Hacker News Reader

As a tech person who doesn’t fit “the look,” I hate that it’s become such a cultural signal. It’s rarely fun watching people react with surprise (doubt) when you tell them your occupation (if they give you the opportunity to chime in at all). :(

My fellow nerds, I would appreciate some more wardrobe diversity.

People doubt you're a SWE because of the way you dress? I think I would find that amusing.

I'm also curious what your look/style is such that people don't believe you when you tell them your occupation.

I like to wear lots of colors, funky jewelry and patterns, bright pink lipstick. Friends have compared the look to Ms. Frizzle (the original). Combined with a generally chipper personality, it’s often not well-received by fellow engineers. I usually get along great with the business and PMO though haha

Very much depends what you mean by "too weird".

I'd argue for most people <30 even wearing a button up shirt is a little 'weird' in an informal setting, so from my perspective blazers/sports coats in informal settings are already 'too weird'.

The further we get away from medieval shit like buttons and ties, the better. It's absurd to have ritual attire in an enlightened society, imo, and for it to be so anachronistic (and gendered) adds to the absurdity. Congresswomen get to wear these colorful and streamlined Star Trek getups, but all the men have to be in suits and ties. Nice.

Most men don't have to wear suits and ties so I feel like we've already got away from it.

I also feel like outside of formal settings men have a lot more options for dress than people seem to think, they're just a bit more subtle.

I think it's important to leave room for beauty and aesthetics in men's dress, but that doesn't necessarily need to mean a suit and tie. Only very recently in history - say since around 1980 - has society decided that men's dress must be purely comfort-oriented and functional, with little or no thought given to shape, ornament, or aesthetic beauty.

I think that's a big loss, because beauty is an important part of the human spirit, and clothing is something we all have to wear every day, even if only for protection from the elements. A world where clothes are purely functional is a world where we're all dressed like Roman peasants.

Beauty in men's dress has always been a part of culture until very recently. Sure, not everyone could afford to dress beautifully, but the aspiration for men was there. We seem to have lost that aspiration of late, and I think that's kinda sad. I would call the state of men's dress aspirations today a lot of things, but "aesthetically compelling" is not one of them.

I think the button down should escape your ire - not gendered, the choice in which buttons to button can completely change the tone, more styling options expressed through sleeves and degree of tucking of the shirt.

I do find your statement

>Congresswomen get to wear these colorful and streamlined Star Trek getups, but all the men have to be in suits and ties

incredibly compelling however, your critique of the suit and the expected range of formal mens wear has struck a chord with me.

I'm so glad Senator Fetterman is breaking the suit and tie status quo.

Boat shoes are a good casual alternative to loafers, I wear mine practically any time I'm out of the house for less than an hour.

The more general shoe for that is the "camp moccasin", or "camp moc". Similar, but tends to have a tad less secure fit, and the sole's usually a little lighter (not specially designed to grip well on a wet wooden deck like a boat shoe—the name "boat shoe" isn't arbitrary). They're also a little sleeker-looking—typically one lace-hole rather than two as most boat shoes have, and I don't know my shoe-part terminology very well, but they usually lack the extra flaps over the top piece of leather where boat shoes put their lace holes, instead putting theirs directly in the main, top part of leather on the shoe. That also serves to make them a little lighter, in addition to the sole.

I'd recommend that style to someone who's only getting one of the two types. Some folks also notice the difference and will regard wearing boat shoes away from water, and especially wearing them with socks, as gauche, while camp mocs may "properly" be worn in almost any causal setting, with or without socks. Which, on the one hand, who gives a shit, but on the other, if you don't want the shoes for nautical purposes, no harm in getting the style that's a bit lighter & simpler-looking and won't draw ill judgement from anyone, socks or no socks, ocean-breeze or mountain cabin.

Agree with you that there's a nice medium level of "nice clothes" that look more formal and are more generally comfortable (though things like "jeans, but made from synthetics so they stretch and move more lightly" and such are making inroads in the comfort department).

> Incidentally, we in (at least certain segments of) this industry definitely have a look. I've got a pretty good record of spotting tech workers in non-tech-heavy areas and settings based solely on clothes & affect taken in from a distance, and I don't just mean when one's wearing legible clothing with some tech slogans or logos on them.

IMO, for men, there's a handful of main looks, and they're all pretty different for each other. "Nerd", "scruffy hacker", "fitness bro" are the ones I see most frequently.

> IMO, for men, there's a handful of main looks, and they're all pretty different for each other. "Nerd", "scruffy hacker", "fitness bro" are the ones I see most frequently.

Oh, for sure, some are easy-mode, though. Conference T and cargo shorts with sandals (possibly including white socks). Rumpled, slouchy shirt and pants outfit parts of which surely date back to a goth phase, but softened by the rest of the ensemble (how do you tell the difference between that and rural-town convenience store clerk? Some combo of age, other grooming, and various details—more feel than science). That kind of thing.

Ivy-league/MIT 2-year-veteran FAANG is a look, but about half that's body language rather than clothes.

Totally agree! When I was still in an office I'd wear a sports jacket and nice leather shoes almost every day. Even if some of my colleagues wore sweat pants.

It’s already getting weird. If you’re not going to some kind of party and the weather doesn’t support a blazer or sport coat, there’s no reason to be wearing it. If you’re wearing a blazer to do groceries, you look weird. As weird as a guy wearing a suit doing groceries, or a guy wearing a fedora anywhere.

Yep, you gotta just choose to own it. It can be kind of fun to stand out in a benign sort of way anyway.

I'm suspecting you're projecting your own culture. In my part of Europe, I wouldn't have a second glance at somebody doing groceries in a blazer, and I probably wouldn't even have any conscious thought about a guy in a sport coat at a party.

a big issue for me in tech was wearing suits... went from banking to retail sector where in banking it was a must to wear suits daily... to retail where you'd dress for your day. Nothing beats the feeling of a well tailored suit on a beautiful day and the comfort of it.

I absolutely agree with you about blazers and sport coats. The more pockets the better.