Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What are some of your nitpicking/ dislikes about today's menswear?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What are some of your nitpicking/ dislikes about today's menswear?

    -Overcoat/Topcoat/Car Coat, etc. - Can't stand when they don't have a center vent in the rear, bottom of the coat. That vent just gives me a nice ease-of-movement, especially when getting in and out of a taxi, riding the subway everyday.

    Jackets (other) - Coats that don't contain side/slant pockets (only patch pockets). This drives me nuts, especially when the patch pockets are up too high. I will not purchase outerwear if it doesn't have side/slant pockets.

    - The hidden buttons trend - The overcoat, rain jacket, etc. with buttons hidden behind a placket. Lots of people like this, not me. I like buttons, especially wen the button gives a nice contrast.

    - Velcro - I can't stand it. Numerous times I have come across a nice looking minimalist down coat that I would of purchased but the sleeve cuffs had Velcro? I want buttons.

    - Truth in Advertising - In America, the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act requires that clothing labels list the generic names and percentages by weight of the fibers present in the product. Well, that is fine and dandy if I am shopping at a brick-n-mortar and can visually see the label. What about online/eCommerce, guess the rules don't apply? Too often, the online description only indicates 'wool mix'? I want to know the exact details of the fibers. It is a PITA to have to start a chat session or call Customer Care to find out. Banana Republic does a god job listing the fabric details. J.Crew? NOPE, they be hiding that.

    What are your gripes....rational or irrational?

  • #2
    Exclusion of chest pocket in a design where there should be one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Tight calves in pant legs. Having to pull your ankles down when transitioning from sitting to standing often is a drag.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #4
        Agree with everything that has been said so far

        Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tayloreuph View Post
          Tight calves in pant legs. Having to pull your ankles down when transitioning from sitting to standing often is a drag.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          Agree. Even Spier and Mackay contemporary fit are a bit tight (unless I size up extra in the waist).

          Comment


          • #6
            MANDATORY INCLUSION OF STRETCH on every garment at every store, and no other options available in the marketplace. This happens mostly on pants, and is especially egregious for something like blue jeans where they are supposed to be thick and not compliant. I can't fix my motorcycle in stretch pants. This also does happen as well on dress shirts, but to a lesser degree.

            I've hated this for the last couple years like crazy. I've resorted to buying barely-used pant models from 2014 on ebay or from poshmark, and they're not going to last forever.


            Originally posted by ianr View Post
            Exclusion of chest pocket in a design where there should be one.
            this is a good one. i won't even buy a shirt with out a pocket on it these days.

            i really think i'll be quite nearly alone in this one, but I constantly wish that more shoe companies would make wide sizes more available. I have so many great Allen Edmonds shoes I just LOVE but to be perfectly honest they're the only shoes that even fit me well, besides a pair of Justin/Chippewa boots i have.

            this will probably come off more as a bitch than a wish, but i just hope athleisure would just dissapear ;0)

            Comment


            • #7
              1) Slim / skinny fits. I get that these fits were stylish in the early to mid 2010s, but now they seem extremely dated. Gentlemen, it's 2020, it's time to embrace straight fits. God forbid we regress to the over-sized baggy looks of the 90s, but rather comfortable, tailored fits that drape, instead of squeeze, your body.

              2) "Tech fabrics." Menswear marketers got smart and realized they can exploit the current trend for "sustainable" and "environmentally-friendly" products by drenching products in artificial fabrics like polyester, and call it a "tech fabric." This trend of "tech fabric" is a reversion to the 1970s when everyone thought polyester was the modern, technologically-advanced fabric of the future. This time around, they're just greenwashing it. The irony is that that the man-made fibers are worse for the environment! They're all just made of plastic. Natural fibers, particularly wool, have a far lower environmental impact. I can't believe that more manufacturers of natural fabrics haven't yet pushed back against these false claims that their fabrics are unsustainable. The only company I've seen do so so far is Naadam, a small cashmere company. But now I'm just ranting...

              Comment


              • #8
                Poorly attached buttons on suits, sports coats, and outwear, sometimes on fairly expensive items. There is no reason a button should fall off with normal use.
                WHY ARE THE GUYS IN SUITS HERE? HAS SOMETHING GONE WRONG?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tayloreuph View Post
                  Tight calves in pant legs. Having to pull your ankles down when transitioning from sitting to standing often is a drag.


                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                  This as well.
                  WHY ARE THE GUYS IN SUITS HERE? HAS SOMETHING GONE WRONG?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by evanparker View Post
                    MANDATORY INCLUSION OF STRETCH on every garment at every store, and no other options available in the marketplace. This happens mostly on pants, and is especially egregious for something like blue jeans where they are supposed to be thick and not compliant. I can't fix my motorcycle in stretch pants. This also does happen as well on dress shirts, but to a lesser degree.

                    I've hated this for the last couple years like crazy. I've resorted to buying barely-used pant models from 2014 on ebay or from poshmark, and they're not going to last forever.
                    Agreed. I just want a pair of denim jeans. I have some stretchy jeans, and they're great. But I still want a pair of just "real," sturdy jeans. And I'm not willing to pay $100+ for a pair of selvedge whatever. I'm sure options are out there, but this past month I searched Gap, J Crew, Target, Levis, and Amazon for a basic pair of straight cut jeans without stretch. Got frustrated to the point of calling off the search and settling for a pair of Levis with stretch. (They're not terrible jeans, and I'm getting my money's worth out of them, but they're not exactly what I wanted.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by C.Dubs View Post
                      Agreed. I just want a pair of denim jeans. I have some stretchy jeans, and they're great. But I still want a pair of just "real," sturdy jeans. And I'm not willing to pay $100+ for a pair of selvedge whatever.
                      I've mentioned it before in these threads, but I'll bring it up again. Try the White Oak Cone Denim from Jomers:

                      https://jomers.com/products/white-oak-cone-denim-rinse

                      100% cotton. $34 with free shipping (though you may need them hemmed). They are mid-weight in a basic dark rinse color, with good fabric and seemingly solid construction. The measurements are on the page. If you want a solid pair of rigid jeans and the dimensions work for you, you can't go wrong with these. And FWIW, I find their "slim" fit in size 32 to fit similarly to my 770 (i.e straight-fit) JCrew chinos.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm seconding the previous mentions of stretch fabrics, the relative scarcity of "normal-cut" pants, and companies offering shoes only in medium width.

                        I will add (and maybe this is not really in the spirit of the original question, but whatevs): slavish devotion to brands/logos. I don't wear any sort of athletic clothing, so that isn't an issue for me personally. But on public transit on a cold day, easily half of the passengers, both male and female, are wearing black North Face jackets or parkas. I have always had a general distaste for logos, so maybe I am more sensitive to this than some people, but I also don't like knowing that I am wearing something that a lot of other people are also going to be wearing. But I'm a middle-aged curmudgeon, so get off my lawn...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by the passenger View Post
                          But on public transit on a cold day, easily half of the passengers, both male and female, are wearing black North Face jackets or parkas.
                          Is this in the Northeast?

                          I've noticed that in the Northeast, The North Face is a dominant brand. This is especially true in New York and Massachusetts. I've also noticed regionally, The North Face dominates cities while other brands and no-name/no-logo technical wear are more popular in rural areas. In California, for example, The North Face is extremely popular in the San Francisco Bay Area but not nearly as much in rural areas to the north and east... i.e. not as popular in areas where you might actually get utility from this type of jacket.

                          I think in cities, people wear these jackets partly to fit in with other people wearing one of these jackets where outside of the city, people wear one of these types of jackets because they are outside a lot.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ianr View Post
                            Is this in the Northeast?

                            I've noticed that in the Northeast, The North Face is a dominant brand. This is especially true in New York and Massachusetts. I've also noticed regionally, The North Face dominates cities while other brands and no-name/no-logo technical wear are more popular in rural areas. In California, for example, The North Face is extremely popular in the San Francisco Bay Area but not nearly as much in rural areas to the north and east... i.e. not as popular in areas where you might actually get utility from this type of jacket.

                            I think in cities, people wear these jackets partly to fit in with other people wearing one of these jackets where outside of the city, people wear one of these types of jackets because they are outside a lot.
                            North Face is popular simply due to name brand recognition. They used to make durable stuff and the current stuff is ok, but people mostly buy it because people know they make insulated winter coats that aren't too pricey.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, I work in Boston so I'm commuting into the city every day. I think it's partly that the sort of person who buys the product is more likely to be a city dweller, but there's a herd-mentality thing involved, too.

                              Also I can second the comment about SF Bay area, was there two years ago in February and saw it firsthand. What's really amusing is that it was a 60-degree day, yet people were wearing puffer jackets, knit caps, etc. as though it was 30.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X