Posted on 03/09/2005 9:47:25 AM PST by qam1
NEW YORK – They've been part of the American "uniform" for years, worn to casual restaurants, house parties, and some workplaces.
But as jeans become more expensive, they are also becoming more ubiquitous, showing up everywhere from Midwestern churches to Broadway shows. Nothing is off limits, it seems. Or is it? Among those who buy high-priced, designer denim or who simply don jeans frequently - there's debate about where it's appropriate to wear them.
The tug of war over jeans etiquette is particularly prevalent in New York City. Here, people tend to be more creative about their appearance, and are often more demanding about how fashion-conscious people should look, says Dannielle Romano, editor at large for DailyCandy.com, a fashion and trends website.
Many 20- and 30-somethings here have theater backgrounds, for example, and often say it's inappropriate to wear jeans to theater and other cultural performances out of respect for the performers and the surroundings (even though the venues themselves have no official dress codes).
"I am all in favor of the current denim revolution that we are having, but I do feel that there are times when jeans should be left at home," says Lisa Kerson, a jewelry designer in her early 30s, whose parents insisted that she look nice when going to a play or traveling on a plane. "I still get bothered when I see people wearing jeans to the theater, ballet, opera, etc.," she says in an e-mail.
Melissa Popiel also prefers not to see denim at the theater, or at an engagement party. To her, jeans are OK for a house party or a casual dinner, but not for traditionally dressy places. "I don't like going to cocktail parties and seeing people in jeans," says the advertising executive, who's in her late 20s.
Ms. Popiel estimates she owns about 15 to 20 pairs, including premium brands, and has paid as much as $200 for a pair.
Many others are also paying big bucks for their jeans - from $150 to $1,000 or more per pair. Celebrities, in particular, are making jeans their garb of choice for appearances on talk shows and at some red-carpet events.
That, say fashion experts, sets the tone for the masses, who are encouraged by features like one in the Jan. 24 edition of Us magazine, "Hollywood's 10 Hottest Jeans," complete with suggestions for buying "premium" denim ($140 or more).
The concept of designer jeans is not new, however. They were also hot in the 1970s and 80s.
Are these jeans made for parties?
Etiquette experts offer few hard and fast rules about jeans, but among them are the obvious: Leave them in the closet when you're attending a wedding, or if your workplace bans them.
"A lot of it has to do with the appropriateness of the kind of jean you're wearing," says Peter Post, grandson of manners maven Emily Post and author of the book "Essential Manners for Men."
It comes down to determining if the jeans are for fashion or work. A pair that you do yard work in, for example, are "probably not appropriate to be wearing to a restaurant that night," he explains.
Mr. Post has seen men show up in quality restaurants wearing denim, which doesn't bother him as much as how sloppy their appearance sometimes is.He recalls seeing a man dressed in a T-shirt and old rumpled jeans. "He hadn't taken any care to step it up just a notch, to say to the woman he was with, 'You know, you're really important to me. I want to look good. I want you to look at me and be proud of me,' " he says.
Dark denim is making it easier for men to comfortably wear jeans in the evenings, especially since black jeans are no longer "in." But no matter how hip a certain style may be, some places are still off-limits.
"I probably won't wear them to a funeral," says Robert Smith, a 30- something businessman in Rockton, Ill. But in the past few years he's started wearing them everywhere else - to church and to most work-related functions.
Not the fabric but how it's used
The good news for jeans devotees is that standards for judging people on their appearance are loosening a bit - at least among women under 40. A recent study by Cotton Incorporated indicates that Generation X-age women (26 to 39) are less concerned about first impressions when it comes to dressing than they were 10 years ago, and more often are taking the approach that "you can't judge a book by its cover." The reverse was true for women boomer-age and older.
Alice Harris, author of the book "The Blue Jean," attributes the rise of jeans to casual Fridays in workplaces, which shifted the way people viewed dressing.
"We've actually gone back to a much simpler way of looking at it," suggests Post of the changing attitudes. It's not that certain materials, like denim, are bad. "It's what you've done with that material."
It isn't. However someone choosing to wear jeans, rather than more dressy clothes to church is making a distinct decision to show less respect to the situation. There is no cost to them to put on slacks and a button down shirt. I really don't see the reason why a person would choose to wear such casual clothes to what most people consider to be a fairly formal setting.
I'm assuming, for this discussion, that it is standard for congregants in that particular church to wear clothes that are dressier than jeans.
Doesn't matter. Other than for religious or medical reasons, hats should be taken off in a restaurant.
I think the subtle point is that people in California have as much of a dress code as people in New York. People in California seem to make an active effort to look casual (even though such casual clothes can run into the hundreds or thousands of dollars).
Ah, nopardons, you're just a dinosaur. Don't you know we live in an era where it's all about "me, me, me." If you don't feel like doing something, then it is your God-given right to reject all rules of civilization and act and dress like a barbarian. After all, we don't want to harm a person's self-esteem, creativeness and self-expression by imposing any repressive "rules" or "standards."
Seriously, get with the times. :-)
Neither should they slavishly cling to them. If one doesn't reject outmoded standards, then how can they change over time?
The wearing of a necktie is an outmoded throwback to when lack of heating required keeping your neck warm. It is now merely a stupid anachronism, a strip of colored cloth without purpose beyond decoration. Strip it off and throw it away, Man! You have nothing to lose but your noose! Clothing revolution now! No comfort, no peace!!!
Thank you, samiam1972. I appreciate your kinder words and do hope I did not in some way insult you. That was not my intention either. I've never met a person I can't get along with yet. Everyone has their redeeming qualities and Lord knows, I'm not perfect. I think sometimes these conversations online with people we haven't met, open up the sort of dialogue we would never have with friends and family, or even the local town folk. It is much easier to be less delicate when speaking our minds when we don't actually sit face to face, or live side by side. Yes, let's agree to disagree. :)
It wasn't a mistake, it was intentional. I am aware of your intended meaning for "class" and was using rhetoric to point out that it is a bastardization of a term that has everything to do with social status caste systems and little to do with politeness. Thats why I used quotation marks. It's also why I called your grammar cop routine pretentious.
You're swimming against the tide, here: like it or not, how you present yourself in public matters. Scream at a wall if you want, but you'll never change this.
It only matters if it effects me. I'm not trying to change random stranger's shallow opinion. I'm trying to remain comfortable while watching a public performance. We're talking about the opera or going to a restaurant, not someplace that matters to me what opinions are made and has earned my respect. I am not advocating tennis shoes for the Oval Office.
Untrue. I dress for occasions that require it because I have respect for other people and the occasion. It's what people who wish to live in a polite, respectful society do.
The opera is not an occasion that demands respect. The only respect that is required is to purchase a ticket and to not disrupt the performance. The person I attend with demands respect, and so may be accommodated with formal wear if we both desire it, but the stranger in the aisle seat has no claim on my attire.
But I'm also a former naval officer who learned a thing or two about the importance of proper appearance and public image
Military appearance and bearing are a whole other thing, touching on discipline, uniformity, and a rigidly enforced caste system required to do their job. There, clothing strictures are a tool of the trade.
Right. Sure.
I am aware of your intended meaning for "class" and was using rhetoric to point out that it is a bastardization of a term that has everything to do with social status caste systems and little to do with politeness. Thats why I used quotation marks. It's also why I called your grammar cop routine pretentious.
Right, sure, part two.
It only matters if it effects me.
This is the truest thing you've written about your opinion so far.
I'm not trying to change random stranger's shallow opinion. I'm trying to remain comfortable while watching a public performance. We're talking about the opera or going to a restaurant, not someplace that matters to me what opinions are made and has earned my respect. I am not advocating tennis shoes for the Oval Office.
You do realize, of course, that at a public performance, for the spectators there, the public is part of the performance?
The opera is not an occasion that demands respect. The only respect that is required is to purchase a ticket and to not disrupt the performance. The person I attend with demands respect, and so may be accommodated with formal wear if we both desire it, but the stranger in the aisle seat has no claim on my attire.
Like I wrote, you have every right to appear in public dressed in whatever costume you prefer. You seem to believe the rest of the world should bend towards your standards, however, and like I wrote (again), you might as well scream at a wall. Be like one of these teenage girls who wear pajama bottoms all the time if it makes you happy---the rest of society still won't take you seriously, and think you a boob. That's never going to change, nor should it. If you're going to throw society the finger, society can throw the finger right back at you.
Military appearance and bearing are a whole other thing, touching on discipline, uniformity, and a rigidly enforced caste system required to do their job. There, clothing strictures are a tool of the trade.
In all walks of life, pride in appearance fosters pride in performance, my friend.
No, its respectful to bot G-d and man to dress appropriately for whatever situation you find yourself. Like someone said earlier, they would find it a little silly and even tasteless if someone came to an outdoor Texas BBQ party in a Prada cocktail dress. That's is my point. Those folks who would wear jeans to a funeral or a church setting are just rude and very unpolite and it's even worse when such vulgarity and rudeness is endorsed and even promoted from the pulpit. It's a pity it's promoted in the pulpits, and makes the issue even more confusing.
I used to go to a church where most people wore jeans and even worse to worship the Lord. When I became convicted by the Lord that wasn't the right way to dress in G-d's house, I caught a lot of flak for it, some of it vicious (even though I wasn't defensive about it like I am now). Just the mere presence of someone dressed properly for church sent them through the roof (just like the "jeans anywhere, anytime" folks here). Just wearing a blouse with a matching skirt and pantihose (G-d forbid) w/ heels sent them into apoplexy.
I think they were feeling convicted themselves but rather than giving in the Holy Spirit and changing their behaviour, they decided that I was being a Pharisee, that I was the problem when it was their own "comfort" and "slovenliness" that was the problem. They loved their comfort more than they loved G-d. They accused me of being materialistic and spending too much money on clothes (even though I have NEVER owned anything by Prada or Chanel). They thought G-d wasn't worth more than a pair of Levi's 501's.
So at times I don't have much acceptance for these folks who seem to belieive that by wearing jeans to church that they are more humble, more Christian, less judgmental, less materialistic that those of us who dress more appropriately. It seems to me most of them are just Pharisees in dungarees.
Good for you. Maybe that should be your tagline, althought it might be too long.
That's the real reason these people wear jeans to church on Sunday INHO. They want to be able to walk right of church and into the rest of their day without being seen as being Christians. Talk about hiding your light under a bushel.
Although, since I go to church on Sabbath (Saturday) I just look like I'm going to a wedding, haha.
Maybe they would act better in school if they did. From what my parents told me, when they were in school girls were required to wear skirts below the knee and boys couldn't wear jeans. The worst discipline problems they had in school were children chewing gum and talking out of turn.
Now that the lowest common denominator is celebrated in our culture, we have teachers getting beat up in class and shootings in the halls. Sometimes, change is not for the better.
Sorry for the confusion. I was only joking about the "johnny come lately" remark (I did show up late). As far as the thread dying, if you think it's dead or don't like the direction of it, then why are you still posting? To moan and groan.
Some people enjoy being irritated.
I might agree with you if the people in my church who wear jeans acted in the manner and fit the description of the people you are describing, but they do not. Again, it is a much different envirionment and setting, and there seem to be much different perceptions about what is "appropriate".
Right. Sure.
I am willing to take you at your word, sir. In a discussion about formal behavior, I would expect no less of you. There are, of course, formal consequences to impugning another's honesty.
You do realize, of course, that at a public performance, for the spectators there, the public is part of the performance?
Then they should all be amazed and thrilled at my theatrical portrayal of of a man showing total indifference to their spectating me.
You seem to believe the rest of the world should bend towards your standards,
Boy, do you have that backwards. It is you who is advocating that I conform to the standards of the opera snobs. Lighten up, Francis; it's only a play where people are singing the dialog. It's not a conference to cure cancer. It. Doesn't. Matter.
In all walks of life, pride in appearance fosters pride in performance, my friend.
Opera isn't my walk in life, it's a pass time, a froth, an entertainment at which I am not performing. I am not a professional restaurant critic, so my eating in one is also not not subject to performance review. And how I dress at either activity will effect my performance at them not at all. "Why, look at that diner's panache! See how that three piece suit enhances his soup consumption? Why, he could never perform that meat cutting in jeans."
In some Asian countries, it's customary for wives to walk about 5-10 paces behind their husband's. We've aways presumed there was some kind of anti-woman motive behind it but I have now come to believe it's the best vantage point to (appropriately) lust after my husband's assets. HAHA.
Opera isn't my walk in life, it's a pass time, a froth, an entertainment at which I am not performing. I am not a professional restaurant critic, so my eating in one is also not not subject to performance review. And how I dress at either activity will effect my performance at them not at all. "Why, look at that diner's panache! See how that three piece suit enhances his soup consumption? Why, he could never perform that meat cutting in jeans."
You remind me of one of those death chicks who dress like cadavers in black-out curtains and then are galled and amazed that people have the nerve to look at them or regard them as anything other than the oh-so-tortured geniuses they obviously are. I'd wager you're in your teens or your twenties. Developmentally, if not chronologically.
Not galled or amazed. Indifferent. Your approval of my clothing doesn't matter to me. I am not dressing for attention from you, either negative, as your goth chick is, nor positive, as your formal wearing diner is.
I am dressing so that I am comfortable while doing a leisure activity. In these situations, my comfort is more important than your social seal of approval.
As for your assessment of my developmental age: it has been my experience that being clothing obsessed and judging peer worthiness based on attire is a trait of juveniles. Maybe you should grow out of it.
I'm sorry that you had a bad experience in a church when you wore a skirt, blouse, pantyhose and heels. Wow, that must have been a strange church. In my experience, that sort of dress is more common than not.
Perhaps that is why you seem to keep thinking, for some reason that I cannot fathom, that I ever implied that I was somehow better than you. So please, for the last time, quit implying that I have said that. Please.
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.