Black Tie means a bow tie not a black coloured tie

[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.

[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.

[chasem]

The point isn't whether the kilt should be dressed up or not, rather how frequently you see people who aren't dressed for the occasion.

[starbkjrus]

Looks like the fashion police are on the move yet again.

[macwilkin]

Looks like the fashion police are on the move yet again.

Dee, I hope you are not referring to those of us who consider ourselves traditionalists.

T.

[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.

[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.

[Paul Henry]

Todd ,yet again , I think you read too much in a post:- nowhere does it say in bikelounger's post that rural folk resent all manner of proper attire... he simply said clothes should be appropriate for work!

You comment "I'm afraid this post is just as judgemental of those of us who take pride in our formal attire as the people who judge those who do not wear it." really doesn't follow, as he is not judging anyone else , merely saying that black tie isn't for him!

Please don't think I'm against your having your own opinions, but it's an observation that you feel that "proper attire"(your words) is being attacked ,and clearly in this post it wasn't, that poster obviously isn't one for the full black number, but he didn't say that other kilt wearer couldn't or shouldn't.

[bikeolounger]

Todd ,yet again , I think you read too much in a post:- nowhere does it say in bikelounger's post that rural folk resent all manner of proper attire... he simply said clothes should be appropriate for work!

You comment "I'm afraid this post is just as judgemental of those of us who take pride in our formal attire as the people who judge those who do not wear it." really doesn't follow, as he is not judging anyone else, merely saying that black tie isn't for him!

Please don't think I'm against your having your own opinions, but it's an observation that you feel that "proper attire"(your words) is being attacked, and clearly in this post it wasn't, that poster obviously isn't one for the full black number, but he didn't say that other kilt wearer couldn't or shouldn't.

Thank you, PaulHenry, you got my point.

There is a vast difference between "too many" and "all." Some folks choose to not understand that distinction.