Dear Editor,
Ow Dave I think you too tough on the brothers (`Men are such jackasses’—Sunday July 1 `So it Go’). I am on a different page with your assessment of how men dress at formal functions.
Banna you cannot fairly compare men with women in that department.
This is how I see it. Women have more options with regards to styles and colours in dress. They can vary the length of the dress and the sleeves and look quite exquisite. Depending on how much of the “love apples” they wish to expose will determine how deep the neckline will plunge.
If they are daring enough the back of the dress will have a cut in the categories of low, very low or extremely low. The dress can be either tight fitting or hanging loosely on her well-shaped body. She can go overboard with shoe styles and height of heel sometimes to her detriment. At the end of it all she looks exquisitely gorgeous.
The brothers don’t have it that easy. At dress formal activities we have shoes, socks, pants, shirt, tie and jacket. Our options are limited.
“Kickers” are out of fashion so the style and height of the shoe is basic. Pants styles are few and shirts are either long or short sleeves. Ties can be colourful but must suit the occasion and match your shirt. Our jackets also have limited variations. We have for centuries presented that dapper look in our suits and will continue that way for some time. Could you imagine a brother in colourful sneakers, multicoloured pants and sleeveless shirt at a formal function? That’s for Mashramani.
Banna, I share your concern too but we cannot revolutionise the brothers style of dress that easily. Until Noel and Ramsammy’s male counterparts find an answer, we are stuck with the suit and tie, only varying in colour. That banna is how it go.
Yours faithfully
L. Dundford Dickson
