, 19:54

D.A. Ridgely wrote:Sock suspenders are pointless for all but pure silk socks because they do no more than the elastic band at the top of socks does quite handily until it's time to throw the socks away. And pure silk socks are an affectation.

Note that "suspenders" is what, I'm reliably informed, the English call a garter belt. However sexy garter belts are on women (and as between them and panty hose it's a no-brainer in favor of the garter belt), sock suspenders do the nearly impossible; they make an naked man wearing socks look even more ridiculous.

Suspenders of the sort the English call braces have the dubious distinction of being an article of clothing that simultaneously calls to mind the Wall Street banker and an extra from Deliverance. They are, to be sure, more comfortable if one has a girth problem. But belts give belt loops their raison d'être and trousers without belt loops are, how to put this as kindly as possible, the sort of thing I imagine Jadagul wearing.
Or the province of a man with a bespoke wardrobe and a tailor on call.

One can dream ... ;)
Slip inside a sleeping bag.

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17463
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 20 Jan 2012, 20:28

Well, as the point I more or less started this discussion with, I simply want to find comfortable, natural fiber clothing of the sort I wore in secondary school and college. If other people want to wear pleated, beltless pantaloons, it's a matter of indifference to me. If someone actually does have his jeans pressed, well, that strikes me as odd but well within the ambit of permissible sartorial eccentricities. (But, from The Magnificent Ambersons: "Trousers with a crease were considered Plebeian; the crease proved that the garment had lain upon a shelf and hence was ready-made.")

Items quite easily obtainable just ten years ago are becoming increasingly difficult to find. Pure cotton Oxford cloth shirts, for example, that have not been subjected to some sort of abominable "no iron" process. Neither Brooks Brothers nor Lands' End Hyde Park shirts, the latter being a reasonably priced staple of mine for years and years, are as well made as they once were. Must I succumb to spending over a hundred dollars a shirt at the likes of Mercers? And don't even get me started on the price of genuine Harris Tweed jackets these days!

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6297
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by Jadagul » 20 Jan 2012, 20:30

dbcooper wrote:
D.A. Ridgely wrote:Sock suspenders are pointless for all but pure silk socks because they do no more than the elastic band at the top of socks does quite handily until it's time to throw the socks away. And pure silk socks are an affectation.

Note that "suspenders" is what, I'm reliably informed, the English call a garter belt. However sexy garter belts are on women (and as between them and panty hose it's a no-brainer in favor of the garter belt), sock suspenders do the nearly impossible; they make an naked man wearing socks look even more ridiculous.

Suspenders of the sort the English call braces have the dubious distinction of being an article of clothing that simultaneously calls to mind the Wall Street banker and an extra from Deliverance. They are, to be sure, more comfortable if one has a girth problem. But belts give belt loops their raison d'être and trousers without belt loops are, how to put this as kindly as possible, the sort of thing I imagine Jadagul wearing.
Or the province of a man with a bespoke wardrobe and a tailor on call.

One can dream ... ;)
Eh, most of my trousers have belt loops. But my waist is shaped a bit funny and it's hard to get the trousers to stay where I want them without suspenders/braces.

Ah, dbcooper, you were talking about something different than I thought. When I was in JROTC they had these things that clip the tops of your socks to the bottoms of your shirttails. They weren't for holding your socks up; they were for holding your shirts down. But I've never been able to find them since.

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11754
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by the innominate one » 20 Jan 2012, 20:33

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 6605
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by Shem » 20 Jan 2012, 20:55

D.A. Ridgely wrote:Sock suspenders are pointless for all but pure silk socks because they do no more than the elastic band at the top of socks does quite handily until it's time to throw the socks away.
If you get the kind that go up your leg and attach to a dress shirt, they're also good for taking a nap under your desk without looking rumpled. Handy to have when you're working an all-nighter.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17463
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The Well-Dressed Man

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 20 Jan 2012, 21:10

Shem wrote:
D.A. Ridgely wrote:Sock suspenders are pointless for all but pure silk socks because they do no more than the elastic band at the top of socks does quite handily until it's time to throw the socks away.
If you get the kind that go up your leg and attach to a dress shirt, they're also good for taking a nap under your desk without looking rumpled. Handy to have when you're working an all-nighter.
Jadagul, how did you get access to Shem's account!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests