Quantity of items

[Creature]

So I’m thinking about how much redundancy I have in my wardrobe and wondering how that compares with others. I wear chinos/wool pants and a button down every day or work (m-f). Some days sweaters, some days blazers, etc., but my everyday minimum is pants and button down.

For work stuff I am at about 10 pairs of pants and 15-20 dress shirts. This includes doubles of highly worn items. For casual 4 pairs of pants and a ton of shirts if you include tees, Henley’s, and button downs.

This is in line with about where you guys are? How many fresh outfits (one wear only) can you make without laundering? How many wears can you typically get per pair of pants or shirt for laundering?

I guess to round this out I’ll add that I have around 35 pairs of underwear so that stock never runs low.

[Banks]

Similar work attire on my end, though I’ve probably got closer to 15 pairs of pants (side rant/question - why are pants referred to as pairs when it’s a single item?). I’ve got a handful of all season, worsted wool types and then a number of fall/winter fabrics and spring/summer. Similar dress shirt count on my end.

[Galcobar]

Similar work attire on my end, though I’ve probably got closer to 15 pairs of pants (side rant/question - why are pants referred to as pairs when it’s a single item?).

Trousers, from the Scottish Gaelic triubhas, and pants from the Italian pantaloons, are pluralised because they separately enclose the legs. They are considered an inseparable pair to function, such scissors, tongs or eyeglasses. A trouser leg, but a pair of trousers.

You will find the singular form when referring to a style, such as a bell-bottom trouser, but the noun -- bell-bottoms -- is always pluralised.

The first recorded use of separated leg coverings comes out of Central Asia around 1000 to 1300 BCE. Separating the legs, unlike the then-traditional togas, robes, and skirts, was considered by the Ancient Greeks and later Romans to be a mark of uncivilized society.

Through various iterations/fashions, by the fifteenth century European nobility tended to wear separated hose (one on each leg) with the crotch covered by a codpiece. Over time the three pieces were joined. During this time the common man wore more practical garments that resemble modern trousers, albeit usually closed around the ankle.

Women's fashions were slower to follow. It wasn't until late in the nineteenth century, for instance, that British women's two-piece undergarments were joined by a crotch (crotchless underwear was more practical for using the toilet when wearing those voluminous skirts). Perhaps the longest surviving version was the separate stockings held up with a garter belt, not superseded by pantyhose -- literally two hose joined to panties -- until 1959.

[theplayerking]

Rotation is important for improving the longevity of your wardrobe. I don’t wear the same piece (including shoes) to work more than once a week. However, work-appropriate trousers come in a handful of colors so I don’t have a lot of redundancy. It also depends on climate. I have a pair of grey woolen flannel for winter and grey hopsack for summer. Beyond that, I don’t see the need for multiple pairs of grey trousers, so I invest in quality pieces that I wear frequently. Indeed, I’m thinking about getting my first bespoke piece: a pair of grey trousers that I can wear all winter.

[Banks]

Interesting. Thanks.

Trousers, from the Scottish Gaelic triubhas, and pants from the Italian pantaloons, are pluralised because they separately enclose the legs. They are considered an inseparable pair to function, such scissors, tongs or eyeglasses. A trouser leg, but a pair of trousers.

You will find the singular form when referring to a style, such as a bell-bottom trouser, but the noun -- bell-bottoms -- is always pluralised.

The first recorded use of separated leg coverings comes out of Central Asia around 1000 to 1300 BCE. Separating the legs, unlike the then-traditional togas, robes, and skirts, was considered by the Ancient Greeks and later Romans to be a mark of uncivilized society.

Through various iterations/fashions, by the fifteenth century European nobility tended to wear separated hose (one on each leg) with the crotch covered by a codpiece. Over time the three pieces were joined. During this time the common man wore more practical garments that resemble modern trousers, albeit usually closed around the ankle.

Women's fashions were slower to follow. It wasn't until late in the nineteenth century, for instance, that British women's two-piece undergarments were joined by a crotch (crotchless underwear was more practical for using the toilet when wearing those voluminous skirts). Perhaps the longest surviving version was the separate stockings held up with a garter belt, not superseded by pantyhose -- literally two hose joined to panties -- until 1959.

[mebejoseph]

Similar work attire on my end, though I’ve probably got closer to 15 pairs of pants (side rant/question - why are pants referred to as pairs when it’s a single item?). I’ve got a handful of all season, worsted wool types and then a number of fall/winter fabrics and spring/summer. Similar dress shirt count on my end.

You're not the first person to wonder about pants being in pairs. But it's not the only word like that; we also have pairs of pliers, sunglasses, and scissors, for example.

https://www.britannica.com/story/why...-pair-of-pants

Here is something that can be readily confirmed to explain this linguistic oddity, although it may raise more questions than it answers: the word pants is a plurale tantum. The Oxford English Dictionary defines plurale tantum, which is Latin for “plural only,” as a “noun which is used only in plural form, or which is used only in plural form in a particular sense or senses.” Bifurcated items (things that can be divided into two), such as pants, fall into this category. Think of items that are usually referred to in plural—often preceded by “pair of” or something similar, even when there is only one item: pliers, glasses, scissors, sunglasses, tweezers, etc. So, pants is a type of noun that is used only in its plural form, even when there is only one item being discussed.

[mark4]

I have about 7 full on dress shirts. As far as pants go (not going to count suits - I have 5) I have some old stuff I really should get rid of (corduroys where the whales have worn smooth in spots, some old wool dress pants that probably need to be ditched and replaced). As for what gets worn to the office, I have 2 pair of Flint and Tinder 365 pants, a couple pairs of other chinos, and three pairs of corduroys that are still in good enough shape to wear to work. A couple pair of Lands End wool dress pants. That's it. For causal wear I have three pairs of jeans and a couple pair of more casual canvass pants (sort of cargo pant material) that are too casual for the office, except for casual Fridays, so I wear them mostly off duty. I have a lot of casual shirts but some are smart-casual enough to wear to the office even on days that are not casual Fridays. Several sweaters. In addition to the 5 suits I have 8 sport coats I wear anymore (Navy blazer, chino summer sport coat, 6 more fall/winter/early spring wool sport coats). I have some old ones that were purchased in my pre-Dappered days when I didn't really know how things should fit. I don't wear those anymore.

[mebejoseph]

For work stuff I am at about 10 pairs of pants and 15-20 dress shirts. This includes doubles of highly worn items. For casual 4 pairs of pants and a ton of shirts if you include tees, Henley’s, and button downs.

This is in line with about where you guys are? How many fresh outfits (one wear only) can you make without laundering? How many wears can you typically get per pair of pants or shirt for laundering?

I guess to round this out I’ll add that I have around 35 pairs of underwear so that stock never runs low.

Those numbers are in line with what I have, although now that I'm working at home, I don't get much use of them any more. Also, because I wore suits to work at least four days a week, I'm counting the trousers that come with the suits.

I always wanted to have at least two to three weeks' worth of dress shirts because I take them to the laundry after wearing them once and I did not want to run out. I probably don't take suits and wool dress trousers to the cleaners more than two or three times a year each. I have a steamer and a good brush for touch-ups.

For years, my habit was to buy two dozen of the exact same black socks and only wear those to work. I liked not fretting about matching them up and losing one sock of a pair. After two or three years, I would toss them all and buy another couple dozen. Same with white socks for running/working out.

Now, I have so many socks in various colors, I couldn't guess at the number.

I'm with you on the underwear--maybe not 35, but always at least around at least 20 pairs of boxer briefs and undershirts.

When I was going to the office daily, I wore ties at least four days a week. I always wanted at least ten (probably 20 right now) so that I would not need to repeat them within a two week period--but I didn't really have a system to keep track of that.

Oh--none of the numbers above include costume clothing. We go to several costume events every year, so we have tons of that junk as well.

[smitty]

I rarely wear dress clothes, so most of my wardrobe is casual. I love buying jeans. I have more than I can count in all different colors, washes, etc. I can't possibly wear them all, but I keep buying them anyway.

I also love different kinds of Jackets. I have several Schott leather jackets, several different types of trucker jackets (denim, suede, corduroy, you name it) and four Baracuta G9 jackets (navy, red, British racing green and faded black). Additionally, I have several other misc jackets.

I have Henley shirts of all different styles (short sleeve, long sleeve, t-shirt, sweater, etc).

I won't even go into shoes, boots and sneakers.

[Creature]

Good to see where others are at. I’m working on my casual stuff now. My closet is pretty full so I’m focusing on getting rid of things I don’t wear much and upgrading not adding. Definitely not trying to be minimalist but I don’t want to own a bunch of stuff that I don’t use.