Changes in formal social events

so..to try and make a relevant point this time...

Alan, do you suppose that "back in the day", men went out because they enjoyed it? or because it was socially expected,? I think in an age without the benefit of technology, an evening out might not just be a time to relax, but a time to make business contacts and schmooz.also, i suppose,in a time when more couples went out there would be the possibility of men running into friends and collegues. I think nowadays, a lot of guys think no one else will be there and they will have no one to talk to.what ever is going on it is sad.I love the mix of both sexes.i don't often enjoy a gathering of largely women.

olive bleu said:

so..to try and make a relevant point this time...

Alan, do you suppose that "back in the day", men went out because they enjoyed it? or because it was socially expected,? I think in an age without the benefit of technology, an evening out might not just be a time to relax, but a time to make business contacts and schmooz.also, i suppose,in a time when more couples went out there would be the possibility of men running into friends and collegues. I think nowadays, a lot of guys think no one else will be there and they will have no one to talk to.what ever is going on it is sad.I love the mix of both sexes.i don't often enjoy a gathering of largely women.

Click to expand...

To get back on topic, I think that Olive Bleu makes a good point. Perhaps one of the reasons for going out to socials and dances was simply a means to socialize. Such rituals probably served a vital function in an era without television (much less the internet). People nowadays also tend to work a greater distance from their home (I read somewhere the average daily commute is 90 minutes!). Then again, people still do have a need to socialize in public, and the sartorial standard isn't elevated in most cases at clubs, bars, dance halls, or billiards.

I think that ultimately, standards eroded for a number of reasons and from many spheres of influence. One cannot discount the association at present of casual clothes with a person being approachable, honest, and not vain. Interestingly, it seems to me that those people on the lower tiers and upper tiers of socioeconomic status have a greater propensity to 'dress up', at least in some elevated fashion...those on the lower tier hoping to maybe 'put their best foot forward' and those in the higher tier simply because they're just used to it. Mind you, each class comes to slightly different results. Add ethnicity to the equation, and things get even more complicated and varied.

Housekeeping

Alan's original premise was that for formal events, it seems that fewer males are willing to participate in getting dressed in formal attire and accompanying their ladies for the evening.

It is not another thread on the evils of flip-flops, or improper attire for funerals.

This thread has been heavily edited (36 posts!) to remove a lot of bickering. Let's let that stray bit stay gone.

S

Slicksuit said:

...Such rituals probably served a vital function in an era without television (much less the internet)...

Click to expand...

I think I read in The Economist a while back, that the internet was actually an issue at play here. Specifically, that men would prefer to interact on the internet as opposed to going out to socialize and make new friends (like we are doing right now, the social interaction part that is). I am not sure I agree with that premise, but I do see the possibility.

However, I do think that mobility may be one of the things at play here. It is my opinion, that most men make their "friends" at the last level of their early education and before, or in the military if they go that route in their youth after their last level of education. In other words, the last best friends we make will be when we are young. Once we are older and have moved about the country/world, the next set of guys we meet are usually business colleagues and hence competitors.

When I look at who my male friends are, they are invariably guys from my early Army years, or earlier, like college, high school, and even grammar school. Generally these are people we knew before we became what we have become. Almost no friends come after that. So someone like me raised in Los Angeles, schooled in NY, the Army, then dropped off in Houston 22 years ago, has left his friends in other places. Hence no incentive to go and socialize unless it's to engage in the tit-for-tat with the new guys. However, if we didn't scatter, like in the days of old when we were not as mobile, then we would probably be more prone to socialize with our established and more trusted friends as opposed to some new guys that we may deem dubious.

Now that doesn't keep me from getting off the couch and going to events with my wife, or just plain going out on dates with her, but I can see where many guys would just rather stay home. My case may be different, as I'm out with my wife often mainly because I am working abroad so often, so when I get home we make it a point to go out and party like it's 1999 as often as possible, which includes a myriad of events here in Houston and other cities (Las Vegas, Miami, L.A., etc.). Most of which I will dress for.

Just my further thoughts on the issue.

M8

Gosh...

...I think there are several PhDs to be earned figuring out why men don't like to do the dress up thing. Everyone has a pet theory.

I think I'm starting to detect the same reluctance among younger women, and even girls. My teen aged nieces are excellent students and are interested in video games, sports, and all this text messaging-face book-technology related stuff. In short, they are interested in what the guys are, and are not much interested in "dressing up."

Mid-fogey said:

...I think there are several PhDs to be earned figuring out why men don't like to do the dress up thing. Everyone has a pet theory.

I think I'm starting to detect the same reluctance among younger women, and even girls. My teen aged nieces are excellent students and are interested in video games, sports, and all this text messaging-face book-technology related stuff. In short, they are interested in what the guys are, and are not much interested in "dressing up."

Click to expand...

Maybe we will become a society that just doesn't have any real social events. We may become Second Life virtual persona :eusa_doh:

Well very interesting topic anyways.

M8

Martinis at 8 said:

Once we are older and have moved about the country/world, the next set of guys we meet are usually business colleagues and hence competitors.

Click to expand...

How about competitive dressing up? We kind of do it already at Lounger gatherings, where the guy with the sharpest lid, the coolest suit, or the most righteous A-2 often can indulge in a little sanctioned showing off.

The key to getting more men into it is to understand that it is really a guy pastime - about quality and history and connaisseurship, appreciating the classic and the rare - rather than a peacock contest to do with fashion or costume.

It's also a lot more civilized kind of competition than who's got the moneyest car or the hottest arm candy or the alpha-doggiest line of talk. It depends mostly on acquiring style, taste and individuality and being able to bond with others thru sharing them.

Fletch said:

...The key to getting more men into it is to understand that it is really a guy pastime - about quality and history and connaisseurship, appreciating the classic and the rare - rather than a peacock contest to do with fashion or costume...

Click to expand...

Oh I agree. Different set of rules when it comes to hobbies, such as Lounger gatherings. In fact I think that hobby gatherings are quite right for what you describe.

My main point about mobility and competiveness stems from the business side of things once we get older and no longer find ourselves rooted in our original geography. Since most men really don't have substantial hobbies that involve gatherings, most will not be engaging in new endeavors of comradeship.

M8

Fletch and Martinis, the notion of this forum and its associated gatherings as civilized hobbies whereby we "acquire style, taste, and individuality" and "bond through sharing them [our acquisitions]" is an interesting way of putting it.

On the flip side, I do believe that women dress primarily in competition among each other, and secondarily to attract men, at least among those women who are passionate about fashion. Most heterosexual men that I know don't know, don't care, and probably wouldn't notice the specifics about the various articles of clothing a woman would wear (just simply the fact that certain body parts are showcased or exposed).

Peter Pan

In addition to dressing down nowadays, I have also noticed that people don't want to grow up. Not so much as in responsibility, (though we all probably know of at least one) but as in dress and even interests. I have met many thirtysomething kids. They dress just like the kids when I was a little kid. Oversized shirts, athletic shoes for non-athletic activities, etc. Their only taste in music is what is currently in the top forty. People as I see it just simply don't want to grow up anymore. People seemed to have stoped changing as they go through life. If you're forty, dress the part. Time to quit dressing like a teen. Heck, its not like teens in their day dressed like today's teens anyway.[huh] Many people have a sheep mentality and do what is on TV and what they see the majority of everyone else is doing. Prove me wrong? Look at all thoes people who wear pajamas to town!

It's not a problem

in our crowd!

and yes, I agree that many "men" these days are infantile. That's why I prefer the vintage life, it seems to attract people who are willing to be mature. I hated being a teenager, and can't imagine wanting to stay that way!