Posted on 06/06/2013 8:48:12 AM PDT by fwdude
This weekend, I will be attending the high school graduation of a young relative, as tens of thousands of others likely will as well. Though these events are a dime a dozen, and a high school graduation doesn't seem to carry the weight of importance that it once did, it seems appropriate to regard the attendance of such an event as a special occasion, special enough to don at least a clean shirt and pants without holes.
But what I expect to see will probably be trumped by even what I've witnessed in past years - people wearing shorts, theme t-shirts, muscle shirts, holey jeans, and flip-flops. At a graduation. Even at college graduations.
What I've noticed over the past several decades is a drastic trend toward an anything-goes attitude toward dress. The last time this drastic a shift seems to have occurred is in the late sixties, when the hippie, commune-living attitude made inroads into society and youth wore whatever they pleased, wherever they pleased, if anything at all.
Today, I see church-goers wear what look like pajamas, short shorts, tube tops, muscle shirts and worse. It's almost like they're defying the traditional "rules." And not only congregants, but pastors and participants seem to be in a contest to see who can dress down the most radically, usually by those who want to be "relevant" to today's youth. (See Ed Young as an example.) I attended a wedding - A WEDDING!!! - several years ago and with very few exceptions, the only people wearing a tie or dress were the marrying couple. Most wore golf shirts, "nice" jeans and tennis shoes. I (wearing my suit) was almost speechless.
Today, there seems to be no venue, no ceremony, no establishment, where manner of dress is any longer important at all. And I see this attitude as directly related to, and caused by, the voracious consumption of society by the rabid, morally-anarchist secularists. Children used to aspire to wear what grownups wore - in Great Britain, young boys were only allowed to wear shorts as appropriate, slacks being a man's attire, and were only allowed to wear such upon attaining "the King's commission." Now, adults seem to want to emulate children, with sagging waistbands, "bling," tatoos and hyper-oversized pants that can't seem to decide if they're shorts or not shorts.
My question is this: is there ANY event or occasion when it is appropriate to dress in other than ordinary, daily apparel, without undue coercion? Or, put another way, is there any occasion when daily, casual wear is inappropriate?
I can already hear the rebuttals by cultural relativists: "but every era has its trends which fly in the face of tradition!" True, but there were still differences in the manner of dress according to occasion. Now, there appear to be none whatsoever. A standardless society when appearances are concerned. Once, even the poorest farmer owned at least one suit, a tie, and a good pair of dress shoes. Everyone was expected to have the ability to look presentable at the most elegant occasion, and all but the poorest (by real poor standards of the day, not today's "opulent poor") could satisfy this minimal standard. Today, I know scores of people who own not one suit, tie, or dress shirt.
I truly believe this attitude mirrors the standardless "morals" we are seeing sweep across every institution which once stood for something. The military might be one last holdout, but even that will see changes - be certain of it.
Indeed, it wasn't fun living in the Dust Bowl, where the fashion-conscious had to take their zoot suits to the dry cleaners frequently to clean out the dust.
Dust--The Sons of the Pioneers (with Roy Rogers) (1938)
Dusty Skies--Bob Wills & the Texas Playboys (1941)
A Zoot Suit--The Andrews Sisters (1942)
Checkered suits, polkadot ties, raccoon coats and zoot suits? It must have been fun to go people-watching during the Great Depression.
when 80% of the graduated students cannot read(new york).... it does not have the same significance
it’s like celebrating the end of day care
I was going to post something along these lines, but you said it so well. The relaxed clothing is really an expression of relaxed morals and lack of consideration for other people. "Constraint" in clothing and "appropriateness" in clothing (context and purpose are important) translate into the same attitudes in treating other people. I've nothing against beachwear or gym wear, as long as it's on the beach or in the gym.
You just stated that the Great Depression happened in 1910...
The Great Depression: October 24, 1929-December 4, 1943.
My great grandparents, grandparents and then 3 year old mother came across the continent in 1928.
There is a black and white picture, taken of the family and the two men are wearing sport coats, ties and hats.
No air conditioning. And a long slow drive. Made it to Whittier California and bought a walnut orchard, on S. Painter, next to what later became The Quad.
Question: Why are you so extremely defensive about this issue? That in itself, says a lot.
<><><><
Your crystal ball software needs an upgrade.
Why is everyone missing the point of my essay? Am I that bad a writer?
<><><><
Please don’t take this as a defensive comment on my part, no you are not that bad of a writer ... your thesis is what is being questioned.
At least that’s what I’ve quarreled with.
I cannot prove that my code is better because of my attire.
My position is one in which I am sent to clients when they are in deep, deep sh*t. When they call for me there is a serious problem.
Now imagine being this client and having me show up dressed like a slob, or an overgrown toddler. Showing up well-groomed and well-dressed immediately puts them at ease and instills confidence in the people I will work with. It’s also a demonstration of respect and courtesy, in my opinion.
So, no it does not impact my performance directly, but it most certainly has some weight on whether our clients call us back again. And they always ask for me by name when they do.
I was not even thinking about client meetings in my response. Coat and tie always for client meetings. Always.
Standards of dress have changed, not declined. At one time men wore skirts and powdered wigs. Anyone want to go back to that?
The point is not that standards have changed, but that there is no longer standards of different levels for different occasions.
In the 1950s, when I was a kid, we would go "over the hill" (i.e., from the Valley to Hollywood or Downtown) and my mother would wear hat and gloves. But in the Valley, everything was much more casual.
I think the biggest problem with the way folks dress today isn't that it is casual, but it is sloppy.
Also, if you look closely at those pictures of folks on the street or at baseball games in the 30s and 40s, they might have been wearing coats, ties, etc. but they were often rumpled and not very clean looking.
I started dressing more casually 25 years ago, when I moved from Colorado to Texas due to the climate. Even so, when it is hot and humid, a pair of light wool dress slacks is a lot more comfortable than a pair of jeans.
Texas governor Bill Clements was a proponent of casual dress. In 1978, he asked that everyone in Texas wear short-sleeved shirts during the summer.
When was that?
That is now in San Francisco.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.