I agree — part of clothing is allowing the wearer to act in a variety of roles. Some practical — gym clothes, work clothes, etc. — others less so. Plus who wants to wear the same blazer with the same crappy t-shirt every night out (male or female).

Also, I like this notion of changing items up without necessarily changing too many of the underlying items of clothing. Though for me this is often interpreted through the lens of a business-formal office wardrobe that would be better suited by years of accumulation of wingtips, bespoke suits, tailored shirts and the like. But of course, nobody is thrust into the working world with said wardrobe so utilizing accoutrements such as tie clips, pocket squares, cufflinks and other dude accessories become essential.

I agree with women having more “roles” than men, but I would however disagree that this implies less variety required by the male wardrobe. Instead, I would argue that this opinion is skewed by men’s own unwillingness to embrace their own varied roles and “mail-it-in” as it were, when it comes to wardrobe. 

Certainly though its pretty liberating for a guy to have a lot more “dependable pieces of the wardrobe (whereas it’s my sense that women’s clothing is a lot more ephemeral) — Levi’s 501s, navy blazers, black overcoat, dark blue ties, white Vans, etc.

What are the Levi’s 501s of women’s jeans?

atariboy:

…

Article link

I would fail at this…for so many reasons…well maybe not fail, but I would be S-T-rugglin’.

I had a pact with myself in high school. Never wear the same “outfit” twice. But I would re-wear the same clothes for days in a row. Yes, there is a difference. An…