Do most women dislike pastels on men? (tone, light, fashion)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A few times I've heard that pastels (beige and baby blue, for instance) look bad on men. Is that a common opinion by women? I originally meant this thread as just about shirts, but I wonder if the pastel thing is a reason women are turned off by chinos (khakis).
Proper fitting chinos (of a variety of colors) are almost always in fashion in one form or another. Male (who enjoys fashion) here, and the thing with "khakis" is that they are worn way too often. They are so ubiquitous in the office-casual crowd that they are almost deemed lazy and unimaginative compared to the variety of other options you have for dress or casual pants. Additionally, many people who are in the khakis-almost-every-day crowd also buy lots of ill-fitting pants and as a result so many "khakis" you see just look bad.
In terms of pastels for shirts and clothing, it all depends on the guy's hair, face & body type, build, skin tone etc. This is no different than a girl. Some guys can pull it off, but some guys cannot.
A few times I've heard that pastels (beige and baby blue, for instance) look bad on men. Is that a common opinion by women? I originally meant this thread as just about shirts, but I wonder if the pastel thing is a reason women are turned off by chinos (khakis).
I love pastels on men. A nice crisp pink Oxford shirt, khakis and loafers with no socks.
Light blue is also a normal color for male clothes. I don't call it "baby blue", though; just light blue or Oxford blue.
I don't even think of beige as a "pastel". It's a neutral. I like men in white and cream also.
Honestly, I think that this is a socioeconomic thing, more than a gender thing. I grew up with men who dressed this way, so it looks "normal" to me.
Baby blue is a specific shade of light blue, and nobody would call a dress shirt "baby blue" (though that item is the most pastel thing commonly found in a male wardrobe).
I agree it's probably socioeconomic. Thank you for not dismissing my original question as total nonsense.
Baby blue is a specific shade of light blue, and nobody would call a dress shirt "baby blue" (though that item is the most pastel thing commonly found in a male wardrobe).
I agree it's probably socioeconomic. Thank you for not dismissing my original question as total nonsense.
It's far from nonsense! In fact, I think it's a very interesting question. And, I am glad that you posed it.
Most people have a huge and unwarranted fear of anything that is attributed to "socioeconomic" issues. Not so much the "economic" part, because in America; at least theoretically anyone can do well economically.
Social class is more tricky to navigate.
In general, lower socioeconomic groups tend to be less comfortable with clothes that are gender ambiguous that do people who are above the "middle class" dividing line.
This includes clothes. Hyper feminine and hyper masculine clothes tend to attract or be a product of, lower class people. The fear of looking like the opposite sex, also seems to be a phobia related to lower middle and working class people.
(trust me, the upper classes have their share of phobias and idiosyncrasies). Fear of being thought of as "effeminate", dous not appear to be one of their "issues" )
Tolerance of colors that are not "manly" on men, does appear to be related to social class, and is beyond a "taste issue".
It's far from nonsense! In fact, I think it's a very interesting question. And, I am glad that you posed it.
Most people have a huge and unwarranted fear of anything that is attributed to "socioeconomic" issues. Not so much the "economic" part, because in America; at least theoretically anyone can do well economically.
Social class is more tricky to navigate.
In general, lower socioeconomic groups tend to be less comfortable with clothes that are gender ambiguous that do people who are above the "middle class" dividing line.
This includes clothes. Hyper feminine and hyper masculine clothes tend to attract or be a product of, lower class people. The fear of looking like the opposite sex, also seems to be a phobia related to lower middle and working class people.
(trust me, the upper classes have their share of phobias and idiosyncrasies). Fear of being thought of as "effeminate", dous not appear to be one of their "issues" )
Tolerance of colors that are not "manly" on men, does appear to be related to social class, and is beyond a "taste issue".
Very interesting. I never thought of it that way but I think you're onto something.
It's also interesting how our oversexualization of everything conflicts with a strong puritanical streak, especially when it comes to men's clothes. If only we could meet somewhere in a sensible middle.
It's far from nonsense! In fact, I think it's a very interesting question. And, I am glad that you posed it.
Most people have a huge and unwarranted fear of anything that is attributed to "socioeconomic" issues. Not so much the "economic" part, because in America; at least theoretically anyone can do well economically.
Social class is more tricky to navigate.
In general, lower socioeconomic groups tend to be less comfortable with clothes that are gender ambiguous that do people who are above the "middle class" dividing line.
This includes clothes. Hyper feminine and hyper masculine clothes tend to attract or be a product of, lower class people. The fear of looking like the opposite sex, also seems to be a phobia related to lower middle and working class people.
(trust me, the upper classes have their share of phobias and idiosyncrasies). Fear of being thought of as "effeminate", dous not appear to be one of their "issues" )
Tolerance of colors that are not "manly" on men, does appear to be related to social class, and is beyond a "taste issue".
Yeah, but that's not just an effect of color, but of more subtle things such as color quality and fabric. Pastels done cheaply look cheap to someone who has seen esquisite pastel done well and expensively.
In the upper socioeconomic groups, an expensive pastel may pass while a cheap example attempting the same color will fail...not because it's pastel but because cheap pastel looks worse than a cheap deep color.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And, I am glad that you posed it. 
)
