Ha I was going to say, it's not a bad outfit but a lot of the "it's hot" comments IMO are emerging from the fact that wearer has the ideal "thin waist, broad shoulders" that women want on a man.
Yeah, it is limited to a certain range of body type. As the cartoon illustrates, you don't have to be "hot", but you do have to be sort of in shape to pull off that look. Also, a comparison of the original pic to the guy trying it as a costume points out that fit matters a lot. The original guys shirt and trousers are ever so slightly oversize; they look tailored rather than baggy, and the overall line is long and lean. The second guy's shirt is a bit tighter, the trousers as well (and not pleated), and the line is not as clean. I still think he looks good, but not AS good as the original.
I wanna figure out why that Bluesky type tweet annoys me so much. Like it's just a tweet and I probably have common ground with the poster, but that "Yikes" really gets under my skin.
I'm guessing it's because they phrase their serious political commentary as an immature teenage emotional reaction, thereby making any intelligent response look nonsensical, even in agreement?
"Yikes" signifies that you want to be part of the story but you want to sit non-commitally on the periphery. Maybe you disagree with a specific poster, maybe you think an entire topic is #hashtag #problematic, it doesn't matter. You are opting out of taking a specific position--something that somebody might actually be able to respond to, if god forbid they wanted--something that is any stronger than "look at me".
I dont really agree with the non commital part in this case. The tweets author clearly disapproves of current US/Canada relations. Like I'd be less bothered if they wrote something like "Proud Canadian, Fuck America" than that and I'm from the US.
What, particularly, is the "yikes"? You've already said you think it's US/CA relations (I don't think that's clear from the tweet), but colorable interpretations would include:
* Americans are assasinating each other based on political views (yikes)
* Your government censoring late-night lame-brain talkies based on political statements (yikes)
* Your president throwing tariffs around like they're party confetti (yikes)
* The US economy staring at stagflation like it's a dare (yikes)
* NATO has historically been bootstrapped by US spending, and all of the EU weenies want the US to cover their asses when a problem is in their backyard (yikes)
* US health care infrastructure is playing footsie-or-worse with anti-scientific viewpoints on vaccines and other things (yikes)
These statements have a variety of political valences, and there's a grain of truth to most of them. The tweet author doesn't need to pick one. They can just say "yikes" and try to boost #engagement. It's lazy stupid shitposting.
You're right. I assumed it was tariff related forgetting major events in our country get headlines globally. Still that type of shitpost is one I hope fades into obscurity as my generational cohort ages out.
Its been a weird experience becoming old enough to see youths of today adopting styles like loose jeans, ugly running shoes, and pleated pants, and deciding that these are actually in fashion again. As someone who grew up seeing these things as insanely frumpy uncool middle-aged man clothes, it's been hard to wrap my head around them coming back into style.
I would have said "classic", but yeah. BTW, when did pleats come back? I thought we weren't doing those any more...
The color matchup is very conservative, the sort of combination that IMO never quite leaves fashion even if it codes as "old". That may simply demonstrate that I'm old...
Pleated pants can stay away. They are a pain to iron, and look ridiculous when you sit down anywhere other than behind a desk, to hide the fact that the giant pleated pants balloon around your groin has expanded into what looks like a combination of a poorly folded napkin on a fancy wedding guest place setting, and a blooming onion from Outback Steakhouse. And ditto to the poster below who noted the 1940s movie casual look of the outfit, with the high waistband. It looks something from a casual photo of Humphrey Bogart -- which doesn't make it bad, just retro in a way that limits its application to very specific body types.
I feel like there was a hot second where they were trendy but you don’t see them often. In any case, it’s part of the 90s/00s interest and return to wide pants, I think.
I still remember Dave Barry’s joke from the baggy-pants era about how “men’s pants should ideally contain enough fabric to fully rig a 19th-century whaling ship.”
I like the outfit, but it just puts me in mind of those getups from the 1940s where the average beltline started at the sternum and ties were 2 inches long and 5 inches wide.
I mean sure, but the very simple solution is just to button one more button. It's similar to how ladies with small cup size can get away with much deeper plunges than those of us with large tracts of land.
I'm an anal retentive into menswear and I don't care for that outfit. I can usually spot groups of Americans from the fact you that you lot seem to relish in wearing as little as possible, not so much in a naturist sense, but in that you often will reduce clothes down to their most basic shapes and most urgently necessary components, so a tee-shirt always unless a shirt is demanded, and joggers, stretch "chinos" or shorts with little shape or adornment, even if said outfit is much too chilly for whichever European city you happen to be visiting. That outfit doesn't feel complete to me, since it's literally just a J Crew shirt (which appears to be big given how far down the shoulders seams are dropped) and pleated khakis. I don't feel strongly enough to really dislike it, but that's because it evokes nothing in me. It has no connection to any context or tradition, beyond maybe what you might call "dressy" (and what Britons would call "smart") in the land of golf shirts and cargo shorts, or headless Pinterest board fodder.
That's not me saying that ultra-casual clothing is worse or less stylish, though. People who blindly follow fashion are usually more stylish, in a sense, than guys who try to be "dapper." My pet theory is that being truly stylish is really about a keen sense of contextual appropriateness, and more importantly projecting the impression that you have a complex inner life. You can't really do this unless you actually have one outside of clothes, to an extent, though you should also ideally know as much as you can about clothes, their history and make.
Lastly, I strongly believe that clothes which look good frame the face and create an interesting silhouette before anything else, rather than showing off hard bodies, or the clothes themselves. Men especially have a problem with object fetishism, where they'll obsess over their watch(es) or their jeans while the rest of their outfit remains totally not up to the caliber of their vintage Datejust or Japanese denims made entirely of sugarcane fiber. Ties, scarves, roll-neck jumpers and appropriately tall and long shirt collars are also massively flattering to most if not all men, and it's a shame we can't all wear them all the time.
"My pet theory is that being truly stylish is really about a keen sense of contextual appropriateness, and more importantly projecting the impression that you have a complex inner life."
What does this mean????? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity. I think when American men try to project their complex inner lives with clothes, it usually just ends up as a graphic t-shirt with a nerdy reference. (Shout-out to the guy I met wearing a "Fibonacci sequins" shirt.)
I think it just looks good and clean, but you’re right that it’s incredibly simple. The line about men being able to try harder is funny given try harder here means “buy a buttoned down instead of a t shirt.” It’s not like the dude took an hour to great ready for the pic.
It's a really weird cultural shift between generations. Even as recently as the 90s, grown middle class men generally didn't wear t-shirts unless it was for something very casual like working out. Even in things like sitcoms from the 90s, it's rare to see regular male characters dressed like that for most scenes. Then something changed in the 2000s and now men think anything with a collar is for dressing up. Even many older men who didn't dress that way when they were young regressed into tshirtdome
Yesssss although it does also depend on a somewhat higher level of laundry care (steaming or ironing or whatnot) than a lot of casual and athleisure outfits.
I usually try to avoid wading into comments on Many Such Takes - would rather just lazily enjoy. I'm jumping in for the first of these takes.
The "beautiful wife" controversy. Why add any modifier at all? Why not introduce her as "my wife, Z" and let her style, her wit, her hair, her expansive knowledge of woodworking, her fist bump... speak for herself. Of course at home you should be telling her that she's beautiful, stylish, bright, caring, sexy....whatever has currency for your partner in the moment. But yeah, among others let her essence do its own talking. Public events are where most women shine most brightly. Even, to my surprise, women who I know are rather introverted. Let her shine.
I do have to say that my own wife usually slaps down my at-home comments that she's beautiful with a "no I'm not." counter. But....hear me out....if I introduce her to others as "my beautiful wife" she'll have a harder time dismissing the compliment.
Couldn’t possibly agree more & stronger. From here in Europe, the mere idea of refering to or introducing “my beautiful wife” would feel cringey squared.
Tbh, that's what I thought too. It would seem really weird to me if a guy introduced his wife with any kind of adjective like that (or vice versa for a woman introducing her husband), unless it was like literally on their wedding or something
I think actors disprove the idea that nicer clothes only work on people who are hot. A parasocial crush can instantly evaporate once that dashing aristocrat plays an out-of-work drifter in denim shorts.
“What’s stopping me from wearing an outfit like this?”
My waistline.
Ha I was going to say, it's not a bad outfit but a lot of the "it's hot" comments IMO are emerging from the fact that wearer has the ideal "thin waist, broad shoulders" that women want on a man.
Yeah, it is limited to a certain range of body type. As the cartoon illustrates, you don't have to be "hot", but you do have to be sort of in shape to pull off that look. Also, a comparison of the original pic to the guy trying it as a costume points out that fit matters a lot. The original guys shirt and trousers are ever so slightly oversize; they look tailored rather than baggy, and the overall line is long and lean. The second guy's shirt is a bit tighter, the trousers as well (and not pleated), and the line is not as clean. I still think he looks good, but not AS good as the original.
I wanna figure out why that Bluesky type tweet annoys me so much. Like it's just a tweet and I probably have common ground with the poster, but that "Yikes" really gets under my skin.
Like what is the point really
It's a very uniquely Millennial-coded way of speaking. I couldn't picture the author of that tweet being Gen X or Z.
It's classic Millennial snot: https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/on-millennial-snot It makes me irrationally angry as well, despite the fact that I also probably share the poster's politics.
I'm guessing it's because they phrase their serious political commentary as an immature teenage emotional reaction, thereby making any intelligent response look nonsensical, even in agreement?
"Yikes" signifies that you want to be part of the story but you want to sit non-commitally on the periphery. Maybe you disagree with a specific poster, maybe you think an entire topic is #hashtag #problematic, it doesn't matter. You are opting out of taking a specific position--something that somebody might actually be able to respond to, if god forbid they wanted--something that is any stronger than "look at me".
I dont really agree with the non commital part in this case. The tweets author clearly disapproves of current US/Canada relations. Like I'd be less bothered if they wrote something like "Proud Canadian, Fuck America" than that and I'm from the US.
What, particularly, is the "yikes"? You've already said you think it's US/CA relations (I don't think that's clear from the tweet), but colorable interpretations would include:
* Americans are assasinating each other based on political views (yikes)
* Your government censoring late-night lame-brain talkies based on political statements (yikes)
* Your president throwing tariffs around like they're party confetti (yikes)
* The US economy staring at stagflation like it's a dare (yikes)
* NATO has historically been bootstrapped by US spending, and all of the EU weenies want the US to cover their asses when a problem is in their backyard (yikes)
* US health care infrastructure is playing footsie-or-worse with anti-scientific viewpoints on vaccines and other things (yikes)
These statements have a variety of political valences, and there's a grain of truth to most of them. The tweet author doesn't need to pick one. They can just say "yikes" and try to boost #engagement. It's lazy stupid shitposting.
I think this is right, and also that the fake shock sounds like "I'm so much better than you I don't even know how to cope."
You're right. I assumed it was tariff related forgetting major events in our country get headlines globally. Still that type of shitpost is one I hope fades into obscurity as my generational cohort ages out.
I wonder what would happen if you introduced your wife with: "Meet my wife. She has a great personality."
“She does a great Trump impression”
"She's really funny."
HAHA!! Expect a punch in the ribs. Or a knife - I don't know your wife. My guess is it won't go well..
Hate to ruin a joke but the owl chain is the logo of his record label.
Don’t care still funny
Also still looks ridiculous.
That might make it funnier: he's stuck in 2010s Instagram style whether he wants to be or not because he committed for his record label.
My mom wore similar owl necklaces -- in the early 1980s.
The best wife to introduce your wife is with a nice Borat inflection.
this is my first MST since deleting Twitter and I just want to say thank you for your service 🫡🫡🫡 I think drake has a humiliation fetish
Don't mind me, just cackling to myself in the church nursery over the 13 reasons why exchange 😆
Lose the pleats, button one more button. Also the pants seem to ride a few inches high, but whatever floats your boat. These are my fashion hot takes.
Yeah if you take away the pleats and button one more button, I’ve pretty much worn that outfit.
Two or three times a week!
My wife, who dresses me, does not like the khaki outfit. Says "it's very '80s"
Now THIS is how men should introduce their wives at parties.
Its been a weird experience becoming old enough to see youths of today adopting styles like loose jeans, ugly running shoes, and pleated pants, and deciding that these are actually in fashion again. As someone who grew up seeing these things as insanely frumpy uncool middle-aged man clothes, it's been hard to wrap my head around them coming back into style.
My wife bought Golden Goose sneakers for me to wear. I do like my jeans loose!
I would have said "classic", but yeah. BTW, when did pleats come back? I thought we weren't doing those any more...
The color matchup is very conservative, the sort of combination that IMO never quite leaves fashion even if it codes as "old". That may simply demonstrate that I'm old...
Pleated pants can stay away. They are a pain to iron, and look ridiculous when you sit down anywhere other than behind a desk, to hide the fact that the giant pleated pants balloon around your groin has expanded into what looks like a combination of a poorly folded napkin on a fancy wedding guest place setting, and a blooming onion from Outback Steakhouse. And ditto to the poster below who noted the 1940s movie casual look of the outfit, with the high waistband. It looks something from a casual photo of Humphrey Bogart -- which doesn't make it bad, just retro in a way that limits its application to very specific body types.
I feel like there was a hot second where they were trendy but you don’t see them often. In any case, it’s part of the 90s/00s interest and return to wide pants, I think.
I still remember Dave Barry’s joke from the baggy-pants era about how “men’s pants should ideally contain enough fabric to fully rig a 19th-century whaling ship.”
It feels like someone tried to give Dilbert a makeover in 1995 and got bored halfway through.
I like the outfit, but it just puts me in mind of those getups from the 1940s where the average beltline started at the sternum and ties were 2 inches long and 5 inches wide.
Add 20 lbs to the guy in that outfit and the entire internet would go off about how sleazy the open-button chest look is.
I mean sure, but the very simple solution is just to button one more button. It's similar to how ladies with small cup size can get away with much deeper plunges than those of us with large tracts of land.
I'm an anal retentive into menswear and I don't care for that outfit. I can usually spot groups of Americans from the fact you that you lot seem to relish in wearing as little as possible, not so much in a naturist sense, but in that you often will reduce clothes down to their most basic shapes and most urgently necessary components, so a tee-shirt always unless a shirt is demanded, and joggers, stretch "chinos" or shorts with little shape or adornment, even if said outfit is much too chilly for whichever European city you happen to be visiting. That outfit doesn't feel complete to me, since it's literally just a J Crew shirt (which appears to be big given how far down the shoulders seams are dropped) and pleated khakis. I don't feel strongly enough to really dislike it, but that's because it evokes nothing in me. It has no connection to any context or tradition, beyond maybe what you might call "dressy" (and what Britons would call "smart") in the land of golf shirts and cargo shorts, or headless Pinterest board fodder.
That's not me saying that ultra-casual clothing is worse or less stylish, though. People who blindly follow fashion are usually more stylish, in a sense, than guys who try to be "dapper." My pet theory is that being truly stylish is really about a keen sense of contextual appropriateness, and more importantly projecting the impression that you have a complex inner life. You can't really do this unless you actually have one outside of clothes, to an extent, though you should also ideally know as much as you can about clothes, their history and make.
Lastly, I strongly believe that clothes which look good frame the face and create an interesting silhouette before anything else, rather than showing off hard bodies, or the clothes themselves. Men especially have a problem with object fetishism, where they'll obsess over their watch(es) or their jeans while the rest of their outfit remains totally not up to the caliber of their vintage Datejust or Japanese denims made entirely of sugarcane fiber. Ties, scarves, roll-neck jumpers and appropriately tall and long shirt collars are also massively flattering to most if not all men, and it's a shame we can't all wear them all the time.
"My pet theory is that being truly stylish is really about a keen sense of contextual appropriateness, and more importantly projecting the impression that you have a complex inner life."
What does this mean????? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity. I think when American men try to project their complex inner lives with clothes, it usually just ends up as a graphic t-shirt with a nerdy reference. (Shout-out to the guy I met wearing a "Fibonacci sequins" shirt.)
I think it just looks good and clean, but you’re right that it’s incredibly simple. The line about men being able to try harder is funny given try harder here means “buy a buttoned down instead of a t shirt.” It’s not like the dude took an hour to great ready for the pic.
Indeed. There are a lot of guys who are allergic to wearing shirts with collars.
It's a really weird cultural shift between generations. Even as recently as the 90s, grown middle class men generally didn't wear t-shirts unless it was for something very casual like working out. Even in things like sitcoms from the 90s, it's rare to see regular male characters dressed like that for most scenes. Then something changed in the 2000s and now men think anything with a collar is for dressing up. Even many older men who didn't dress that way when they were young regressed into tshirtdome
Yesssss although it does also depend on a somewhat higher level of laundry care (steaming or ironing or whatnot) than a lot of casual and athleisure outfits.
Mmm that is a fair point! I concede men have to Do Better at laundry lol
Give “my humble wife” a shot and then “my former wife”
Dr. Smell!!!
Someday I look forward to CHH Dr Smell collab lol
I reached out to her months ago and she left me on read so I decided not to harass her any further
I see! Makes a total sense!!
Someday hope she changes her mind to respond just like some ppl respond to dating app messages 3 months later lol
“DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM!”
Very civil of you. She’d be great on substack
I usually try to avoid wading into comments on Many Such Takes - would rather just lazily enjoy. I'm jumping in for the first of these takes.
The "beautiful wife" controversy. Why add any modifier at all? Why not introduce her as "my wife, Z" and let her style, her wit, her hair, her expansive knowledge of woodworking, her fist bump... speak for herself. Of course at home you should be telling her that she's beautiful, stylish, bright, caring, sexy....whatever has currency for your partner in the moment. But yeah, among others let her essence do its own talking. Public events are where most women shine most brightly. Even, to my surprise, women who I know are rather introverted. Let her shine.
I do have to say that my own wife usually slaps down my at-home comments that she's beautiful with a "no I'm not." counter. But....hear me out....if I introduce her to others as "my beautiful wife" she'll have a harder time dismissing the compliment.
Couldn’t possibly agree more & stronger. From here in Europe, the mere idea of refering to or introducing “my beautiful wife” would feel cringey squared.
Tbh, that's what I thought too. It would seem really weird to me if a guy introduced his wife with any kind of adjective like that (or vice versa for a woman introducing her husband), unless it was like literally on their wedding or something
I think actors disprove the idea that nicer clothes only work on people who are hot. A parasocial crush can instantly evaporate once that dashing aristocrat plays an out-of-work drifter in denim shorts.