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
GodSpeed
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:05 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby GodSpeed » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:55 am

zettsscores40 wrote:One thing I haven't seen discussed is hairstyles. I think we've covered facial hair.


I'm glad I dont have to worry about this. My Ex-GF used to get pissed off because people would compliment my hair so much, especially after she'd pay $300 to get her hair done :mrgreen: Cougars have pulled on it, told me they love it and whispered very dirty things in my ear outside the presence of their sig-others and gay guys have complimented me on it. Awesome hair FTMFW.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:58 am

GodSpeed wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:One thing I haven't seen discussed is hairstyles. I think we've covered facial hair.


I'm glad I dont have to worry about this. My Ex-GF used to get pissed off because people would compliment my hair so much, especially after she'd pay $300 to get her hair done :mrgreen: Cougars have pulled on it, told me they love it and whispered very dirty things in my ear outside the presence of their sig-others and gay guys have complimented me on it. Awesome hair FTMFW.


Yeah I got blessed with good hair genes (thanks dad :mrgreen:) but the problem is I get bored of it too easily and I like to change it up (nothing too radical--just shorter to longer, parting it in different spots, slicking back, etc). I guess I was trying to figure out/gauge if there are any no-nos for an interview/the office. Obviously the Pauly D is out.

User avatar
GodSpeed
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:05 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby GodSpeed » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:00 am

zettsscores40 wrote:
GodSpeed wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:One thing I haven't seen discussed is hairstyles. I think we've covered facial hair.


I'm glad I dont have to worry about this. My Ex-GF used to get pissed off because people would compliment my hair so much, especially after she'd pay $300 to get her hair done :mrgreen: Cougars have pulled on it, told me they love it and whispered very dirty things in my ear outside the presence of their sig-others and gay guys have complimented me on it. Awesome hair FTMFW.


Yeah I got blessed with good hair genes (thanks dad :mrgreen:) but the problem is I get bored of it too easily and I like to change it up (nothing too radical--just shorter to longer, parting it in different spots, slicking back, etc). I guess I was trying to figure out/gauge if there are any no-nos for an interview/the office. Obviously the Pauly D is out.


Side part, ftw.

I'm a rebel; I part it on the right *gasp*

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:01 am

romothesavior wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:Well, I'm wearing a button-down with a suit tomorrow, mostly because I have no other shirts to wear (most of my wardrobe has been moved to STL). Is it ideal or trendy? According to GQ, no. But a hell of a lot of people do it, and the button down has been worn with suits (yes suits, not just sports jackets) periodically throughout the past century, so I certainly won't be looking or feeling awkward in it.


What's the event?


Going to watch a trial for my internship. (I'm a 0L interning in HR at a Fortune 100 company this summer, and an attorney invited me to come watch a trial.)


I mean you should be fine. It's become pretty common. No one is going to point you out for it.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby romothesavior » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:04 am

zettsscores40 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
Going to watch a trial for my internship. (I'm a 0L interning in HR at a Fortune 100 company this summer, and an attorney invited me to come watch a trial.)


I mean you should be fine. It's become pretty common. No one is going to point you out for it.


Yeah, and this company is extremely laid back in terms of dres. When I went to talk to to this attorney in his office last week, he was wearing a short sleeve mock-turtleneck and slacks (the guy is kinda jacked for a 40-something, so he pulls it off). No one will notice or care.

Also, how fashionable is the thin, balding hairstyle? That's what I'm rockin, and will be rockin' for some time to come. :lol:

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:06 am

GodSpeed wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:
GodSpeed wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:One thing I haven't seen discussed is hairstyles. I think we've covered facial hair.


I'm glad I dont have to worry about this. My Ex-GF used to get pissed off because people would compliment my hair so much, especially after she'd pay $300 to get her hair done :mrgreen: Cougars have pulled on it, told me they love it and whispered very dirty things in my ear outside the presence of their sig-others and gay guys have complimented me on it. Awesome hair FTMFW.


Yeah I got blessed with good hair genes (thanks dad :mrgreen:) but the problem is I get bored of it too easily and I like to change it up (nothing too radical--just shorter to longer, parting it in different spots, slicking back, etc). I guess I was trying to figure out/gauge if there are any no-nos for an interview/the office. Obviously the Pauly D is out.


Side part, ftw.

I'm a rebel; I part it on the right *gasp*


Yeah I did that recently for a wedding except it was a shorter style. I have to gel it/moose it a bit (which I hate) b/c I haven't worn it like that in a while and it's not "trained" well enough to stay without some product. I've parted to the right but I have a problem with a cowlick on the leftside of my hair that makes it weird--it's easier to deal with on the left.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:08 am

romothesavior wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
Going to watch a trial for my internship. (I'm a 0L interning in HR at a Fortune 100 company this summer, and an attorney invited me to come watch a trial.)


I mean you should be fine. It's become pretty common. No one is going to point you out for it.


Yeah, and this company is extremely laid back in terms of dres. When I went to talk to to this attorney in his office last week, he was wearing a short sleeve mock-turtleneck and slacks (the guy is kinda jacked for a 40-something, so he pulls it off). No one will notice or care.

Also, how fashionable is the thin, balding hairstyle? That's what I'm rockin, and will be rockin' for some time to come. :lol:


Depends on the dude and facial feature/structure really. I already said if I bald at an early age (knock on wood) I'm going Mr. Clean style.

User avatar
BunkMoreland
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:16 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby BunkMoreland » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:17 am

GodSpeed wrote:
Waterman47 wrote:
BunkMoreland wrote:Opinions: on interviews, whether or not a small white linen pocket square in TV fold would be appropriate


Just know that it would set you apart from everyone else. If you're comfortable with that, go for it.

I personally wouldn't do it because it might look like you're trying too hard. The rest of the ensemble better be impeccable, IMO.


At first I was like "no way" but you MIGHT be able to pull it off. I'd say no though. Honestly, it's not going to win you any points for doing it and you stand to lose a lot if someone doesn't like it.

Actually, that's a good rule of thumb for interviews. Everything deviating from the traditional uniform(Navy/dark charcoal, solid suit, red power tie, white shirt, black shoes, black belt), at best, will do nothing for you and at worst will cost you the job.

Conservative doesn't mean bland or boring or even not good. I dress extremely conservatively and I frequently get compliments. In fact, I think it's EASIER to look good being conservative than it is trying to be GQ at a charity ball or something. It's done well so rarely, especially by the under 30 crowd, that a 25yr old with a solid navy suit, black LEATHER SOLED shoes, black belt and strong red tie actually stands out.



I kind of was leaning towards this anyway, thanks guys. I always wear pocket squares (before we get into it, yes I only use either white linen TV fold or a tasteful puff fold that isn't just the same pattern/cut of the tie that they sell to black doods) but ITE I'm not taking any chances

User avatar
vamedic03
Posts: 1579
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby vamedic03 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:38 am

Renzo wrote:
vamedic03 wrote:Wow, you seem to harbor some anger towards button down collars with suits... chill out and recognize that men's business wear has very few hard rules...

One of which happens to be button-downs with suits make people look like circus clowns.


See, here's the problem with this thread... there's just a lot of poorly formed opinions that people toss around like hard set rules...

User avatar
HJO
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:04 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby HJO » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:11 am

I'm wearing brown shoes and belt with a navy suit for my interviews. These specifically...

Image

User avatar
missvik218
Posts: 1103
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:45 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby missvik218 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:35 am

I know what 'Business Attire" for men means, but got ladies does it mean the same thing or could you get away with a shift dress?

Image

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
GodSpeed
Posts: 245
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:05 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby GodSpeed » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:06 pm

HJO wrote:I'm wearing brown shoes and belt with a navy suit for my interviews. These specifically...

Image

Well, if you insist.

User avatar
Waterman47
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Waterman47 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:09 pm

I'd wear brown, but a much darker brown than that. I think that shade of brown is a bit casual. And I hate that toe-cap style. Looks like something an old man would wear.

Pair of brown shoes I would wear to an interview:

http://www.bluefly.com/Ferragamo-hickor ... detail.fly

This is an expensive example, but there are many cheaper versions around. Notice that the sole and the top are the same color. This is much, much better than the black sole/brown shoe look.

I think, generally, if you're going to break from the mold in interviews/office settings, you've got to do it well. IMO wearing the light brown pair will make you look clueless, if the person conducting the interview is at all fashion conscious. But if you wear something like the Ferragamo pair, you could stand out for your chicness.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:38 pm

Black for interviews is generally safer. Maybe my eyes are still a bit woozy but the ones Waterman posted look a little weird to me.

User avatar
vamedic03
Posts: 1579
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby vamedic03 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:06 pm

Brown shoes + brown belt are perfectly acceptable for wearing with a navy suit.

User avatar
Mr. Fancy
Posts: 592
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:22 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Mr. Fancy » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:20 pm

vamedic03 wrote:Brown shoes + brown belt are perfectly acceptable for wearing with a navy suit.


Dark brown is perfectly acceptable. Medium brown with black soles is not.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:25 pm

vamedic03 wrote:Brown shoes + brown belt are perfectly acceptable for wearing with a navy suit.


No one disputes that but black is generally safer for interviews b/c as mentioned you can completely fuck up the color/matching with belt. Err on the side of caution.

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby keg411 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:27 pm

missvik218 wrote:I know what 'Business Attire" for men means, but got ladies does it mean the same thing or could you get away with a shift dress?

Image

--ImageRemoved--


Pair the second dress with a jacket and both are okay for office wear (the first looks like it could be a bit casual, but it depends on the office and the material). Wouldn't use either for an interview, though.

User avatar
missvik218
Posts: 1103
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:45 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby missvik218 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:31 pm

keg411 wrote:Pair the second dress with a jacket and both are okay for office wear (the first looks like it could be a bit casual, but it depends on the office and the material). Wouldn't use either for an interview, though.

What about a day of orientation marked [Dress in Business Attire]?

User avatar
aIvin adams
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby aIvin adams » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:46 pm

HJO wrote:I'm wearing brown shoes and belt with a navy suit for my interviews. These specifically...

Image


i dont like those shoes. i like the darker brown posted above w a navy suit. this shoe might look better w bal laces and a different sole but as it is it looks... i dunno, informal.

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby keg411 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:47 pm

missvik218 wrote:
keg411 wrote:Pair the second dress with a jacket and both are okay for office wear (the first looks like it could be a bit casual, but it depends on the office and the material). Wouldn't use either for an interview, though.

What about a day of orientation marked [Dress in Business Attire]?


I thought you were talking about day-to-day officer wear. If those are the instructions, wear a suit. Definite no on the first dress.

User avatar
leobowski
Posts: 511
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:11 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby leobowski » Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:51 pm

Waterman47 wrote:I'd wear brown, but a much darker brown than that. I think that shade of brown is a bit casual. And I hate that toe-cap style. Looks like something an old man would wear.

Pair of brown shoes I would wear to an interview:

http://www.bluefly.com/Ferragamo-hickor ... detail.fly

This is an expensive example, but there are many cheaper versions around. Notice that the sole and the top are the same color. This is much, much better than the black sole/brown shoe look.

I think, generally, if you're going to break from the mold in interviews/office settings, you've got to do it well. IMO wearing the light brown pair will make you look clueless, if the person conducting the interview is at all fashion conscious. But if you wear something like the Ferragamo pair, you could stand out for your chicness.



Those shoes are metro/goofy as hell and certainly less suitable for interviewing than a traditional cap-toe.

User avatar
Waterman47
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Waterman47 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:06 pm

leobowski wrote:
Waterman47 wrote:I'd wear brown, but a much darker brown than that. I think that shade of brown is a bit casual. And I hate that toe-cap style. Looks like something an old man would wear.

Pair of brown shoes I would wear to an interview:

http://www.bluefly.com/Ferragamo-hickor ... detail.fly

This is an expensive example, but there are many cheaper versions around. Notice that the sole and the top are the same color. This is much, much better than the black sole/brown shoe look.

I think, generally, if you're going to break from the mold in interviews/office settings, you've got to do it well. IMO wearing the light brown pair will make you look clueless, if the person conducting the interview is at all fashion conscious. But if you wear something like the Ferragamo pair, you could stand out for your chicness.



Those shoes are metro/goofy as hell and certainly less suitable for interviewing than a traditional cap-toe.


Not sure how a shoe that simple can be "goofy as hell", and I don't think metro is a bad thing. Either way, I'd wear those 1,000 times before I wore the light brown monstrosities posted above.

notanumber
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby notanumber » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:08 pm

I know it's been mentioned in this thread before, but it should be reiterated: Everybody should just suck it up and buy a pair of black Allen Edmonds Park Avenues (http://www.zappos.com/allen-edmonds-park-avenue). They may seem expensive but they are well made (in America) and with shoe trees they will last for years. It's the go-to shoe when you want to project the inoffensive and safe "corporate drone" image. People who are fashion conscious will recognize the shoes and realize that you made the conscious choice to project this image, which will be a good thing. People who are not fashion conscious will likely not notice the shoes at all, which is also a good thing.

User avatar
Waterman47
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Waterman47 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:15 pm

notanumber wrote:It's the go-to shoe when you want to project the inoffensive and safe "corporate drone" image.


Image

I'm starting to think there should be two separate fashion threads: one for all those who wish to don the "corporate drone" costume, and another for those who aren't afraid to inject some subtle hints of personal style even in situations that call for conservative dress. The former thread would be quite short.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.