Not as many men wear suits as were worn say, in 1956 (The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit). Times and styles change.
However, between business concerns (excluding casual Fridays), and certain social events (weddings, funerals, etc.), it is sometime appropriate to don one.
(I own exactly that – ONE. I’d own more, but just don’t have the needs or funds – Guffaw)
As with so many other social skills, I was not taught HOW to wear a suit! Not how to tie a tie (I was taught that), or polish shoes (I still do that – it relaxes me) but, where does one put stuff, exactly?
The Art of Manliness blog comes again to the rescue!
The whole point of wearing a suit is to create a sleek, smooth look for yourself. So you don’t want to ruin that dapper silhouette by stuffing your pockets with too many accouterments, and in such a way that they create unbecoming bulges in your clothing. Hauling around a bunch of stuff not only distorts the proper shape of your suit, but can also distort its fine fabric, putting unnecessary wear and tear on the material.
Instead, when it comes to carrying your formal/professional EDC in a stylish way, the name of the game is minimalism and balance. You want to pare down the things you carry with you, and distribute them evenly throughout your pockets.
Your wallet should be thin and compact, and placed in one of the inside breast pockets of your suit jacket, rather than in the back pocket of your trousers where it will push your jacket out. If you still find a wallet too bulky to carry, then a slim money clip, with just a few bills and a credit card, can fit in the front pocket of your trousers.
A pen can also go in this inside breast pocket, though some suits have a special slit for it to sit.
Your phone can be put in the other inside breast pocket. If you’re doing a money clip in your trouser pocket instead of a wallet in the jacket, then the phone will lack a counterweight up top. But unless your phone is very heavy and large, it’s not likely to unbalance the way the jacket hangs on you.
A big set of jangling keys will create a significant bulge in your trouser pocket, so when you’re wearing a suit, strip down your keychain to just your house key and car key on a single ring. Or always carry all your keys in a device like this one which minimizes their space and noise.
Your other trouser pocket can hold a plain handkerchief (here’s 6 reasons every man should carry one). While a pocket square can sometimes pull double duty as a functional hankie, you usually want a nicer, fancier one for the outside breast pocket on your suit, and a utilitarian one for blowing your nose.
And that, gents, is pretty much all you need to tote around on your person when you’re suited up. Other things like gum or a pocket knife could go in a briefcase or bag if you’re carrying one. Your phone could easily be put away in a bag too; after all, one’s suave appearance cannot only be ruined by carrying around too much bulge-creating stuff, but also by taking out a particular piece of it and checking it every two minutes.
Privacy mavens have been going on for some time regarding the complete lack of privacy on the Internet. Coupled with private industry and public intelligence, license plate readers and facial recognition software, the NSA listening to our cellular telephone calls and reading our email, and cameras everywhere, from about 2002, lets face it…
Now, another factor has entered the arena.
According to Motherboard, it’s a real threat.
A global conference of senior military and intelligence officials taking place in London this week reveals how governments increasingly view social media as “a new front in warfare” and a tool for the Armed Forces.
The overriding theme of the event is the need to exploit social media as a source of intelligence on civilian populations and enemies; as well as a propaganda medium to influence public opinion.
. . .
The event, the Sixth Annual Conference on Social Media Within the Defence and Military Sector, is sponsored by the Thales Group, the tenth largest defense company in the world, which is partially owned by the French government.
Participants in the conference—chaired by Steven Mehringer, Head of Communication Services at NATO—will include military and intelligence leaders from around the world, especially “social media experts from across the armed forces and defense industry.”
. . .
“Social Media is increasingly important to the portrayal of armed forces, at home and abroad on operations; raising awareness of institutional issues; and gaining support through successful recruitment campaigns,” said conference Chairman, NATO’s Steven Mehringer, in an invitation brochure for the event.
The military’s goal of using social media to influence the beliefs of populations to win wars is alluded to in the description of other panels. A proposed panel titled ‘NATO’s Digital Outreach: Creating a Global Conversation’, describes NATO’s aim of “cultivating a global audience through social media to support The Alliance.”
Another panel discussion makes direct reference to the role of social media in covert US military ‘psychological warfare’ operations—i.e. propaganda—as well as the use of social media to support mass surveillance.
There’s more at the link.
At first I assumed that the conference was about nothing more or less than the usual propaganda exercises employed by all sides in any conflict. However, reading between the lines, it appears that they’re talking about more active – and more covert – interventions, such as ‘sock-puppeting‘ comments on or reactions to articles, blog posts, etc. that they don’t like. In other words, they wouldn’t act openly, or say that this is the view of a particular party; so one wouldn’t be able to exercise informed judgment on what they have to say.
I know some of the more totalitarian governments have been doing this for decades. (The so-called ‘Great Firewall of China‘ is a good example, and it’s now morphing into a ‘citizen score‘ for every person, upon which will depend their ability to get good jobs, get loans, or even eat well.) If Western nations are now starting to venture into the same territory, we’ll have to be on our guard.
To coin a phrase: Big Brother is not your friend.
Plaintiff Yvonne Allen is a devout Christian woman who covers her hair with a headscarf as part of her religious practice. In December 2015, Ms. Allen sought to renew her driver license at the Lee County driver license office, where officials demanded that she remove her head covering to be photographed. When Ms. Allen explained her religious beliefs, the County officials responded with a remarkable claim: They admitted that there was a religious accommodation available for head coverings, but contended that it applied only to Muslims.
The ACLU press release adds:
Lee County’s refusal to grant Allen a religious accommodation contradicts state rules and violates her rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Alabama Constitution, according to the lawsuit.
“The county’s interpretation of state rules blatantly violates the First Amendment,” said Susan Watson, executive director of the ACLU of Alabama. “The government cannot discriminate between faiths in granting religious accommodations.”
Heather L. Weaver, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, agreed. “The county’s policy is puzzling. There is absolutely no reason to restrict accommodations for religious headgear to certain religions. The Constitution protects both Christians and Muslims and, indeed, people of all faiths.”
The World has indeed turned upside down. Or, become The Bizarro World – depending on one’s point of reference.
Guffaw actually agreeing with the ACLU?!
Historically, an organization who has stood up for folks rights, even if they were ‘misunderstood’ folks – like Illinois Nazis. But only stood up for the Second Amendment rights of folks if doing so suited another purpose. Generally, the ACLU picks and chooses which rights and amendments to support. And when.
I remember my father calling them THE AMERICAN COMMUNIST LAWYERS UNION!
Will wonders never cease?
The Brilliant-and-Lovely TAMARA spake thus:
Just because H. habilis was several branches back on the family bush doesn’t mean we’re supposed to stop being handy.
I get not carrying a pistol. It’s not for everybody and, if done with any level of seriousness, demands certain commitments and obligations that not everyone wants to undertake, and that’s cool. It’s still (mostly) a free country.
But how do you go through life without a flashlight and some kind of knife? Our most primitive ancestors carried sharp rocks around with them. Hell, carrying a sharpened rock around in case of future need is basically how we tell where the apes stop and the people start in our fossil family album. If they could have carried a light around without it burning their fingers or going out all the time, you bet they would have.
They make flashlights and knives small enough to accommodate any code, dress or legal, up with which you have to put.
I (and many of my brethren and sistern) have carried knives in perpetuity! And many times flashlights. (Especially now, with the advent of modern technology involving LCD bulbs and lithium batteries! – small!)
Unfortunately (or fortunately) my knife is mostly utilized to open envelopes (my maternal grandfather would cringe at persons using thumbs and fingers to open envelopes – he had a Christy!)
, and packages (my roommate is going for the Amazon customer of the year award – of course, she has her own cutlery!) My Kershaw Ken Onion Blur
rests clipped in my right, front pocket.
And Flashlights? I’ve a two-inch long one affixed to my keychain, and a larger one (with lithium batteries) in my car console, and another in my nightstand. AND, a Maglite nightstand adjacent!
Sight is of some value.
As is a cutting, stabbing, slashing device.
We lost MARK BELL.
My co-worker, shooting student, sounding board, reminder of things good, bon vivant, and loyal friend.
We had just attended Kevin Baker’s blogshoot the previous Sunday, and had spoken on the telephone, yesterday (four years ago – I cannot believe it’s been four years!).
Then his beloved wife Cathy called me tomorrow (four years ago) to tell me he had dropped dead from a heart attack suddenly yesterday.
Having almost lost Walter recently, this may be a little maudlin.
I don’t care.
PLEASE, tell the ones you love that you love them, and hug them, if at all possible.
Because you never know.
(Nick Otto/For The Washington Post)
FRESNO, Calif. — While officers raced to a recent 911 call about a man threatening his ex-girlfriend, a police operator in headquarters consulted software that scored the suspect’s potential for violence the way a bank might run a credit report.The program scoured billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and the man’s social- media postings. It calculated his threat level as the highest of three color-coded scores: a bright red warning.The man had a firearm conviction and gang associations, so out of caution police called a negotiator. The suspect surrendered, and police said the intelligence helped them make the right call — it turned out he had a gun. (…)
Another twist on ‘the machine’ from TV’s Person of Interest. Not video or audio surveillance, but data-mining to determine if a
subject suspect person-of-interest is a potential danger.I wonder if it finds blog posts and comments and scores them with regard to potential danger, based on a peaceful expression of concern for governmental abuses?Guess I’m worthy of a bright red warning…h/t Liberty Headlines
…and so do others of any color, and cops! – Guffaw
Then there’s THIS (from Kevin Baker):
As I’ve said here and on other fora, if you really want to do something about homicide by firearm then you need to pay attention to who’s doing the killing, who’s doing the dying, and where it is taking place. ProPublica has an article out, How the Gun Control Debate Ignores Black Lives, on this topic, and the title to this post is THE pullquote from it.
Some other choice selections:
In 2012, 90 people were killed in shootings like the ones in Newtown and Aurora, Colorado. That same year, nearly 6,000 black men were murdered with guns.
Mass shootings, unsurprisingly, drive the national debate on gun violence. But as horrific as these massacres are, by most counts they represent less than 1 percent of all gun homicides. America’s high rate of gun murders isn’t caused by events like Sandy Hook or the shootings this fall at a community college in Oregon. It’s fueled by a relentless drumbeat of deaths of black men.
Gun control advocates and politicians frequently cite the statistic that more than 30 Americans are murdered with guns every day. What’s rarely mentioned is that roughly 15 of the 30 are black men.
Avoiding that fact has consequences. Twenty years of government-funded research has shown there are several promising strategies to prevent murders of black men, including Ceasefire. They don’t require passing new gun laws, or an epic fight with the National Rifle Association. What they need — and often struggle to get — is political support and a bit of money.
Lost in the debate is that even in high-crime cities, the risk of gun violence is mostly concentrated among a small number of men. In Oakland, for instance, crime experts working with the police department a few years ago found that about 1,000 active members of a few dozen street groups drove most homicides. That’s .3 percent of Oakland’s population.
Two weeks after Obama unveiled his plan, (Pastor Michael) McBride and dozens of other clergy members, many of them from cities struggling with high rates of gun violence, met again with staffers from Vice President Biden’s task force.
The mood at the January 29 meeting was tense. Many of the attendees, including McBride, felt the president’s agenda had left out black Americans.
“The policy people working for Biden worked with the reality of Congress,” said Teny Gross, one of the original Boston Miracle outreach workers who now leads the Institute for Nonviolence Chicago. “What they were proposing to us was very limited and was not going to help the inner city.”
Gross said he “blew a gasket.” The clergy members in the room were pleading for help. “We bury hundreds of kids every year in the inner city,” Gross recalled them telling the administration representative. “Some of the solutions need to apply to us.”
A staffer said that the political will of the country was not focused on urban violence, several ministers who attended the meeting recalled.
“What was said to us by the White House was, there’s really no support nationally to address the issue of urban violence,” said the Rev. Charles Harrison, a pastor from Indianapolis. “The support was to address the issue of gun violence that affected suburban areas — schools where white kids were killed.”
The Rev. Jeff Brown, from Boston, was angered by the administration’s calculated approach. “When you say something like that and you represent the President of the United States, and the first African-American President of the United States, you know, that’s hugely disappointing,” he said.
It would seem that Obama’s a huge disappointment to a lot of people.
RTWT. And especially the comments.
Well, TWO of them, in fact! One, who was doing the same job as me, the second, our department’s boss.
Being a firearms trainer certified by the NRA and AZ DPS CCW trainers, I always felt that the more people I could train, the better!
Guy #1 was a Big, Black Man. He’d been a football player in college and a weight lifter. While he no longer played ball, he continued to lift. Often and well. We became friends over discussions of political conspiracies.
When I knew him, he’d complain about walking through the mall (our offices were then above a shopping mall) and folks parting like the Red Sea in front of him. He referred to himself (and others like him) as BBMs – Big, Black Males. And said BBMs had problems, as people viewed them as Big, Angry, Black Men.
Which he wasn’t.
ANYWAY, we met one day with a couple other (White) guys from work at a local, indoor range for familiarization and fun. I brought a bunch of guns and ammo (this was when I had such) and spent most of my time instructing versus shooting. Which was okay.
My BBM friend shot about 20 minutes, then left. I’d given him rudimentary instruction, but he just wasn’t into it. It seemed he’d been partying the night before, got home late, and was somewhat hung-over. He mumbled something about liking to get a Tek-9 and left.
I’m guessing the concussive sounds of gunfire were a bit much for him.🙂
I never did find out if he bought a firearm.
Guy #2 was our boss, in charge of our department. He was NOT a BBM. (A SBM – Slight Black Male?) He’d been in the Army, and had some familiarity with firearms. He lived alone, was smaller, and had a small dog. I knew little more of his personal life, but if one could label him, he might be metrosexual(?)
And he wanted a handgun for self-protection. Seems he’d had a few run-ins with Angry, White bigots.
So, Guy#2 and I met for familiarization and lessons, probably 12 sessions, at the same indoor range. After he’d tried a few of my handguns, he settled on purchasing a Glock 26. And became quite accurate @ 15 yards! And I arranged a deal for him at the gun store where I had worked part time.
Sadly, my pain levels were increasing, particularly when standing. (This was before I was diagnosed a diabetic.) And I had to beg off giving more lessons.
At least he paid for the ammo and range time!
Race never entered into it (for me, anyway).
I’ve trained Black guys, White guys, women, children…I think one guy was Latino(?) No Asians as of yet…
EVERYONE should know how to defend themselves, and have the means.
It is our Right. ALL of ours!
“But wait, there’s more!”
I recently posted Tomi’s view regarding escalating our efforts against terrorism and supportive nations (an idea I support).
And, I have an addendum to her idea.
To wit, consider this argument:
Why were the Parisian terrorist attackers so successful in obtaining fear, terror and death?
Because of French and Parisian laws, the citizenry were unable to respond! As people in most schools, hospitals, concerts, military bases and all gun-free zones are in The United States.
Fact – most polls currently in the United States support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Fact – The Supreme Court has upheld this right as individual.
Fact – In so-called gun free zones, the recommended method of survival is to hide and wait for people with guns to come and solve the problem.
Let’s take the gloves off!
Every able-bodied man and woman who has has training should be carrying a handgun, everywhere. Including adult students, teachers and the military!
Let’s take the fight to them!
If some joker or a team of jokers decide to attack your place-of-business, church, concert hall, shopping mall or school, let’s show them that of which we are made.
If they want to see their god – provide an introduction.
It’s time to stop pussy-footing around. ‘They’ aren’t just in Europe and India, they are here! Whether they are imported here as ‘refugees’ or are ‘home-grown’ is of no consequence.
I DON’T CARE !
We need to stand up. As the military responds overseas, we need to here.
Let’s take the Republic back from fear of terrorism by being proactive in our ability to respond.
(from one of my favorite sites for such things Art of Manliness!)
Click for the Link
Everything from tying a tie and shining shoes, to surviving a bear attack!
What every man should know (women, as well!)
(mustache wax not included)