Black Tie means a bow tie not a black coloured tie

[Bugbear]

O, ok, I follow, we're talking about wearing a four-in-hand tie with a low cut waistcoat and jacket like a tux. There are visual fashion reasons that combination does not work well.

[Jock Scot]

bikeolounger.
I do wish people would understand what "a black tie event" is and then we would not have to have this discussion. Whether we get an opportunity to go to one of these events, or we choose, or not, to go is entirely another matter . Whether we like it or not there are conventions, I am not talking laws here, that we have to/should follow in life, some are important, some are not. That choice is for all of us to make. However, if we choose to follow a particular course then it really is down to us to follow those conventions with good grace. If you cannot, for your own good reasons, then go and find something that you are more at ease with. Its that simple.Surely a simple black tie is not worth all this "inverted snobbery" of yours. You have made a choice and I, for one, certainly respect that.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I do not own, and refuse to buy, a full set of "black tie" garb. I would use such attire at most once every four or five years, and would have to manufacture reason to do that. I'm not likely to go to the trouble to rent formal wear, either--that level of formality is just too artificial for me. In short, if the invitation specifies "black tie," I won't be there. You need not worry about seeing me wearing a tartan tie over my tweed kilt at your precious black tie event.

To me this smacks of some sort of resentful, "inverse" snobbery which, quite frankly, I don't understand.

I don't care that you (and millions of other folk) ride bicycles on the public road (and often the public foot path) without paying one penny of road tax for the privilege, and without adequate insurance to cover third party damage-- that's what you do, so have at it, even if I am subsidizing, to some extent, your ability to pedal your bike pretty much wherever you want.

You, however, are not being asked to subsidize anyone who wears black tie, or hosts, or attends black tie events. Even, "precious" black tie events. As you have more-or-less admitted that you have no intentions of attending a black tie event, I fail to see what you have to be resentful or snobbish about.

[Nervous Jock]

What is a prat?

What is a chav?

Should I be concerned?

no, I love you crazy Americans

[McNulty]

I think about what Winston Churchill once said about the differences and similarities between the UK and the US. "We are a common people separated by a common language. What is a "prat", "chavs", and "full fig" mean in our native tongues? I'm an English teacher in the US and always on the look out for colorful/colourful language. Thanx in advance. AND BTW I agree with your fashion concerns as most people do blindly follow the fashion scene rather than being their own person. I deal with teenagers who dress according to current skinny fashion mavens and expose way too much skin.
Nulty

[Tim Little]

Glad to see this thread going downhill fast!

I believe that the original post was about the definition of "black tie" -- regardless of whether one ever attends such events or what one thinks of them.

This site (www.blacktieguide.com) has been cited previously on X Marks and, IMHO, provides an excellent overview of what "black tie" actually entails -- in both "classic" and "contemporary" interpretations.

I concur that when one chooses to attend a "black tie" event, it behooves one to conform more or less to the social standard. If one wouldn't be caught dead at such a shindig -- or never has the occasion to attend -- then the social conventions pertaining thereto are a moot point.

[bikeolounger]

To me this smacks of some sort of resentful, "inverse" snobbery which, quite frankly, I don't understand.

I don't care that you (and millions of other folk) ride bicycles on the public road (and often the public foot path) without paying one penny of road tax for the privilege, and without adequate insurance to cover third party damage-- that's what you do, so have at it, even if I am subsidizing, to some extent, your ability to pedal your bike pretty much wherever you want.

You, however, are not being asked to subsidize anyone who wears black tie, or hosts, or attends black tie events. Even, "precious" black tie events. As you have more-or-less admitted that you have no intentions of attending a black tie event, I fail to see what you have to be resentful or snobbish about.

And you, also, neglected to see that I was going for "over the top" to make my point. Note to self--folks around here don't understand my literary devices.

I won't get into the bicycles on roads thing here--too far afield of the topic at hand--beyond pointing out that if all of the road maintenance/construction money came from fuel and other auto-centric taxes, you would be paying more than twice what you currently pay on those bills. Those taxes only partly pay for your privilege of operating a motor vehicle on public property--the rest of the public taxation bears the brunt of the burden. That you even bring up the issue rings of the exact level of snobbery of which you accuse me. You may PM me for citations on this.

For my response to your third paragraph, see my response to your first.

[Bugbear]

... This site (www.blacktieguide.com) has been cited previously on X Marks and, IMHO, provides an excellent overview of what "black tie" actually entails -- in both "classic" and "contemporary" interpretations.
...

Ya, that's a good site; I've been slowly looking over the information there.

[Spc. Scott]

Glad to see this thread going downhill fast!

I believe that the original post was about the definition of "black tie" -- regardless of whether one ever attends such events or what one thinks of them.

This site (www.blacktieguide.com) has been cited previously on X Marks and, IMHO, provides an excellent overview of what "black tie" actually entails -- in both "classic" and "contemporary" interpretations.

I must have missed this site from earlier threads. Thank you for bringing it up again Tim.

[macwilkin]

Everyone must be careful, because "snobbery" can go both ways. It is just as bad for someone to look down on those who are "unrefined" as it is for the other side to look down on those who are "dandies".

Some people can't be bothered to get dressed up and attend formal events, or just don't have the occasion to do so. I say that's fine, but I also think they're missing out on an experience.

I was raised in rural southern Illinois. My relatives were for the most part farm folk. My dad over the years raised horses, cattle, and even pigs, yet he owned a suit for nicer events. Granted, I don't think he ever wore a tuxedo, but he would have if the occasion warranted.

I have the occasion to get dressed up formally once or twice a year, usually on cruises, but sometimes other events. I wouldn't want to dress that way all the time, and generally don't even care to wear a tie, but I enjoy doing it at those times because it's something special.

Dressing appropriately is not about being superior, it's about respecting the host of the event.

And thank you, Dave, for understanding my point.

Todd