Posted on 03/28/2026 6:42:05 AM PDT by DoodleBob
Several years ago, I joined some friends on a trip to Mackinac Island, a place famous for its Victorian culture and ban on automobiles.
After bicycling around the island, we decided to splurge and have tea at The Grand Hotel, which is as polished as its name sounds. Before trooping in for tea, however, we stopped in a nearby restroom to exchange our sports clothes for something a little classier, for the hotel requires its patrons to dress up before entering its domain. Such a change was a bit of a bother, but in the long run, it made me value my experience far more. Because my outward appearance was more polished, my inward self could relax and savor both the food and my surroundings.
The good ol’ Grand Hotel isn’t alone in its dress standards anymore. Ruth’s Chris Steak House recently announced a new dress code for its patrons, posting the following on its website:
BUSINESS CASUAL – PROPER ATTIRE REQUIRED PLEASE.
Kindly remove all hats when entering the restaurant. Guests wearing ball caps are asked to dine in the bar/lounge.
The following attire is not permitted in our dining rooms:
Gym wear, pool attire, tank tops, clothing with offensive graphics or language, revealing clothing or exposed undergarments.
The famous steakhouse was mocked for these (rather minimal) standards by fellow restaurant chain Chili’s, which claimed that you only have to be dressed in order to enter their restaurant.
It’s an admittedly touché response … but does it really win Chili’s any points in the long run? Put differently, if money were no object, would we rather go to the trouble of dressing up to sit and enjoy the upscale Ruth’s Chris than go to Chili’s just so we can bum around in our shorts and t-shirts? Most would choose the former without question.
Some might consider this snobbery. The dress controversy between Chili’s and Ruth’s Chris, however, is really a microcosm of the larger culture war which has raged over of how we present ourselves to the world for years.
The viewpoint of Chili’s is the one toward which our society has been slouching for many years. “Come as you are,” they say, “we won’t judge!” Thus, what once was considered acceptable dinner attire – a nice dress for women and a sport coat for men – gradually morphed into jeans and a blouse, then booty shorts, crop tops, or sweatshirts and pajama pants.
Americans cling to such clothes, loving the comfort that they bring above all else. Yet at the same time, we also complain about how difficult it is to get ahead in the world and how hard it is to get others to respect us. What if the two are related? Might we see more success in our relationships, jobs, and other aspects of life if we didn’t cling so obstinately to the Chili’s dress code of “anything goes”?
Famed Hollywood costumer Edith Head would have said yes. In her book, “How to Dress for Success,” Head wrote, “No matter in which direction your strivings for success are pointed, what you wear and how you look can make the difference between moving steadily toward your goal or just rocking back and forth in the same spot.” In other words, if you want monotony and stagnation, keep choosing those casual, comfortable clothes when you go shopping, dine at restaurants, attend church, or even go to the office.
But those who want to move forward in life should consider a different tactic. Although it sounds a bit crass, Head encourages us to think of ourselves “as a product” that needs selling. And in order to sell that product, one must seriously consider how to improve it.
“The difference between ‘packaging’ you and a static product like a can of beans is considerable,” Head goes on to explain. “The beans are going only one place. You are going many places, and the way you look in each special situation, at different times of the day and on varied locations calls for a variety of looks, a number of moods and a diversified wardrobe.”
If we can control nothing else, we can always decide how we dress, Head says. “When you know what you want out of life—the areas of success you desire—then it is easy to dress ‘in character’ to create the most exciting, pleasing, attractive appearance for your audience.”
Yet so many of us do the exact opposite. What, after all, do our sweats, ripped jeans, and skimpy shorts and shirts say about us? Do they signal that we are a “product” that is clean, neat, alert, responsible, and quality material worthy of advancement … or do they signal that we are dumpy slobs, more interested in lazing through life and getting by with minimal effort?
It’s completely our own choice as to which of these options we’ll follow … but just remember, that choice may be the difference between a Ruth’s Chris or a Chili’s life.
Suit shows respect for YOURSELF AND OTHERS...PERIOD.
Yet when I said "no suit", you went to "slovenly slob".
Keep believing that.
Dr. Walensky, Anthony Fauxi, Merrick Garland, Eric Holder, Alejandro Mayorkas, Rachel Levine, Albert Bourla, Susan Wojcicki, Andrew Cuomo, Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, Klaus Schwab, Zohran Mamdani, Adam Schiff, Joe Scarborough, Jimmy Kimmel, and Rachel Maddow respect you. They really do.
And you should respect them because they're wearing suits.
We don't have time to get to know the character of every person we interact with. Therefore, we have to make quick judgments. Most of us will assume a well-dressed person has a certain amount of self-respect, respect for others, taste and attention to detail. It creates a presumption. The opposite is true for slobs. In both cases, the presumption can be overcome, of course. It would never cross my mind that a person has dressed well in order to deceive. If that's the way you view the matter, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.
That is a different thing. I am not in any way disparaging people who don’t want to wear a suit and tie. I get that, even though I wore a tie to work every single day for more than 40 years.
I am talking about people who stand outside in bathrobes or go to the supermarket in pajamas, or who wear inappropriate or disheveled clothing to work, events, church, weddings, dinners, or other areas where interaction with people will happen.
In my original post, I was not talking about suits. I was talking about clean, appropriate clothing for human interaction where that kind of clothing and appearance is expected.
But...there are those smart enough to discern a scheister in a suit. Ie thinking conservatives vs feeling liberal commies. Someone in a sloppy t shirt at an interview at some businesses starts with a lower score on the hiring scale. They CAN overcome it, but why not come in at a higher level to start?
Yet we prefer John Fetterman over other Senators.
"Suit" slang refers to a business executive, manager, or bureaucrat, often used derisively to describe a faceless, corporate decision-maker. It highlights a person by their attire rather than their function, implying they are overly corporate, uncreative, or just a "machine". It is frequently used in professional settings, often in the plural (e.g., "the suits").
Yup. I remember that verse where Jesus said cursed are the poor because they don’t wear a suit. Then there was the parable of the rich man asking Lazarus for a drop of water.....the chasm couldn’t be crossed because the rich man didn’t wear a suit when he could afford it..... or something.
*Democratic Senators.
You are using completely illogical arguments to make your points and you seem totally incapable of understanding that, . . . so . . . yeah.
No, it's like saying Americans used to salute the flag with a stiff arm gesture but we don't anymore because the Nazis coopted the salute. It's like saying we don't celebrate rainbows anymore because LGBTQWERTY Communists coopted the rainbow. It's like saying we don't print the swastika anymore despite it being from ancient cultures and religions, including native Americans because the Nazis adopted it.
Good point. Straight arms and rainbows have now been made evil so we better stay away from them. You know what all these bad people also had in common? They breathed air. I would guess that by your tortured logic, we should all stop doing that, too.
When bad people wear a costume in order to add legitimacy to their actions, maybe it's time to stop wearing the same costume.
I highly doubt that you will be able to grasp this, but formal wear isn't a costume. At least for people who aren't total slobs, it isn't.
It's very funny that you post that because you're the one all butt-hurt. Show us on the doll where the on-line poster hurt you.
You are correct, your poor thinking and fallacious logic are a little painful to read. However, it is a sadistically enjoyable to poke fun at people like you who don't realize that. I'll try to stop here. Just think of me as one of those bad men who wears suits!
So, "well-dressed" or "slob" - nothing in between. That's the fallacy of Either/Or Reasoning. It ignores everything in between.
It would never cross my mind that a person has dressed well in order to deceive.
I can't believe in this day and age that I'm reading that from an adult. Never cross your mind? Maybe it should cross your mind. There are at least two generations who believed the propaganda delivered via television because it was told to them by and repeated by an army of people in suits. There are hundreds of thousands of people who are dead or ill from the COVID-1984 Jim Jones Jab pushed at them by people wearing suits. There are con artists preachers fully suited up, selling you salvation on their terms and at their price.
If that's the way you view the matter, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.
???
I don't need you to convince me of anything. I already have enough people in suits going to great efforts to convince me of things.
“And my point is that falling for that deception has led us down a path where it’s used to manipulate others, instead of teaching our sons and daughters to respect people for who they are instead of by the costumes they wear, especially when you know they’re only wearing the costume to help deceive others.”
I wore a suit for my first job interview while at the UofF where normal dress code was shorts and t-shirts.
Was I being deceptive?
That's your fallacy, don't ascribe it to me. Comparing that to "they also breathe air" is a sad attempt to belittle a valid point. It's not me claiming the suit is a costume of deception, it's their own advisors and television industry professionals. I'm just the messenger.
By the way, I was only responding to your comment to me. I found it interesting to go back and see where we discussed suits...and we didn’t.
But you definitely have a thing about suits, and I saw you kept posting pictures of people wearing suits that you regard as evil and dangerous.
So that wasn’t our discussion, you were having that discussion with others, hammering your point (which the way you put it, I don’t agree with in any case) by posting images of provably bad people with suits.
I was going to post pictures of people who DO and DID wear suits who changed humanity for the better, but...I couldn’t and wouldn’t make that generalization that all people who wear suits are agents of good (and not agents of evil) and that with respect to good and evil, “clothes don’t make the man”.
How about sneakers with a suit or jacket? Barf.
Were you?
Were you telling people that Ivermectin is "horse paste"?
Were you telling people that you didn't wipe your mail server"?
Were you telling people that Jao Bai-din got 81 million votes?
Really, what else is there?
“Were you telling people that Ivermectin is “horse paste”?”
Nobody asked me.
“Were you telling people that you didn’t wipe your mail server”?”
I never saw my mail server,
“Were you telling people that Jao Bai-din got 81 million votes?”
I hadn’t even heard of Biden.
Ya. We live in America in 2026. Anyone wearing jeans to church for 50 years bragging about it is obnoxious
No one is kicking him out of church Jesus is t kicking him out
But he is obnoxious and shouldn’t be surprised if his social life is disgusting
They changed the fashion of what was suitable, not that inappropriate and unsuitable attire would now be tolerated.
I wonder if you are one of those people who believe it is o.k to wear flip flops and shorts when appearing in court.
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.