The devolution of our society through fashion in just two pictures.

[rue]

^lol

 

[vitanola]

Twenties college boys wore ridiculous "Oxford Bag" pants, which trickled down to high schoolers by the end of the decade. This style is epitomized for you here by comic-strip favorite Harold Teen ---

As you can see, Harold is a bit of a goof. But at least he's not feeling the breeze between the tail of his shirt and the top of his pants.

Remember, that the late 1920's were the day of single-pipe furnaces (a conventional furnace with one very large register) in many modest homes. Imagine a boy in oxford bags standing over the grate, inflating the bags with hot air. Oh, the humanity!

(apologies to the late Fontaine Fox)

 

[Miss Stella]

I saw a young man yesterday running through the crosswalk holding up his pants (like a lady use to hold up her dress when she walked 'quickly') so they wouldn't fall down any lower...than stop at the corner to pull them up SERIOUSLY only an inch MAYBE!!! What? They were too low??? Who told young men this is a good look????

 

[LizzieMaine]

The thing is, the only men who can wear their pants like that *without* having them constantly slip are those fellows with -- ah -- womanly hips. The look may be a lot of things, but it sure ain't *masculine.*

 

[Miss Stella]

Lol!!

 

[amador]

I was accused of participating in a fight before school when in the 7th grade. I was called to the principal's office. The observation was made that I was too neatly dressed and groomed to have been in a fight and sent back to class. Lesson learned.

The concern I have about clothing is one of hygiene. I would'nt sit in a chair previously occupied by Mr Redshirt but no qualms with Mr Fedora, altho tobacco smoke would be a considration.

Female hips may hold up pants but a male may have his own anatomical pant hanger given the right, um, motivation. No motivation for Mr Redshirt looks like.

 

[Shangas]

It's a shame, really. Even my work uniform includes a collared shirt and Dickie's pants. I take mine home and iron them, so they look crisp and clean, as well.

I wear jeans, I hate them. I just get too much hassle from the family if I don't wear jeans. Even with jeans and just a plaid shirt, people ask 'why are you dressed up?' To me, that's very casual dress.

Last year for Chinese New Year, I wore a red tie for dinner. Red being the traditional Chinese colour of celebration.

My mother immediately asked me why I was 'so dressed up' and that it would 'put off everyone else at dinner'.

I don't care.

I'll wear what I want.

I told her that. And I also told her that she was lucky I wasn't wearing White Tie. THEN she might have a reason to complain.

My dad insists that I wear jeans more often. But I really hate them. I have two pairs of jeans. I barely wear them. Maybe once every three or four months, I'd put them on. And only because all my other trousers are being washed.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

I guess you and me are kinda cut from the same cloth, then!

I wear jeans on the weekends mostly. Don't care for them at all. I wore slacks yesterday and my ma questioned me why and I said I don't like jeans. They all talked about how much they like jeans, but had to admit that slacks make me look thinner.

Last year for Chinese New Year, I wore a red tie for dinner. Red being the traditional Chinese colour of celebration.

My mother immediately asked me why I was 'so dressed up' and that it would 'put off everyone else at dinner'.

I don't care.

I'll wear what I want.

I told her that. And I also told her that she was lucky I wasn't wearing White Tie. THEN she might have a reason to complain.

My dad insists that I wear jeans more often. But I really hate them. I have two pairs of jeans. I barely wear them. Maybe once every three or four months, I'd put them on. And only because all my other trousers are being washed.

 

[rue]

This is weird... yesterday I wore jeans (which I rarely wear unless I'm doing dirty work), because my brother was coming up to work on my car and I had to help. Well today he went on and on to my mother about how I look so much better in jeans than a dress. I'm beginning to think it's a family type conspiracy....

 

[Shangas]

I don't wear jeans because...

1. I don't like the connotations. Jeans were invented as working-class labouring trousers. I'm not working class and I'm not a labourer.

2. I find jeans very uncomfortable. Denim fabric and me just do NOT see eye-to-eye. Never have.

3. I can never find a style that I can honestly say I really enjoy.

4. It doesn't suit my style. At all.

I just can't wear jeans. Also, when I see what some people DO with jeans, it makes me want to wear them even less.

Pre-shredded, pre-ripped, pre-faded, pre-destroyed, distressed, acid-washed, stone-washed, low-rise, butt-squeezers, skinny leg. Stuff like that fills my head with trashy teenagers and dare I say it, slutty girls. Connotations that I could do without.

Don't we just have TROUSERS anymore???

 

[Kirk H.]

The only thing I can say about Mr. Red Shirt is that in my profession that is a good look for bad guys to wear. In one incident there was a street level pharmaceutical entrepreneur who I interrupted in the middle of one of his business transactions. He took off running and was wearing pants that were way to big. As we continued on our jog he had to keep reaching down and pulling his pants up. The next thing you know the pants fall down to his ankles and he goes end over end like a tea kettle and lands face first on the ground.
And as others have stated it is sad when you go out shopping and you see people wearing their pajamas and other things that should not be seen in public.

 

[amador]

Dungerees, jeans, are working pants. I wear them when I need protection of my legs from what I am doing. Slacks would not hold up very well for clearing brush, digging in the garden, crawling under the house or car for repairs, throwing sandbags on the levee during a flood.

Alas we have "Jeans Fridays" at the clinic. When in Rome...

I do not wear any kind of pants that will expose my gluteal cleft. Thank you very much.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

That's what jeans are for, absolutely. Could you imagine using the weed whacker while wearing khakis?

Dungerees, jeans, are working pants. I wear them when I need protection of my legs from what I am doing. Slacks would not hold up very well for clearing brush, digging in the garden, crawling under the house or car for repairs, throwing sandbags on the levee during a flood.

 

[Shangas]

Well that's just my point, really. Jeans are designed to be hardwearing, for heavy work. They were originally invented in the 1850s for miners and gold-prospectors working in California.

It's for that reason that I find them unsuitable for wearing in any other situation apart from heavy work. If you're chopping wood, doing gardening, fixing your car, clearing out the house...yeah maybe. But not for going out for dinner, visiting friends, going to the cinema or the theatre or anything like that. You may as well wear a boiler-suit.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

I remember very well, my grandfather working on his cars in slacks. I always found them to be a little impractical for that purpose lol

 

[1961MJS]

That's what jeans are for, absolutely. Could you imagine using the weed whacker while wearing khakis?

HI Tom

About 12 years ago, I was in one of the more expensive Wichita restaurants. I think it was our anniversary, but we went out pretty early say 5:30 PM. There was a bad 45 / good 60 year old guy setting the bar on the way in, drinking his post lawn mowing single malt scotch. He was wearing a thread bare white button down color dress shirt (Polo Brand), and paint stained, grass stained khaki's (Polo Brand). It's nice to see 15 year old Polo brand dress pants being put to good use.

Ya got it, it's too old to wear to work, wear it in the yard.

later

 

[Shangas]

If the slacks or whatever, really are too old or dirty to be worn in polite society, then, in the interests of thrift, I think they certainly would be used in yardwork or some other dirty work. It would save money and get more use out of them.

I forget who it was, but there was a member here on this forum who once said that a standard shirt went through three stages.

1. Regular shirt.

2. Shortsleeved shirt (when the sleeves and cuffs started to go).

3. Rags and handkerchieves (when the body of the shirt started to go).

I'm sure in the Golden Era, all clothes received similar treatment. Nothing was wasted, at all.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The ultimate expression of this was the fad during the war for turning abandoned men's civilian clothing into women's garments -- most of the ladies' magazines of the era had articles showing exactly how to give a suit a sex change, and it was very commonly done.

"Cut Down" clothes were also very common, before, during, and after the war -- a worn-out adult garment would be taken apart and cut down and resewn to fit a child. It was very common to do this with cotton shirts, cotton dresses, and other items of everyday wear.

I've even heard stories of men's shoes being cut down and resoled to fit women during the war, but that wasn't something the average person could do at home.

 

[Edward]

If the slacks or whatever, really are too old or dirty to be worn in polite society, then, in the interests of thrift, I think they certainly would be used in yardwork or some other dirty work. It would save money and get more use out of them.

I forget who it was, but there was a member here on this forum who once said that a standard shirt went through three stages.

1. Regular shirt.

2. Shortsleeved shirt (when the sleeves and cuffs started to go).

3. Rags and handkerchieves (when the body of the shirt started to go).

I'm sure in the Golden Era, all clothes received similar treatment. Nothing was wasted, at all.

There certainly wasn't the concept of "disposable" fashion back then. In terms of stage three, actually, I decided a while ago that when next any of my existing shirts wear to the point that they cannot be passed on, before I put them in the recycle bin as well as stripping the buttons I will cut out the larger panels (back and front) to have hemmed as pocket squares. Regarding any bits that are to be thrown away, it's worth putting the n a recycling bin. I was told by a Sally Army officer once that the rag trade money they make on the donations they receive which cannot be re-used as clothing* are enough to pay the rates on all their charity shop in the UK. Whatever position you take on their theology, the Salvation Army do a tremendous amount of good work with the homeless and other persons living below the poverty line, a cause well worth supporting.

*Donated clothes are split into three types on receipt:

1] clothes that can be sold in the UK charity shops

2] clothes that are so deeply out of fashion or otherwise unsuitable for the UK market but are still perfectly serviceable (these go to relief work in the third world where people have absolutely nothing and would otherwise have to go naked, whatever the weather).

3] Unwearable stuff - this goes to the rag trade.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

That's more or less how my clothes go. I don't throw anything away, it all ends up in the rag bin, in the end.

If the slacks or whatever, really are too old or dirty to be worn in polite society, then, in the interests of thrift, I think they certainly would be used in yardwork or some other dirty work. It would save money and get more use out of them.

I forget who it was, but there was a member here on this forum who once said that a standard shirt went through three stages.

1. Regular shirt.

2. Shortsleeved shirt (when the sleeves and cuffs started to go).

3. Rags and handkerchieves (when the body of the shirt started to go).

I'm sure in the Golden Era, all clothes received similar treatment. Nothing was wasted, at all.