Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Ideological and Historical Roots of anti-Suit Hatred

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Doran, congratulations for a wonderful thread.

IMO, suits are seen as uncomfortable uniforms that are forced upon men by their superiors. Suits are not associated with "having a fun time."

Leisure has come to be prized above all else by the post-Victorian generations... and today's men simply don't feel relaxed in a suit.

.
 

David Conwill

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,854
Location
Bennington, VT 05201
I'm a wannabe weasel, so maybe my worldview is also skewed, but I thought I'd chime in, since I'm also one of the aforementioned "2000 Generation" (I must say, I like that considerably better than Generation Y/Why).

I do think that people my age are starting to take more of an interest in dressing nicely. I see two paths in my own experience - the rumpled, J. Crew crowd that's wearing pseudo-vintage clothing (typical example would be the guy in the pulled-down rep-stripe tie you saw today or perhaps Ryan Seacrest), and the overly streamlined, "gangsta" crowd wearing cheap reproduction clothing (I believe they're taking their cues from the late rapper Biggie Smalls and the Godfather films). I have no objection to either, though I'm not really a part of either group.

So long as a person takes some pride in his or her appearance, and declines from loudly voicing their judgment of the style of another (with the exception of amongst like-minded friends in a semi-private setting like the lounge), I respect them for it.

-Dave
 

Lou

One of the Regulars
Messages
182
Location
Philly burbs
We have some interesting observations here.

Doran, I too thought it was odd that a Berkeley resident would call into question a man's sexual orientation. Similar to your point 5, I suspect they're just borrowing it as a browbeating tool without realizing their hypocrisy.
 

carter

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,921
Location
Corsicana, TX
As observed by warbaby, malfeasance by some of those ensconced in positions of power certainly would lead one to avoid being identified with their ilk in the sartorial sense. However, that is a relatively recent cultural phenomena.

Price, quality, and availibility certainly play a role. The once ubiquotous three-piece suit is seldom found in any quantity as an of-the-rack item in mainstream retail establishments today in the US. I recently asked a local Men's Wearhouse to bring in four three-piece suits, two by Jones of NY and two by Ralph Lauren, for my appraisal. When I went to view the suits, two had been returned to the manufacturer, one had been sold, and the other was not something I wanted. I purchased a two-piece linen suit by Calvin Klein instead. Sadly, no vest/waistcoat was offered. In my experience, MW has very good prices, some of their quality isn't bad, but the selections (while large) aren't enticing.

It occurs to me that, as the US workforce has become (until recently) the most over-worked on the planet, the desire for more perceived leisure time resulted in an increased relaxation of the standards of dress. It will be interesting to see if the current financial crisis and resulting loss of employment for huge numbers of workers will have any significant effect on this.

Mass media influences standards of dress and there are few style-icons in the news today. One often sees or reads of someone making a knockoff of a particular garment worn by a female personage at some event. These garments are sold in many retail establishments. I don't recall anything of this sort happening with men's apparel.
Has this always been the case? Perhaps one of our gurus of male fashion can shed some light on this.
 

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
The gay/bisexual connection is strong. While the '60s hippies were eschewing suits, Britain's Tommy Nutter and the Carnaby Street crowd were embracing highly tailored 3-pieces and double-breasteds. Gays in the fashion/entertainment industries promoted the look and passed it onto John Lennon and Mick Jagger, among others.

Then, in the '70s, gays embraced disco and wore fitted suits to dance in.

In the late '70s, many gays turned to preppy fashion and made Lacoste shirts and khakis their new uniform. In New York, they turned to Ralph Lauren for WASP style; in Los Angeles, Armani was preferred.
 

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
carter said:
As observed by warbaby, malfeasance by some of those ensconced in positions of power certainly would lead one to avoid being identified with their ilk in the sartorial sense. However, that is a relatively recent cultural phenomena.

Not so recent. In the early days of America's Great Depression, 'daytime' brushed silk top hats, bowler hats and rolled lapels were associated with evil, greedy bankers, traders and industrialists. As a result, they came to be worn less and less often by the 'evildoers'.
 

Marc Chevalier

Gone Home
Messages
18,192
Location
Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
carter said:
It occurs to me that, as the US workforce has become (until recently) the most over-worked on the planet, the desire for more perceived leisure time resulted in an increased relaxation of the standards of dress.

Agreed. Relaxation of dress standards in the workplace is a way of fooling people into feeling that somehow they're working less hard. It's a 'consolation prize' of sorts.
 

Max Flash

One of the Regulars
Messages
181
Location
London, UK (and elsewhere...)
Marc Chevalier said:
I take it that you're one of those 'weasels'. ;)

.

I'm a lawyer, so yes, I guess I fall in that category of 'weasel', according to some very narrow-minded people on here. However, they should remember that a great many of the people they categorise as such are a monumental force for good in the world. Personally, I have represented disabled people denied benefits that would help them lead lives as close to what we would consider to be normal as possible, and set up and supported charities.

I am also a corporate lawyer, working for big business. However, I don't believe that makes me a morally deficient person, or in any way worse than the next man. I believe in order, a clear definition between the right and wrong way of doing things, and I stick to those beliefs. Some people should just grow up and stop regurgitating the rubbish that stereotyping and the media promulgate.

For what it's worth, wearing a suit for me has very little to do with my job. If I worked in any type of office, or in many other jobs, I would wear a suit because (a) I like it and (b) it looks professional, meaningful and in engenders respect. The latter is most important as very few people have respect for their fellow man anymore. That is what makes a stranger on an internet forum think he can brand others 'weasels', simply based on stereotypes of the jobs they perform.
 

Dr Doran

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,853
Location
Los Angeles
Marc Chevalier said:
In the late '70s, many gays turned to preppy fashion and made Lacoste shirts and khakis their new uniform. In New York, they turned to Ralph Lauren for WASP style; in Los Angeles, Armani was preferred.

Thank you for your compliment, Marc, and it is good to see you here again.

I think that in the eyes of my brother (the one who uses the "g"-word as soon as I pick up a collar bar) -- and who, Lou, is VERY politically liberal to the point of "hating" most or all Republicans quite indiscriminately -- rather hypocritical of him, but then again, I think he is 'just being funny' with the "g" word -- the connexion of

suits = early 1980s Armani = gay

is, indeed, the connexion he is making. No distinction in his mind between heavy tweed, full-cut trousers plus T. S. Eliot haircut versus the Armani "gay" connexion.

(He does not actually think suit-wearers are gay in the homosexual sense; he is certainly aware that I am not gay; he is only joking and it is a combination of making fun of elegance to show how "rugged" he is, plus being slightly insecure when I and my father and my other brothers dress up and he feels left out.)
 

Dr Doran

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,853
Location
Los Angeles
carter said:
Price, quality, and availibility certainly play a role.

I completely ignored that. But ... but ... lack of demand has created lack of supply, hasn't it? What men desire to buy appears swiftly under this economic regime. It's not like you need 1,000 government permits to sell suits in this society (I am contrasting the idiotic housing shortage in Communist Poland during my wife's youth. No, individuals weren't allowed to simply buy land, buy lumber, hire a contractor who could hire builders and BUILD HOUSING under that regime, even if lots of people wanted apartments -- and as a result, people were living 8 to a one-bedroom apartment in a country with plentiful land AND lumber. Individuals had to wait for permission from the government and go on a many year long waiting list just to rent an apartment in the huge Soviet apartment blocks.)
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
Marc Chevalier said:
IMO, suits are seen as uncomfortable uniforms that are forced upon men by their superiors. Suits are not associated with "having a fun time." .

I'm not sure why suits are considered uncomfortable--perhaps poor construction or lack of tailoring? I'm perfectly comfortable sitting here in a non-stretch skirt, blazer, panty hose and dress shoes. Surely they're more comfortable than low-rise jeans, a camisole and flip flops that have to be continually yanked up or pulled down or don't provide support.
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
Funny thing.....

As opposed to NYC and Chicago, I get nothing but love for my tailored clothing from the 20-somethings in my South Miami Beach neighborhood.[huh]

I'm thinkin' it could stem from the fact that most all the rappers who live/play on the Beach often get suited-up for a night on the town.

I wonder if Diddy can save the suit.

p-diddy-in_gray_suit.jpg
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
Doran said:
6.) For women: The "Slut" Factor. I dislike the word "slut" and never use it. People who have lots of friends can do what they want with their friends and it should be none of my business. However, many women I have talked to have stated that they fear dressing up lest they seem overly eager to impress men, lest they seem overly eager to sleep with men. Their girlfriends will insult them for being slutty in the same manner in which a man's (lame) friends presumably will think he is acting "gay" if he cares about his appearance.

I get fewer come-ons when I'm dressed up. More looks, but fewer come-ons.

The "girlfriends" sound like jealous manipulators who don't want to either make more effort to look good or look unkempt next to their "friends."
 

Max Flash

One of the Regulars
Messages
181
Location
London, UK (and elsewhere...)
Marc Chevalier said:
Max, it's possible --even probable-- that the chap who said "weasels" had his tongue firmly in cheek. At least, that's the way I read it.

I'm not prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, but I am sick and tired of having to put up with this crap.
 

Dr Doran

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,853
Location
Los Angeles
Paisley said:
IThe "girlfriends" sound like jealous manipulators who don't want to either make more effort to look good or look unkempt next to their "friends."

This must be true. It is like my brother feeling rather raggedy in his plaid Pacific North West flannel, unshavenness, sneakas, and ripped knee-holes when he sees the rest of us dressed up.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
107,328
Messages
3,034,173
Members
52,776
Latest member
HughGDePoo
Top