Thread: The wearing of jeans Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=027105
Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on
:
According to the Guardian , one should not wear jeans after the age of 57.
Since I wear such leg attire just about all the time, and am turning 70, does this edict matter? Or is there permission to ignore fashion statements when one actually does stuff such as carpentry, painting, mechanical repairs and other wierd activities that are unheard-of in the fashion world?
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I think your sig is the perfect response.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
I've got a few months of jean-wearing left, then. But since in California, jeans are the answer to any wardrobe question, I suppose in a few months I'll be running around buck naked. That's not going to be good for anyone.
Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on
:
90 is sooo the new 57.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
My mother still wears jeans, and she sailed past 57 many years ago. Chief purpose of this story is to get people to talk about the Guardian.
Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on
:
or the general irrelevance of fashion writing.
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
The Guardian article contains irony. If you actually read it, it dismisses the theory;
"So wear your jeans until they bore you, PB, or until they just no longer feel right."
If it wasn't a satirical article you might conclude that you were too old to keep reading The Guardian. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Or is there permission to ignore fashion statements when one actually does stuff such as carpentry, painting, mechanical repairs and other wierd activities that are unheard-of in the fashion world?
There are jeans and there are jeans. I have a pair of beater jeans that I wear on dog walks and while doing yard work, and I'm a little ashamed to admit that I have a pair of jeans that I only wear if I am going out, usually with a sport coat or if I am feeling really daring, a dinner jacket. The cut on these two forms of jean is pretty different, as is the feel and look of the fabric, and (naturally) the price. If you went out on the town in the first pair, people would make fun of you for wearing mom jeans. If you went to the hardware store in the second, the guys might wonder if you have ever swung a hammer in your life.
I think they are only speaking of the second kind of jean when they give this kind of advice.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
What's the difference between a sports coat and a dinner jacket?
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
90 is sooo the new 57.
I tried to "like" this.
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
What's the difference between a sports coat and a dinner jacket?
Dinner jacket = tuxedo jacket.
Yes, that can be pulled off, but not with a pair of Wranglers.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
It has to be navigated with equal balances of carefulness and swagger but it can be done. (Important lesson: when trying to demonstrate that a look works, it never hurts to have a picture of Justin Timberlake in said look as exhibit 1.)
In that post, you see the reference to "dressier" and "casual" jeans. Ant that, I think, is what the article is referring to.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
In that post, you see the reference to "dressier" and "casual" jeans. Ant that, I think, is what the article is referring to.
Judging by the photos used, "dressier" = not shown clearly in picture. I suspect that if we saw a full-length picture of Mr. Timberlake in that getup, he would look worse.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
It has to be navigated with equal balances of carefulness and swagger but it can be done.
That just doesn't work.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
This is formal attire in California.
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
In his book The Painted Word, Tom Wolfe has a great satirical illustration of Jackson Pollock wearing paint-spattered jeans and a dinner jacket. Wolfe illustrates the difficulty counter-culture artists had accepting the windfalls of success and still keeping their revolutionary cred. Thus the caption, "I'm still a virgin. Where's the champagne?" (Sorry that I couldn't find a larger picture link.)
[ 29. April 2014, 04:30: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
Do you have any idea what those Jackson Pollock jeans are worth?
In his latter years, the frugal Pablo Picasso would pay his bills with checks that he put a little sketch on, knowing that they were more likely to be sold than cashed.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Jeans with a tailored jacket? Why does this make me think of Jeremy Clarkson?
Just. Don't.
Posted by cattyish (# 7829) on
:
My Grannie taught me to dress like the queen. I don't wear a crown, but the idea is to dress appropriately for whatever occasion or situation. I therefore have the following criteria for clothes:
1) Comfortable.
2) They cover me.
3) Pockets.
4) Machine washable.
Since loads of women's clothes are deficient in one or more of these areas, jeans with a belt do for most days. The three days a week I work I tend to wear trousers which would be jeans if they were made of denim.
I suspect that a comfy pair of jeans will see me through my 60s, but I'll also need cycling shorts and hi-viz if I'm lucky. My friend Evelyn wears combat style trousers or cycling gear and she's over 70.
I have worn a drop waist satin frock with plenty beaded jewellery and enough make-up to sink a battleship recently, but only on stage.
Cattyish, off to buy fabric for a sewing project.
Posted by bib (# 13074) on
:
My mother was still wearing jeans at the age of 94. She found them very comfortable and much easier to manage than stockings.
Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on
:
Back in our university days my husband used to wear jeans with a tailored jacket...we thought it was so cool then....oh dear!
I find the jeans thing quite interesting and I stopped wearing them way before I reached 57 because I came to the conclusion that although we all wear them when we are young not all of us look good in them though different cuts can help with that. It's the fabric thing too.I do have one pair of denim crop trousers which I do still wear.
My sister-in-law always looks amazing (60+) and I don't think she's ever worn jeans, not even when we were in our 20s. Hers is a classy look, even when relaxing and jeans don't quite work.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
This reminds me of class picture-taking days at the seminary, when you'd see guys running around campus with a suit jacket and clerical collar on the upper half, cut-off jeans shorts and sandals below.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
I, meanwhile, despite reaching the age of forty something that can't be called early forties alas, still wear them. Skinny ones at that. With my inside leg/height ratio, it's a positive style decision. Well, I think so anyway.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
Age 62 and I am NOT about to wear beige.
Wore a suit every day for work for nearly 40 years.
Am going to wear jeans for formal and trackie bottoms for informal occasions for the rest of my life.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Palimpsest has already made the point, but the Guardian article actually says the opposite to the OP's claim. She says, 'There are no age rules in fashion. Nada. Zilch.' The 57 rule is sarcastic.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
I'm pushing 70 also, but I wear jeans most of the time -- with Timberland Pro boots.
As summer approaches, though, I've switched to shorts, although admittedly I don't really have the legs for them. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
63 this year, and (now I have retired from paid employment) my normal daily attire about the parish is jeans, casual shirt, plain pullover (in cold weather), and whatever odd coat or jacket I can find in my wardrobe. I'm fortunate (?) to be fairly tall and thin, so comfy jeans are easy to find e.g. for a fiver from Asda's George (but how on earth do svelte young - or not-so-young - ladies, like our Vicar's wife, pour themselves into those really tight jeans? Inquiring minds need to know!).
On Sundays, however, it's black suit, black shirt, black overcoat and (occasionally) black homberg hat......with a tie of the appropriate liturgical colour......
Ian J.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
My eighty-four year old Daddy-O wears jeans a lot. He also does a lot of outdoor work and climbs on the roof and up ladders to trim the live oaks. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
(Despite his daughter's pleas for caution.)
Jeans are very appropriate for that kind of lifestyle!
I, however, do not wear jeans anymore. *sigh*
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I'm over 60 -- I'll give up my jeans when you pry them from my cold, dead legs.
Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on
:
I am 50 and still wear jeans in my downtime. I never wear them to work although my younger colleagues think Friday is designed for jeans.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
I am 50 and still wear jeans in my downtime. I never wear them to work although my younger colleagues think Friday is designed for jeans.
In California, every day is "casual Friday"
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
Jeans with a tailored jacket? Why does this make me think of Jeremy Clarkson?
Just. Don't.
Perfect illustration of rule 1: do not attempt the sport coat look with your relaxed fit around the house jeans. Ditto if you didn't know there was any other fit.
Posted by piglet (# 11803) on
:
I don't see anything wrong with the casual/sports jacket/jeans combo à la Messrs. Clarkson, Hammond and May - and à la my 58-year-old Better Half for that matter - as long as it's paired with a suitably informal shirt and preferably brogue-type shoes.
Perhaps for a gentleman to get away with jeans and a dinner-jacket, he needs to be either a fashion designer or a rock singer, and/or have a supermodel on his arm.
For myself, I suspect I'll continue to live in my jeans* as long as I find them comfortable.
* even for work - most of my colleagues wear them, and so do I.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
It has to be navigated with equal balances of carefulness and swagger but it can be done.
That just doesn't work.
No, it doesn't. He looks like someone trying on clothes in a charity shop.
Quite honestly I really don't understand the appeal. If my trousers have holes in, or look faded, they get thrown out. What's the big deal about looking deliberately scruffy when you have the option of wearing clothes that make you look good? Unless you're about to do decorating or gardening, why go for grunge?
I've never owned a pair of blue jeans. Or trainers. There was a point when almost everyone of my generation was wearing these things - so much so that it looked like a uniform. Boring.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
and trackie bottoms for informal occasions for the rest of my life.
A colleague told me, this afternoon, that old men who wear trackie bottoms tend to be incontinent.
I have not yet felt able to forgive her for saying that.
Am sat here, now, in said trackie, dry, before changing into jeans and going out to lead a post-Lent group.
Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
According to the Guardian , one should not wear jeans after the age of 57.
Since I wear such leg attire just about all the time, and am turning 70, does this edict matter? Or is there permission to ignore fashion statements when one actually does stuff such as carpentry, painting, mechanical repairs and other wierd activities that are unheard-of in the fashion world?
Whatever the general merit of the fashion dictum (which is very little in my opinion), if you're pushing 70 you have every right to ignore it.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
This is formal attire in California.
Not up here, it ain't.
I mean, jeans are good until you actually cross the "formal" line, but after that, a full suit is a full suit.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
This is formal attire in California.
Then California is more uncouth than I ever imagined.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
Whatever the general merit of the fashion dictum (which is very little in my opinion), if you're pushing 70 you have every right to ignore it.
Besides, true men of fashion don't follow trends -- they set them!
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
Whatever the general merit of the fashion dictum (which is very little in my opinion), if you're pushing 70 you have every right to ignore it.
As I always say of my own fashion choices - what's the point of being a mad old bat if you can't dress the part?
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
This is formal attire in California.
Not up here, it ain't.
I mean, jeans are good until you actually cross the "formal" line, but after that, a full suit is a full suit.
Oh, you'd never wear it to something that was actually black tie, or at least I wouldn't. There is an art to being daring, and rule number one is never to be under-dressed.
But let's say you are going out to a swanky bar where the median age hovers well below 50. A suit might make you look overdressed or even old. Slacks and a blazer are going to make you look like a high school student. What is a guy supposed to wear? I posit that one answer is nicely fitted jeans and a tailored jacket.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
Oddly enough, just this morning my older friend and I (combined ages 144 yrs) went to the Levi outlet store, as both our wives had told us our old jeans were disgusting - neither of us had noticed - and came away looking quite smart and fashionable. My 86 year old mother-in-law almost always wears jeans except for going to church. She could probably make good money selling her torn and faded jeans to teenagers, but prefers to keep them.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
I wear jeans most of the winter and chinos in the summer when denim can be too much.
I've one pair of 501s (black) that seem indestructible - I've been wearing them for over 30 years and they look as good (and as black) as the day I bought them.
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I couldn't even imagine wearing a tuxedo jacket with bluejeans. Or even black jeans. Even Sauron's not that uncouth.
This is formal attire in California.
In Portland he'd be wearing a flannel shirt. And one of those rasta stocking caps.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Wear whatever you want, but own it. And do not expect everyone to like it.
Link not worksafe unless you turn down the volume.
[ 30. April 2014, 05:38: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
Posted by Dennis the Menace (# 11833) on
:
I'll be 63 soon and still wear jeans and about to go into forced retirement. Have at least six prs in various states of 'newness'. Wear them to church, theatre, shopping etc. Trakkie daks are for around the house ONLY, never, ever past the front gate.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Wear whatever you want, but own it. And do not expect everyone to like it.
Link not worksafe unless you turn down the volume.
Quite possibly some of the worst music I've ever heard. Well done lilBuddha.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Quite honestly I really don't understand the appeal. If my trousers have holes in, or look faded, they get thrown out. What's the big deal about looking deliberately scruffy when you have the option of wearing clothes that make you look good? Unless you're about to do decorating or gardening, why go for grunge?
I can explain that. I'm scruffy because I'm scruffy. I'm not smart. I'm scruffy. My clothes reflect that. If I wear the finest Savile Row suit I'm still a scruff, just a scruff in a suit. There are pictures of me in dinner suits and bats round throat outfits for concerts. I'm still a scruff. Fortunately I work in IT.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I also think scruffy looks good, and I always have. Things like ties and suits make me look like a down-at-heel hit-man.
[ 30. April 2014, 09:48: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on
:
Tidy jeans ad trainers every day for me at 81, because they're comfortable. For church I wear my new clean trainers, but they're not comfortable yet.
Daughter-in-law (not a churchgoer) was shocked at some reference to jeans in church. I remembered her comment next Sunday when I passed the minister's husband, son and daughter, all in quite acceptable jeans.
I do have other trousers for, say, evening wear, but haven't worn a dress since my son's wedding.
I don't feel justified in spending money on clothes apart from maybe a new shirt each summer and again in the winter.
But when all's said and done, at my age you can wear what you like.
GG
Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on
:
I've always been a t-shirt, jeans and trainers guy, five o'clock shadow etc. I do like getting suited and booted when it fits the occasion though. I can get into James Bond mode then. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I can explain that. I'm scruffy because I'm scruffy. I'm not smart. I'm scruffy. My clothes reflect that. If I wear the finest Savile Row suit I'm still a scruff, just a scruff in a suit. There are pictures of me in dinner suits and bats round throat outfits for concerts. I'm still a scruff. Fortunately I work in IT.
This is exactly what I meant up-thread when I talked about my sister-in-law. I'm beginning to think everyone has their own "style personality" and as such jeans do or don't work so well for them. So it's not about age it's about dressing up or down in a way that suits you.It has taken me a very long time to really understand this so some photos of me from the past are cringe-worthy....
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Wear whatever you want, but own it. And do not expect everyone to like it.
Link not worksafe unless you turn down the volume.
Quite possibly some of the worst music I've ever heard. Well done lilBuddha.
But he owns it, so it works. (One of these days I am finally going to start the hip hop and rap appreciation heaven thread so that we can work out the Ship's issues with contemporary urban music.)
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
At the other end of the scale, I'm in my mid 50s and haven't worn jeans for at least 10 years, probably nearer 20. I don't find them comfortable and they don't suit my style.
Nen - all about soft cotton and elasticated waistbands.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Wear whatever you want, but own it. And do not expect everyone to like it.
Link not worksafe unless you turn down the volume.
Quite possibly some of the worst music I've ever heard. Well done lilBuddha.
But he owns it, so it works. (One of these days I am finally going to start the hip hop and rap appreciation heaven thread so that we can work out the Ship's issues with contemporary urban music.)
I suspect it may be due to the prevalence of the chronologically blessed. But the link was more about the clothes.
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on
:
Generally I find jeans too hot here and some of the local jeans are of a thin denim that somehow just doesn't hang right. I'm with Nenya on the soft cottons and elasticated waistbands - I'm also all for loose fitting stuff to at least partially conceal the toll that gravity has taken on my body over many glorious years of dissipation.
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
My petite and stylish SiL posted a FB link to Good and Bad jeans. Good jeans were crotch-clamping, waist-hugging, buttock-sculpting paint-ons. Bad jeans were saggy, stretchy, elasticated and with the wrong sort of pockets.
I am a Bad jean person.
Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on
:
The cut of the jeans have to match the shape of the leg. Slim fit is good.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Never thought I'd see the day I agreed with AdO here. I'm a smidgeon off 6' tall and have a 29" inside leg. You can imagine how bloody stupid baggy jeans look on me. Sprayon FTW.
Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on
:
The OP is misleading. The Guardian doesn't say one shouldn't wear jeans after 57. The columnist writes some people say 57 tops but she says wear denim at any age.
Look at the picture at the top of the column. If one is a middle-aged guy who is going to wear jeans then dress like Gary Oldman and Calvin Klein, not like Samuel L. Jackson.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Never thought I'd see the day I agreed with AdO here. I'm a smidgeon off 6' tall and have a 29" inside leg. You can imagine how bloody stupid baggy jeans look on me. Sprayon FTW.
Here is a look for you Karl. Or perhaps this.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
I am 57 and intend to wear jeans 'till they carry me off in a box!
Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Here is a look for you Karl. Or perhaps this.
Look #2 looks like it's part of the Goth ninja trend. Look #1 looks like he has to go potty.
Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on
:
Jeans are for theatre and trade-show work as required and casual Fridays at school, not for leisure unless I just go straight down the pub after the job is over. For casual wear, I prefer corduroys or track-suit trousers as well as Dockers or similar with polo shirts, not t-shirts. Jeans are also for horseback riding along with boots, checked long-sleeved shirt and cowboy hat, the latter two items never worn for other purposes!
I am 60.
Posted by jrw (# 18045) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
According to the Guardian , one should not wear jeans after the age of 57.
Since I wear such leg attire just about all the time, and am turning 70, does this edict matter? Or is there permission to ignore fashion statements when one actually does stuff such as carpentry, painting, mechanical repairs and other wierd activities that are unheard-of in the fashion world?
Nothing's carved in stone.
Posted by piglet (# 11803) on
:
Now that I think about it, D's mid-life crisis was starting to wear jeans. He'd always been a jacket-and-tie* chap and all of a sudden bought himself a pair of cream-coloured jeans and a matching jacket when he turned 40. Then he went on to black jeans, polo-neck sweaters and coloured sports-jackets.
At 50 he bought his first pair of blue denim jeans and a leather jacket and when we went to visit my sister there was Much Mirth.
* When I first knew him, the jackets in question were usually velvet, but it was the early 1980s ...
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
I gave up buying jeans when I turned 40 (a fair whack of time ago now) ... not least because of a Jewell lyric about "a drip of a man/ he looked like a potato, stuffed into jeans!"
Given that my last pair lived on for a few years after that I guess I haven't end them for twelve years or so.
Posted by JeffTL (# 16722) on
:
I'm 25, haven't owned a pair in at least a decade. They just aren't that comfortable or attractive on me; I'd rather wear Dockers and the like, honestly, and I presently work in suits.
Posted by comet (# 10353) on
:
for crying out loud, people, wear whatever you want. stay this side of the law and don't get frostbite and who the hell cares?
if the worst anyone ever can say about me is that I'm a fashion accident, I'm letting down my side.
Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on
:
Recently I finally got around to reading Kingsley Amis's Lucky Jim, and was interested to find that his protagonist, a university lecturer, owned only three pairs of trousers.
In Hope Against Hope, Nadezhda Mandelstam mentions that her husband, the writer Osip, owned only one pair of trousers during the time they were on the run from Stalin.
I don't think we realise how well-off we are clothes-wise these days.
Despite leading a fairly modest lifestyle by Western standards, I have just calculated that I own eight pairs of jeans, two pairs of trousers (including the bottom half of my wedding/funeral suit), four pairs of tracky daks, two pairs of overalls and assorted shorts.
(Tracky daks are easier than jeans to get down for quicky sex).
Posted by Drifting Star (# 12799) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
(Tracky daks are easier than jeans to get down for quicky sex).
Although there may be less need to do so. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
Never wear jeans but I do wear a faded denim jacket as the occasion demands
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Never wear jeans but I do wear a faded denim jacket as the occasion demands
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
What kind of trousers do you wear it with? I've seen guys wear a sport jacket with jeans, but I don't recall ever seeing someone wearing a faded, denim jacket with dress slacks.
Posted by WearyPilgrim (# 14593) on
:
I have a friend, a nationally prominent retired minister, who is tall, lanky and 87 years old. He has, for years, come our denominational conventions nattily dressed in a dark blue sport jacket with a neatly folded silk handkerchief in the pocket; long-sleeved, well-starched white shirt; silk tie; highly polished black Oxfords; and blue jeans. I'll tell ya -- he looks pretty darned sharp.
[ 02. June 2014, 16:55: Message edited by: WearyPilgrim ]
Posted by WearyPilgrim (# 14593) on
:
An attendant question is whether anyone over the age of 57 should wear shorts. I know the older I get, the worse I look in them. I never wear them in public.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
Having grown up wearing jeans at every possible opportunity, I reached the point about 3 years ago when I didn't have a single pair of jeans left in my wardrobe - not even a scruffy pair for gardening. And you know what? I don't miss them one little bit. I actually can't even imagine buying a pair ever again. And I'm not 57 just yet.
Shorts are another matter altogether. During summer, I would happily wear shorts all the time. When I look at what some young women wear these days, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't allow the world to see my nobbly knees.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Is there such a thing as attractive knees? Don't think I've ever seen any. Which is why I don't worry.
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
for crying out loud, people, wear whatever you want. stay this side of the law and don't get frostbite and who the hell cares?
if the worst anyone ever can say about me is that I'm a fashion accident, I'm letting down my side.
Exactly.
But do up your fly.
Wear socks with your sandals.
I did both of these yesterday. Rather proud of the first. The second is merely comfortable. I also wear colours that allegedly clash. It's called style.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Wear socks with your sandals.
No no no no no no and a million times no!
That is ALWAYS a mistake.
Jesus never wore socks with his sandals, so why should we????
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Never wear jeans but I do wear a faded denim jacket as the occasion demands
What kind of trousers do you wear it with? I've seen guys wear a sport jacket with jeans, but I don't recall ever seeing someone wearing a faded, denim jacket with dress slacks.
Around here, there are plenty of cowboys and farmers who wear faded denim jackets with jeans. Of course, that's in the winter, or early morning riding the fences.
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by jedijudy:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Never wear jeans but I do wear a faded denim jacket as the occasion demands
What kind of trousers do you wear it with? I've seen guys wear a sport jacket with jeans, but I don't recall ever seeing someone wearing a faded, denim jacket with dress slacks.
Around here, there are plenty of cowboys and farmers who wear faded denim jackets with jeans. Of course, that's in the winter, or early morning riding the fences.
Well, yeah, that was my point. ExclamationMark said he didn't wear jeans but that he did wear a denim jacket. If you don't wear jeans with what do you wear a faded denim jacket? Cargo pants? Dress pants? Sweats?... Dockers?
Posted by OddJob (# 17591) on
:
Thankfully the age limit constantly increases. In the 1970s it looked wrong on anyone over 30-35, by the early 1990s the limit was ten years older. If the 1:2 time passing to age acceptability continues, those of us in our early fifties can continue buying £4.99 Tesco own brand ones for about another decade. As long as we're not expected to squeeze into thin Levis, which some of us couldn't manage even as fit teenagers.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Wear socks with your sandals.
No no no no no no and a million times no!
That is ALWAYS a mistake.
Jesus never wore socks with his sandals, so why should we????
Jesus never wore undershorts either, but I'm not going to give up my Loom Fruit or my Birks-and-socks. It's part of the Seattle spring/autumn uniform.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Can't think what else I'd wear casually. Trousers are for work. I look terrible in them, but they insist. I've not worn shorts since I was finally allowed not to at the age of 9; they permanently take up a place in my mental landscape as "what you wear when you're a little boy."
My jeans are all black. Nearly all the clothes I wear voluntarily are black. I'll wear purple, but just don't like other colours.
[ 02. June 2014, 19:54: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by The Weeder (# 11321) on
:
My default Church wear is blue jeans and a funky top.
If I am speaking at a church other then my own, the basic outfit is the same, but covered by robes.
The only criticism I have ever had is for wearing robes when they were not expected. No one has ever commented on the blue jeans.
PS I am quite old.
Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on
:
RE: Jesus & sandals with socks
We don't know, do we, really?
Fr instance, the Roman Legions certainly wore socks with their sandals, and socks were to be found in Roman households, at least if research (which I can't find at the moment) is correct.
However, I agree about socks not being a good look with sandals. A friend, who admittedly has no fashion sense, showed up at a recent party (!) in tee shirt, running shorts, and sandals with BLACK socks. The mind reeled at such a devastating sight.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by georgiaboy:
RE: Jesus & sandals with socks
We don't know, do we, really?
Fr instance, the Roman Legions certainly wore socks with their sandals, and socks were to be found in Roman households, at least if research (which I can't find at the moment) is correct.
However, I agree about socks not being a good look with sandals. A friend, who admittedly has no fashion sense, showed up at a recent party (!) in tee shirt, running shorts, and sandals with BLACK socks. The mind reeled at such a devastating sight.
Not only did Roman soldiers wear socks with sandals, but there are letters written by soldiers stationed at Hadrian's Wall begging their loved ones to send supplies of extra socks because they were so cold!
Posted by Chocoholic (# 4655) on
:
I remember in the 1980s when a family friend's teenage son suffered a good deal of criticism for daring to wear jeans to church. Our family said he should be able to wear what he wanted (and he was a teenage boy actually going to church) so I thought I could wear mine (it felt terribly daring though), nope, you're not wearing those to church young lady!
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Well, yeah, that was my point. ExclamationMark said he didn't wear jeans but that he did wear a denim jacket. If you don't wear jeans with what do you wear a faded denim jacket?
I guess I was awkwardly suggesting that the local uniform is the perfect attire utilizing a faded denim jacket. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by georgiaboy:
RE: Jesus & sandals with socks
We don't know, do we, really?
It's not in the gospels, so therefore IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
You mean, let's HOPE it didn't happen.
Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Not only did Roman soldiers wear socks with sandals,
No wonder the Empire collapsed.
That sort of thing leads to wearing lace-up business shoes with tracky daks, which leads to baseball caps with suits, at which point you might as well give up on life altogether.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
[QB I'm not going to give up my Loom Fruit or my Birks-and-socks. It's part of the Seattle spring/autumn uniform. [/QB]
I understand the resistance to change, but they have invented other things to wear that warm your feet much better. They are massive with the youth these days. They call them shoes.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Not only did Roman soldiers wear socks with sandals,
No wonder the Empire collapsed.
That sort of thing leads to wearing lace-up business shoes with tracky daks, which leads to baseball caps with suits, at which point you might as well give up on life altogether.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Drifting Star:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
(Tracky daks are easier than jeans to get down for quicky sex).
Although there may be less need to do so.
I have absolutely no idea what a tracky dak is, but I've decided I really don't want to know...
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Oh, come on! you know you want to look.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
I looked. Forgive me, Lord!
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on
:
Ouch.
Posted by Starbug (# 15917) on
:
I normally wear jeans to to church, on the grounds that God won't recognise me if I get dressed up. On the rare occasion when I've worn a dress or shirt, someone usually expresses surprise that I 'do have legs after all'. What did they think was inside the jeans?
Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Oh, come on! you know you want to look.
Pretty sure that's not me.
I'm taller.
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Weeder:
My default Church wear is blue jeans and a funky top.
Mine is a chasuble.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chocoholic:
I remember in the 1980s when a family friend's teenage son suffered a good deal of criticism for daring to wear jeans to church. Our family said he should be able to wear what he wanted (and he was a teenage boy actually going to church) so I thought I could wear mine (it felt terribly daring though), nope, you're not wearing those to church young lady!
You know, I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church. It's funny how experiences differ.
It's not like Hezekiah 13:5 says "Neither shalt thou wear jeans to church, like the peoples in the lands the LORD gave you did, who he drove out before you."
[ 03. June 2014, 08:52: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Bob Two-Owls (# 9680) on
:
There are three kinds of people:
A.Those who wear what they want without worry
B.Those who worry about the clothes they wear
C.Those who prey on the insecurities of B. and try to make up all kinds of petty rules, disguising the fact that in the end it is all just about stopping you dying of exposure, sunburn or dipping your codling in the gravy at dinner.
Posted by Dennis the Menace (# 11833) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Chocoholic:
I remember in the 1980s when a family friend's teenage son suffered a good deal of criticism for daring to wear jeans to church. Our family said he should be able to wear what he wanted (and he was a teenage boy actually going to church) so I thought I could wear mine (it felt terribly daring though), nope, you're not wearing those to church young lady!
You know, I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church. It's funny how experiences differ."
My partner and I are both in our mid 60's and more often than not wear jeans to church. Mostly because we are going out for lunch/the markets/visitng/shopping and don't want to get good trousers dirty/wet/or be very over dressed. I wear them even if I am doing something up front and certainly are not alone in wearing them. We even wear shorts in summer.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Two-Owls:
There are three kinds of people:
A.Those who wear what they want without worry
B.Those who worry about the clothes they wear
C.Those who prey on the insecurities of B. and try to make up all kinds of petty rules, disguising the fact that in the end it is all just about stopping you dying of exposure, sunburn or dipping your codling in the gravy at dinner.
There are of course those in subgroup A(ii), who are in group A but really, really wish Group C would go and fall down a hole.
[ 03. June 2014, 12:19: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by piglet (# 11803) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church ...
It may depend on which church it is. I remember getting some dirty looks when I wore trousers (not jeans) to a service at the church where I was brought up (a Baptist church in Scotland c.1974).
Any wonder I deserted them for the Anglicans*? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
* These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
Posted by Tree Bee (# 4033) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by piglet:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church ...
It may depend on which church it is. I remember getting some dirty looks when I wore trousers (not jeans) to a service at the church where I was brought up (a Baptist church in Scotland c.1974).
Any wonder I deserted them for the Anglicans*?
* These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
A friend of mine didn't speak to me for a while after I wore a smart trouser suit to her confirmation in a Norfolk Anglican Church. A different world!
Posted by piglet (# 11803) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tree Bee:
A friend of mine didn't speak to me for a while after I wore a smart trouser suit to her confirmation ...
Blimey, TB, with friends like that, who needs enemies? ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by piglet:
These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
Was that you with the lime green trainers?
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by piglet:
These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
Was that you with the lime green trainers?
Would someone please get the smelling salts for Miss Amanda?
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
I don't ever recall having anything said about me wearing jeans - Baptist church, early 70s.
(Except a friend who said 'you don't want to put him off entirely' over man I was pursuing at time. It didn't do any good).
M.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You know, I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church. It's funny how experiences differ.
Yep. You can spot the Jehovah's Witnesses on a Sunday making their way to the hall because they're all very smartly dressed, even the children, and some of the women wear elegant hats.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tree Bee:
quote:
Originally posted by piglet:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church ...
It may depend on which church it is. I remember getting some dirty looks when I wore trousers (not jeans) to a service at the church where I was brought up (a Baptist church in Scotland c.1974).
Any wonder I deserted them for the Anglicans*?
* These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
A friend of mine didn't speak to me for a while after I wore a smart trouser suit to her confirmation in a Norfolk Anglican Church. A different world!
For being too smart, or for wearing trousers?
Either way it's stretching the definition of the word "friend" IMNAAHO.
[ 04. June 2014, 09:37: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on
:
I won't wear jeans or training trousers and a t-shirt to church unless I'm just going in to pray at the side chapel before dawn, never for mass!
Posted by Tree Bee (# 4033) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Tree Bee:
quote:
Originally posted by piglet:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... I've lived my entire life in the UK, and never, ever, come across any expectations (beyond common decency) of wearing anything in particular, or not wearing anything in particular, to church ...
It may depend on which church it is. I remember getting some dirty looks when I wore trousers (not jeans) to a service at the church where I was brought up (a Baptist church in Scotland c.1974).
Any wonder I deserted them for the Anglicans*?
* These days I can get away with what I like - I sing in the choir, and a cassock and surplice will cover a multitude of sins.
A friend of mine didn't speak to me for a while after I wore a smart trouser suit to her confirmation in a Norfolk Anglican Church. A different world!
For being too smart, or for wearing trousers?
Either way it's stretching the definition of the word "friend" IMNAAHO.
For the wearing of trousers. I embarrassed her and her family apparently. Stayed friends though it's just Christmas cards now. Oh well.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
As I've got older, I find myself still wanting to wear jeans, but smarter ones. Trouble is, it's actually quite difficult to find smart, well-fitting jeans. So, I've found the perfect solution - cotton drill. They also have the advantage of coming in lots of colours, so you are not limited to blue.
Regarding church, I did use to cause shock and disapproval wearing jeans, as a teenager. It was very strange then, in the early noughties, to find the disapproval was directed at me for wearing choir robes (jeans were in, and robes were out, apparently)! How times change.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
For pear shaped or hourglass shaped women, Evans' 'cut for a pear' jeans are excellent and properly fitted at the waist. No gaping!
Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on
:
The Indian parents (members of our home group) of one of our pastors can cope with his preaching in jeans, but not shorts - or half-pant, as they are called in India.
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Regarding church, I did use to cause shock and disapproval wearing jeans, as a teenager. It was very strange then, in the early noughties, to find the disapproval was directed at me for wearing choir robes (jeans were in, and robes were out, apparently)! How times change.
Thankfully, some parishes refuse to change with the times.
I was not aware that jeans were appropriate attire at any age.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Regarding church, I did use to cause shock and disapproval wearing jeans, as a teenager. It was very strange then, in the early noughties, to find the disapproval was directed at me for wearing choir robes (jeans were in, and robes were out, apparently)! How times change.
Thankfully, some parishes refuse to change with the times.
I was not aware that jeans were appropriate attire at any age.
Anywhere they're not appropriate, I'm de facto not welcome. It suits me, because I generally find the sort of places where jeans are disapproved of are the sort of places I hate with a passion.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
I should add - I have never been able to understand why anyone thinks what another person is wearing is any of their business.
Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on
:
I have a church in an utterly remote and rural Aussie parish. I don't mind what the farmers and their families wear BUT I draw the line on SLUGS on their farm boots.
Am I unreasonable?
Posted by Bob Two-Owls (# 9680) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I should add - I have never been able to understand why anyone thinks what another person is wearing is any of their business.
Well I did once have to tell a would be beaver leader (the section of scouts below cubs), that a Cannibal Corpse T-shirt bearing the legend "f****d with a knife" was not appropriate for Church Parade. He just turned it inside out.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Two-Owls:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I should add - I have never been able to understand why anyone thinks what another person is wearing is any of their business.
Well I did once have to tell a would be beaver leader (the section of scouts below cubs), that a Cannibal Corpse T-shirt bearing the legend "f****d with a knife" was not appropriate for Church Parade. He just turned it inside out.
OK, someone can always find the exception that proves the rule, can't they
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
Are there really churches these days which disapprove of members of the congregation wearing jeans?? An urban myth, surely. Wearing jeans in the Sanctuary or the Chancel, when carrying out a specific role, might still be a problem, but not in the Nave! People regularly wear jeans to the Cathedral, especially if they are popping in to a service after doing their shopping.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
I don't come across many elderly British people wearing jeans. I suppose elderly Americans are more likely to do so, since jeans were invented in the USA and have filtered out to every group in society.
When I was an undergraduate going to 'student churches' I felt comfortable wearing casual stuff like jeans. Yet I instinctively knew I'd aggravate my mother and elicit unwelcome comments from the older ladies if I tried to wear the same stuff at my inner city working class Methodist home church, so I never even tried.
Young people are now so highly prized in many historical churches that no one really minds what they turn up in, but for middle aged and older folk it's different. In some charismatic churches, though, jeans seem to be de rigeur for practically everyone.
Posted by Chocoholic (# 4655) on
:
Chorister, I think it may be 'noticed' at some places in London, other than that I don't know.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Not at our shack. I've worn jeans (or cotton trousers in hot weather) in and out of church for years, and I'm now 64 - people in our congo wear all sorts of things, some of the black women wear hats, some don't, some men wear shorts in hot weather, some wear suits, some wear African dress, it really doesn't matter. We might draw the line at speedos though...
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Are there really churches these days which disapprove of members of the congregation wearing jeans?? An urban myth, surely. Wearing jeans in the Sanctuary or the Chancel, when carrying out a specific role, might still be a problem, but not in the Nave! People regularly wear jeans to the Cathedral, especially if they are popping in to a service after doing their shopping.
I suspect this may be more common in the U.S. than across the pond.
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
We might draw the line at speedos though...
Not fond of shirts with beer logos and thinks like B.U.M. Equipment and FCUK. But I never ever say anything. Probably God may like beer and rude-suggestive logos.
Posted by burlingtontiger (# 18069) on
:
I had this conversation only the other day about churches and jeans. If any particular church objects to jeans then, hypothetically, John the Baptist in clothes of camel hair would have been equally unwelcome.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
It's been said that middle class churchgoers are more comfortable with casual wear because it allows them to leave their formal work clothes at home, while working class churchgoers value the 'Sunday best' because it gives them the chance to change out of their overalls and pinafores into something smarter. This is probably an outdated view, but of course, contemporary casual wear can actually be quite expensive, whereas a nice suit made in 1980 and worn only at church could probably last some men a lifetime!
Talking of John the Baptist, he was far too eccentric to care what other people thought of his clothes (and was he even a regular attender at the synagogue?). That's fine for a prophet, but most people want to be unobtrusive in their environment.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
The elderly don't often get the chance to dress up, they don't often go out in the evenings - so dressing up for church on Sunday morning is a big occasion.
Posted by John Holding (# 158) on
:
I attend a fiercely casual church.
Recently, although I actually have no issues with casual clothes, I have started wearing a tie and blazer (suit on festivals). Partly to make it clear there isn't a rule forbidding such -- which can turn as many people away as it attracts. Partly in solidarity with our Burundian parishioners, whose men at least sometimes attend in suits. And partly to assure a particular newish member -- aged 93 -- who wears tie and jacket every week that this is all right. (I'm sure he's with us simply because we're the closest place to where he lives and can get to.)
Round here its the people who choose to wear somewhat formal clothing who run the risk of being told they're out of place -- not those in jeans.
John
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Svitlana: quote:
I don't come across many elderly British people wearing jeans.
Surely it depends on what you define as 'elderly'? My parents (in their seventies) are quite happy wearing jeans, but my husband's parents (ten years older than that) would not have been seen dead in them...
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by burlingtontiger:
I had this conversation only the other day about churches and jeans. If any particular church objects to jeans then, hypothetically, John the Baptist in clothes of camel hair would have been equally unwelcome.
I do not think John the Baptist had an extensive wardrobe, so he has an excuse.
And I would not say that we so much object to jeans, as "mildly encourage" more appropriate attire, if within their means.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
quote:
Originally posted by burlingtontiger:
I had this conversation only the other day about churches and jeans. If any particular church objects to jeans then, hypothetically, John the Baptist in clothes of camel hair would have been equally unwelcome.
I do not think John the Baptist had an extensive wardrobe, so he has an excuse.
And I would not say that we so much object to jeans, as "mildly encourage" more appropriate attire, if within their means.
In what sense is other attire "more appropriate"? Does Hezekiah 13:5 say "Neither am I very keen on Jeans"? Is "The LORD your God prefers you to wear a suit, to be perfectly honest." hiding in Leviticus somewhere?
I genuinely don't get this.
[ 11. June 2014, 09:21: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Persephone Hazard (# 4648) on
:
I thought everyone could wear jeans? I thought that was the point of them?
Of course, black jeans are superior to jeans of other, lesser colours in all ways. There is probably an age after which one should consider not wearing blue jeans. But only because they're usually kind of hideous anyway. That age is actually more like 17 than 57.
[ 11. June 2014, 09:38: Message edited by: Persephone Hazard ]
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
There is a hierarchy of superiority. Black are best, other colours other than blue are next, blue last.
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on
:
John Holding, I love that you are so tuned in to the importance of people feeling comfortable in church whatever they're wearing that you have proactively helped create that atmosphere.
I reckon the right pair of jeans can look pretty smart. My workplace has a policy of "no jeans" but the alternative trousers can look a lot more casual IMHO and, with so many trouser designs based on the idea of jeans, it's difficult to decide whether the ban is on the style, the material, or the combination of both.... none of which make much sense to me in an environment where our work clothes are supposed to be practical.
Personally I love wearing jeans but these days can't get any that don't hang so low on the hips that my Bridget Jones knickers are on display to the world! (Should I pass the brain bleach out now?)
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I've been wearing blue jeans now for 50 years, so yay! Me and my mate Jan used to get them made to measure by a little Jewish tailor in M/c. Schmutter cutters of the world unite!
And if any church should dare to suggest that I should not, within their hallowed precincts, they would see my blue-jeaned-backside disappearing down the street.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
I think it's fine for everyone to wear jeans to church on Sunday except the person who is leading the service.
Moo
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I think it's fine for everyone to wear jeans to church on Sunday except the person who is leading the service.
Moo
I don't think our priest has ever not worn them.
I can see your point though, if you've got a congregation containing members who'd be scandalised. I can't imagine that God gives a monkeys' though.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
I attend a smells & bells outlet not that far from John Holding's and it is also casual in tone. At the 8.30, jeans and other dark trousers are now fading to walking shorts as Ottawa's Amazonian summer begins. There is one jacket & tied congregant and a retired priest wears his cassock. One other worshipper, who doubtless deems himself to be dashing, wears an ascot.
At the main service, it tends to be slightly more formal, but I would think largely on account of a nattily attired contingent with origins in Sierra Leone and Barbados. Jeans are present, but rarely noticed, and are usually formalized by a respectable top or a pressed shirt. I've never heard of athletic wear or un-artsie Tshirts, which I see at RC Latin churches.
Perambulating after the morning service and passing by other churches filling up, the two Orthodox and three Chinese Baptist outlets tend to be dressed more formally, but in recent years the Chinese Baptists are less likely to be in suits and more what would be called business casual-- jeans seem to be absent but I will now start taking notice.
I would think that, in Anglican or UCC circles, anyone criticizing jeans-wearers would find themselves quietly taken aside and chatted to, not the jeans-wearers.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
I am wearing dark blue jeans as we speak - indigo blue jeans look wonderful with a pure white shirt or t-shirt. By blue jeans were stonewashed jeans meant? Because indigo blue jeans look great.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I am wearing dark blue jeans as we speak - indigo blue jeans look wonderful with a pure white shirt or t-shirt. By blue jeans were stonewashed jeans meant? Because indigo blue jeans look great.
No, sorry. All standard denim blues are at the bottom of the jeans food chain. Black ftw.
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
And I would not say that we so much object to jeans, as "mildly encourage" more appropriate attire, if within their means.
In what sense is other attire "more appropriate"? Does Hezekiah 13:5 say "Neither am I very keen on Jeans"? Is "The LORD your God prefers you to wear a suit, to be perfectly honest." hiding in Leviticus somewhere?
I genuinely don't get this.
I would say two things. First, when we worship God, I believe we should try to be as respectful and reverent as possible. The sermon should be thoughtful. Those assisting in the liturgy should be practiced. The choir and organist should be rehearsed. The lectors should have reviewed the text and prepared accordingly.
Similarly, the congregants should be thoughtful and contemplative as they prepare to worship the Lord. Part of this, I would argue, is dressing appropriately. Just as those in the Bible were told to remove their sandals when they stood on holy ground, one should approach worship with a certain solemnity.
This leads into my second point - that in today's increasingly casual society, dressing with some degree of formality helps to distinguish profane time from sacred time. By dressing inordinarily, it helps us enter into the correct state of mind to worship God.
Now, trying to fathom the gradations of formality according to jean color... that is something I genuinely do not understand. I do not think I have ever seen a pair of black jeans, as a matter of fact.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
But how are jeans not respectful? They are not revealing or anything.
Also being reverent does not mean wearing formal clothes, and we are to worship God all the time and not just for an hour on Sunday. It's that attitude which is making people leave the church in droves.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I am wearing dark blue jeans as we speak - indigo blue jeans look wonderful with a pure white shirt or t-shirt. By blue jeans were stonewashed jeans meant? Because indigo blue jeans look great.
No, sorry. All standard denim blues are at the bottom of the jeans food chain. Black ftw.
But black doesn't suit everyone - I can wear it because I have winter colouring, but it would look awful on an autumn or a spring.
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But how are jeans not respectful? They are not revealing or anything.
Also being reverent does not mean wearing formal clothes, and we are to worship God all the time and not just for an hour on Sunday. It's that attitude which is making people leave the church in droves.
It depends. A lot of times, the fashion is to wear jeans that are too tight, or that are "distressed," or to wear them too low, etc. It is easier for everyone to avoid them rather than try to evaluate them on a case-by-case basis. Also, jeans are often paired with other clothing that I would consider too informal.
I would not say that jeans are not respectful, but rather that there is other attire that is more respectful.
As for worship, you are right that we should not only worship God for that little time on Sunday morning, but rather, should glorify him all the time in everything we do. I would single out Sunday in particular, however, as it is the Sabbath that God has set aside, not to work, but to worship Him.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But how are jeans not respectful? They are not revealing or anything.
Also being reverent does not mean wearing formal clothes, and we are to worship God all the time and not just for an hour on Sunday. It's that attitude which is making people leave the church in droves.
It depends. A lot of times, the fashion is to wear jeans that are too tight, or that are "distressed," or to wear them too low, etc. It is easier for everyone to avoid them rather than try to evaluate them on a case-by-case basis. Also, jeans are often paired with other clothing that I would consider too informal.
I would not say that jeans are not respectful, but rather that there is other attire that is more respectful.
As for worship, you are right that we should not only worship God for that little time on Sunday morning, but rather, should glorify him all the time in everything we do. I would single out Sunday in particular, however, as it is the Sabbath that God has set aside, not to work, but to worship Him.
But how does formal clothing equal a more reverent attitude to worship? You could be in shorts and t-shirt and fully attuned to worshipping God, and in formal clothing (not sure what exactly you mean by more formal clothing anyway) but not really 'there'. Worship is a matter of the heart and clothing is irrelevant.
In any case, surely formal clothing demands a formal occasion? Church shouldn't be formal but should be informal and friendly. I don't own any more formal clothes - should I just not bother going to church then? My church has zero problem with me wearing jeans and doesn't assume I am somehow disrespecting God.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I think wearing jeans to church is preferable to turning a church service into a fashion show, where people are trying to one-up each other with the latest designs.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
I suppose places like GCabot's have their uses - by disapproving of my chosen attire, they've outed themselves well in advance as places I'd not want to have as my regular church anyway. Saves time. Formality always tells me something's not for me. I don't think that's a helpful thing for church to be telling me.
[ 12. June 2014, 10:28: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
I should add - I'm just joshing with the jeans colour thing. But I have to say it seems no sillier to me than having a hang up about jeans in the first place.
Posted by Alwyn (# 4380) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
... in today's increasingly casual society, dressing with some degree of formality helps to distinguish profane time from sacred time.
If it works for you, great.
As I see it, to misquote Terry Pratchett's character Dorfl (from Feet of Clay) 'all time is sacred or none is'.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I think wearing jeans to church is preferable to turning a church service into a fashion show, where people are trying to one-up each other with the latest designs.
Jeans are often worn as a fashion item, at least by young people in the UK. Have you never been to a fashion store and seen how many different varieties there are? And depending on where you shop, a 'churchy' polyester or cotton skirt can cost less than a pair of women's jeans.
But most English churches don't have any set rules about how to dress (although some of the Pentecostals used to be quite particular about this). If there are problems these days it'll be down to the occasional instances of inward-looking, declining churches whose very elderly members have lost interest in reaching out to a wider demographic. Free-spirited wearers of jeans probably wouldn't want to worship there anyway.....
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Interesting. I don't regard wearing jeans as free spirited but as very conventional.
In fact, I find it astonishing that we're having this conversation. It wasn't a conversation in the 70's when I became a christian, just what people wore. The age profile of jeans wearers has probably increased, I suppose.
M.
[ 13. June 2014, 06:38: Message edited by: M. ]
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
I'm wondering if it's a pond difference... most churches in the UK are just glad if you turn up, whatever you're wearing.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by M.:
Interesting. I don't regard wearing jeans as free spirited but as very conventional.
In fact, I find it astonishing that we're having this conversation. It wasn't a conversation in the 70's when I became a christian, just what people wore. The age profile of jeans wearers has probably increased, I suppose.
M.
Aye. They're not particularly conventional nor free spirited. They're just what people wear. Which is one of the reasons I can't get my head around their being singled out as "inappropriate."
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
I'm wondering if it's a pond difference... most churches in the UK are just glad if you turn up, whatever you're wearing.
Indeed. If you're under 50 many churches'd be all over you like a cheap suit if you turned up just wearing a jock strap and tie.
Posted by GCabot (# 18074) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But how are jeans not respectful? They are not revealing or anything.
Also being reverent does not mean wearing formal clothes, and we are to worship God all the time and not just for an hour on Sunday. It's that attitude which is making people leave the church in droves.
It depends. A lot of times, the fashion is to wear jeans that are too tight, or that are "distressed," or to wear them too low, etc. It is easier for everyone to avoid them rather than try to evaluate them on a case-by-case basis. Also, jeans are often paired with other clothing that I would consider too informal.
I would not say that jeans are not respectful, but rather that there is other attire that is more respectful.
As for worship, you are right that we should not only worship God for that little time on Sunday morning, but rather, should glorify him all the time in everything we do. I would single out Sunday in particular, however, as it is the Sabbath that God has set aside, not to work, but to worship Him.
But how does formal clothing equal a more reverent attitude to worship? You could be in shorts and t-shirt and fully attuned to worshipping God, and in formal clothing (not sure what exactly you mean by more formal clothing anyway) but not really 'there'. Worship is a matter of the heart and clothing is irrelevant.
In any case, surely formal clothing demands a formal occasion? Church shouldn't be formal but should be informal and friendly. I don't own any more formal clothes - should I just not bother going to church then? My church has zero problem with me wearing jeans and doesn't assume I am somehow disrespecting God.
I never claimed that formal clothing necessarily equated a more reverent attitude. What I have been trying to say is that it can help focus one on worshipping the Lord. While it is certainly possible for one to worship conscientiously in a t-shirt and shorts, I find that dressing casually begets a casual mindset, even if only unconsciously.
I am unsure why you equate more formality with unfriendliness. Frankly, your attitude towards more formal clothing evidences far more hostility than anything I have discussed in the reverse. If you are so uncomfortable outside of jeans and own nothing else, then so be it. It makes no sense to dress more formally if it actually detracts from your ability to focus on worshipping God. No one is going to judge you on your personal piety. I merely seek to defend the practice of those parishes where more formality remains the norm.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But how does formal clothing equal a more reverent attitude to worship? You could be in shorts and t-shirt and fully attuned to worshipping God, and in formal clothing (not sure what exactly you mean by more formal clothing anyway) but not really 'there'. Worship is a matter of the heart and clothing is irrelevant.
Would you go to a wedding or a funeral in jeans, trainers and a T-shirt with a slogan on the front, or would you make a bit of an effort to wear something nice for the occasion?
Same with church.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
There have been many sartorial shifts in recent years- it is now exceptional to run into a jacket (let alone a suit) and shirt and tie in any but the more formal offices-- upper echelons of the public service and academia as well as the legal profession. Everywhere else, "smart casual" appears to rule the day. One of the doctors who works in my GP's group practice wears a tie and is considered to be very very old-fashioned.
In most circumstances, formal wear for men no longer requires a tie, and a simple pressed shirt and trousers suffices. And in non-work situations, formal wear now includes good jeans (i.e., fitting, no holes, and clean) and even a Tshirt (without slogans). I attend one of the stuffier Anglican temples in Ottawa, and no eyebrows would be raised at such attire. And, as I mentioned above, our amazonian summers permits us walking shorts.
This would not have been acceptable ten years ago and, in churches with a predominantly African or Caribbean presence, it would not be (my comments apply to Anglican circles, as I find that RC worshippers dress down considerably).
Pace GCabot and Ariel, the jeans- and Tshirt-wearing worshippers likely think that they are respectably dressed, and it might well be that this helps them focus and take their presence seriously and with greater devotion.
I tend to the dressier side and, on voting in advance polls last week, the poll clerk complimented me on my ascot and jacket (which I often wear to the 8.30 am of a Sunday); I noted that I took the act of voting seriously and a little ceremony does not go amiss.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
People can dress as they like at church, it doesn't bother me. All I'm saying is that IME an individual churchgoer at the average mainstream church is more likely to be wearing jeans if they belong to certain demographic categories. And I suggest that people outside those categories - in some churches - might be more noticeable and hence feel more self-conscious if they're wearing jeans.
I'm aware that many people posting on the Ship attend the sorts of churches where no one really cares about such trivial things. That's great!
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But how does formal clothing equal a more reverent attitude to worship? You could be in shorts and t-shirt and fully attuned to worshipping God, and in formal clothing (not sure what exactly you mean by more formal clothing anyway) but not really 'there'. Worship is a matter of the heart and clothing is irrelevant.
Would you go to a wedding or a funeral in jeans, trainers and a T-shirt with a slogan on the front, or would you make a bit of an effort to wear something nice for the occasion?
Same with church.
Depends on whose wedding/funeral. I hope that when I dir folk'll wear whatever they like. My nice clothes are my favourite black jeans, my dragon t-shirts and some ghillie shirts. I do not like my formal stuff and do not consider it "nice".
Posted by John Holding (# 158) on
:
Dress for funerals is an interesting one.
As I have said, my parish is militantly informal. Apart from me, the 94-year-old I mentioned earlier, a couple of Burundians and the odd visitor, no male wears a tie or jacket and jeans would be the norm (shorts in summer).
Recently a parishioner died and lots of people showed up to the funeral. Apart from the soloist (we don't do vestments for singers) who dressed as usual and was duly embarrassed, every single male member of the parish (over 18) who showed up wore a suit. This included students, university profs, IT people and others, none of whom I expected even owned a suit, much less would wear one.
John
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Yes, that's an interesting anomaly in my approach - I do dress up a bit for weddings and funerals (black dress and grey jacket - actually, normal workwear - for Ken's funeral yesterday).
But those are occasions. So I obviously don't regard going to church as an occasion, just what I do. And I always wear trousers of some sort for church if I'm ringing, as I don't like to ring in skirts (the bell rope catches a bit under the skirt and lifts it up, leading to potential or actual knicker flashing and much hilarity among other ringers. Yes, it happened last time I wore a shortish skirt to ring).
M.
Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I think wearing jeans to church is preferable to turning a church service into a fashion show, where people are trying to one-up each other with the latest designs.
I don't ever wear jeans to church, but when I see another parishioner who is wearing jeans or short trousers, I just think "I'm glad you're here!" as opposed to staying home and not worshipping! I dress up less than the choir (who wear all black) but well enough to meet standards for attire when I am lector - in addition to nice long trousers, I wear good shoes and a shirt with a proper collar.
Posted by RevMotherRaphael (# 18102) on
:
My mother still wears jeans at 69 and is very style conscious-more so than I can ever be unless habits suddenly come into fashion-and she will dress them up with nice shirt, jacket, shoes and bag for a Saturday lunch/shopping with friends without looking like 'mint sauce' but would never think to wear them for occasions like a polo/cricket match etc.
In my humble opinion I think jeans are fine for the older generation and if I may say so, tend to look better wearing them than the teenagers who for some reason can only find jeans that are too lose or too tight for their bodies... ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Posted by Abigail (# 1672) on
:
I’ve found this thread interesting because I started wondering a few years ago if I’d reached an age when I should stop wearing jeans (I’m almost 60). I still wear them, though less than I used to. I often wear them for church but never for work.
And regarding church: my church is very informal and people wear whatever they like. I had a look round this morning and quite a few people were wearing jeans.
Including the vicar.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
Hand-embroidered jeans jacket sighting at this morning's 8.30 at Saint Barlaam's. More shockingly, one of the sidespersons (an adolescent male) wore a sports shop Tshirt.... Among the 18 there, 6 pair of walking shorts, presumably as we are going to get one of this month's rare sunny days.
Posted by Meerkat (# 16117) on
:
What are 'walking shorts'?
Posted by lily pad (# 11456) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Meerkat:
What are 'walking shorts'?
Walking shorts* are shorts that are a little bit above knee length. Generally, they fit nicely and look a little neater than any other shorts. So, not sport shorts or short shorts, and neither really loose and baggy nor overly tight. They often have front and back pockets like a pair of trousers would and are either a solid colour or a small plaid. Pretty much a more up-to-date version of Bermuda shorts.
*Hoping this was a serious question as I always assumed they were a British thing.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0