For Wearing 'Golden Era' Vintage, Are Men Socially Castigated More than Women?

[MissMittens]

Let me ask you folks here this about modern dress shoes (for men). I absolutely hate the long, square-toed fashion that has taken over 85% of all shoes today. An example below. I don't get it. I can adjust to lots of things, but I can't do this style. What are your thoughts here on this?

Fugly

 

[ButteMT61]

Well good. I'm not alone here...

 

[MissMittens]

Well good. I'm not alone here...

Good God, no man!

 

[scottyrocks]

I'll take a pair of these any day:

 

[rue]

It's like this...........

I can go to the most conservative places in my band's regalia, looking like the undead, with "panda eyes", chains, and drummer-boy jacket - no one blinks.

If I wore a 30's suit, I'd be stared at, pointed at, and probably have more than a few names hurled in my direction. It's odd, but society is conditioned to accept visually shocking appearances and to reject the more classier look [huh]

That's really true! I was at a mall in Phoenix about 4 months ago and the guy with the full sleeves and mohawk didn't get one sideways look, but I kept getting snickered at [huh]

 

[LizzieMaine]

Let me ask you folks here this about modern dress shoes (for men). I absolutely hate the long, square-toed fashion that has taken over 85% of all shoes today. An example below. I don't get it. I can adjust to lots of things, but I can't do this style. What are your thoughts here on this?

I didn't know shoes like that came in black. I thought they only came in red.

 

[MissMittens]

That's really true! I was at a mall in Phoenix about 4 months ago and the guy with the full sleeves and mohawk didn't get one sideways look, but I kept getting snickered at [huh]

I promise I wouldn't snicker. Leer, yes, snicker, no :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[YETI]

Would fop be the same as dandy?

 

[rue]

I promise I wouldn't snicker. Leer, yes, snicker, no :lol: :lol: :lol:

Awww.... you're sweet my friend... in a sick way, but sweet nonetheless

 

[YETI]

Thank you very much for those observations, Fred.

I guess it's all relative: I, too, look at the auction results for 1940s suits/hats in pristine condition (and none-Golden Era sizes) .... but I reckon that, by and large, they're too low. I sit on the floor in stunned silence, thinking "How could that go for only that price?" (Then again, I'm a seller.)

Didn't you know it's a collectors market?

 

[Travis Lee Johnston]

Everything goes in cycles. Said mall guys look would have been laughed at about 10 years ago, now every guy with a trust fund credit/debit card has a bro-hawk and instant sleeve tattoos. Hooray!

 

[MissMittens]

Awww.... you're sweet my friend... in a sick way, but sweet nonetheless

Sickly sweet

 

[MissMittens]

Would fop be the same as dandy?

I believe so, yes

 

[noonblueapples]

I'm kind of amazed by that. You would think in this consumer culture they would push people (men and women) to buy as much stuff as possible.

They are pushing, it's just not shoes but a fifty thousand dollar manly truck or some such

 

[Pompidou]

Everything goes in cycles. Said mall guys look would have been laughed at about 10 years ago, now every guy with a trust fund credit/debit card has a bro-hawk and instant sleeve tattoos. Hooray!

True - fitting in is fitting in. If a person is going to make a point of going against the grain, a person should expect to get splinters. Better to be snickered at than ignored, at the very least.

 

[ejbhats]

What an excellent post! I could not agree more. Myself, i stictly wear vintage hats and the small town I live in has no issue with that, rather it's seen as a bit of culture and breaks the routine boredom. In a recent excursion with some friends for a get together, 3 of the 8, wore vintage clothes head to foot the other merely had classic panamas and straws. In this small, touristy town we visited, the folks were very friendly however constsntly asking if we were a theater group! One of the guys had on the full seersucker vintage and straw hat. No easy feat as he is a big man, not tall sideways but a tall linebacker built guy who carried it off quite well down to his white longwing suede shoes. Of courseI had to open my mouth and call him Matlock! All in good fun of course. The citizenry of this town took it all in fun and even a few pics of us as a group were taken! I think perhaps it's how you carry yourselves. Set the tone... act not like snobs and share your interests and be received as a fun group who like fun things!

It all comes down to, for both men and women, whether or not the outfit looks like a costume or not. In most cases of heckling, I imagine the outfit does come across like a costume. This is a community predisposed to looking kindly on dressing in a golden era manner so we don't think anything of it. It's the era we like and bemoan the loss of. No problem with that. What if we celebrated a different era? The difference between us and Renaissance enthusiasts is that they know they stand out like a sore thumb. I, personally, have no problems at all with people dressing to be different - to stand out. In fact, I applaud it. There are consequences. Consider the broad strokes we paint "youth these days". Well, to the general public, all year-round costume wearers get painted with the same broad strokes. Might as well dress like General Cornwallis. Not necessarily right, but seems to be the case. The take away message being, subtlety is the key. If you pick your vintage with an eye for not looking out of place, you'll avoid castigation.

 

[Edward]

Does society castigate men more than women for wearing vintage 'golden era' clothes and accessories?

Yes and no. Women in general are judged to a far greater degree by society as large - whether in explicit sexual terms by men, or in other ways by women (delete / adapt according to perceived gender orientation and sexuality, of course). In some ways it has always seemed to me that men are simply more afraid of standing out from each other. Look at our conventions in formal and semi-formal dress, for example. For the men it is basically a uniform, whether black tie, white tie, or morning wear. A guy who showed up in too outlandish a reinterpretation - such as "creative black tie" - would be regarded as having committed a serious faux pas. On the other hand, many women's nightmare would be to arrive at an event in an identical dress to another lady. It seems to me that this cultural imprint of "men shouldn't stand out" is still an influence.

And if so, could this be leading them to be more "gun-shy" about forking over cash for the stuff?

Partly that, but partly it's also a combination of cost and availability. It seems to me that if you want to get a really accurate vintage look for a specific time period - especially early 30s, for a man you're looking at a significantly higher outlay than for a lady. Think about it - original vintage dresses seem to have survived in greater numbers than men's suits and trousers. Probably many dresses being made of a material less attractive to moths helps here. That and you don't get the same wear points (specifically between the upper thighs) on a dress that wear out a pair of trousers. Then consider repro - there are any number of companies that deal in reproduction ladieswear, and anyone who has developed a reasonable competency with a sewing machine can actually recreate much vintage ladieswear from a readily available pattern. Not the case for menswear, for the most part. In terms of cost, a reproduction dress can cost around the same price as a pair of trousers for a guy - to do the whole outfit right for the men is simply much more expensive (although this might be somewhat mitigated by the fact that we don't require to invest in expensive period-style underwear in order for vintage cut garments to fit correctly). Cost aside, there is much less available in terms of men's repro - especially if you don't want to dress as a rockabilly or a Ted.

By modern era standards, a man who goes out in public with his shirt tucked in is an insufferable fop.

There is also this. It seems to me that as far as most of the mainstream is concerned, while women are encouraged, even expected, to make an effort, lower standards for men are celebrated. A suit, even a tie, is something you are forced to wear to work, not something you should choose to adopt for yourself. It's like a bunch of little kids complaining about having to wear school uniform when they really want to wear their jeans.

If 2 guys are a couple, tho, they probably wouldn't care about any castigation. What would people say? "You look g...ok, guess I got that one right."

Oh, I love it when people do that. I'm not even gay myself, but I find it just hilarious to play along if someone says "you're a gay", like that's supposed to be some kind of insult. lol Hasn't happened me in a long, long time, though - not outside of wearing drag, anyhow.

Speaking in the bigger picture and not looking at regional prejudices, I say men are not more castigated than women. . "The Look"(call your specific era) is very different for ladies than for men compared to today.. Vintage female hair, makeup, dresses, shoes, etc. make it very hard for a gal to do her own thing and not stick out(for lack of a better term..). I think this holds true for dressing up and down. Vintage guys can blend in better if necessary.

What's "wildest" the average vintage inclined guy wears? A fedora, two-tone shoes, or a watch chain? It's the rare bird that sport the loud patterns clothing.

If I assume correctly and this conversation was inspired by this thread I would suggest the reason more men don't wear the wilder elements of vintage style is because they are uncomfortable/unfamiliar with mixing and matching pattern and not the result of social pressure.

Actually, I believe in many ways the relative subtlety to the average observer of the difference between a vintage and a contemporary men's look is a big part of it. A lady well turned out in late 40s wear will look like she is doing something deliberate and distinct. To many people on the street, when I toddle out in very wide legged trousers with a wide lapel and a hat, I don't look like I'm dressing in the style of a specific era, but rather simply "old fashioned", like I don't know what is "trendy" in menswear - currently, of course, uber narrow lapels, tight legs and low waists. I think this effect can scare men off more than if they were more obviously dong something different.

I get more weird looks and a general feeling of being less welcome in vintage garb when I am in the suburbs. When I am in the city (especially in minority neighborhoods, but that is a different matter) I get nothing but smiles and compliments, except from a few teenagers.

I had to modify my own judgemental attitude to the looks of the local hip hop kids when it occurred to me that they were always the first (and, under about the age of 25, the only) people to offer genuine compliments on the street. Older black gentlemen are also equally complimentary in my experience (I did actually once get a "Hey, white boy! Lookin' sharp!" on my way home from Church. Really sharp looking old black guy who was probably of an age to have stepped off the Windrush. I've never been so flattered. ).

This reminds me of something that i read once; "Women dress to impress other women.
Men dress to tell other men how they expect to be treated" I think that most men will "dress up" in vintage style, suits, hats, overcoats, etc. and will appear more formally dressed. As any man in a suit will stand out in most settings today, it makes others uncomfortable because they are usually dressed so poorly. Some people feel threatened and will react negatively.

Interesting. Some people do feel threatened, it's true. Most commonly any hostility I hear of is associated with the notion that if I wear a suit I must be a braying city boy (the type who caused the rash of "no suits" signs in bars across central London), or that I must be massively right wing. Interestingly, many people within the vintage community make similar assumptions about others who dress vintage, something which is, more often than not in the UK at least, wholly incorrect. It's generally extremely obvious if anyone engages me in conversation that this is not the case for me, though I find the more obviously vintage (or, at least, out of the norm) I am, the less likely people outside the vintage community at least are to make these sorts of assumption.

On a related note, I find when I'm out shopping for clothes especially, how I dress makes a difference. It's a rare thing that I would be buying clothes in an actual shop as it's simply a rarity that I can find what I want on the High Street (it has ever been thus, even long before my vintage days). Picking up bits and pieces on Jermyn Street every so often, however, I do feel that while in the places I go everyone receives excellent service, I do seem to attract that little extra layer of appreciation as I am clearly one who dresses this way because I want to, rather than yet another guy dropping in because convention dictates he has to have a new suit for a wedding.

Women are snarkier and cattier than men. I think they are also threatened more easily. But they need to ask themselves why they feel threatened by someone who is dressed differently, and not expect the rest of us to dumb it down for them.

That is a difference - men will express their discomfort at vintage by shouting things, women are more likely to make snidey asides, in my experience at least.

 

[Edward]

I've always been pretty daring with my wardrobe, and living in a small minded town never stopped me. but since it would be foolish for me to wear my priceless pink Hollywood slacks to my current place of business, I've morphed into a more "socially acceptable" version of myself. It's still all vintage or vintage styled, but not outrageous at all and I usually don't get a second look.

I think the thing is that when guys first get into vintage they often do do that classic thing of putting a suit on on a Saturday morning to go grocery shopping. I don't believe that was really how they did it back in the day (actually, according to my grandmother, back in the day in smalltown Ireland at least a man wouldn't be seen dead in a grocery shop, but that's another matter). People back then varied how they dressed according to circumstances - makes sense for us to do the same. [huh]

Yep, they saw them coming,.. :eusa_doh:
But I wonder,..is it too late to change things??

I don't think so. Swings and roundabouts, really. Fashion can only go so far in one direction before all that's left to be new is to go back the other way. Waists have gotten so low now they can only go up, legs and lapels can only get wider. It's not remotely impossible to think that in ten years time we could see a major revival in Forties styles on mainstream fashion (and then we'll all be on here bitching about how "the mainstream slobs stole our clothes!" lol ).

We also have to consider where you live in this poll. Being in a big city certainly helps. I quit caring about what people think of me long ago. For everyone that looks at you funny, there's someone I'll like that tells me it looks nice.

Absolutely. I never cared about sticking out doing my own thing when I was young and stuck in the back end of nowhere, but it's certainly nice to live in a big, cosmopolitan and multi-cultural city where I can do my thing without it having to be this big statement every time I step out the door.

Dunno. The new Queen-to-be seems to have made dressing well cool again from what I read. It happened some with Lady Di, and it often takes a leader than can bridge class with cool to pull it off. Either way, I like it, so I hope it does continue...

It took me a good five minutes to figure out to whom you are referring there.... lol The impression I get is that Catherine Wales hasn't made much of an impact on mainstream fashion, and I doubt she will, really - no more so than her husband has or will for men. The days of royals as fashion-leaders are long gone.

I don't think so either. I think most of the time what she wears looks classy and lovely. I was watching the local news here and they say partly because of the Royal Wedding, hats might be making a come back. Although they always predict somethings going to come back and it never does.

Jinkies, I hope to all that is holy that that's not what brings hats back. Okay, maybe what I've seen was not a representative sample as I didn't watch it and avoided the whole circus as far as possible, but the headwear I've seen from that event was pretty much uniformly hideous.

I don't know. I've seen some statements in some "mens" magazines such as "one pair of feet, one pair of shoes". Apparently, if you own more than a couple pair of shoes, you are too finicky and particular to be a "real" man and if you "dress" up you are too concerned about your look to be considered manly (with a certain assumption about your masculinity blurring between the lines). I don't agree, but that's the vibe I get.

There certainly is a strain that suggests it is "unmanly" to care how you look. For the most part, though, here in the UK the men's mags I've seen that aren't thinly-veiled pornography for those either too timid to buy proper pornography or who choose to lie to themselves that that's what they really want (instead finding their desired slice of objectification and misogyny buried between nonsense about soccer and other such inanities), are intersted in clothes. Esquier has regular features on suits and other clothing, GQ too. Thing is, the clothing that they choose to feature is far beyond the reach of the average reader. I've never seen a pair of shoes in there at less than GBP200; the average pair of jeans they feature will e that sort of price too. Two-piece OTR suits in their fashion spreads are typically upwards of GBP1000. Whereas women's magazines will typically have a "here's how to get the designer look for less" sidebar at least that shows how to assemble a similar look from High Street pieces on a mortal budget, this is wholly absent in men's publishing. All this serves to do is to reinforce the notion that dressing well is for the rich. A crying shame, as my typical vintage outfit (or vintage inspired) is often put together on less than half the outlay of a head to toe branded sportswear confection.

I'm kind of amazed by that. You would think in this consumer culture they would push people (men and women) to buy as much stuff as possible.

It does seem to, though for men it emphasises dress down and dull conformity.

Yes, but you see, "shopping is girly." For a generation which crows righteously from the rooftops about how it's made cheap gender stereotyping a thing of the past, there certainly doesn't seem to be any current shortage of it.

The oddest thing is that I find more often than not such gender stereotypes are perpetuated by women. While by no means letting men off the hook, a significant proportion of the very worst misogynists I have ever personally met have been matriarchal figures. I never did get that.

Let me ask you folks here this about modern dress shoes (for men). I absolutely hate the long, square-toed fashion that has taken over 85% of all shoes today. An example below. I don't get it. I can adjust to lots of things, but I can't do this style. What are your thoughts here on this?

If, whenever the time comes, you approach me lying in the morgue and try to put a pair of those on my cold, dead feet, I'll sit back up and refuse to wear them. Nasty things. As a general rule I'm not a fan of slip-ons (outside of house slippers, I think the only 'slip on' footwear I currently own is a pair of Engineer boots). The shape of these is particularly awful. I don't care for laced up shoes in this style either.

It's like this...........

I can go to the most conservative places in my band's regalia, looking like the undead, with "panda eyes", chains, and drummer-boy jacket - no one blinks.

If I wore a 30's suit, I'd be stared at, pointed at, and probably have more than a few names hurled in my direction. It's odd, but society is conditioned to accept visually shocking appearances and to reject the more classier look [huh]

Interesting. I find it varies depending upon where I go, but certainly as an old punk I can confirm that it is far more shocking for me to show up anywhere casual these days in suit and tie than a pair of bondage trousers. All the mohawked kids at the last Sex PIstols gig I went to loved my fedora, though.

Everything goes in cycles. Said mall guys look would have been laughed at about 10 years ago, now every guy with a trust fund credit/debit card has a bro-hawk and instant sleeve tattoos. Hooray!

"Bro-hawk"?

What an excellent post! I could not agree more. Myself, i stictly wear vintage hats and the small town I live in has no issue with that, rather it's seen as a bit of culture and breaks the routine boredom. In a recent excursion with some friends for a get together, 3 of the 8, wore vintage clothes head to foot the other merely had classic panamas and straws. In this small, touristy town we visited, the folks were very friendly however constsntly asking if we were a theater group! One of the guys had on the full seersucker vintage and straw hat. No easy feat as he is a big man, not tall sideways but a tall linebacker built guy who carried it off quite well down to his white longwing suede shoes. Of courseI had to open my mouth and call him Matlock! All in good fun of course. The citizenry of this town took it all in fun and even a few pics of us as a group were taken! I think perhaps it's how you carry yourselves. Set the tone... act not like snobs and share your interests and be received as a fun group who like fun things!

And therein lies the secret. If you carry yourself like you're happy in your own clothes, if they're no big deal to you, then for the most part other people won't see it as a big deal either. If you come on like you're in costume, it's different, or - worse- if you come on like you're parading yourself as an example for the assembled serfs to follow and you give off the vibes of "I'm better than you because of how I dress", it will get people's backs up.

 

[MissMittens]

Interesting. I find it varies depending upon where I go, but certainly as an old punk I can confirm that it is far more shocking for me to show up anywhere casual these days in suit and tie than a pair of bondage trousers. All the mohawked kids at the last Sex PIstols gig I went to loved my fedora, though

Should have guessed that from your Vivienne Westwood quote.

 

[Edward]

Should have guessed that from your Vivienne Westwood quote.

You'll find that if you scratch a good half of the vintage community over here (most especially the rockabillies) you'll find an old punk lurking underneath.