Is Hat Ettiquette Obsolete?

[jlee562]

It was in reply to you, but it wasn't directed *at* you specifically, but rather at the larger group we were referencing. It was used in the plural sense. I've explained that.

If you really want to stick that "explanation," your reply was poorly phrased, because you switch from supposedly not addressing me directly ("How you can make sweeping conclusions...", to addressing me directly ("...bringing up past generations isn't clouding the issue,") to supposedly not addressing me directly ("They were when I was your age too").

And I've said the objective measurements are only proof if you accept them as an absolute indicator of future occurence.

False.

A measurement such as the proportion of the middle class at two different time periods is not an "absolute indicator of a future occurrence." It is a descriptive statistic.

...I reject that premise. That doesn't mean the data *are* false, it only means that they are indicative of a trend, not definitive.

If you really want to get into the macroeconomic argument, it's totally unrealistic to expect a large scale economic change which would significantly change what we know about upward mobility today. You keep saying that I'm making absolute projections. In fact, I did nothing of the sort.

This was the original statement which you took issue with:

So if we go back to the question: does this current generation have it worse off than the last?

If you want to answer the question as you did, judging by life experience, sure, it's "absurd" to judge what will happen in the coming years. However, that is not how I chose to answer the question.

Upward mobility is a quantifiable value. And it was a quantifiable value in 1965, 1955, 1945, 1935, 1925, etc, etc, etc. The proportion of the middle class is a quantifiable value. And it was a quantifiable value in 2000, 1900, you name it.

If you want to answer the question with quantifiable data, you have an answer. And that answer is that, on average, a young person today does not have as good a chance of exceeding their parent's generation, as the that generation had compared to their precedents.

My statement is intentionally very specific and has two parts. If your only point is to reiterate that one cannot make judgments on what will happen in the future, I'm really not sure why you're still debating me, because I already conceded that in the first part.

My second point, was that, if you choose to answer the question "does this current generation have it worse off than the last?" with quantitative data, the answer is yes. But my answer was a two-part answer. You keep saying the second part is false by asserting the first.

Well, I do. But I haven't said that yet. I only taken issue with your assertion that the future is set in stone by virtue of some upward mobility statistic. And on a larger theme, I take issue with the assumption that "worse off than your parents" is on some sort of absolute scale. It's not. It's relavative and how bad that actually is is a matter of opinion/perception, which is why comparing it only to the previous 20 years is not only misleading, it's pointless.

Things like social and environmental issues are another day's argument.

It was my assumption that "better/worse off than your parents," was commonly understood as a phrase in the lexicon representing a measure of income. Moreover, in the US, it is historically true that each successive generation has done better. To wit:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18868904/...ation-does-better-dont-count-it/#.Uzuro84vDtc

The American dream has always held that each generation will enjoy a higher standard of living than the previous one, and that is still true, as measured by household income.

...

U.S. inflation-adjusted household incomes rose only 9 percent from 1974 to 2004 — a severe slowdown when compared with the 32 percent increase from 1964 to 1994.

Going back to 1820, per capita gross domestic product in the United States has grown an average of 52 percent for each 30-year generation, according to the report. But since 1973, median family income has grown only 0.6 percent per year, a rate that produces just a 17 percent increase over a generation.

"Thus, unless the rate of economic growth increases, the next generation will experience an improvement in its standard of living that is only one-third as large as the historical average for earlier generations," the report said.

 

[Edward]

Perhaps an exchange better taken to PM, gentlemen?

 

[Huertecilla]

Moreover, in the US, it is historically true that each successive generation has done better.

Not anymore.
It changed at the end of the 20th C. and the schock economics of the 21st have changed the scenery to one no different than a colonial one.

Over here in Spain it is worse though politically not yet so hopeless. Economically it no longer is a question wheter our kids will have it better than us but the hope they will have it better than our parents. Btw those had it probably worse than your grandparents.
I am teaching my kid chinese to go with his spanish, english and german so he spread his wings in well educated manner.
He craves for a crushable fedora...

 

[fashion frank]

Now Thats More Like IT !

I suppose if I wear a nice wide ribbon Knox from the 1940's, ( a sweet hat, BTW) with jeans, topsiders, and a collarless pullover shirt, I'm not properly dressed. Since I'm not properly dressed, I'm exempt from the proper dress and proper behavior code of the said, aforementioned time period. So,,the next topic to be considered, is it acceptable etiquette to wear a classic fedora with jeans, topsiders ( no socks, of course!) and what is quite possibly nothing more than a dyed black Tshirt.?

Wear your hats. Enjoy them. Life's too short to worry about it. Be kind and polite to people, with your hat on your head or in your hand, and people will appreciate you either way. If not, they're the one with the problem.

Boy you got it right , I choose to dress a certain way but in reality only because it pleases me if other people like it and commemt to me about well then all the better!
I also try to have manners and "hat manners" as well but thats because again I choose to .
Like you stated if you wear jeans and a t shirt and a nice fedora hey so be it thats what makes you happy .

But you best point that might get lost on some people here is " Be kind and polite with your hat on your head or in your hand and
people will appreciate you either way ".


I practice hat manners so to me its not dead , but what seems to be dead here is a little respect for other members in the words of Rodney King " cant we all just get along ", you "gentlemen " are killing the polite debate and drifting from the subject matter.


All the Best ,Fashion Frank

 

[Huertecilla]

"Be kind and polite WITH OR WITHOUT A HAT and people will appreciate you either way ".

 

[Tomasso]

I am teaching my kid chinese .

I recall people rushing to learn Japanese back when their economy had its moment in the sun.

 

[Huertecilla]

I recall people rushing to learn Japanese back when their economy had its moment in the sun.

There are an awfull lot more chinese than japanese.
Furthermore it is no solution. Only part of a kit to create solutions.
A set of good manners is included too.

 

[Tomasso]

There are an awfull lot more chinese than japanese.

That just may be their Achilles Heel.

 

[Huertecilla]

That just may be their Achilles Heel.

In any case, are good manners not.
Without but certainly with (because more obvious) hat, good manners get more appreciation than lack of them.
Even if they would be obsolete to the mass, they are not to all and constitute a positive note. The more so when authentic, genuine.

 

[gtdean48]

I am but you're taking up space for hats.

That is why the ignore list grows & grows....neat feature, wish we had one to ignore threads too....

 

[scotrace]

Perhaps an exchange better taken to PM, gentlemen?

Indeed.

 

[Tomasso]

The more so when authentic, genuine.

Therein lies the rub. While I appreciate and generally practice good manners, I realize that in many/most cases they are a merely a facade covering a disingenuous core. Conversely, there are many who have a gruff or ill mannered facade encasing a solid honest ethical core. When push comes to shove, I'll go with the later.

 

[Huertecilla]

I had a look in the german language area and found the ´Institut Fuer Stil und Etikette´.

It does not differ from the english language versions if less exclusive dealing with the christian/catholic church.

Another one is the explicit mention of the disrespectfull nature of having the lining in view. This conflicts a bit with the manufacturers user instructionfor a fedora to not put that with the rim down.

I liked the bottom line:

´Fazit:

Der feine Mann macht nichts falsch, wenn er im Zweifel den Hut abnimmt.´

´Concluded:

The refined gentleman commits no error in taking off his hat when in doubt.´

 

[Huertecilla]

And the spanish laguage area etiquettes can be found on Protocolo & Etiqueta.

Again the same with again a striking bottom line:

´La moda no debe estar por encima de la buena educación.´

´Fashion should not prevail over good manners.´

 

[Huertecilla]

L' étiquette du chapeau is a bit more tricky as it has many references to other etiquette which I need to follow up on.

One is the great affront taken with touching another men´s hat without explicit permission; in the past enough to automatically invoke a duel untill well after that was officially prohibited. Basically the same as throwing the gauntlet at someone.
Cool reading that!

The most extensive I have sofar encountered is ´Guide de L'etiquette Et Du Savoir Vivre´ by De Prelle.

 

[suitedcboy]

I think etiquette is entirely contextual. I practice it that way. To do otherwise is to make it an act that is only affectatious and is only a caricature of etiquette.

Example: you enter a church where no others are wearing any head cover and you take off yours. This is practical relevant etiquette.

You enter a country diner full of locals and they are wearing western hats and ball caps and you take off your hat. Inappropriate and not an act of etiquette. To do so shows no etiquette, likely more a little voice in your head that makes you fearful of a smack from your mommy or even worse, you are trying to tame this mongrel mass.

 

[Huertecilla]

Therein lies the rub. While I appreciate and generally practice good manners, I realize that in many/most cases they are a merely a facade covering a disingenuous core. Conversely, there are many who have a gruff or ill mannered facade encasing a solid honest ethical core. When push comes to shove, I'll go with the later.

St.Isidore of Seville (560 - 636) wrote that by his external way of being, his bearing, his gaze, his walking, his behavior, every man should symbolize the moral ideal he follows.

Do note that this honoured man was a leading figure of the catholic church in Spain. The same one that invented/maintained the Inquisition and who was the driving force causing the civil war, both in the interest of the infuence and power of the church.
I think I vote for the Marx brothers whose absurdistic sketches illustrated the hypocrisie in our society.

So:
Be genuine, avoid all else.
So much the beter if that includes good manners.

 

[Mr Oldschool]

I think etiquette is entirely contextual. I practice it that way. To do otherwise is to make it an act that is only affectatious and is only a caricature of etiquette.

Example: you enter a church where no others are wearing any head cover and you take off yours. This is practical relevant etiquette.

You enter a country diner full of locals and they are wearing western hats and ball caps and you take off your hat. Inappropriate and not an act of etiquette. To do so shows no etiquette, likely more a little voice in your head that makes you fearful of a smack from your mommy or even worse, you are trying to tame this mongrel mass.

Good practical advice. I would say on the last example, though, that if your practice is to always remove your hat when you enter a restaurant, not doing so would feel weird to you, so it would be less of a conscious application of ettiquette, and more of a conditioned practiced behavior. Funny thing about these sort of behaviors, they could go either way. And I suppose, if you are trying to adopt a pratice that you haven't previously been doing, for a little while it probably will be a caricature until you get it down as natural.

 

[suitedcboy]

I'm 56 and have worn hats since I was a child continuously. My etiquette has been molded by admonitions from elders and by being uncomfortable because I removed a hat when the peers didn't. I remove a fedora much more frequently than a western.
I will say that I wear mostly western hats. Western hat wear is way more about keeping them on outside in the wind than taking them off inside where there is usually none.

Handling a hat wears it out. Handling it with dirty hands soils it. By its very nature a hat is an object that is for your head.

 

[facade]

To answer the original poster... Yes hat etiquette is obsolete. There may be pockets, such as the military, where forms are practiced. However amongst the general public, it is officially dead.

It does not matter that there are folk who keep the traditions alive. To be etiquette a behavior must be expected by society at large. Since society at large is largely oblivious to hat etiquette (and some may argue any form of etiquette) there is no expectation. Without expectation it is simply a personal mannerism.