Interesting stuff. I think it's useful to frame these as uniforms. The type of guy that you are seems to directly reflect the things you spend your day doing. Or aspire to do. Or appear to aspire to do, I guess. Anyway, male fashion feels clearly more action-oriented than female fashion. And maybe that's why it can seem so shallow and false in current times:
"What do you do for work?"
"Some abstract internet thing."
"Oh. What do you do for fun?"
"Some _more fun_ abstract internet thing."
"Oh. What do you really want to do?"
"Dunno. More of that?"
Why bother with a uniform beyond t-shirt and sweatpants for such a life? Maybe the particular style matters less than simply appearing to be comfortable wearing a uniform -- even just a personal uniform that serves no practical function. Like "I'm wearing this so I'm Ready To Go Do My Thing!" without ever needing to clearly define what that Thing is, other than that you are Ready To Go Do it.
There's probably something to that; every so often I consider the fact that there's not really a fashion selection that clearly signals "I am a tech worker who does tech things" unless you're wearing, i dunno, a linux t-shirt.
But I do think the Type-Of-Guy stuff is less literal than that; it's less "I am literally a person who works with my hands" (for heritage americana) and more "I enjoy the vibes this puts out and would like to lean into those vibes instead of other vibes I might choose instead." And there are A Lot of style directions that are culturally-legible; I just chose some arbitrarily based on what came to mind.
I think the struggle for many in this area is deciding *which* Type of Guy to pick. Perhaps they've even tried some and none felt quite right. It often feels safer to be correctly read as a bland and non-committal Type of Guy than to commit to being a Type of Guy that's legible but feels false
> Rat-adjacent men tend to resist consideration of fashion (or, if you’re a fashion nerd, “menswear”) as intrinsically shallow. Maybe it is!
The stupidity in that is that they also consider shallow as unimportant or not beneficial. Something can be shallow and hugely important and beneficial to get right.
what type are you?
I like heritage workwear. I think it looks cool and aligns with the face I would like to present to the world.
Interesting stuff. I think it's useful to frame these as uniforms. The type of guy that you are seems to directly reflect the things you spend your day doing. Or aspire to do. Or appear to aspire to do, I guess. Anyway, male fashion feels clearly more action-oriented than female fashion. And maybe that's why it can seem so shallow and false in current times:
"What do you do for work?"
"Some abstract internet thing."
"Oh. What do you do for fun?"
"Some _more fun_ abstract internet thing."
"Oh. What do you really want to do?"
"Dunno. More of that?"
Why bother with a uniform beyond t-shirt and sweatpants for such a life? Maybe the particular style matters less than simply appearing to be comfortable wearing a uniform -- even just a personal uniform that serves no practical function. Like "I'm wearing this so I'm Ready To Go Do My Thing!" without ever needing to clearly define what that Thing is, other than that you are Ready To Go Do it.
There's probably something to that; every so often I consider the fact that there's not really a fashion selection that clearly signals "I am a tech worker who does tech things" unless you're wearing, i dunno, a linux t-shirt.
But I do think the Type-Of-Guy stuff is less literal than that; it's less "I am literally a person who works with my hands" (for heritage americana) and more "I enjoy the vibes this puts out and would like to lean into those vibes instead of other vibes I might choose instead." And there are A Lot of style directions that are culturally-legible; I just chose some arbitrarily based on what came to mind.
Also I like heritage workwear.
Awesome, glad to see this topic being covered :D
I think the struggle for many in this area is deciding *which* Type of Guy to pick. Perhaps they've even tried some and none felt quite right. It often feels safer to be correctly read as a bland and non-committal Type of Guy than to commit to being a Type of Guy that's legible but feels false
> Rat-adjacent men tend to resist consideration of fashion (or, if you’re a fashion nerd, “menswear”) as intrinsically shallow. Maybe it is!
The stupidity in that is that they also consider shallow as unimportant or not beneficial. Something can be shallow and hugely important and beneficial to get right.