Formal Dress Forum

[Bonnie]

I get the impression that, like "suspenders" or (forgetting the term for what they are in English-English) "girdles"(?), they are mostly worn by, and should continue to be worn only by, journalists typing away furiously to get the night's report in.

[Mr Comedy]

Suspenders should most definitely be for girls only, and rather racy they are too. Indeed, we need more girls wearing them, particularly if they are part of a matching bra and panties set. Tremendous.

However, I suppose that you mean braces, by which I think they are probably to be encouraged, even though I don't wear them as a matter of course. In a formal dress setting I believe they are excellent, although I'd agree that they a tad over the top for every day working life. However this rule is totally suspended if you are a fat, middle aged banker in London. If you fall into this category the only way to show your appreciation for the chefs fine meal is to put your thumbs underneath your braces, push them out, and then drum your fingers on your taut belly. After this call for more brandy and cigars, preferably at the top of your voice.

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Of course, you need to be careful not to wear a belt as well as braces. To quote from Once Upon a Time in the West...

"You're wearing a belt and braces! How can you trust a guy who doesn't even trust his own pants?"

[hr]

Mmmmmmm, cake.
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102114

[Anon.]

Quoting Mr Comedy from 08:09, 5th Sep 2007
Suspenders should most definitely be for girls only, and rather racy they are too. Indeed, we need more girls wearing them, particularly if they are part of a matching bra and panties set. Tremendous.

Isn't scrupulously matched underwear a bit like exactly matching ties and pocket-handkerchieves - i.e., just trying a bit too hard?

However, I suppose that you mean braces, by which I think they are probably to be encouraged, even though I don't wear them as a matter of course. In a formal dress setting I believe they are excellent, although I'd agree that they a tad over the top for every day working life.

All my suit trousers are made for braces (though I'm afraid I haven't quite gone so far as to have a fishtail-shaped back to my waistband yet).

However this rule is totally suspended if you are a fat, middle aged banker in London.

...or a Tory "core voter", the type they're currently trying to sweep under the carpet

If you fall into this category the only way to show your appreciation for the chefs fine meal is to put your thumbs underneath your braces, push them out, and then drum your fingers on your taut belly. After this call for more brandy and cigars, preferably at the top of your voice.

Quite.

W.r.t. those armband things: aren't they only useful if your shirt sleeves are too long for you? If I just want my cuffs (shirt or coat) out of the way for an immediate purpose, I'd much rather simply undo them and turn them back than start faffing about with twangy bits of metal.

[Eliot Wilson]

I'm with Mr Renouf here; I always wear braces at work, and all my suits have the appropriate buttons. Ironically, it was a Conservative Member who came into the office and raised an eyebrow at my red braces. Odd.

[hr]

Bill and Ted beat the Grim Reaper at Twister

Bill: "You played very well, Death, especially with your totally heavy Death robes."

Death: "Don't patronise me."

[Mr Comedy]

Quoting Eliot Wilson from 10:18, 7th Sep 2007
I'm with Mr Renouf here; I always wear braces at work, and all my suits have the appropriate buttons. Ironically, it was a Conservative Member who came into the office and raised an eyebrow at my red braces. Odd.

Presumably a Cameroon then?

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Mr Comedy]

Quoting Anon. from 18:16, 6th Sep 2007

Isn't scrupulously matched underwear a bit like exactly matching ties and pocket-handkerchieves - i.e., just trying a bit too hard?

Maybe, but it is nice to see - generally it represents a bit of an effort, which I like. However, I'm generally far more interested in who is wearing the underwear, so like all dress matters there is some room for manouevre here.

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Al]

I'm not sure that room to manoeuvre in the underwear department is necessarily a good thing.

[Mr Comedy]

Quoting Al from 14:49, 7th Sep 2007
I'm not sure that room to manoeuvre in the underwear department is necessarily a good thing.

Depends entirely on the situation...

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Mr Comedy]

I'm a big fan of knee length socks for general warmth value, however I'm contemplating where they can be worn. So far I have:

- whilst playing a sport (e.g. football, rugby)
- with a kilt
- when hunting/riding/shooting.

However, I'm a big fan and keen to use them more widely than this narrow band - are there other occasions to wear knee length socks without commiting a dress crime?

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Dickie]

Quoting Mr Comedy from 18:32, 5th Oct 2007
I'm a big fan of knee length socks...

However, I'm a big fan and keen to use them more widely than this narrow band - are there other occasions to wear knee length socks without commiting a dress crime?

There is nothing worse than a man in a dinner suit who has socks so short that you can see skin below the neck. I for one have long socks for wearing with my DJ but they fall at the knee not over it.


[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a

[Tweedle-Dum]

Surely in most instances it wouldn't matter, as all that would be seen is the very bottom of the socks, unless you make a habit of taking your trousers off, which may give you more pressing concerns.

[hr]

Tetragrammaton is a four letter word.

[Jos Dad]

There is nothing worse than a man in a dinner suit who has socks so short that you can see skin below the neck. I for one have long socks for wearing with my DJ but they fall at the knee not over it.
[hr]

While I agree, there is a more pressing need for men who,like myself, are some 40 (how much?, that's cheap) years older than most of you, that is to avoid being "instantly cut off" (Cant p.81). Can one get men's stockings suitable to wear under modern trousers? (I have the suspender belt). Long Johns, bought from McKays, are inconvenient (if that is the word I want) and I don't think they do them any more.

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Does anyone know the Cambridge gown system well? Is it *that* much of a faux pas to wear an MA status gown when I'm only really old enough to be wearing a BA status one?

[hr]

Mmmmmmm, cake.
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102114

[Lid]

Quoting Dave the Explosive Newt from 23:04, 30th Oct 2007
Is it *that* much of a faux pas to wear an MA status gown when I'm only really old enough to be wearing a BA status one?

Old enough, or awarded enough? It's a faux pas to wear a PhD gown at 70 if you haven't been awarded it. It's equally not a faux pas to wear a MA gown at 21 if you have been awarded an MA. You're only entitled to wear a gown of a degree you've been awarded, and surely more often than not, the highest degree you've been awarded.

Thus, as I believe, you have a BSc (Hons) (St And), you should wear your St Andrean Batchelors gown, but then again, I might be hideously wrong, but there's my interpretation.

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

You can't wear a gown of another university degree to a Cambridge event, as I understand it, hence the rules for incomming graduates is that you wear a Cambridge gown of equivalent status: BA status gown for over 21s and MA status for over 24s. The MA status gown is exactly the same as my gown from St Andrews, so I'm understandably unwilling to go out and buy another gown just for a couple of years...

[hr]

Mmmmmmm, cake.
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102114

[Jamie potton]

Errr, not quite. Have a peek at the crescent on the sleeves. The Venerable Shaw would be spinning in his grave.

[exnihilo]

That rule seems improbable. It would mean that someone at 22 with an MA and MLitt entering Cambridge for a PhD would be obliged to wear a bachelor's gown, whereas a candidate from elsewhere who was 25 with a BA would wear a master's? Age seems wholly irrelevant, and I also strongly deprecate a rule which bans gowns from other universities, if you are to permit graduates of other universities then you really ought to permit them to wear their proper attire, anything else is incredibly foolish.

[RJ Covino]

I disagree. It seems quite clear that graduates of other universities *are* accorded 'proper attire'. To make sure that nobody stands out in the crowd (one of the fundamental purposes of gownage in the first place), Cambridge seems to level the playing field by age. Who are we to question their methods?

The point is that rules are rules. If you are going to go to Cambridge and make a big song and dance about it, then you ought to dress in accordance with their system, no matter how screwed up you might find it personally, and not come to the FDF seeking sanction for what is, at the end of the day, parsimonious behaviour.

[Imago]

Quoting exnihilo from 12:49, 4th Nov 2007
I also strongly deprecate a rule which bans gowns from other universities, if you are to permit graduates of other universities then you really ought to permit them to wear their proper attire, anything else is incredibly foolish.

I remember that it certainly used to be the case that only Cambridge first degrees were recognised by Cambridge. Thus if one arrived with one’s first from St A to embark on a Camb PhD, one’s nameplate on the staircase would state merely ‘A Jones’, whereas next door would be ‘B Smith BA (Cantab)’.