Some tips to help those who are clueless about men's fashion

[dog20]

Is there an easy way to figure out if a watch is for a man? Such as a dial diameter guideline?

 

[Undertow]

Is there an easy way to figure out if a watch is for a man? Such as a dial diameter guideline?

Watches are typically split into three sexes:
1. Men - larger faces, thicker bands
2. Women - smaller faces, thinner bands; sometimes bands range from non-flexible bracelets to slim jewelry-like bracelets.
3. Unisex - see Men above

There are many varieties of watches, and no standard size or look. The best rule of thumb is that watches intended for females tend to be a bit dainty, whereas a man's watch typically serves a purpose (telling time).

 

[Tomasso]

Is there an easy way to figure out if a watch is for a man?

Like Justice Stewart, "I know it when I see it."

 

[Espee]

I wondered if that one rule was trying to tell you not to wear suspenders OVER a waistcoat...
A young guy shopping in a store said to me, "Excuse me... do you know how long a vest is supposed to be?"
I said, "Long enough to hide your belt. That way people can think you could be wearing suspenders."

 

[filfoster]

I'm surprised more people don't wear suspenders. To not have a belt putting unnecessary pressure on my mid-line, and having my trousers stay up, is a beautiful thing.

Amen. I am'skinny' but suspenders feel so much better than a cinched waist and keep the trou at a desirable level with no 'creep'. (well, excepting the feller inside them but you know what I mean).

 

[filfoster]

Watches are typically split into three sexes:
1. Men - larger faces, thicker bands
2. Women - smaller faces, thinner bands; sometimes bands range from non-flexible bracelets to slim jewelry-like bracelets.
3. Unisex - see Men above

There are many varieties of watches, and no standard size or look. The best rule of thumb is that watches intended for females tend to be a bit dainty, whereas a man's watch typically serves a purpose (telling time).

Or nowadays, the regrettable oversized monsters that serve as 'bling'.

 

[Richard Warren]

Are you stating the "rules" listed in the OP are actually regulations governing conduct? Or perhaps the "rules" listed are in some way customary sartorial practice?

In either case, the answer would be negative. If the OP were regulations governing conduct, they would be false - there are a number of inaccurate "rules" listed, including the bow tie conjecture.

If the OP were customary sartorial practices, they would again be inaccurate as already detailed in previous posts.

They are good "rules" because, if you follow them, you will not be subject to any (reasonable) criticism or censure. On the other hand, if you do not follow them, you might be worse off for it.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

It's surprising how many brands mislabel understate their waist sizes. The desire for people to stay in their smaller waist size is very powerful, and I think has caused a good part of the men's trouser industry to understate the real size of their trouser waists. I am technically a 38, but wear a lot of trousers labeled "36", but when I measure the size myself, they are 38's.

The industry term for this is "vanity sizing". Levi's Dockers are big abusers of it, while Polo Ralph Lauren is more honest.

 

[Undertow]

They are good "rules" because, if you follow them, you will not be subject to any (reasonable) criticism or censure. On the other hand, if you do not follow them, you might be worse off for it.

Perhaps I'm arguing semantics here, but I find the OP to be a set of guidelines according to modern taste; a set of "reasonable" rules, however, it is not.

The problem with this list is not that it doesn't adhere to anyone's particular tastes, so much as it suggests a one-size-fits-all rule is appropriate; this in a world of such sartorial freedom.

For instance, suggesting one avoid pleated pants and wide leg trousers is, at best, bad advice. Perhaps the bullet point should read, "A pleated trouser with wide legs often suits more substantial men, while a flat front and narrow trouser is better suited for the thinner gentleman."

Or rather than say women don't approve of bow ties, which is pure speculation gone terribly awry, the point might read, "Bow ties are an acceptable, if not uncommon, substitute for the neck tie in modern fashion."

 

[Feraud]

For instance, suggesting one avoid pleated pants and wide leg trousers is, at best, bad advice. Perhaps the bullet point should read, "A pleated trouser with wide legs often suits more substantial men, while a flat front and narrow trouser is better suited for the thinner gentleman."

I've found the opposite to be true. Stout men benefit from flat front non-baggy cut trousers while thin fellas look fine in pleated wide legged ones. Low rise(a frequently overlooked detail) trousers will ruin the look of any cut of trouser be you stout or thin!

 

[avedwards]

For instance, suggesting one avoid pleated pants and wide leg trousers is, at best, bad advice. Perhaps the bullet point should read, "A pleated trouser with wide legs often suits more substantial men, while a flat front and narrow trouser is better suited for the thinner gentleman."

Or rather than say women don't approve of bow ties, which is pure speculation gone terribly awry, the point might read, "Bow ties are an acceptable, if not uncommon, substitute for the neck tie in modern fashion."

The avoid pleated trousers rule has as much factual basis as the "untapered high crowned hats don't suit narrow faces" rule. A simple look at my avatar will prove that high crowned untapered hats can work with narrow faces and that pleated wide legged trousers can suit thin people (unless you are of the opinion that I look badly dressed in my avatar of course ).

As for bowties; they simply need a lot of confidence to pull off. They are unusual these days and inappropriate for certain situations (like very conservative job interviews), but they are not frowned upon by the ladies. I've found quite the opposite in fact.

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

Is there an easy way to figure out if a watch is for a man? Such as a dial diameter guideline?

I think vintage watches can be smaller than modern watches for men. This could cause some confusion. It is also a matter of taste and style. Imagine Sylvester Stallone with a very slim silver watch

Why do you ask? Do already own a watch? (Pictures would help) or do want to buy a used one? Most modern ones would be advertised as for men or women.

 

[kyboots]

I realize pleats are really unacceptable now, but these are very forgiving for middle aged guys. I still prefer these in my suit pants. You young guys can get away with the flat pants look. ( at least for now ). Can I wear a Bootlegger with pleated pants?lol------John

 

[Matt_the_chap]

I love pleats - I quite enjoy being able to put things like lighters or packets of cigarettes in my pockets and still be able to sit down comfortably. Hell, with pleats and deep pockets I've occasionally misplaced a lighter when I've needed it most because I've forgotten it's been there.

I just can't see the reasoning behind not having pleats at all when they're highly practical, comfortable and, if the trousers fit at least, improve the fit spectacularly to my eye. Just my two-penneth on that rule.

 

[Undertow]

...Low rise(a frequently overlooked detail) trousers will ruin the look of any cut of trouser be you stout or thin!

Oh lord, don't get me started with low-rise trousers! It's a modern miracle to find OTR trousers in my size that actually fit at my waist. Even wool slacks from a suiting store seem to be under my waist no matter how hard I try.

 

[Richard Warren]

The "rules" against pleated trousers and bow ties have the same basis: there are large numbers of people out there who will look askance on you for wearing them.

In addition, personally I find whatever aesthetic value pleats might have is lost at a time when it is impossible to buy a suit without low rise trousers.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

The "rules" against pleated trousers and bow ties have the same basis: there are large numbers of people out there who will look askance on you for wearing them.

Yes ... and in some professions, wearing clothes that make people look askance at you can hurt your chances of being successful. Depending on your line of work, you have to weigh the pros and the cons: i.e., is the wearing of my bow tie --as much as I like it-- worth jeopardizing my chances of attracting a customer and closing a sale?

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

So we could conclude this "rules" are for the modern businessman who wants to fit in.
Male fashion Icons like Fred Astaire or the Dude of Windsor didn't need to worry about this. Their "rule-breaking" made their styles famous.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

So we could conclude this "rules" are for the modern businessman who wants to fit in.

That's definitely the impression I got from reading them. Yes, that seems to be their target audience.

Male fashion Icons like Fred Astaire or the Dude of Windsor didn't need to worry about this. Their "rule-breaking" made their styles famous.

It also helped that one was a prince (and who would he have to answer to?) and the other was an artist/entertainer.

 

[nihil]

If you're famous enough, it's you that decide what's fashion.