"I enjoy it. From throwing on some wacky stuff to some really slick stuff," said Travis Kelce.

Link to Vogue.

More Kelce fashion-talk: "I kind of take bits and pieces from everybody and everything that I see, and just kind of change things around depending on which situation I’m in and what event I’m going to.”

Why do I find this so funny? "Dog Dad"... the posing... posing as nonchalant.

"The Vogue editrix has proven time and again that she’ll stand by the designer despite his hateful comments. But one thing matters more to her than loyalty: money."

I'm reading "Why Anna Wintour scrapped the Met Gala’s tribute to John Galliano" (London Times).

In February 2011, a drunk Galliano was caught on video at La Perle bar in Paris saying to a Jewish couple, “I love Hitler” and “People like you would be dead. Your mothers, your forefathers, would all be f***ing gassed.”

"For prospects rising through the Milwaukee Brewers’ farm system, and even established veterans on a rehab assignment, wearing lederhosen is a rite of passage."

"No, this isn’t some elaborate rookie hazing prank... it’s the result of Friday’s theme night at High-A Wisconsin, one in which the team normally known as the Timber Rattlers becomes the Brats as part of Bratoberfest, a play on Germany’s iconic Oktoberfest, while also paying homage to the state that’s home to one of the highest concentrations of residents with German ancestry. It just so happened that Abner Uribe, the Brewers’ flame-throwing reliever who is working his way back from a flexor strain, was in town on his rehab assignment...."

The NYT picks up the best Milwaukee Brewers story of the day: "Brewers’ Abner Uribe delights fans in ‘Brats’ lederhosen uniform during minor-league rehab."

Humiliating? Or is it wonderful... bratoberfestive!

I could watch the Green Bay Packers exhibition game, women’s college volleyball, the team with the best record in baseball the Milwaukee Brewers, the Winn-Dixie 250, high school football, WWE SmackDown, or…Abner Uribe in lederhosen. You tell me… pic.twitter.com/lZWfgdxMLi

— Steve Palec (@stevepalec) August 29, 2026

ADDED: I have a bit of a tags quandary for this post. I don't like tag proliferation, but this isn't the first appearance of lederhosen on this blog. It's the fourth. See them all here. But all the other times, I was able to use my well-loved tag "men in shorts." But this baseball take on lederhosen avoids the baseball travesty of shorts — White Sox, 1976 — and sticks with traditional knickers. As I've said before, I like the knickers and wish all the players would wear them and not those pajama-looking long pants, but I'm still not making a tag for knickers. But if I did, I'd have 12 "knickers" posts now. 

Let me highlight the best of those old "knickers" posts. I remembered that the Young Rascals wore knickers. I found this 1926 song with the lyric: "Knickers and trousers, baggy and wide/Nobody knows who's walking inside!" I said that David Brooks: "expatiated about the good old days when men like George Washington displayed their thighs in tight silk knickers."

And, in 2008, before I got together with Meade and started watching baseball again, there were TVs outside State Street Brats just as The Backstreet Boys were singing the national anthem to open the World Series. I blogged: "The players look like hell! When did they stop wearing stockings and knickers? Those long pants look like pajamas."

And there was Meade, the first commenter: "I must be smoking too much blog. I hallucinated." Because the video looked like this:



Key word linking the end of this post to the beginning: brats.

I see my name invoked over at Instapundit.

It's on the old "men in shorts" topic. Something about women being able to wear "sundresses" to work. I think the term "sundresses" is being used to mean sleeveless dresses. An actual sundress wouldn't look any more professional than a man in shorts, but sleeveless dresses exist and might look okay in the office. But isn't the office air conditioned? I think women are more likely to put on a sweater than to want their bare arms exposed. 

Anyway, my classic men-in-shorts topic was about men looking like children. It all started back in 2006. It all started with something Tom Wolfe wrote in "I Am Charlotte Simmons" [commission earned]. "I was amused," I blogged, "to run across this description of a man wearing shorts":

All that elegance was what made the personage of Dr. Lewin seem so curious. Last week, when the class first met, he had worn a plaid cotton shirt and pants -- nothing remarkable about that. The shirt had had long sleeves, and the pants had been long pants. But this morning he had on a short-sleeved shirt that showed too much of his skinny, hairy arms, and denim shorts that showed too much of his gnarly, hairy legs. He looked for all the world like a seven-year-old who at the touch of a wand had become old, tall, bald on top, and hairy everywhere else, an ossified seven-year-old, a pair of eyeglasses with lenses thick as ice pushed up to the summit of his forehead -- unaccountably addressing thirty college students, at Dupont, no less.

That's my motivation. Trying to encourage you to eschew the look of an ossified 7-year-old. 

It doesn't take much these days to be considered "formal."

I'm reading "Think It’s Cool to Wear Fancy Sneakers to Work? You Might Be Old. After years of office casual, young people are embracing loafers, derbies and oxfords" (NYT gift link).

Earlier this year, Esquire described the trend as the loafer’s “big generational shift,” describing how younger consumers “were bypassing sneakers in growing numbers.” And in January, The Times UK deemed 2026 “the year of the loafer.”...

The surging interest in formal footwear fashions has simultaneously been a boon for both high-end luxury retailers and heritage brands with classic shoe offerings, like Allen Edmonds, the Wisconsin-based retailer. Nick Wooster, the brand’s consulting creative director, said that they have “absolutely” seen a recent increase in interest in their handmade leather loafers and derbies among younger customers. 

Even sneaker brands are trying to be more dressy.

"Women remain, as linguists say, the 'marked' sex, the nonstandard, defined as the opposite of the male norm."

"There is no one effortless way to look as a congresswoman, no uniform of business suit and tie that allows her to blend in. Most female politicians handle this by approximating male attire with some tweaks. Usually that involves a blazer, pearls, and very discreet hair and makeup — ideally, none of which gets talked about. But there is power in rejecting this model. Power in embracing the variety of embellishments available to women — earrings, lipstick, dresses, different hair styles. And an extension of this power can be a woman experimenting with baring her belly, along with her reproductive journey. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is consciously working to fuse her body and mind on the public stage, to show us what real, human, embodied and, yes, female power can look like. She will not be a mere 'thing in a suit,' as she said."

Writes Rhonda Garelick, in "Ocasio-Cortez Rewrites the Rules" (NYT gift link).

It's an old idea — that feminine beauty is powerful and that power-seeking women can implement beauty to rise in the political world. Cleopatra, etc. But Garelick adds the notion that a woman baring her belly to the public and making a show out of shifting her fertility into the realm of science and technology will augment the power achieved through beauty and fashion. The old idea is a cliché. It works as far as it works. The new idea is barely coherent.

"This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants for women in the US. Except maybe instead of burqas..."

"... they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked. And it's actually worse when I think about their plans for society as a whole with illiteracy, poisoned food, toxic 'health' care, etc. Separation of religion and state must happen to even attempt a free society. This is why this concept exists."

A highly rated contribution to the comments section for "Afghan Women Erased From Public Life in Five Years of Taliban Rule/Decrees restricting the rights of women and girls to study, work, travel and act independently now threaten to damage Afghanistan permanently, experts say" (NYT gift link).

"These days I am a middle-aged man who works the door at a bar in Chicago that is reasonably popular with the youths, and I am routinely flummoxed..."

"... by the sartorial flotsam that comes packing itself in. The other night a guy came in with a shoulder-length butt cut and his T-shirt tucked into his jeans. 'Now there’s a dork,' I thought. I could’ve clocked him from down the block. But no. An hour later I went outside, and he was making out in the alley with a six-foot freaking supermodel — and she was goth. Or at least she was dressed like what I consider to be a goth; nowadays I don’t even know..... Why is everybody under the age of 30 these days dressed like an actual lunatic?... The subcultures of my youth were a sort of surrogate extended family. In a society jettisoning the type of organizations and communities that stitched it together over the 20th century, finding someone or a group of someones who were the same thing as you served as a bulwark against the fracturing sense of atomization. Making up a subculture every couple of months basically does the opposite, keeping you permanently aloof from the kids around you. I mean, half these things barely sound like groups of anything. What the hell is a performative matcha boy — some guy who drinks a thing? How’s that going to be your tribe?"

Writes Thomas Morton, in "Gen Z-ers Dress Like They’ve Never Worn Clothes Before" (NYT gift link)(lots of photos at the link).

#1 reason for blogging this story: It used my favorite word, "flummox."

I like the blue jumpsuit.

That's image that sprang to mind for me as we were discussing this blue jumpsuit worn by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong at the Madison protest yesterday.

If you don't know who that is in the photo above, it's Jack Lalanne. Why did I know his jumpsuit was blue? I only ever watched him on black and white TV. His daytime show began in 1951 (the year I was born).

"Decades ago, the world of fashion was smaller and feistier, dominated by eccentric, visionary designers trying to express themselves...."

"In 2000, John Galliano showed his infamous 'homeless chic' couture collection. Alexander McQueen’s 'Highland Rape' show of torn dresses shocked the industry in 1995. Rei Kawakubo’s spring 1997 line, known as 'lumps and bumps,' remains one of the most significant collections of the century because it rejected traditional sex appeal, distorting and reimagining a woman’s form. It would be impossible to defend 'homeless chic' or 'Highland Rape.' Or Mr. Lagerfeld's disdain for fat bodies, a part of his personal brand, or Mr. Galliano’s antisemitic tirades.... But as fashion becomes more consolidated and homogenized... it hasn’t seemed to figure out how to provoke and shake up aesthetics and culture, creating crazes that people open their wallets to be part of...."

Writes Amy Odell, in "The Rise of Fashion Slop" (NYT).

A Monday morning juxtaposition. .

I see this at the top of the NYT right now:

Sterile wealth, romanticized poverty, and mindlessness about sleevelessness.

1. The family of 5: "'Money right now, there’s not enough. Literalmente,' said Ms. Torres, speaking Spanglish. 'Sometimes I feel bad, like I can’t do enough for my kids.'"

2. The Biebers: "The 2,792-square-foot apartment has two kitchens — an open-plan kitchen for entertaining, with marble counters and Scandinavian larch wood cabinetry, and a secondary chef’s kitchen with stainless steel and matte aluminum cabinetry. The primary suite looks out to the Hudson River..." The living room, I see, looks out onto a big TV screen and turns its back on the uninspiring skyline of New Jersey.

3. The presumed dearth of sleeves: "In all of the discussions about body positivity and loving the different parts of you, including the parts of you that decades of social conditioning have deemed potentially problematic, arms, especially the upper arms, are often overlooked...." The letter writer is urged to "rethink the issue" and "learn to love your arms."

This skirt is messing Obama up.

Barack Obama "is really messed up. I'm giving him some time because this beautiful skirt that my stylist Meredith Koop picked out that is my favorite portrait of my mom. He didn't know it existed until just a few minutes ago. I've had a few weeks to settle down"
- Michelle Obama pic.twitter.com/YbjPXRy0OS

— Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) June 16, 2026

ADDED: I've seen faces on shirts but I can't remember ever seeing a face on clothing below the waist. I went looking and found this from Jean Paul Gaultier in the 1990s. I think it works because the faces are small and numerous, making it not that different from, say, a floral print.

One giant face, larger than the face of the wearer, feels quite obtrusive. But it's long been accepted above the waist. How long have those things been around? I remember the Che Guevara shirts, circa 1970, but what was the original T-shirt with a big face? My quick research says it was probably the Thomas E. Dewey 1948 U.S. presidential campaign T-shirt — Dewey's face and the slogan "Dew-it with Dewey."

"Tasteslop is slop made out of things considered tasteful. It comes in two flavours..."

"... either AI/algorithmically generated content that deploys recognisable taste markers — a brand mood board featuring a designer suitcase, a skinny-neck kettle, a Dieter Rams book — or tasteful things deployed in service of slop, like a curated influencer dinner for a tech company. The key is that the visible signs of taste have been extracted from their original social context and redeployed generically."

Said the trend forecaster Emily Segal, quoted in "The rise of social media ‘tasteslop’ — and how to avoid it/From clothes to interiors, the internet has created good taste as defined by the algorithm. The trend forecaster Emily Segal tells us how to step away" (London Times).

After Segal coined the term it went viral.... [S]he pinpointed a dinner party at a New York restaurant considered to be classy and slender-spouted kettles as slop, and explained why Jennifer Lawrence’s style is too (“she looks more like a shopper/demographic and less like an individual figure”, Segal wrote). Once you see it …

Dieter Rams? Here's Dieter Rams pointing at things he doesn't like:

Pattie Gonia is making it hard for Patagonia to defend its trademark.

Full Instagram video here.

Read the comments over there and check out the NYT article, "Patagonia Is Suing Pattie Gonia Over Trademark Infringement: What to Know/The outdoor apparel company says the drag queen and environmentalist is using its name for commercial purposes. She’s ready to go to court" (gift link).

Mx. Gonia... said the company was trying to take away their name permanently and “erase an activist”.... Mx. Gonia said the timing of Patagonia’s lawsuit, “at the height of anti-LGBTQ politics and attacks,” was purposeful. “They looked at this political moment and thought they could pull this off without a pushback,” she said.

By the way, I think the NYT is getting the pronoun wrong when it writes "She's ready to go to court." I'm seeing this in Outside: "My name is Wyn Wiley, but you might know me as Pattie Gonia, Patricia Gonia, if ya nasty. I’m a drag queen, I’m an environmentalist, and I’m a professional gay person. As Wyn my pronouns are he/they and in drag, my pronouns as Pattie are she/they."

You might think the easiest solution is to use "they," but in that headline, "They're ready to go to court" would be read as referring to Patagonia. Patagonia has already filed suit. The caption on the court papers, I believe, is Patagonia, Inc. v. Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. (doing business as Pattie Gonia Productions) and Wyn Wiley (individually, as the owner/founder). I think the person "ready to go to court" is Wiley, so it should say "He's ready to go to court."

"[S]ocks and sandals were fully associated with nerd-dom, meaning that soon it was time for fashion... to embrace the twosome again."

"And so it did, with multiple brands, including Fendi, Miu Miu and Dior Men all showing sandals and socks on recent runways.... That this has happened at the same time that Gen Z has become increasingly vocal about its general discomfort with visible toes — the subject of multiple 'who let the dogs out' memes and Reddit threads — is probably not a coincidence. (Gen Z, after all, is the consumer group most brands are most eager to attract.) Whether that reaction is due, as some have posited, to a fear of fetishization — there are accounts on OnlyFans devoted solely to feet — or some other generational quirk, it’s a real thing."

From "Are We All Supposed to Wear Socks With Sandals Now? A teacher wonders about the etiquette rules of contemporary footwear" (NYT).

Complicated! I'd like to say wear socks and sandals in whatever combination expresses the youness of you, but as between the people who have publicly overembraced a supposed rule against socks with sandals and the people who are squicked out by the sight of toes, I'd like to skew toward the toe-haters. But make a good sock choice. Wear socks that say: I know what I'm doing.

And for you Roman Empire buffs: "ROMAN SOCKS AND SANDALS: FASHION OR FAUX PAS? In this article Mark Griffin explores the history of this unlikely pairing." ("'Udones' were made either of pieced together cloth or woollen yarn using a type of knitting called 'nalbinding' or something that looks similar to netting called 'sprang.'")

Who jumps out of bed to answer the doorbell?

I'm reading this interview, in The London Times, with Tori Amos:

What do you wear to bed?

A slip. If I’m alone, I’ll also have, on the floor, a pair of cut-off blue jeans shorts, a Rick Owens bomber (above) and a pair of white Roxy sneakers just in case somebody rings the doorbell.

"The artist Michaela Stark, who is known for binding her own flesh so that it spills over, confronting those who see it with their own idea of what is considered beautiful..."

"... and who also posed for a Met mannequin — put it... bluntly: 'It institutionalizes the idea that bodies are different.'"

From "The Met Makes a Statement With 9 New Mannequin Bodies/The latest Costume Institute exhibition expands its ideas of who, exactly, belongs in fashion. Will the gala follow suit?" (NYT)(gift link, so you can see the artist's bound flesh spilling over and the quite interesting mannequins in their fashions).

"Stark [said] that the images that come out of the gala matter, especially now. 'Who’s on that red carpet and what their bodies are like is a political statement,' she said. To really inspire change, she said, the party needs at least some 'fabulous fat women wearing fabulous gowns.' 'If it is watered down to an Ozempic-fueled event of skinny girls wearing paintings on the red carpet,' she said, 'that’s an active denial of what this exhibition is really about.'"

The idea of "wearing paintings" relates to the theme of the Met Gala this year, which is something about the way fashion has channeled fine art. We'll see how literally the gala-goers take it. I hope nobody uses the idea of walking about inside a picture frame. 

AND: The Gala is tonight, so watch for the picture frame idea. It's on my bingo card. So is a "Starry Night" star on each breast.

"One fashionista visibly shuddered when asked her opinion. 'It was terrible. Just awful,' she said."

"'I mean, who was the stylist for that movie?' she gasped, hand to heart. (For the record, it was Molly Rogers, who took over from her mentor, the legendary Patricia Field, mid-way through filming as Fields’s 'dance card was full' with other projects such as Emily in Paris). Perhaps the worst criticism was aimed at the outfits Streep agreed to tolerate for her role. 'They put her in a coat with couch pillow tassels on it! It was criminally ugly,' said one aghast attendee. 'I’ll never get over it.' Or, as Peter Davis, the editor-in-chief of Avenue magazine, said, laughing: 'They should rename it The Devil Wears Bad Clothes.' He went on: 'The fashion was awful but not so bad it was good, like Ab Fab, which the filmmakers should have rewatched for inspiration before rebooting this cheesy, tacky, and worst of all, boring movie.'"

From "Why billionaire fashionistas hate The Devil Wears Prada 2/At an exclusive soiree on Billionaires’ Row celebrating a private screening of the sequel, guests bemoan sequins, sofa-esque tassels and a ‘lousy script'" (London Times).

"In an upstairs room in Capitol Hill, a dozen people settled into a circle of folding chairs — sketch pads in one hand, cocktails in the other..."

"... and watched a model in cheetah print lingerie and bunny-eared kink mask spread across a stretch of red satin. Then they got to work. They came to practice life drawing, but this wasn’t a traditional class held at an arts center or university. This was Kink N' Draw, held, for this session, at a bar called As You Are. The event is part of a proliferating practice around D.C. where people can shell out a few bucks to draw live, naked models at a bar.... 'This is a space for creativity, self-expression and appreciation of the human form in a way that is respectful, open and completely judgment-free,' announced 27-year-old showrunner and Kink N’ Draw founder Dominique Landinez...."

From "Sorry, pub trivia. Nude drawing might be the hippest new event at D.C. bars/The scantily clad events popping up across the city’s nightlife scene are more wholesome than you think" (WaPo).

1. I've spent hundreds of hours in life-drawing classes, so this seems quite normal to me, "but this wasn’t a traditional class." Oh, it sounds traditional enough. So you've got a few props — lingerie, masks. 

2. There are lots of photos at the link, but absolutely no nudity on view, not even in a drawing. We don't get to see any of the drawings. Perhaps that's because the drawings are bad — and not in a kooky amusing way. But I think it's because WaPo is protecting us readers from nudity... even as it sniffs at "a traditional class" and titillates us with the mere idea of "kink" — manifested in the form of a bunny. 

3. Titillation from a bunny?

"We have recently crossed some sort of undeniable threshold, a point of no return in pants-wearing: An Event Horizon of pants."

"Seemingly all pants are in style, which, conversely, means no pants are in style. (Also, literally, pantslessness is in style, according to the no-pants trend seen on runways and red carpets.) We have achieved pants singularity.... 'Social media has decentralized trend authority, allowing multiple fits — from low-rise baggy to capris to short shorts — to gain traction simultaneously,' says Laura Yiannakou, womenswear senior strategist.... 'Sculptural shapes such as balloon and barrel pants also perform strongly in visual environments.'... 'Personally, I think it’s great that there’s not one dominant silhouette,' says [fashion historian Sonya] Abrego, 'because it allows people to have more choice and feel less boxed in by what’s more normative.'"

From "What pants are in style now? You won’t like the answer. Barrel-leg pants, balloon pants, capri pants, track pants and sweatpant jeans are all vying for your attention — and breaking your brain" (WaPo)(gift link, so you can see the pants (and not try to box me in by what's more normative when I'm out and about in my balloon pants).