Dress Codes

[Mrs. B]

Your disdain is not appealing, and doesn't help your cause.

Disdain towards what exactly?

[bonaire]

I'll go where I like; that's not your call. Don't like me not dressing up someplace? *You* don't go there. Or not.

This kind of "least common denominator" argument doesn't really move the discussion anywhere. I saw the same thing from a number of folks during the whole "smoke-free" debate. It basically boils down to "we are doing something that a group of people doesn't like, but we want to keep doing it without any attempt at finding common ground, so we'll play the 'it's a free world' card and tell you all to go away". Sounds awfully self-serving to me. The argument seems to imply a lack of respect for how others feel on the issue at hand and a complete unwillingness to think about compromise. Perhaps this is more commentary on the structure of our little debate, so feel free to ignore, I just find absolutist arguments like this to be discussion-killers.

FWIW, I like to look nice when I go to a restaurant, but no one on earth would call me a fashion maven. I think there's a difference between looking presentable and wearing a couture headpiece replete with neon ostrich feathers straight from Milan. I like it when others in a restaurant respect the spoken AND unspoken dress code but I feel no need to point out that others look like slobs -- they point that out quite well themselves. Thus, I respect someone elses right to walk into a restaurant in Crocs but I expect that person to realize some folks will think they are underdressed.

[Spill]

This kind of "least common denominator" argument doesn't really move the discussion anywhere. I saw the same thing from a number of folks during the whole "smoke-free" debate. It basically boils down to "we are doing something that a group of people doesn't like, but we want to keep doing it without any attempt at finding common ground, so we'll play the 'it's a free world' card and tell you all to go away". Sounds awfully self-serving to me. The argument seems to imply a lack of respect for how others feel on the issue at hand and a complete unwillingness to think about compromise. Perhaps this is more commentary on the structure of our little debate, so feel free to ignore, I just find absolutist arguments like this to be discussion-killers.

FWIW, I like to look nice when I go to a restaurant, but no one on earth would call me a fashion maven. I think there's a difference between looking presentable and wearing a couture headpiece replete with neon ostrich feathers straight from Milan. I like it when others in a restaurant respect the spoken AND unspoken dress code but I feel no need to point out that others look like slobs -- they point that out quite well themselves. Thus, I respect someone elses right to walk into a restaurant in Crocs but I expect that person to realize some folks will think they are underdressed.

Well, the obvious difference between how you dress in a restaurant and whether you smoke in a restaurant is that the latter physically impacts other diners, interfering with them tasting their food and potentially endangering their health.

The moral outrage evident among some here who disapprove of others choices in clothing is not in the same class.

[Mrs. B]

The one who is actually "foolish" is the one who judges others to be foolish based on their appearance.

I will withhold "judgement" on a person wearing a jeweled crown but unless the diapered person is at a New Year's Eve bash or Halloween Party I think I have every right to judge their attire as foolish based on current standards of behavior. I heard a bit on NPR about a guy that liked to walk around in a superhero costume just because it made him feel good and it made other people feel good too. To each his own.

You know you might just have something with this word judgement. Like wearing shorts and and a tank top to CityZen might just show poor judgement as would wearing a tuxedo to wash your car. You have a right to wear whatever you want okay? I don't judge a person by their clothing but I might judge their judgement. Just don't even think about wearing muddy boots in my house.

PS Spill, you really need to stop triple spacing. When responding a reply put your cursor right behind the close quote thingey ] or directly under, if you put an extra return in you will triple space and piss off Don. Love Mrs. B.

[Anna Blume]

Don, enough with the guest chefs Chats with Superstar Chefs in a different forum on this message board. Obviously, Miss Manners should register and talk to us for a week.

[Spill]

<---- taking bets one whether he's wearing a tie right now

[Anna Blume]

nice weather we're having

[Pat]

I'm not sure I'm even really replying to one person here, but a dress code isn't necessarily about fashion. It's a rather conservative practice, which often stands at the other end of the spectrum from what is considered of the minute fashion. Someone wearing the trendiest and most fashionable cargo shorts or jeans (or track suit) would fail to meet the requirements at places with the strictest dress codes, while I could wear a very out-of-style skirt that originally belonged to my mother and satisfy the dress code just fine. Someone wearing a dress by a cutting edge designer that revealed a large amount of flesh might not pass muster.

There was a time that many more restaurants would not allow jeans than consent to it now, but that was before designer jeans had started making wearing denim respectable in more formal contexts. As they became more and more commonplace, barriers to wearing them on "fancy" occasions declined. Now "nice" dark jeans might be acceptable but those with holes and shredding are not, even though the latter is quite popular in some circles, fashionwise. There's been a similar progression with sneakers/athletic footwear.

[pizza man]

What about hairstyle, bad toupee, hair plugs, earrings (spacers), and other piercings, (the bull ring through the nose thing and lip rings come to mind) tattoos on the face and neck..etc. What about those things that are not defined in "dress code"?

What if Lady Gaga wants to eat at Citronelle, do you think she will be turned away for wearing her underpants?

[pizza man]

Well Dressed Man Disguise

"I've been driving through my life

My own way, and did I say

That I've been doing what I want

Along the way?

But I've got one eye on the rear-view mirror

And I've got the other one on the road

'cause I'm a hunted man

Ya' understand?

Alone, a desperado

In a well-dressed land

Running from the hunters stalking me right before my eyes

In the well-dressed man disuise

Hiding in plain sight

The well-dressed man disguise

It's like a real-life version

Of 'The Invasion of the Body Snatchers'

They watch and wait

Then try and catch ya'

They're all around me, can't close my eyes

To the well-dressed man disguise

I'm tired of running

From the well-dressed man diguise

My patience has expired, I'm getting sick and tired

Really sick and tired of the things that they've conspired

I'll take my chances, gonna stand and fight

That's right, gonna stand and fight!

No more running

No more!

Sometimes it ain't easy

To drive down the roads that I choose

But it's my life

I don't intend to lose

I'm tossing out my rear-view mirror

And putting both eyes on the road

'cause I don't care what's behind me anymore

The hunters stalking me right before my eyes

In the well-dressed man disguise

They'll never break me

The well-dressed man disuise

Well-dressed man

My patience has expired, I'm getting sick and tired

Really sick and tired of the things that they've conspired

I'll take my chances, gonna stand and fight

That's right, gonna stand and fight! "-Ludichrist

It's an old Hardcore song. I think it's about living life as you see fit, and blowing raspberries at the people who JUDGE others based upon their choices.. It takes all types.

P.S. I always follow the dress code as well as I am able.

[ktmoomau]

Don, enough with the guest chefs at this web site. Obviously, Miss Manners should register and talk to us for a week.

But I am loving reading all this and it has been really insightful! I learned I am an elitist snob. I had my suspicions all along though. Maybe it was my love of good stinky blue cheese and vinagrette on salads at an early age, or because other kids wanted ponies and I had a horse or maybe it was my obsession with chicken nuggets at age 3 (obviously elitist I only liked the all white meat ones) or maybe it was my Father's obsession that I learned tennis so I would fit in with all my elitist friends... I should have seen it sooner, really the signs were all there. Now I feel very enlightened and self-aware. (see? very snobby and elitist...) With this realization I am going to go dictate an email to my assistant- she will LOVE this. And when she gives me that look I will tell her sorry but I learned I am an elitist snob and this is what elitist snobs do.

I learned that some people think that this is an income issue, when I find it really isn't. Just like going to church you can be poor and dress nicer for church than Joe Moneybags.

I love that there are multiples of us youngsters who think that t-shirts are inappropriate.

And I am shocked no one has blamed it on the influence of engineers, .com and technology companies loosening dress code standards. I mean we have blamed it on so many other things why not?

FYI: Zaytinya's dress code says there isn't one but most people wear upscale casual. I think Armani jeans therefore qualify? I do think diners put restaurants in an akward position when they clearly state a dress code and it is ignored. I mean they want to get new customers and keep everyone happy and that is such a fine balance.

And really do we think lunch standards should be lower than dinner?

I am truly loving this. I can't stop reading this thread for the sheer delight.

[Pat]

What about hairstyle, bad toupee, hair plugs, earrings (spacers), and other piercings, (the bull ring through the nose thing and lip rings come to mind) tattoos on the face and neck..etc. What about those things that are not defined in "dress code"?

What if Lady Gaga wants to eat at Citronelle, do you think she will be turned away for wearing her underpants?

I would imagine that the traditional application of a dress code served to keep people away who might, uh, not fit into the environment for other reasons. (This is an explanation, not a personal statement.) As things have changed over time, the dress code is a vestige of an old way of doing things. Trying to reject someone for matters of personal appearance would be far more difficult than doing it because they have violated some objective rule (e.g., walking into Corduroy in shorts and flip flops).

Being famous enough, I imagine, trumps the dress code in some places. A restaurant could always supply Lady Gaga with a long sport coat from their dress code collection

[pizza man]

Oooh, lookin' good!

[demandalicious]

What if Lady Gaga wants to eat at Citronelle, do you think she will be turned away for wearing her underpants?

Moot point, since Lady Gaga and her cameltoe don't eat.

[JPW]

And I am shocked no one has blamed it on the influence of engineers, .com and technology companies loosening dress code standards. I mean we have blamed it on so many other things why not?

In this, as in all things that are leading to the collapse of civilization, I blame the Baby Boomers. Effin' Hippies!!!!!!

[BookGuy]

About ten years ago, I called Vidalia to ask if they had a dress code for dinner and was told something to the effect that "we are here to sell food and not to evaluate clothing." Still, whenever I go there, I wear a tie and loosen it during dinner.

[Michael Landrum]

As not only a guest chef, but as someone who has spent many years playing host to guests in many circumstances, I can say one thing that would perhaps explain my relaxed approach to the question of appropriate dress in restaurants: there are hundreds of reasons why someone may be dressed inappropriately at a restaurant. Boorishness is only one, and of the hundreds the only one which maybe should be judged harshly, if at all. All others should elicit and engender sympathy and understanding, not scorn.

It could be a difference in racial/cultural/geographic experience or expectations.

It could be a business traveler or tourist with lost luggage.

It could simply be a family in an unfamiliar city who unknowingly wandered into the "wrong place" because they were hungry and tired, as if there ever should be such a place in the hospitality business.

It could be someone who read about a wonderful, must-try restaurant on donrockwell.com and didn't realize he would be unwelcome there based on his apparel.

It could be, as is sometimes my case, a family member with severe mental illness who does not always manage to arrange himself "properly", but usually does behave well--should he only experience "lesser" restaurants?

I am sure every one here has a story of finding himself, for whatever reason, unexpectedly or unavoidably inappropriately dressed.

Without knowing why, precisely, the individual is not dressed appropriately--and who can ever know that?--judgement should be reserved, and all efforts should be made, by the restaurant staff as well as surrounding diners to make that person feel as comfortable as possible. Trust me, except in the case of the boor, the offending party already feels as much shame, embarrassment and mortification as you would probably like him/it to feel for being out of place.

As to the whole Cary Grant/Mad Men thing, I am sure in those days anyone committing the offense of wearing a suit with padded shoulders would be treated to the same scorn felt towards those wearing jeans today.

That being said, as some may have seen first-hand, when I am out doing some daytime drinking, on my way to the club, or out on a date with a young lady of what some would call questionable morals (but believe me, there is never any question in my mind) I may be wearing a sweat suit or a jeans outfit that costs much, much more than my suits from Brooks Bros., Hart, Schaffner and Marx or Hickey-Freeman, but that doesn't mean I am going to try to go to Citronelle, Bourbon Steak or even the Source dressed that way. I do however, appreciate that in jeans I may be welcome at Central, Proof and Komi, or in the hotel version of Corduroy. In fact, over the years those restaurants with a dress code or of a certain atmosphere have lost literally thousands of dollars in spontaneous business from me on nights when I found myself out and wanting a good meal but not dressed for the occasion--so I do agree that everyone who knows better and who has a choice under the circumstances should make the effort to dress appropriately and respectfully or choose his dining options to suit.

But again, I always say, when I am out with people I like I never notice how long I have to wait for a table, how long it takes the waiter to get my drink, or what the people around me are wearing. It's only when I am out with people I don't like that I notice those things.

[jparrott]

I want to have sex with Coco Chanel.

[pizza man]

I would imagine that the traditional application of a dress code served to keep people away who might, uh, not fit into the environment for other reasons. (This is an explanation, not a personal statement.) As things have changed over time, the dress code is a vestige of an old way of doing things. Trying to reject someone for matters of personal appearance would be far more difficult than doing it because they have violated some objective rule (e.g., walking into Corduroy in shorts and flip flops).

Being famous enough, I imagine, trumps the dress code in some places. A restaurant could always supply Lady Gaga with a long sport coat from their dress code collection

I guess the first point could be considered, "discriminatory", and therefore, a liability for the proprietor to enforce? As for the second point, it's the reply I was looking for and it does have the faint air of elitism, regardless of pop stars' eating habits, (maybe she's just there to have drinks and do coke in the restroom )

[zoramargolis]

I can't even begin to count the number of times that I have wanted to go out to dinner, but my husband refused to go out because he didn't feel like changing his clothes, and wouldn't consider going to a restaurant, wearing what he was wearing. After returning from my recent trip to California, he picked me up at the airport, I was starving, it was late and I knew there wasn't any food at home. I suggested the new Ray's the Steaks, which had just opened. Himself was reluctant, believing he would be out of place in his flannel shirt. I begged. He relented. Michael and Mark were both welcoming. It took a couple of glasses of wine for himself to stop feeling self-conscious, but in the end it was fine. A terrific meal and just what I needed that night. However, himself still hates to get dressed up, and believes that he must in order to go to a restaurant, so we rarely go out for anything other than a burger.

[aaronsinger]

I don't really have a problem with some places having a dress code, just depends on the establishment. I do remember in the mid-90's my sister wasn't allowed into a Dave and Buster's because she was wearing jeans.

[Elyssa]

Well, the obvious difference between how you dress in a restaurant and whether you smoke in a restaurant is that the latter physically impacts other diners, interfering with them tasting their food and potentially endangering their health.

The moral outrage evident among some here who disapprove of others choices in clothing is not in the same class.

Crocs endanger my health...they hurt my eyes!

[DPop]

I so want this thread to make it to 500 posts without any conclusion/concession. I'm sure Don would be thrilled about that.

We're on our way, people, keep up the arguing the same points over and over and we should be there by Friday!

[Waitman]

The one who is actually "foolish" is the one who judges others to be foolish based on their appearance.

Everyone judges a hundred people by their appearance every day, consciously or not, usually to no important end, but as some kind of ancient tribal instinct. To pretend otherwise is to be, well, foolish. (Though Mr. Landrumm's post makes the fine point that in sizing up the other person, one must evaluate more than judge, and look past the clothes, as well, particularly when tempted to be critical).

The moral outrage evident among some here who disapprove of others choices in clothing is not in the same class.

It's surely another one of those logical fallacies that I've been slowly recalling: to pump up disapproval or mere dislike into moral outrage in order skew an argument and make your opponent appear irrationally extreme. It's like calling a Republican a fascist or a Democrat a socialist, the kind of inflationary rhetoric that debases the currency. One is permitted to have opinions on manners, judgment and aesthetic opinions without being accused of moralistic overdrive.

In this, as in all things that are leading to the collapse of civilization, I blame the Baby Boomers. Effin' Hippies!!!!!!

As a Baby Boomer, currently swathed in luscious client-ready fabrics for which I still owe money, I blame the collapse on the Gen X-ers. F-in slackers!

What about hairstyle, bad toupee, hair plugs, earrings (spacers), and other piercings, (the bull ring through the nose thing and lip rings come to mind) tattoos on the face and neck..etc. What about those things that are not defined in "dress code"?

What if Lady Gaga wants to eat at Citronelle, do you think she will be turned away for wearing her underpants?

Intriguing questions, all. In random order:

Citronelle is a French Restaurant. You know how the French are. She would be steered to a private chef's table where her attire would not clash with the dress code and where the chef had the opportunity to ply her with rare comestibles and Veuve Fourny (lot of widows in the bubbly biz, it seems) until even the underpants disappeared. This assumes that she was wearing ONLY underpants, not underpants beneath more traditional evening wear.

Unfortunate hairstyles, bad toupees and hair plugs are all indicative of trying, which counts for a lot, just like when someone pulls out that mis-sized blazer they only wear once a year because it's their anniversary or someone died or something. You are allowed to behave towards them, and towards those with polyester ties and prom dresses that have been re-cut and saved for special occasions, as you would to a stylish friend who, as even Carrie Bradshaw does occasionally, commits a fashion faux pas. That is, with a brief eye-roll, sympathy, and respect for the effort.

Many people with spacers, bull rings, horsehoes, tattoos on the face and neck and similar aggro body art are unemployed now that Tower Records has closed and e-mail has crippled the bike courier industry, and they cannot afford a decent meal. As with Skinheads, they should be taken bowling and fed burgers and fries between frames. Most of the rest of these body-art outlaws work until 4AM at trendy clubs and thus will not be at the next table when you dine at CityZen this Friday night. Should they show up clad with a certain Euro-panache, they get bonus points and should be poured a free glass of Demi-Sec after dinner by Andy and given a tour of his forearms, or allowed to visit the kitchen, where they can trade ink and hardware tips with similarly illuminated line cooks and possibly get another piercing with an ice pick, on the cutting board. If they are wearing the now-rumpled suit and/or dress their mother made them buy for a cousin's wedding three years ago, they should be treated as usual. If they are in jeans and t-shirt they should be turned away, unless they are that bouncer from the 9:30 Club, in which case they can do anything they damn well please.

I kind of like the visible ink guys, because -- without pointing a finger at anyone in particular -- it's pretty fucking easy to wear jeans and a t into a nice place and pretend you're a rebel individualist because you're standing up to straights in suits and assholes like me. That hairy eyeball from the host as you pass by makes the fancy cocktail taste even sweeter. But the ink guys and gals have to put up with real shit from strangers, and they can't go home and change into a button-down and go back to their job in the office. It may be a pose, but it's not cheap and easy.

My daughter in Catholic School does not love her tartans and complained that they stifled her individuality. (My son got to go to a secular high school and expressed his individuality by dressing in roughly the same rags as every other male in his class, but that's another story) I basically told her that if she was such an damn individualist she might express that by thinking individual thoughts rather than whining about her inability to dress in clothes bought from the Gap. And, at some point, she joined a weird sport, questioned the existence of the deity to whom her school is dedicated, and received demerits for protesting the Church's stance on gays. She became an individual. In the same tartan skirt all the other girls wear. A real individual.

Note -- the spellcheck thingy on Mozilla beats the hell out of the one on Explorer.

Edited to add: but still far from a match for me.

[B.A.R.]

FYI - Terry Theise is in the house. Check out Events & Gatherings.......now, back to our originally scheduled programming, joined in progress

[DanCole42]

I am posting naked while eating a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken. I hope this does not ruin anyone's meal and simultaneously furthers DPop's goal.

Actually, it just puts me in the mood for chicken.

At Ray's Hell last night I suggest to my wife that we go their in a tux and evening gown some night, just to make life a little more surreal for everyone.

[deangold]

That being said, as some may have seen first-hand, when I am out doing some daytime drinking, on my way to the club, or out on a date with a young lady of what some would call questionable morals (but believe me, there is never any question in my mind)

I hope no one with good taste or who is at work opens this one.....

Just in case, Michael

[Waitman]

I can't even begin to count the number of times that I have wanted to go out to dinner, but my husband refused to go out because he didn't feel like changing his clothes, and wouldn't consider going to a restaurant, wearing what he was wearing. After returning from my recent trip to California, he picked me up at the airport, I was starving, it was late and I knew there wasn't any food at home. I suggested the new Ray's the Steaks, which had just opened. Himself was reluctant, believing he would be out of place in his flannel shirt. I begged. He relented. Michael and Mark were both welcoming. It took a couple of glasses of wine for himself to stop feeling self-conscious, but in the end it was fine. A terrific meal and just what I needed that night. However, himself still hates to get dressed up, and believes that he must in order to go to a restaurant, so we rarely go out for anything other than a burger.

You should move to Denver -- they think a collared shirt is Black Tie!

This is a dilemma and he will now never speak to me again if he reads my posts, but one of the reasons dressing for a nice place is nice is because the vast majority of restaurants would welcome a gentleman dressed as I have seen him on several occasions without a second thought. Maybe it goes deeper -- maybe it's because their cooking is rarely as good as yours.

I've been to Ray's the Steaks for exactly the reason's described above. But when going to The Classics, I always try to wear a cummerbund, especially if there's a Cary Grant movie at the AFI.

[JPW]

As a Baby Boomer, currently swathed in luscious client-ready fabrics for which I still owe money, I blame the collapse on the Gen X-ers. F-in slackers!

Hey! As a Gen X-er I resemble those remarks!!

.

.

.

Oh, my bad, I thought you wrote "F-in Dockers!"

[bioesq]

I hope no one with good taste or who is at work opens this one.....

Just in case, Michael

I thought that her attire was inappropriate, and a bit more than tawdry. I would have refused service.

[hungry prof]

Just so I'm clear on this: Where can I and where can I not wear a shirt like this when I eat out?

[pizza man]

Everyone judges a hundred people by their appearance every day, consciously or not, usually to no important end, but as some kind of ancient tribal instinct. To pretend otherwise is to be, well, foolish. (Though Mr. Landrumm's post makes the fine point that in sizing up the other person, one must evaluate more than judge, and look past the clothes, as well, particularly when tempted to be critical).

It's surely another one of those logical fallacies that I've been slowly recalling: to pump up disapproval or mere dislike into moral outrage in order skew an argument and make your opponent appear irrationally extreme. It's like calling a Republican a fascist or a Democrat a socialist, the kind of inflationary rhetoric that debases the currency. One is permitted to have opinions on manners, judgment and aesthetic opinions without being accused of moralistic overdrive.

As a Baby Boomer, currently swathed in luscious client-ready fabrics for which I still owe money, I blame the collapse on the Gen X-ers. F-in slackers!

Intriguing questions, all. In random order:

Citronelle is a French Restaurant. You know how the French are. She would be steered to a private chef's table where her attire would not clash with the dress code and where the chef had the opportunity to ply her with rare comestibles and Veuve Fourny (lot of widows in the bubbly biz, it seems) until even the underpants disappeared. This assumes that she was wearing ONLY underpants, not underpants beneath more traditional evening wear.

Unfortunate hairstyles, bad toupees and hair plugs are all indicative of trying, which counts for a lot, just like when someone pulls out that mis-sized blazer they only wear once a year because it's their anniversary or someone died or something. You are allowed to behave towards them, and towards those with polyester ties and prom dresses that have been re-cut and saved for special occasions, as you would to a stylish friend who, as even Carrie Bradshaw does occasionally, commits a fashion faux pas. That is, with a brief eye-roll, sympathy, and respect for the effort.

Many people with spacers, bull rings, horsehoes, tattoos on the face and neck and similar aggro body art are unemployed now that Tower Records has closed and e-mail has crippled the bike courier industry, and they cannot afford a decent meal. As with Skinheads, they should be taken bowling and fed burgers and fries between frames. Most of the rest of these body-art outlaws work until 4AM at trendy clubs and thus will not be at the next table when you dine at CityZen this Friday night. Should they show up clad with a certain Euro-panache, they get bonus points and should be poured a free glass of Demi-Sec after dinner by Andy and given a tour of his forearms, or allowed to visit the kitchen, where they can trade ink and hardware tips with similarly illuminated line cooks and possibly get another piercing with an ice pick, on the cutting board. If they are wearing the now-rumpled suit and/or dress their mother made them buy for a cousin's wedding three years ago, they should be treated as usual. If they are in jeans and t-shirt they should be turned away, unless they are that bouncer from the 9:30 Club, in which case they can do anything they damn well please.

I kind of like the visible ink guys, because -- without pointing a finger at anyone in particular -- it's pretty fucking easy to wear jeans and a t into a nice place and pretend you're a rebel individualist because you're standing up to straights in suits and assholes like me. That hairy eyeball from the host as you pass by makes the fancy cocktail taste even sweeter. But the ink guys and gals have to put up with real shit from strangers, and they can't go home and change into a button-down and go back to their job in the office. It may be a pose, but it's not cheap and easy.

My daughter in Catholic School does not love her tartans and complained that they stifled her individuality. (My son got to go to a secular high school and expressed his individuality by dressing in roughly the same rags as every other male in his class, but that's another story) I basically told her that if she was such an damn individualist she might express that by thinking individual thoughts rather than whining about her inability to dress in clothes bought from the Gap. And, at some point, she joined a weird sport, questioned the existence of the deity to whom her school is dedicated, and received demerits for protesting the Church's stance on gays. She became an individual. In the same tartan skirt all the other girls wear. A real individual.

Note -- the spellcheck thingy on Mozilla beats the hell out of the one on Explorer.

Edited to add: but still far from a match for me.

That's the good stuff. Thanks. Friends?

[DonRocks]

As not only a guest chef, but as someone who has spent many years playing host to guests in many circumstances, I can say one thing that would perhaps explain my relaxed approach to the question of appropriate dress in restaurants: there are hundreds of reasons why someone may be dressed inappropriately at a restaurant. Boorishness is only one, and of the hundreds the only one which maybe should be judged harshly, if at all. All others should elicit and engender sympathy and understanding, not scorn.

Thanks for that lecture on tenderness and compassion, Mr. 10-2-1.

[goodeats]

I want to have sex with Coco Chanel.

Memo: Aren't you a little late?? Maybe with Donatella Versace? Betsey Johnson? [<- how's that for dress code?!]Maybe Diane von Furstenburg? Meow.

[Michael Landrum]

Thanks for that lecture on tenderness and compassion, Mr. 10-2-1.

Inappropriate dress, I said, not behavior. DC behavioral norms still manage to be boorish, thuggish, grabby and whiny all at the same time, and I have as little tolerance for that as always.

[pizza man]

What if the chef wears flip flops, occasionally with socks, a ratty t'shirt and some crusty old pants?

*edit* No actual persons, living or dead, are intended. This is purely hypothetical.

[Waitman]

That's the good stuff. Thanks. Friends?

Indeed.

[jparrott]

I want to have sex with Coco Chanel. Again.

[DonRocks]

I want to have sex with Coco Chanel. Again.

[This one-line post is an insipid, choppy piece of nougat that degrades both the substantial talent that Waitman demonstrated in his inspired response, and the annoying perspicacity that you demonstrated in your response to the Ackermann Function Challenge. It's the literary equivalent of wearing a T-shirt among well-dressed diners. Carry on.]

[jparrott]

and the annoying perspicacity that you demonstrated in your response to the Ackermann Function Challenge.

You really want to bring that up? There's a reason your OP is still in my sig.

[Mrs. B]

[This one-line post is an insipid, choppy piece of nougat that degrades both the substantial talent that Waitman demonstrated in his inspired response, and the annoying perspicacity that you demonstrated in your response to the Ackermann Function Challenge. It's the literary equivalent of wearing a T-shirt among well-dressed diners. Carry on.]

I want to have sex with Cary Grant - he can keep his hat/suit on. Thanks for the great back and forth you guys, I needed it today.

[DameEdna]

Have you ever just returned from a long visit with the Carthusian monks, and needed to let loose a good screed? I thought so. Some of you probably thought the writer was George Will, whilst experimenting with the special mushrooms the local kids sell on the street corner. Not so. It's just too good. And George Will would never say "hairy eyeball".

I was going to mention something about the guy who wears the incredibly shmatte brick red suit, who is seen in all the best places. But what is the point?

[Pool Boy]

One thing that I am not sure has been mentioned yet on this thread is the degrees of 'inappropriateness in attire' (for lack of a better term). Someone suggested that we all make judgements based on appearance to some degree many, many times a day. I agree that this is the case, and further agree that anyone who doesn't think this this is the case for the vast majority of people on this planet (if not all) is fooling themselves.

Now, I think anyone would agree that if someone came in wearing a bright pink and turquoise polka dot suit would be a distraction to other diners in a restaurant. Ditto for someone wearing tattered clothing. Or clothing covered in grease. Or smelling of day old fish. Or someone wearing something extremely revealing. Or think of something extreme.

Now one could argue that the other example another person gave where a guy walks in to a restaurant with a nice jacket and really expensive designer blue jeans. Technically against the dress code of the restaurant? Sure. The degree of this person and someone walking in with say, really lousy looking jeans -- say they are clean, but really worn, or maybe they are out of fashion or whatever. And this other person is not wearing a jacket. Clearly there is a difference between the degrees of against a given dress code or policy or implied dress code vibe of the place of these two examples.

This is where what is OK for some folks is not OK for others and to what degree that it could get really interesting.

[Al Dente]

Now, I think anyone would agree that if someone came in wearing a bright pink and turquoise polka dot suit would be a distraction to other diners in a restaurant. Ditto for someone wearing tattered clothing. Or clothing covered in grease. Or smelling of day old fish. Or someone wearing something extremely revealing. Or think of something extreme.

Assless chaps?

[Heather]

Assless chaps?

I have been waiting for those all day. This thread is now complete.

We keep arguing about clothes. Can we get back to the shoe issue, please?

[treznor]

I have been waiting for those all day. This thread is now complete.

We keep arguing about clothes. Can we get back to the shoe issue, please?

Having not seen a post in this thread for 8 hours, I propose a new law:

The mention of assless chaps ends conversation as nothing is left to be said.

[Cooter]

Memo: Aren't you a little late?? Maybe with Donatella Versace?

I can assure you that no one wants to have sex with Ms. Versace.

[lackadaisi]

I am quite enjoying this pointless discussion, and I really want it to continue. But people, can we please agree that the word judgment has only one e? It is killing me.

[DanCole42]

I am quite enjoying this pointless discussion, and I really want it to continue. But people, can we please agree that the word judgment has only one e? It is killing me.

Not if the English are the ones passing judgement.

[Pool Boy]

I have been waiting for those all day. This thread is now complete.

We keep arguing about clothes. Can we get back to the shoe issue, please?

Ahhh shoes.

Here's a conundrum. Why is it OK and acceptable for ladies to be able to wear sandals in some places and it's not ok for gents to do the same? I'm not talking about nasty old or casual sandals, but nice man sandals. What's the deal?

And big giant über colorful sneakers. Why are these allowed anywhere? Some of them are the size of small moons. ;-p

Shall we also discuss hiking boots?

Carry on!