Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The Headliner]

Sorry Dallas, but I'm gonna have to go on a rant here - hope you don't consider this Gimmick Infringement.

What I'm talking about is 'formal' attire, 'smart' clothes, 'proper' dress. As a male member of the species, the definition forced upon me is very obvious - the ubiquitous shirt and tie. The degree of 'formality' varies from what you'd be expected to wear to the office, to what you'd be expected to wear to a wedding, but it all boils down to the same garments. My question is, why?

Who made the decision that this particular combination of clothes amounts to 'smart' and 'proper'? Where is it written? And why have so many generations chosen to follow this trend like mindless sheep?

Take a look at the origins of the familiar shirt. Back in the Stone Age, cavemen discovered that a good way of keeping a warm bearskin on their back was to fasten the sides together at the front, securing the heat and preventing the bearskin from dropping on the floor at inappropriate moments - during a hunt for more bears, for example. It might not have been bears, maybe it was sabre-tooth tigers. That's not the point. The point is, the development of buttoned garments from that point on was done out of necessecity.

But for many decades and even centuries, clothing technology has evolved beyond the need for a buttoned front. From the vest to the T-shirt, torso coverings have become self-fastened, sealed all the way around with the ability to simply pull the item over your head. Even the Roman tunics benefited from this design. So why does the traditional form of shirt still survive? And not only does it survive, but it is still considered the 'proper' form of dress, meaning that men and boys all over the world are forced to wear these ugly, outdated garments every time they want to be taken seriously or wish to attend a formal event. Why should this be?

And the necktie. This evolved from the frilly, laced ruff of Victorian times, seen in many old pictures adorned by men also wearing knee-high stockings and curly wigs. Over the years, it was gradually replaced by a simple length of fabric tied around the neck, hanging in front of the chest. It doesn't serve any practical purpose whatsoever, in fact it's more of a hassle than a bonus. Okay, it can be argued that it assists in retaining warmth by further tightening the collar, but hello - we live in a time of central heating! Yet the necktie remains a part of the formal ensemble. Why should this be?

The answer is that our society has become stuck in the rut of a pointless tradition. The reason we consider a shirt and tie to be 'smart' is because we are told they are smart. And the people who told us were themselves told so by the generation before them. We are all blindly following this dictated fashion because nobody has questioned it. We all just accept that this is 'the done thing' and go along with it. Is there any reason why jeans and a T-shirt shouldn't be seen as 'formal'? No, not when you think about it. There is nothing inherently better about a shirt and tie, it's just what we've become accustomed to. Just because some caveman millions of years ago decided to fix his bearskin at the front, doesn't mean we have to! And it doesn't mean we should, either.

If we followed this trend in other areas, we'd still consider writing on slate 'superior' to writing on paper or using a computer. And we wouldn't be caught dead using a gas or electric fire, or the aforementioned central heating, when we could be doing it 'properly' with a pile of dry logs. See how ridiculous it is? Yet we willingly adhere to the antiquated rules of 'smart' dress, no matter how pointless.

Rant over.

[Aldogg]

I agree.  I have worked 2 jobs in which I had to wear dress shirts and ties.  Now, you would think these jobs would be somewhat important, right...WRONG!  The first was MCA at Sears, MCA is a nice way of saying your are a folder of sweaters.  So, instead of wearing a t-shirt and jeans to do a shit job, I had to dress up nice nice to drag a folding table with me.  The second job was a beer stocker.  Yeah, this job lasted 5 minutes, since they were pissed I was not wearing "dress shoes."  I consider my And 1's dress shoes, and for a job which is sitting in a cooler stocking beer all night, I don't think these people care about how I am dressed, they want thier beer, they want to go home, get hammered, beat the wife and pass out on the couch watching porn.  But, these guys are like "This is an old time liquor store," define what an "Old time Liquor store" is?  I think society as a whole need to relax on things like uniforms and "formal" attire.  I would not show up at a wedding in a Kobe jersey and sandals, but, if somebody is doing something like folding a sweater, wearing a tie is worthless.  Good rant headdy, I agree totally.

[J.J.S.]

The second job was a beer stocker.  Yeah, this job lasted 5 minutes, since they were pissed I was not wearing "dress shoes."  I consider my And 1's dress shoes, and for a job which is sitting in a cooler stocking beer all night, I don't think these people care about how I am dressed, they want thier beer, they want to go home, get hammered, beat the wife and pass out on the couch watching porn.

  That's my job now.  I don't have to get dressed up, just as long as what I'm wearing doesn't offend any of the drunks/rednecks that come in (yeah we have rednecks in Milwaukee).

[Aldogg]

Nah, these guys are just jackasses.  They have an ad in the paper for help wanted on a by-weekly basis, since they act higher than high.  Even more my interveiw, they were sitting there talking about my facial hair, hair length and shit like that, I was surpised they hired me, since I was everything they didn't want.