Mens Fashion

Simple living, extreme early retirement, being wealthy, ...
Salathor
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Salathor » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:11 pm

The photo is weird, but I couldn't find one of him standing normal. He's an actor who plays "weird" roles a lot so most of his photos aren't really appropriate for the topic.

2Birds1Stone
Posts: 590
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:20 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by 2Birds1Stone » Wed Mar 13, 2019 6:02 pm

Jason wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:40 pm
That is either the most bow legged person I have ever seen or someone photoshopped out his stool and cello.
I couldn't have worded it that well myself, but these were my exact thoughts.

Augustus
Posts: 854
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 10:15 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Augustus » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:12 pm

What's wrong with blue Levi's and white t-shirts? I used to think the price on Levi's was outrageous ($50?!), but wife got me some and I've been wearing them for the last 8 years and they're still going strong, I'm having to stow them because I lost 55 lbs and they look too big now. It may be because I like relaxed fit, they allow much better range of movement. Wife convinced me to try straight fit or whatever they call it and I think they will last a lot less long. Costco bulk white t-shirts are a good deal and good quality. That's about 90% of my wardrobe.

For summer I found some $16 shorts at Costco that look pretty durable, we'll see. I can usually get 3-4 years out of the cheap ones at Ross. All go well with white t-shirts.

vexed87
Posts: 1463
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:02 am
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by vexed87 » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:35 am

Get that man some vitamin D.

Jason
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Jason » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:00 am

I like what he's wearing. It's very spiffy. It's just that he stands like he got rear ended while riding a carousel.

Fish
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 9:09 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Fish » Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am

vexed87 wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:48 am
Don’t encourage him ;)

The Swedish frugality blogger FruEfficientBadass wrote a post criticizing Jacob’s choice of attire for the hamsterhjulet documentary. She eventually reasoned that it must have been very hot when they filmed. Trying to imagine a TV camera following me around for 2 full days during a summer heatwave without A/C. Yeah I would abandon aesthetics too.

I also related to this blog comment: “I believe that all these 19 t-shirts I have in my discard pile after a minimalism-challenge are fresher than Jacob’s, but who is the one at work and who is the one who has more money than he can do with?”

I’ll wait until I have 100+ years of expenses saved up to give DLj unsolicited advice on fashion and aesthetics.

Jin+Guice
Posts: 343
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:15 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Jin+Guice » Sat Mar 16, 2019 3:40 pm

I know there is a societal imperative that men, especially nerdy men, shouldn't care about looks (their own), particularly clothes. I realize that the fashion industry as its generally thought of is inherently shitty and kind of the opposite of ERE. I still feel like a douche when I'm shopping for clothes with any interest.

But unless you're 1) so extreme that you don't wear clothes (a nudist) or 2) are so massively introverted that you basically never go outside, I highly recommend that you reexamine your stance on this. You've got to wear clothes everyday, so why are we supposed to optimizing this fairly essential part of our lives? There's nothing wrong with jeans and a white t-shirt, provided the fit is good (I still feel like an asshole saying this too). This is sort of the beans and rice solution. I'm forced nature (society) to eat (wear clothes) so I will chose something that is simple, cheap, pragmatic and effective. This will be fine for some people, but I think we can all agree that most people who'd enjoy their life more by spicing it up.

Obviously fitness is more important than fashion. If it were a choice between being physically fit and having good clothes, I'd chose fitness every time. But thankfully it's not a choice. No one will know if you have to body of a Greek god if you're wearing a t-shirt that's 8 times too big for you, unless of course the holes are big enough to show off your rippling abs.

I have very rarely done something so easy that has had such a great impact on my life. In addition to giving the slightest shit about what I was wearing I did also lose weight (this was not easy) and get a fancy ($30) haircut. The benefits are, getting hit on by women, getting hit on by my own girlfriend again, learning about a new subject (one that women really like to talk about), obviously garnering more respect and attention from everyone I interact with, a greater ability to ask for things and receive them and greater self confidence. To do this I researched what makes a good garment (not actually necessary for looks, but I wanted to know for ERE reasons), read one article per type of garment (i.e. jeans, dress shirt, etc..) to learn how to tell if something fits right, and tried on clothes before I bought them, incorporating what I'd learned from about 30 minutes of internet research with my own instincts about what I thought looked good in the mirror.

I know all male forum members have such monstrous intellects coupled with such bold personalities that no one could possibly care or even notice what they're wearing, but, in the interest of science, just try trying once.

C40
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by C40 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:35 pm

Augustus wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:12 pm
What's wrong with blue Levi's and white t-shirts?
Nothing, if they fit you well. That's mostly what I wear. I wear Hanes shirts as they fit me well. It can take a lot of testing to get a T-shirt that really fits right. And within brands there are variations of fit styles, materials, etc.

I watch Levi's online, and sometimes when I pass a Levi's factory outlet store, I go in to check if they have my fit/size/color on sale (it's not very often, so now I buy them when I see them, even if I don't need another pair at the moment. They are $70 retail and get down as low as $20 or maybe even $15). A word of caution to those who have found the fit# and size for them, actual sizes are different for different washes. I've bought three washes of the same fit #, and they all fit slightly different.

Note that if you wear ugly shoes it ruins whatever good look you have going on. Especially when you're wearing only three visible articles of clothing. Personally, I like boots, like these and these (which I prefer in black) (Redwings)
Last edited by C40 on Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

C40
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by C40 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:41 pm

Fish wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Don’t encourage him ;)
I also related to this blog comment: “I believe that all these 19 t-shirts I have in my discard pile after a minimalism-challenge are fresher than Jacob’s, but who is the one at work and who is the one who has more money than he can do with?”

I’ll wait until I have 100+ years of expenses saved up to give DLj unsolicited advice on fashion and aesthetics.
That is totally unreasonable (the quote).

While I don't think we should give Jacob unsolicited fashion advice, I think it seems clear from reading what he was written, and from seeing pictures of him (and meeting in person once) that fashion is not something he cares about. So obviously people should not be aspiring to his example. When he writes about clothes it is mostly just about what clothing types keep him warm enough. I feel sure, given how good he has been at the things I know he cared about, that if he cared about fashion and tried, he'd dress well. You wouldn't model your fashion after Bill Gates or Warren Buffet - or Donald Trump! just because they have money.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 4745
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:12 pm

Sometimes, even if you are not fit and dressed in whatever random clothing you bought at the $1 Salvation Army Store and slept in the night before, and you are hoping to be invisible while jamming returnable cans into the stinky machine, somebody will behave as though you are not invisible. So, then you will look down and see that a critical button has popped off your shirt. And, that's when you realize that you have once again crossed over the fuzzy graph lines between frugal and cheap-azz and semi-retired and slacker.

Bankai
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Bankai » Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:57 am

Jin+Guice wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 3:40 pm
I have very rarely done something so easy that has had such a great impact on my life. In addition to giving the slightest shit about what I was wearing I did also lose weight (this was not easy) and get a fancy ($30) haircut. The benefits are, getting hit on by women, getting hit on by my own girlfriend again, learning about a new subject (one that women really like to talk about), obviously garnering more respect and attention from everyone I interact with, a greater ability to ask for things and receive them and greater self confidence. To do this I researched what makes a good garment (not actually necessary for looks, but I wanted to know for ERE reasons), read one article per type of garment (i.e. jeans, dress shirt, etc..) to learn how to tell if something fits right, and tried on clothes before I bought them, incorporating what I'd learned from about 30 minutes of internet research with my own instincts about what I thought looked good in the mirror.

I know all male forum members have such monstrous intellects coupled with such bold personalities that no one could possibly care or even notice what they're wearing, but, in the interest of science, just try trying once.
This!

ROI on paying attention to one's looks is ridiculously high (for men, women have it much harder since they almost all compete). In the land baggy t-shirts hiding overweight bodies, the fitting shirt on a lean body is king.

Just by being normal weight, one jumps into the top 30% looks wise. With some muscles, that's probably 20%. Add fitting, matching clothes and you're in the top 10% easily. If the clothes are actually nice (compared to your peers), you're in the top 5%. Now add a haircut, grooming & nice smell and you're pushing into the top 2%. This is looks/fashion equivalent to mensa, however, unlike IQ, which is inborn, you can sort your weight within a few months, and clothes/grooming within a single day.

In my experience, in a typical office, you have few gay men who dress best and occupy the top 1%, then some metrosexual guys being close 2nd (98th percentile) and then... everyone else in baggy t-shirts and jeans. You really don't need a lot to beat that 98%.

Crazylemon
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 2:29 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Crazylemon » Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:27 am

Jin+Guice wrote:
Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:47 pm
I don't know what this means. Explain yourself!
I felt this could do with potentially more of an explanation. Now this is looking at it form a British point of view terminology/expression might differ slightly.

A Dress shirt will normally mean a shirt that was primarily intended to be worn with a suit. That doesn't mean they can't be worn on their own but if done so will generally be at the much smarter end. They don't have to require cufflinks but almost any shirt (bar intentional rule breaking) that does need cufflinks will be a dress shirt. They will also tend to have fairly conservative colours/patterns because of the need to match to a suit +/- Tie. They will also normal be a fine weave of cotton +\- some synthetic to ease ironing.

For example if we look here. This is probably what as I would describe as a mid tier UK. It has 3 main types of shirt: formal, business casual and casual. For the purpose of the delineations of casual button up/dress the first 2 are the same but if you browse the formal section you will see even fewer choices compared to business casual in terms of pattern and palate.

Then look at casual. Many more pattern options and colours. Some slightly coarser materials used in some and most of them are oxfords. These can be more interesting patterns because they don't need to match a suit and are more able to be the more signature item of an outfit. If they are being paired with chinos/smart jeans those are going to be relatively understated items, the shirt can thus be louder. Whereas with a suit you do not want the shirt to be fighting for all the attention. This can then be relatively dressed up/down further by shoe choice.



In terms for ROI I would agree it is pretty good but the sort of ratios @bankai mentions are not indicative for a capital/high end metro area. The competition is more fierce.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 10970
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by jacob » Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:46 am

Fish wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
The Swedish frugality blogger FruEfficientBadass wrote a post criticizing Jacob’s choice of attire for the hamsterhjulet documentary. She eventually reasoned that it must have been very hot when they filmed. Trying to imagine a TV camera following me around for 2 full days during a summer heatwave without A/C. Yeah I would abandon aesthetics too.
Bingo! I did ask the camera what would be appropriate for TV and the answer was "whatever you like". Normally, in the [unbearable hot and humid Chicago] summer season, I just wear shorts (5.11 tactical) and no shirt, but I figured TV/civility required putting on some kind of top item. To those who care, both shirts are relatively unused hockey jerseys. They are more comfortable at high temperatures than t-shirts because of the material/looseness.

During the filming the outside temperature was 85F and the inside was not much lower. That's also why Frank (the dog) struggles during the walk at the end. Normally, we'd take him much later in the evening when it's cooler. That way he's also not dragging behind. Inside I dialed it down a bit, but the A/C had to be off when the camera was on due to the sound(*). I actually do own a fancy (high triple digit) suit, but had I worn that my head would have been beet red.

(*) Frank snoring was also a problem during some scenes.

You can see my standard business casual in other youtube vids. It's typically a dark grey sweater and khakis. I hope that is acceptable :-P

Fish
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 9:09 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Fish » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:10 am

C40 wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:41 pm
That is totally unreasonable (the quote).
I thought it was reasonable coming from a person who is ostensibly unfamiliar with Jacob’s views on fashion. To generalize it: “In my estimation, you are very bad at this one thing, but I also acknowledge you are much better at this other thing that I very much care about, so I will stop criticizing now.” Saying that he considers the person as a whole instead of assuming that one weakness defines the person. I don’t think that it is an entirely kind thing to say either, but considering context (talking about a 3rd party that one does not know about, and not expected to be present) it seems somewhat fair. Though from the emotional aspect of criticizing other people, saying 1 positive thing is usually not enough to fully cancel out 1 negative comment, especially when the speaker may have had more interest in making the negative comment.

-----

I had a similar reaction as Fru when I first watched the documentary. [Fish note: I could not resist the urge to write a few lines of unsolicited advice, which I dutifully deleted before submitting. I don’t need to speak my piece since Jacob has indicated his awareness of all relevant aspects of the situation, so it all boils down to “Fish cares more about aesthetics” which is my problem and not his.] Eventually I also reached a similar conclusion. Anyone who would ignore the messenger based on appearances would not be receptive to ERE and probably FIRE as well, so nothing lost in terms of outreach. These people would have found something else to criticize anyway.

@jacob - I didn’t realize that shirtless was an option. You really do consider everything :)

The attire for the youtube interview with Mike Rosehart was acceptable. The framing and angle used for the interview was also aesthetically pleasing (referring to your house here).

This is the nicest pic I’ve seen of you on the internet and you should consider using it for promotional purposes if the owner would allow it:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/40000228@ ... /lightbox/
Last edited by Fish on Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

C40
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by C40 » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:31 am

@Fish - it makes a lot more sense the way you interpreted it.
jacob wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:46 am
[just quoting so you get a notification]
@Jacob - if we happen to be in the same city some time, let me shoot portraits of you for you to use on the internet, when articles are written about you so you can supply them for the pictures, etc. (unless you already have a bunch? That one fish linked is decent)

7Wannabe5
Posts: 4745
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:43 am

I, for one, am completely in favor of public display of shirtless pictures of the Top 10 Contestants in the forum's burpee contest.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 10970
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by jacob » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:21 am

The flickr photo was shot by a professional photographer sent out by some new magazine (I forget the name) associated with the NYT in 2010. Ultimately, the editors decided not to run with the piece because they deemed ERE/me too extreme. This confirms what I realized around that time (obviously slightly after) namely that appearances matter. Most people are looking for something that looks good on instagram($). (Also see discussion on wording wrt "lentil soup" vs "artisanal Indian cuisine").

($) Tautologically true by proof of contradiction. If it wasn't the case, instagram would not exist.

For some this comes naturally and for others it might be infused as part of the job description.---I think primarily in client-facing businesses (think G3 or E4/E3---especially the Lehman handshake) which of course include romantic interests as well. Those without client-facing habits (compare scientists with engineers) are often not willing to pay the cost. It's not because I think that I as a "nerdy man" shouldn't care, it's just that I don't or rather I file it under a "nice to have" but not a need or a want on par with other priorities. I actually did try (the flickr outfit is from men's wearhouse which along with brook's brothers is as high as I've ever gone) but ultimately it simply doesn't fit with my lifestyle(*). It seems to me that fashion is more about seeing and being seen compared to doing. I really wear what I think is the most optimal for what I do around the house.

(*) Ditto for "being more social". I find the trading of Kegan3 interactions (gossip) to require too much effort (see Graham link) for what I get out if it. I file it under "nice to have".

Fun fact: We (DW and I) actually enjoy watching makeover shows, but I think insofar I was ever made over, whatever new wardrobe was installed would converge back to the current one because I haven't seen the ROI that you guys (Jin+Guice) see.

As such the TV documentary was realistic. The message I intended to send was that I'm in a position not to care---I don't need to dress up to impress the G3/E4 tiers. In terms of recruiting those tiers, my choice of "sloppy" is a problem. I think this is part of why influencers closer in Wheaton levels have been able to pull more in from the mainstream. As such I'm certainly willing to entertain that my choice is a mistake. OTOH, depending on one's lenses (wheaton levels), dressing up could also be seen as trying too hard, that is, indicating an absence of FU money. Showing up in flip-flops shows that you don't need to care, but not necessarily that you don't care.

Same with the interior decoration... it could be done to a higher level---for example the very attractive Scandinavian style with white walls of despair coupled with pre-matched Ikea knick-knack would cost less than daily stock market noise)---and this would attract people who are into [that] style. It would turn off/reject people who are into the DIY style though.

TL;DR - Style choice is basically signalling and likes attract likes. If someone is running with a different style it is conceivable that this is deliberate and not because of sheer incompetence.

@C40 - I'm in constant need of "action-shots" so that would be very welcome.

Seppia
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:34 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Seppia » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:03 am

Simple way to determine if it’s a casual or dress shirt: if the size is expressed as L, M, etc, it’s casual.
If the size is described in neck and sleeve length (as in 15.5 - 35), it's dress.

Jin+Guice
Posts: 343
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:15 am

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by Jin+Guice » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:36 am

jacob wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:21 am

It's not because I think that I as a "nerdy man" shouldn't care, it's just that I don't or rather I file it under a "nice to have" but not a need or a want on par with other priorities. I actually did try (the flickr outfit is from men's wearhouse which along with brook's brothers is as high as I've ever gone) but ultimately it simply doesn't fit with my lifestyle(*). It seems to me that fashion is more about seeing and being seen compared to doing. I really wear what I think is the most optimal for what I do around the house.
If you've never researched fit/ bought a well fitting garment, I'd really suggest it. I'm running this intentionally with ERE mind, thus drastically preferring cheaper/ well-made/ used garments to new ones. So far Buffalo Exchange (a thrift store that "curates" it's garments) has been a goldmine, with everything else falling short. The fancy jeans I bought from the internet were too loose and made of some bullshit stretch denim material and Goodwill clothes are all too big (thanks Louisiana). So far I've paid $20-$50 per garment and spent about 2 hours on research and maybe three hours trying to find clothes. For me, there's just enough to learn to keep it interesting, but the cost in time and $$ is really very low. If I wanted to save the most time I could limit myself only to what's worked so far, and if I wanted to maximize dollar savings I'd hit up Goodwill on a more regular basis.

Wearing nice clothes is akin to having a nice tool. A good garment should last longer, maximize ease of use and function better than a shitty garment. I am using "function" here to mean look good, as this is part of the function of clothing, but it shouldn't be uncomfortable either. A with tools, simply buying the most expensive/ popular brand is not the best strategy, even if you are ignoring price. Brands are a heuristic for quality, but if you don't know how to spot quality in the first place, then you're going to be a sucker.
jacob wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:21 am
As such the TV documentary was realistic. The message I intended to send was that I'm in a position not to care---I don't need to dress up to impress the G3/E4 tiers. In terms of recruiting those tiers, my choice of "sloppy" is a problem. I think this is part of why influencers closer in Wheaton levels have been able to pull more in from the mainstream. As such I'm certainly willing to entertain that my choice is a mistake. OTOH, depending on one's lenses (wheaton levels), dressing up could also be seen as trying too hard, that is, indicating an absence of FU money. Showing up in flip-flops shows that you don't need to care, but not necessarily that you don't care
IMO, if you care about recruitment at all, you are wrong about this. Only those in the extreme in-group are going to understand your signaling. These are people who've likely adopted your message already. I would estimate that around 60-70% of people aren't going to register what you're wearing consciously (or maybe only 60-70% of men). Most will not view showing up to important bullshit as having FU money, they will view it as exercising FU money.


I'm pulling really hard for this because I have recently had a reversal of faith and it has been on the order of life changing. I'm also not a fashion guru, I seriously just read 3 internet articles about fit and construction and then tried clothes on. I imagine I'm still below 80-90% of women in this regard. I would have never done this without the ERE lens, because I viewed fashion as too consumerist and for girls, instead of viewing clothes as something we "need," which should therefore be optimized.

@Seppia: Thanks, this is actually very helpful to me.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 10970
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: Mens Fashion

Post by jacob » Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:17 am

Jin+Guice wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:36 am
If you've never researched fit/ bought a well fitting garment, I'd really suggest it.
Well, I think I have. I actually did have a minor phase during my consumer years when fancy clothing was an interest of mine. Admittedly this was mostly due to running out of other things to spend money on. I'm fortunate in the sense that I'm relatively tall as well as height-weight proportional. My BMI is 23 but I'm in excellent shape, so denser than the average specimen, and this means that I can find suits that fit me off the rack w/o alternations. MW suits includes a tailor fit... well, whenever I've bought suits at $250+, the company has usually had a tailor check the fit. I've never owned anything bespoke though.

It seems pertinent to note that in terms of functional clothing, looking good loses to being able to walk 4 miles at any time, sprint, lift heavy stuff, not be cold, warm, or wet, and most importantly, not be subject to dog hair or rips. Ideally, it would contain lots of pockets too.

Business, business-casual, or "English gentleman" simply doesn't meet these objectives as well as outdoor/military/work wear.
Jin+Guice wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:36 am
IMO, if you care about recruitment at all, you are wrong about this. Only those in the extreme in-group are going to understand your signaling.
Actually, what I care most about is identifying the extreme in-group. Also see counter signaling (I forget what the fashion term is but it exists... my brain says it's "understated" but I don't think that's correct). This is part of the "guru on the mountain" and "moat"-approach I've followed wrt ERE since 2012. This is also why I didn't really feel insulted by the article @Fish posted. If the poster doesn't recognize what's going on, they're not ready for ERE level stuff.

Going back to the client-orientation: If my goal was to attract as many customers or romantic interests as possible, clearly mine is the wrong approach. But that's the point ... I've tried that and it doesn't work for me because there's too wide a gap between who I then appear to be and who I really am. IOW, it's a signal/noise problem. Signalling attracts too much noise. Countersignalling filters it out.

What do you think Zuckerberg's nerdy hoodies cost?

Post Reply