Pajamas in public...

[PoohBang]

I'm not surprised people discuss clothing on a forum devoted mostly to clothing, I am surprised people are bothered by what others wear, when they themselves wear clothing that is 60+ years out of fashion.

on a side note aren't "Scrubs" just glorified PJs?

Do you only go to doctors who dress like this?

 

[AtomicEraTom]

I have never actually seen my doctor wear scrubs before, come to think of it. He always wears an oxford shirt, tie, slacks, and wing tips. Looks a bit like a young Marcus Welby lol I've never been in for anything beyond a checkup, though!

 

[Andykev]

I'm not surprised people discuss clothing on a forum devoted mostly to clothing, I am surprised people are bothered by what others wear, when they themselves wear clothing that is 60+ years out of fashion.

on a side note aren't "Scrubs" just glorified PJs?


What? "Scrubs" are for those in the medical professions who are often exposed to bodily fluids from others (patients). The "Scrubs" are worn as part of a professional "uniform". I often see people from the vets' office in the local mall having lunch, shopping, etc., as well as nurses or dental assistants. Absolutely proper..they are in shoes, and I dare imagine, they are wearing their "underwear". They also wear name badges....

P.J.'s are sleepwear, for hummmmm, SLEEP. In college, the co-eds sometimes had a "P.J." day, and wore their flannels to class....ALL the young girls from the dorm.... It was like a Halloween costume, a fun thing. In the proper setting: ON CAMPUS.

But the "Wal-Mart" shoppers (see people of Wal-Mart) who go about their daily routine, shopping, etc. in PAJAMA's are SLOBS, and you cannot attach ANY "work related" merit or justification to such behavior. I remember the ladies who used to go out shopping, wearing those big fat pink curlers in their hair (they were going out that evening). I always laughed at that.

You might just as well wear your undies on the outside of your pants...or be the "sagging pants" group.

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

Honestly. It's really not about "fashion" at all. It's not about current style, or being 'modern". It's not about looking good or looking bad. It's not about being modern versus vintage. It's not about who is right or who is wrong or who is more "politically correct".
It's just all about money. That's the bottom line. Corporations want as much of it as they can get their grabby, grimy little paws on, and they don't care about aesthetics or integrity. Principles such as quality and a real work ethic, are fast becoming a thing of the past because of their insatiable greed and the pursuit of profits.
It is so cheap and easy to produce current articles of clothing that have been foisted upon people by corporations and the media they control and played up to be "fashionable".
Think about it. A T-shirt is simply 5 or 6 pieces of fabric cut from a very simple pattern. As are shorts, pajamas, etc. Super cheap and easy to produce in vast quantities and sold to all those fashion conscious consumers in order to reap enormous profits with minimal effort and expense.
Real, finely tailored clothing is quite another thing. It takes real effort, creativity, skilled labor, quality materials and time to produce the kind of clothing many of us here appreciate.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

You might just as well wear your undies on the outside of your pants

 

[Flicka]

You might just as well wear your undies on the outside of your pants...

Hey, no dissing Superman, thank you. Tight PJs and underwear is perfectly appropriate superhero-wear.

 

[Pompidou]

I'm not surprised people discuss clothing on a forum devoted mostly to clothing, I am surprised people are bothered by what others wear, when they themselves wear clothing that is 60+ years out of fashion.

on a side note aren't "Scrubs" just glorified PJs?


What? "Scrubs" are for those in the medical professions who are often exposed to bodily fluids from others (patients). The "Scrubs" are worn as part of a professional "uniform". I often see people from the vets' office in the local mall having lunch, shopping, etc., as well as nurses or dental assistants. Absolutely proper..they are in shoes, and I dare imagine, they are wearing their "underwear". They also wear name badges....

P.J.'s are sleepwear, for hummmmm, SLEEP. In college, the co-eds sometimes had a "P.J." day, and wore their flannels to class....ALL the young girls from the dorm.... It was like a Halloween costume, a fun thing. In the proper setting: ON CAMPUS.

But the "Wal-Mart" shoppers (see people of Wal-Mart) who go about their daily routine, shopping, etc. in PAJAMA's are SLOBS, and you cannot attach ANY "work related" merit or justification to such behavior. I remember the ladies who used to go out shopping, wearing those big fat pink curlers in their hair (they were going out that evening). I always laughed at that.

You might just as well wear your undies on the outside of your pants...or be the "sagging pants" group.

The fedora was a woman's hat but now mostly men wear them. Pajamas were eastern everyday clothing, and looking at the pics earlier on, were casual wear here as well on being brought over. They were also for sleeping in. In short, pajamas are for whatever the wearer feels like. Baseball caps aren't just for baseball players. Shorts aren't just for children. Rules change. Pajamas and slippers became appropriate daily wear the moment people started wearing them as such. You can't break the rules of style, only change them, at least in a long term sense. You can try, and every so often a politician will try and legislate his style peeves on the community, but it's too little too late- bailing out the titanic with a tea cup.

 

[J.W.]

I have to confess: I don't even own a proper PJ...

 

[Edward]

I've taught at several US universities and it seems to be somewhat of a "fad" on the US mainland, particularly on mid-west and east coast campuses. I used to teach at one college on the East Coast and in the middle of winter, with snow on the ground, students would come to class in their PJ's and some in their bunny slippers (yes, through the snow...). Bye-the-bye, I do mean PJs not sweatpants.

In contrast, here in Hawaii while we are much more casual in general than the mainland, student do not wear PJs to class. They wear standard casual wear, T-shirts, shorts and slippers (though I have to say no one here except me wears pajamas anyways…). I can completely understand why people would wear casual clothes to class (shorts, t-shirts, sweatpants, etc.), but the PJs and bunny slipper thing in the middle of winter rather eludes me…

In comparison, I've lectured at universities in other countries (in Europe and Asia) and I've never seen a student in PJs in class.

Interesting, I've never seen it here in London either. Not in thirteen years of teaching postgrads and four years of teaching undergraduates, anyhow. I do see all the "new" fashions - especially with the undergrad girls. I'm always amused when they come through in the Eighties looks I remember from the first time round (no goths, alas, just the mainstream stuff). I have only once see what I believe to be pjs on the street here - just a few weeks ago, actually. I may have mentioned this earlier in the thread. Two Chinese girls, early twenties, probably. The window of the Gap currently has loungewear/ casual trousers with an elasticated waist in tartan patterns.... they look to me like PJs paired with regular clothes on the top. In the several months they've been there, though, I've yet to see anyone actually wearing them, so maybe they are meant to be worn in the house?

It's been a long time since there was any point me looking but last I remember of looking into buying a girl underwear, it was all so pricey for anything half decent, well. Paying that sort of money for pants I'd damn well be wearing them on the outside.

Hey, no dissing Superman, thank you. Tight PJs and underwear is perfectly appropriate superhero-wear.

Pschaw. Superman is a two-dimensional goody-goody. This is one instance where I can see why they girls all prefer a bad boy who is interesting.... But then I always preferred anti-heroes over the regular, vanilla heroes, and even as a kid it was the femme fatale archetype who appealed way over and above the "I'm just a girl!" leading lady type. [huh]

The fedora was a woman's hat but now mostly men wear them. Pajamas were eastern everyday clothing, and looking at the pics earlier on, were casual wear here as well on being brought over. They were also for sleeping in. In short, pajamas are for whatever the wearer feels like. Baseball caps aren't just for baseball players. Shorts aren't just for children. Rules change. Pajamas and slippers became appropriate daily wear the moment people started wearing them as such. You can't break the rules of style, only change them, at least in a long term sense. You can try, and every so often a politician will try and legislate his style peeves on the community, but it's too little too late- bailing out the titanic with a tea cup.

There you go too far..... I shall be a tolerant Dear Leader when I rule the world, but no grown man over the age of sixteen shall be permitted to wear trousers. We have to have some standards.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I have never actually seen my doctor wear scrubs before, come to think of it. He always wears an oxford shirt, tie, slacks, and wing tips. Looks a bit like a young Marcus Welby lol I've never been in for anything beyond a checkup, though!

Agreed. The only time I ever saw an actual doctor -- not a Tee Vee doctor, but the real deal -- wearing scrubs was when he was standing over me in the operating room. The right time and the right place. Every doctor I've ever seen for an exam has been dressed in a long white coat with conservative office clothing under it.

My dental hygenist wears scrubs, but that, again, is perfectly appropriate given the stuff that goes flying when she's at work.

The only non-medical people I've ever seen wearing scrubs in public answer to the name of "Defendant," and they often wear ankle chains as an accessory.

I also firmly agree with Edward's often expressed views on grown men in shorts -- they invariably make men look short, dumpy, and stumpy. Unless you're going to tea with the Viceroy of India or preparing to engage Rommel on the plains of Tunisia, do yourself a favor and wear grownup pants.

 

[Mrs Chaddsley_Corbett]

I don't have a problem with anyone wearing whatever they want, conformism went out in the 1950's thank God!! live and let live I say!


[video=youtube;reHBeKyOKa4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reHBeKyOKa4&feature=endscreen&NR=1[/video]

Even POLYESTER

 

[Nathan Dodge]

I also firmly agree with Edward's often expressed views on grown men in shorts -- they invariably make men look short, dumpy, and stumpy. Unless you're going to tea with the Viceroy of India or preparing to engage Rommel on the plains of Tunisia, do yourself a favor and wear grownup pants.

That's an extreme viewpoint, wouldn't you say? I'm guessing your view on women in slacks is "unless you're Marlene Dietrich or Katharine Hepburn, let the men in the family wear the trousers."

I don't know when or where you were born, but unless it was sometime in the 1880s, chances are you grew up in an era (1970s?) where men wearing shorts was commonplace, or at least socially acceptable.

Only short, dumpy, and stumpy men look that way in shorts.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Actually, I don't think I ever saw men wearing shorts on the street when I was growing up -- certainly none of the men in my family *ever* did. The only time the male knee -- in my personal opinion the single most unattractive part of the human body -- was ever exposed to the public gaze was at the shore.

My grandfather wore shorts in the '20s, but he was a semipro basketball player at the time. And his knees were always kept covered by leather pads.

My objection to shorts is purely aesthetic -- I've yet to see a man who looks good wearing them, especially with a long T-shirt draped over the waist. It completely disrupts the lines of the body and makes the wearer look like Charlie Brown.

The trouser comment is a non sequitur. I rarely wear pants myself because I can't find ones that fit properly. I don't care for low-rise pants on anyone, but that's another personal aesthetic judgement. I also don't personally care for loud patterned ties, monk-strap shoes, "skinny" jeans on men, shoes worn without socks, deck shoes worn anywhere but on a deck, athletic jerseys worn anywhere but on the ballfield, or the "stubble face" look. But the male knee exposed to the public gaze, well, that transcends all of these as an offense to public order, theology and geometry.

 

[dnjan]

Actually, I don't think I ever saw men wearing shorts on the street when I was growing up -- certainly none of the men in my family *ever* did. The only time the male knee -- in my personal opinion the single most unattractive part of the human body -- was ever exposed to the public gaze was at the shore.

My grandfather wore shorts in the '20s, but he was a semipro basketball player at the time. And his knees were always kept covered by leather pads.

My objection to shorts is purely aesthetic -- I've yet to see a man who looks good wearing them, especially with a long T-shirt draped over the waist. It completely disrupts the lines of the body and makes the wearer look like Charlie Brown.

Gotta agree with Lizzie on this one. While men should be allowed to wear shorts, I would hope that in most cases commons sense would prevent it.
The only thing that looks worse than shorts on most men are "man-capris".

 

[Nathan Dodge]

Actually, I don't think I ever saw men wearing shorts on the street when I was growing up -- certainly none of the men in my family *ever* did. The only time the male knee -- in my personal opinion the single most unattractive part of the human body -- was ever exposed to the public gaze was at the shore.

My objection to shorts is purely aesthetic -- I've yet to see a man who looks good wearing them, especially with a long T-shirt draped over the waist. It completely disrupts the lines of the body and makes the wearer look like Charlie Brown.

The trouser comment is a non sequitur. I rarely wear pants myself because I can't find ones that fit properly. I don't care for low-rise pants on anyone, but that's another personal aesthetic judgement. I also don't personally care for loud patterned ties, monk-strap shoes, "skinny" jeans on men, shoes worn without socks, athletic jerseys worn anywhere but on the ballfield, or the "stubble face" look. But the male knee exposed to the public gaze, well, that transcends all of these as an offense to public order, theology and geometry.

I'm glad you provided your reasons for not liking shorts. I briefly suspected it was something possibly influenced by being so immersed in all things retro.

My wife refuses to wear slacks, though I like them on her on those rare occasions she does wear them. Her big peeve is the "hoodie and jeans nation" the U.S. has become, which is not surprising given that people wear pajamas in public now, especially women, who have even sunk past men in being horrible dressers. I've never seen a man wear pajama bottoms in public; it's always been women.

I own exactly one pair of jeans and they're about seven years old; they're rarely worn.

 

[LizzieMaine]

There were plenty of trends in the Era that I think were unattractive -- all those twenties college boys flouncing around in pants that made them look like Harold Teen, for one. Zoot suits were one step up from something you'd see on a clown in a burlesque show. Those big-shoulder suits of the early fifties look ridiculous on anyone who isn't Sid Caesar. And as far as womenswear goes, you'd never catch me dead in the New Look. LBK all the way.

 

[Feraud]

I've never seen a man wear pajama bottoms in public; it's always been women.

I saw a young couple this weekend at Bloomingdale's decked out in pajamas browsing the ladies designer handbag department. I was fascinated at the idea of someone dropping a load of cash on a designer bag but cannot muster the self-respect to not leave the house in pajamas.

Edit- To add to what Lizzie mentioned above, ever era has bad fashion. There is nothing wrong with pointing it out and giving opinions.
The idea that Fedora Loungers dislike a certain style because "it isn't vintage" is incorrect. Some styles are just God-awful and inappropriate in public.

 

[LoveMyHats2]

The pajama issue, wow, there have been a few places that actually asked for customers to come in for breakfast wearing pajama's, they were in the more "posh" areas of Los Angeles, and had a brunch deal, fancy menu and Asti to wash it down. A trend I am sure has long gone.

Now the shorts deal....humm...I do wear them, but the ones I wear are pleated, silk dress shorts, worn well pressed, with silk shirts that are well pressed and with shoes that look appropriate and match within a color, and always with a matching straw fedora of some sort. I do not own any "Hawaiian" print shirts, can't go there, my silk short sleeve summer shirts are mostly solid colors, white, creams, dark blue, mid range soft yellow. As I do not have a "beer gut" and think I look appropriate in what I wear, I tend to think my wearing the shorts is just fine.

 

[Mrs Chaddsley_Corbett]

[video=youtube;iVsD0rltRr8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVsD0rltRr8[/video]

I try not to judge a person by what they are wearing, never judge a book by its cover you can be disappointed or have a delightful surprise

 

[sheeplady]

I'm not surprised people discuss clothing on a forum devoted mostly to clothing, I am surprised people are bothered by what others wear, when they themselves wear clothing that is 60+ years out of fashion.

on a side note aren't "Scrubs" just glorified PJs?

To be perfectly honest, I am far more worried about someone wearing scrubs following their day at work to pick up their kids, go grocery shopping, etc. than someone wearing PJs. People who work in hospital settings get exposed to all sorts of things and a lot of those things linger on their clothing. They should change before leaving work if at all possible to prevent infecting others with contagious diseases; particularly for those members of the public who have compromised immune systems.