OCI/callbacks/etc Men's Clothing Mega-thread

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:17 pm

spondee wrote:
Spor wrote:I've read other places that black is a definite no for any business environment.


Is that true? What's wrong with black?


That is 100% false.

shanejamin
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby shanejamin » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:18 pm

Esc wrote:
shanejamin wrote:
twert wrote:all the suits i see on websites are wool. what do people in warm climates wear, cotton?


Wool is for all seasons, unless it's summer and 160 degrees, in which case, cotton is the choice (or linen if you're the Don, or seersucker if you're fat, southern, and alive in 1920).


lol. I wouldn't mind seersucker suits if they didn't automatically make everyone who wears them look like a segregationist. :|


Seriously. They're really successful at being cool in the summer in Texas and also at looking like you need a bowtie and a pocket chain to round out your Colonel Fucking Preposterous St. Croix costume.

User avatar
Veyron
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Veyron » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:19 pm

betasteve wrote:
Veyron wrote:
betasteve wrote:
Veyron wrote:2) It does NOT need to be Hugo Boss or better, so long as it is tailored and not so cheap it falls apart.


*Clears throat*

Thats why I said Hugo Boss or better or a custom re-cut.

Blue is also fine but cg is the absolute most conservative.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:28 pm

Veyron wrote:
betasteve wrote:2) It does NOT need to be Hugo Boss or better, so long as it is tailored and not so cheap it falls apart.


*Clears throat*

Thats why I said Hugo Boss or better or a custom re-cut.

Blue is also fine but cg is the absolute most conservative.
The "or" there implies that if you buy a really expensive-label suit you don't have to have it tailored. This would be an unfortunate decision.

User avatar
sanpiero
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:09 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sanpiero » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:32 pm

if having pleated suit pants tailored, how wide - in inches - should the cuff be? i think there is a fine line btw too wide and too narrow but i've never heard which measurement, or range of measurements, is most suitable. i'm sure a decent tailor would know the answer to this question, however i'd like to have an idea in case i run into a situation where i need to know.
Last edited by sanpiero on Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

legalized
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:45 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby legalized » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:33 pm

shanejamin wrote:
Esc wrote:
shanejamin wrote:
twert wrote:all the suits i see on websites are wool. what do people in warm climates wear, cotton?


Wool is for all seasons, unless it's summer and 160 degrees, in which case, cotton is the choice (or linen if you're the Don, or seersucker if you're fat, southern, and alive in 1920).


lol. I wouldn't mind seersucker suits if they didn't automatically make everyone who wears them look like a segregationist. :|


Seriously. They're really successful at being cool in the summer in Texas and also at looking like you need a bowtie and a pocket chain to round out your Colonel Fucking Preposterous St. Croix costume.


Explain the reference?

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:37 pm

For around $800 you can have a suit custom made by a tailor. The benefits are, among others, that the suit will fit you perfectly, it'll be prepared to your sartorial desire, and it will likely last longer than most suits that you'd buy on a rack. If $800 seems like a lot of money, thinking about the cost per wear should help.

Black, navy, and grey are the most obvious options. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:39 pm

missvik218 wrote:Ok, I'm going shopping with a friend & we are buying her boyfriend a new watch ... this will be for work/formal wear. I don't know anything about men's watches, etc. and neither does she. I think we're looking for something around $500, suggestions?!


Emporio Armani, square face.

User avatar
danielle77
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:18 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby danielle77 » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:40 pm

Thanks! I do like theory, it just fits me poorly. Is there a secret place for awesome fitting button down shirts? even though the rest of my torso can fit into a standard xs, i cant usually close the buttons in the chest area, and if i can i get that weird ripple and everyone can see inside of it. Would a tailor just fix it? like just cut off have of a larger shirt?

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:43 pm

sirchristaylor wrote:. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:
Sorry, but this is another lie told to you by GQ. Single, forward pleats are fine, and some body types look better in pleats. However, flat-fronts are a la mode, so a much safer choice for the fashion cautious.

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:46 pm

Renzo wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:
Sorry, but this is another lie told to you by GQ. Single, forward pleats are fine, and some body types look better in pleats. However, flat-fronts are a la mode, so a much safer choice for the fashion cautious.


Well, if you think you look good in pleats I guess that's all that matters.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:50 pm

sirchristaylor wrote:
Renzo wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:
Sorry, but this is another lie told to you by GQ. Single, forward pleats are fine, and some body types look better in pleats. However, flat-fronts are a la mode, so a much safer choice for the fashion cautious.


Well, if you think you look good in pleats I guess that's all that matters.

Nah, personally I stick with flat-fronts. I'm not a small guy, so I need as slim/athletic fit as possible to avoid looking fat.

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:52 pm

betasteve wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:For around $800 you can have a suit custom made by a tailor. The benefits are, among others, that the suit will fit you perfectly, it'll be prepared to your sartorial desire, and it will likely last longer than most suits that you'd buy on a rack. If $800 seems like a lot of money, thinking about the cost per wear should help.

Black, navy, and grey are the most obvious options. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:

You think black is equally acceptable as navy or grey, but think pleats are never acceptable? You've just failed. GQ is not the proper style guide for the legal profession. Hth.


Your comment is a fail on multiple fronts, a few of which are: I never advocated one color over another; pleats are never acceptable (unless, as I just mentioned, you feel that you look good in them (because who can do anything about that?)); you should probably read GQ. I spent enough time in the legal industry to not need to refer to GQ when discussing proper style in the legal profession. Thanks for playing.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:59 pm

For anyone that lives near a Nordstroms, their Men's Half-Yearly Sale is a good time to get a high-quality suit at a discount. Plus, they can help guide you as to what looks good on you and their tailoring is top-notch.


If you're only going to have one suit, it should be fairly conservative so as to be multi-functional. Dark blue / gray / whatever. Just make sure it's not white or something.

Pleats are fine for some, not others. They are a bit more classic / conservative and not quite so fashionable at the moment, but no one will think bad of you for wearing them. I like them.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when you're wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:21 pm

betasteve wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:
betasteve wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:For around $800 you can have a suit custom made by a tailor. The benefits are, among others, that the suit will fit you perfectly, it'll be prepared to your sartorial desire, and it will likely last longer than most suits that you'd buy on a rack. If $800 seems like a lot of money, thinking about the cost per wear should help.

Black, navy, and grey are the most obvious options. Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant. Ever. :shock:

You think black is equally acceptable as navy or grey, but think pleats are never acceptable? You've just failed. GQ is not the proper style guide for the legal profession. Hth.


Your comment is a fail on multiple fronts, a few of which are:
After I address these following, I'll expect you to let me know where else my "comment is a fail."
sirchristaylor wrote: I never advocated one color over another

I never said you did - in fact I specifically said you treated black as preferable as grey or navy. It, in fact, is not.
sirchristaylor wrote:pleats are never acceptable (unless, as I just mentioned, you feel that you look good in them (because who can do anything about that?))

So pleats are never acceptable, except when they are (when the specific wearer looks good in them). But wait - didn't you say in the post I initially quoted that one should "Never, EVER, wear a pleated pant." You should probably make up your own mind before you give advice.
sirchristaylor wrote: you should probably read GQ.

I have - and it's great for getting advice to be hip and current with your fashion, but it is unequivocally a piece of shit to the uninformed when it comes to dressing conservatively (i.e. how you'd dress in the legal profession).
sirchristaylor wrote:I spent enough time in the legal industry to not need to refer to GQ when discussing proper style in the legal profession. Thanks for playing.

As I said, no one should ever be referring to GQ when determining how to dress in the legal profession.

And so, in conclusion:
1) Thanks for playing;
2) As you eluded to, I'd love to hear what other ways my initial comment fails...


Once again, your comment is a complete failure. I'll give you at least an "A-" for effort.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:24 pm

:lol:
kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when you're wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:27 pm

betasteve wrote:
kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when you're wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.

wtf are you talking about?



Last line of your post above mine.

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:28 pm

betasteve wrote:
sirchristaylor wrote:
Once again, your comment is a complete failure. I'll give you at least an "A-" for effort.

Excellent rebuttal. I give you a D for effort. If you are going to try to give up without looking like you give up, you really do need to do better than that.


Honestly, you haven't shown enough intelligence or skill in this debate to make me want to continue. Enjoy your fun-filled, pleated life. :D

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:35 pm

I saved you from continuing to murder the English language.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:50 pm

It's a continuing process for most people. It's not like pulling a gun and one shot and dead. It's like slowly and deliberately torturing it to death.

User avatar
thalassocrat
Posts: 488
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby thalassocrat » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:53 pm

kalvano wrote:I saved you from continuing to murder the English language.

kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when [strike]you're[/strike] your wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.


FTFY. :wink:

User avatar
sirchristaylor
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby sirchristaylor » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:57 pm

thalassocrat wrote:
kalvano wrote:I saved you from continuing to murder the English language.

kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when [strike]you're[/strike] your wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.


FTFY. :wink:


Look at that cute little kitty. No pleats! :D

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11725
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby kalvano » Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:59 pm

thalassocrat wrote:
kalvano wrote:I saved you from continuing to murder the English language.

kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when [strike]you're[/strike] your wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.


FTFY. :wink:




Fuck my iPhone.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:01 pm

kalvano wrote:
thalassocrat wrote:
kalvano wrote:I saved you from continuing to murder the English language.

kalvano wrote:Goddamit.

Elude - what you do when [strike]you're[/strike] your wife is coming after you with a .45.
Allude - to make reference to.


FTFY. :wink:




Fuck my iPhone.

Uh huh. Everyone always has an excuse for the second-degree grammar burn.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.