Skirts and Heels

[river444]

Let me first state that in general, I avoid situtions where dressing up is required, Exceptions are special events ( weddings, funerals, job interviews, mandatory work events etc). When I pick out a shirt or pair pants my main concern is it being clean and appropriate for the weather. Modesty is not a concern since I don’t own a single article of clothing that is considered immodest. I don’t even own shorts!

I see nothing wrong with a person wearing cargo pants and flip-flops out in public unless it is at a special occasion. I wear sweatpants and sweat shirts in public, when it’s appropriate. For work I wear a uniform. Off the clock, unless it is an event I listed above, I dress to please myself ,as long it is clean and appropriate for the weather.

BTW I don’t own a single dress,skirt or pair of heels.

 

[Bluegoat]

Let me first state that in general, I avoid situtions where dressing up is required, Exceptions are special events ( weddings, funerals, job interviews, mandatory work events etc). When I pick out a shirt or pair pants my main concern is it being clean and appropriate for the weather. Modesty is not a concern since I don’t own a single article of clothing that is considered immodest. I don’t even own shorts!

I see nothing wrong with a person wearing cargo pants and flip-flops out in public unless it is at a special occasion. I wear sweatpants and sweat shirts in public, when it’s appropriate. For work I wear a uniform. Off the clock, unless it is an event I listed above, I dress to please myself ,as long it is clean and appropriate for the weather.

BTW I don’t own a single dress,skirt or pair of heels.

OT, but it made me think of when George on Seinfeld got the velvet jogging suit.

 

[mouse_has_faith]

Haha, no no, I’m not nearly as upset as you seem to think I was/am over the issue. I see your point, and fair enough, but mine also stands.That analogy of the man who held open the woman for the well-dressed woman (i.e. skirt/ blouse), “because she’s a lady”, is indicative of that. Surely you can’t deny that there was some of that in this thread.

Your two comments did come across as some kind of insult (couldn’t really figure out what it was, though, which is why I asked about it), though as I said you probably didn’t mean it. I’m willing to conceed that some of that (or most of that?) is due to being unable to get your tone across on the internet (perhaps for the same reason you suggested I get a cup of coffee?).

 

[chevalier]

Haha, no no, I’m not nearly as upset as you seem to think I was/am over the issue. I see your point, and fair enough, but mine also stands.That analogy of the man who held open the woman for the well-dressed woman (i.e. skirt/ blouse), “because she’s a lady”, is indicative of that. Surely you can’t deny that there was some of that in this thread.

I think it seems to you the boy was fixated on just the skirt, while it seems to me perceived and reacted to an overall impression - especially considering that the one girl was his girlfriend, so he obviously knew her quite well, and the other girl was his classmate, so not a stranger, either. He must have seen a more integral pattern. He apparently associated the concept of a lady with a certain degree of decorum, the same as gentleman, really, anyway, the result being he found it in his classmate, but not in his girlfriend.

Please note that while originally, lady or gentleman was a descriptive term for someone from a freeholding family not working on the land, later it became a positively charged description that entailed some measure of excellence, setting example etc. It wasn’t a constitutional right. Cake mechanics work here - rights generally pair up with obligations and one can’t have it both ways. If one wants to be associated with a certain standard, one needs to keep it.

Your two comments did come across as some kind of insult (couldn’t really figure out what it was, though, which is why I asked about it), though as I said you probably didn’t mean it. I’m willing to conceed that some of that (or most of that?) is due to being unable to get your tone across on the internet (perhaps for the same reason you suggested I get a cup of coffee?).

If you show it to me and explain, you might convince me, but I can’t really think of anything in my posts which could be unwilling offence, let alone an insult. Remember the 17th-18th century gentlemen with epees from adventure novels and films, who seem honour-bound not to overlook the slightest insult by anyone, real or potential? Too far is too far.

 

[mouse_has_faith]

Questioning my sensitivity and motives ala ad hominem doesn’t exonerate your comments. Maybe you could just drop it now.

 

[Ailina]

Start one!

Actually, suits are often more comfortable than casual clothes.

Really? All the men I know would disagree with that statement. They all feell too hot and as if they were being strangled by their ties. They are all reluctant suit wearers actually. It would never be their first choice.

I feel most comfortable in pyjamas. Still, I would never wear those in public! I like skirts in summer, when I can toss the icky nylons. But in the cold north that I live in, skirts and nylons are much too inadequate for the -20 C (or worse…we usually get a spell of -40 C with a windchill) weather we usually experience in winter. Then it’s pants, long down-fill coat, scarf, hood and boots up to the knees!!! We might as well be wearing burkas then.

 

[chevalier]

Really? All the men I know would disagree with that statement. They all feell too hot and as if they were being strangled by their ties. They are all reluctant suit wearers actually. It would never be their first choice.

I think you’ve already answered the why! Just like someone who wears a suit several times a year (or decade) won’t feel comfortable in it, so a person wearing jeans and t-shirt just a couple of times a year would feel awkward in it. Once you get used to it, it makes little difference if at all. One of the PR wizards here made a politician sleep in suits in order to avoid him standing out from the rest (he was a protesting farmer in the beginning but later he became the best dressed politician after getting elected as a representative).

The thing with ties is that people for some reason tend to think you’re elegant enough only if the collar is tight enough to make you white on the face, same with tie. In reality, that’s neither necessary nor even really elegant, after all (if a finger or even two get through, it’s okay).

Suit trousers are way less stiff than jeans, so especially men with some weight (especially that they gained after buying those jeans…) should notice the added comfort. Suit shirts generally have a nicer touch than other shirts (cotton vs cotton, as obviously there’s no point comparing a cotton tee to a polyester suit shirt), jackets may be a bit constricting, but not really more so than a sweater (I’d say, for me, a jacket would be more comfy than a sweater). I think all in all, people just need to pick the right size instead of thinking that a suit needs to be uncomfortable anyway, so might as well buy any that seems more or less to fit. Instead, take your measurements properly and find the right size. Same goes for the shirt.

Then it’s pants, long down-fill coat, scarf, hood and boots up to the knees!!! We might as well be wearing burkas then.

Naah. Ladies look cute in nice winter outfits and men gain some advantage from long coats, too. I wear one whenever I can. I don’t think I end up looking worse in the winter than in the summer, winter being up to 0 or -5 degrees here. Some men wear long underwear to cheat the system, so they could probably stand a -20 or worse, while looking the same as in autumn on the outside (pretty shoes with plenty fur stuffing are handy ).

 

[LilyM]

I think you’ve already answered the why! Just like someone who wears a suit several times a year (or decade) won’t feel comfortable in it, so a person wearing jeans and t-shirt just a couple of times a year would feel awkward in it. Once you get used to it, it makes little difference if at all. One of the PR wizards here made a politician sleep in suits in order to avoid him standing out from the rest (he was a protesting farmer in the beginning but later he became the best dressed politician after getting elected as a representative).

Sorry, got to beg to differ. I’ve been wearing suits every workday for the past six weeks. This isn’t the first corporate job I’ve had either, so I’m not inexperienced with the wearing of the suit. And of course my clothes fit fine - any that didn’t would either not be in my wardrobe or not worn more than once.

None of this has made wearing suits one whit more comfortable for me than it was the first day I wore one. Simple as that.

 

[chevalier]

Sorry, got to beg to differ. I’ve been wearing suits every workday for the past five weeks. This isn’t the first corporate job I’ve had either, so I’m not inexperienced with the wearing of the suit. And of course my clothes fit fine - any that didn’t would either not be in my wardrobe or not worn more than once.

None of this has made wearing suits one whit more comfortable for me than it was the first day I wore one. Simple as that.

How about we talk again in half a year in the same job? And get something that fits fine for walking and working (doing a couple of sit-ups while trying it on should give you a hint), not for taking a photo. Seriously, if I can do press-ups in a business suit with cufflinks, you can too. It just takes time (and some picking). It’s no big deal anyway. Mediaeval knights walked on their hands or did somersaults in full plate armour when learning to wear it.

 

[LilyM]

How about we talk again in half a year in the same job? And get something that fits fine for walking and working (doing a couple of sit-ups while trying it on should give you a hint), not for taking a photo.

Excuse me, I DO know how to properly choose a suit to work in. I’ve spent a LOT of time in suits, this is (as I clearly stated) far from my first corporate job - so another six months is definitely not going to change my opinion.

I DON’T get photos taken in my work clothes. In fact I know no-one who does apart from models, actors and very vain managers/CEOs, and I’m none of the above. So I don’t give a stuff how my clothes photograph, and find it odd that you’d assume it was even a consideration.

And - last but not least - I didn’t even say my clothes were *physically *uncomfortable!

Thanks for the amusing but entirely erroneous barrage of assumptions.

 

[chevalier]

Excuse me, I DO know how to properly choose a suit to work in. I’ve spent a LOT of time in suits, this is (as I clearly stated) far from my first corporate job - so another six months is definitely not going to change my opinion.

I DON’T get photos taken in my work clothes. In fact I know no-one who does apart from models, actors and very vain managers/CEOs, and I’m none of the above. So I don’t give a stuff how my clothes photograph, and find it odd that you’d assume it was even a consideration.

And - last but not least - I didn’t even say my clothes were *physically *uncomfortable!

You’re being inconsistent. Either a suit is comfortable or it is not, you can’t have it uncomfortable when you’re denouncing suits as suffocating or constricting, and have it comfortable when I tell you that you need to pick a more comfortable piece than the one that suffocates you or restricts your movement.

As for “physically”, what are you implying anyway? Firstly, the subject was men wearing suits, not you, and secondly it was about collars and ties to a large extent. Few things are more “physical” than a badly chosen collar (i.e. too small) or a tie tied too tightly gets is bruising your neck.

If you really mean something psychological, you’re basically proving my point that people these days aren’t much into dressing up, that they want to be as informal as possible, and some internal barrier against putting on a suit is a prime example of that.

Thanks for the amusing but entirely erroneous barrage of assumptions.

Nice try, but won’t work. You don’t shoot an elephant with a deer rifle.

 

[masha]

Suits are interesting. From what I understand, they (men’s suits) were designed to look and feel comfortable on a particular type of man’s body - the “office” model basically. Men who do heavy labor - farming, masonry, construction, fishing (not hobby fishing) supposed to look wrong in suits, because their bodies are built for work and suits are designed for the office. Most suits also act as a sort of uniform - unless you’re buying a very expensive suit, your suit is designed to be somewhat suffocating, and designed to mark your status in the company. I don’t know for sure, and I’m sure it’s all very general, but I remember reading that. For what it’s worth. I know absolutely nothing about women’s suits, so I won’t even try to comment. Lily M, I’m sure your’s is stifling to you - a suit is not something I could be happy in everyday - they’re all too much the same!

I think it seems to you the boy was fixated on just the skirt, while it seems to me perceived and reacted to an overall impression - especially considering that the one girl was his girlfriend, so he obviously knew her quite well, and the other girl was his classmate, so not a stranger, either. He must have seen a more integral pattern. He apparently associated the concept of a lady with a certain degree of decorum, the same as gentleman, really, anyway, the result being he found it in his classmate, but not in his girlfriend.

The whole story of the boy, his girlfriend, and the “lady” does bother me. If the boy didn’t respect his girlfriend, he shouldn’t be with her. If he thinks that a woman is a “lady” only based on how she dresses, he’s misguided. If he thinks he can respect on women and (pretty blatantly) disrespect another, he’d better have a really good reason. And honestly, if you’re a man who holds doors for women - you hold doors for all women: well dressed, frumpy, strippers, church-goers, whatever. Because you’re not respecting the individual woman and her use of her femininity - you’re respecting the woman as a women, her individual self, made in the image and likeness of God, and through her all women. Just as when you respect a priest, you’re respecting the priesthood, more than just this individual, good, or bad priest.

I’m always sad to see men who don’t know or don’t try to treat their women with respect. My father always told me to stay away from a man who wouldn’t open the door for me - because that man didn’t respect women. And when a man ignore’s his girlfriend or wife but holds the door for another woman, he’s not respecting women, he’s disrespecting his woman, and using the other woman to do so.

 

[chevalier]

Masha, some people do think a suit is a kind of hear shirt, so it’s meant to feel bad but there is an obvious error in that logic, or rather two errors: firstly, people don’t normally see what you’re going through, so they can’t give you credit for your suffering; secondly, if they actually do, then the impression isn’t positive. You get “status points” when a suit is your second skin, which means you’re comfy in it.

The whole story of the boy, his girlfriend, and the “lady” does bother me. If the boy didn’t respect his girlfriend, he shouldn’t be with her. If he thinks that a woman is a “lady” only based on how she dresses, he’s misguided.

The thing is nothing in the story says he was basing it only on clothes. This is the leap that some reader’s minds take - they notice that clothes were a factor, they get angry and annoyed because they think clothes shouldn’t be a factor, they move on to believing that clothes were the only factor, which is generally the way a human mind exaggerates the wrongdoings of the opposing faction - a bit like in politics.

If he thinks he can respect on women and (pretty blatantly) disrespect another, he’d better have a really good reason.

He didn’t say, “and you are not.” He noticed a positive quality that the other girl had but his girlfriend didn’t. Now imagine, say, a boy and girl, where the girl says, “he’s a gentleman,” based on the fact that some other boy, say, wears a blazer instead of a hoodie, or speaks in fuller sentences and milder language instead of the way boys of that age normally speak. Would you then say that the girl blatantly disrespected her boyfriend?

And honestly, if you’re a man who holds doors for women - you hold doors for all women: well dressed, frumpy, strippers, church-goers, whatever. Because you’re not respecting the individual woman and her use of her femininity - you’re respecting the woman as a women, her individual self, made in the image and likeness of God, and through her all women. Just as when you respect a priest, you’re respecting the priesthood, more than just this individual, good, or bad priest.

Yes, which is why the boy wasn’t right in this scenario, but let’s remember we’re talking about a boy, not a seasoned man. I’m partly guessing, but it seems likely to me that the boy forgot how to be a gentleman and didn’t see much worth in it, considering few other people even tried. How to be a lady wasn’t perhaps on his girlfriend’s mind (and few girls think about that). The other girl, by being more decorous, perhaps offering a bit of a regal presence, remind him what mum taught him and he brushed up what gallantry he had because he saw a purpose. In this I can empathise with him. After all the fact that you treat every woman the same in regard of basic courtesy, i.e. you treat her like a lady, it doesn’t mean that you show every woman all the same as an example to your daughter of how to behave or dress or speak etc. like a lady.

I’m always sad to see men who don’t know or don’t try to treat their women with respect.

As am I. Believe me when I say this is true. It is all the more saddening to see that women do not expect any better and take that treatment for granted.

And when a man ignore’s his girlfriend or wife but holds the door for another woman, he’s not respecting women, he’s disrespecting his woman, and using the other woman to do so.

Pardon me, but I believe you’re going too far. The boy didn’t hold the door for anyone before. Apparently, he first did it for that other girl (and possibly on instinct). In your description, it sounds as if he had made a deliberate demonstration to his girlfriend, which doesn’t find support in the facts of the story. There is no trace of such intent at all. Again, try and turn the table. Would you form such strong opinions if a girl failed to act courteously towards a boy? That teenage boy is not a wife-beater that hits the bottle every night and treats his family like dirt, nor even a mean jerk from work. It’s just a child yet.

 

[masha]

Masha, some people do think a suit is a kind of hear shirt, so it’s meant to feel bad but there is an obvious error in that logic, or rather two errors: firstly, people don’t normally see what you’re going through, so they can’t give you credit for your suffering; secondly, if they actually do, then the impression isn’t positive. You get “status points” when a suit is your second skin, which means you’re comfy in it.

I think you’re mistaking my meaning. When I said suits gave an indication of status, I meant that unless you have a very well taliored suit and you’re wearing it outside of the requirements of work, the suit symbolizes your status as “belonging to the man”. Being required to wear a suit everyday displays your status as “middle-class”. The fabric of the suit, the cut, the fit, the style can either raise or lower your status, but if you wear a suit to work everyday, your status never rises above that of “company man” - someone whose time is not his own. So the idea of wearing a suit when not required - unless its not also your work uniform - gives the impression that you are even less of your own man.

The thing is nothing in the story says he was basing it only on clothes. This is the leap that some reader’s minds take - they notice that clothes were a factor,

Actually, my little “leap” came because this story was used in a thread focused on clothing. I don’t disagree that clothes are a factor in how we should and do judge other people. But that judgement should not lead him to treat one with disrespect simply because she falls short of the perception he has of the other.

He didn’t say, “and you are not.” He noticed a positive quality that the other girl had but his girlfriend didn’t. Now imagine, say, a boy and girl, where the girl says, “he’s a gentleman,” based on the fact that some other boy, say, wears a blazer instead of a hoodie, or speaks in fuller sentences and milder language instead of the way boys of that age normally speak. Would you then say that the girl blatantly disrespected her boyfriend?

If I said to my husband: “That man is a gentleman, he wears a blazer.” not only would I be ridiculous, because blazers are so ridiculous themselves, but I would also be saying, “you are not a gentleman” because my husband would never wear a blazer. I’m saying to him “gentlemen wear blazers.” That is disrespectful. Imagine if your girlfriend, listening to you and another boy play piano, turned to you and said “That* boy is a musician.” How would you feel about your playing? In this story, the boy takes it one step further. Not only does he say “She is a lady.” He also, by holding the door for one and not the other, is very emphatically saying “I hold the door for ladies, and you are not one.” If it’s unintentional, it is even more hurtful to her, it adds, “so much so that I’ve never even considered seeing you differently.”

Yes, which is why the boy wasn’t right in this scenario, but let’s remember we’re talking about a boy, not a seasoned man.

“seasoned man” sounds so creepy…maybe it’s just me The point is not to dissect the story, but to see how it’s being used in this thread - as an example. Besides, even a boy who can’t make the connection ought to be made to realize that he is being disrespectful, so that when he grows up he can avoid being a rude man.

he brushed up what gallantry he had because he saw a purpose.

Purpose? What purpose would that be, if it’s obviously not to make his girlfriend feel loved and respected, and is obviously not to make the girls at his school feel respected and being to view themselves as ladies worthy of respect. Is it to make himself more attractive to another girl? To make his girlfriend jealous? Does he only do the right thing when he’ll be thanked or appreciated?

After all the fact that you treat every woman the same in regard of basic courtesy, i.e. you treat her like a lady, it doesn’t mean that you show every woman all the same as an example to your daughter of how to behave or dress or speak etc. like a lady.

No, but neither do you publically disrespect her. If I made bread for the man next door, if every week I brought him a loaf to enjoy, but never baked for my husband; if I told my husband it was because our neighbor was “a gentleman,” what would I be saying to my husband? How would he feel when our friends saw me catering to one and not the other?

Pardon me, but I believe you’re going too far. The boy didn’t hold the door for anyone before. Apparently, he first did it for that other girl (and possibly on instinct). In your description, it sounds as if he had made a deliberate demonstration to his girlfriend, which doesn’t find support in the facts of the story. There is no trace of such intent at all.

As I said above, one of the saddest parts of the story is the lack of intent. His intending to demonstrate his disrespect for his girlfriend would be mean. His complete and unintentional disregard for her shows that he may like her, but he doesn’t hold her in any regard, and failed to notice her.

Again, try and turn the table. Would you form such strong opinions if a girl failed to act courteously towards a boy?

Of course. Who wouldn’t?*

 

[chevalier]

The fabric of the suit, the cut, the fit, the style can either raise or lower your status, but if you wear a suit to work everyday, your status never rises above that of “company man” - someone whose time is not his own.

While some high-earning specialists who don’t deal directly with clients can get away with casual dress at work, CEOs of large companies, even presidents of countries, can’t really - would you say their status is low? By those definitions, only landowners, film stars etc. would have status.

So the idea of wearing a suit when not required - unless its not also your work uniform - gives the impression that you are even less of your own man.

How does wearing a suit when out in the city at night make me look less my own man and so on?

As for the boy and the girl, you’re only showing more and more amply how it’s all conjecture. The reality is that we have very little data but somehow a lavish bounty of conclusions. Those things were not necessarily there. You don’t have enough data to make such precise determinations. And yes, it matters how things really were, because you can’t use a bike as an example of car. The comparison with your husband wasn’t very fitting because neither you nor he are school children like that boy and girl. A boy will not behave like a man. As for my piano skills, they’re beyond help and I’d laugh it off. But I’m a real artist with litigation!