Are the limitations of men's styles making them miserable...?

jwabeasley 2026-01-17 03:49:10 UTC #2

Yes, extremely so. I'm a very fashion-conscious individual, but the reality is that adding a tasteful vest to standard office attire, as I do daily, takes me from normal to extremely well-dressed, and if I add some actually interesting boots and my long canvas duster, I get into highly eccentric territory quickly.

There are definitely a lack of options available, and even fewer that one can wear to anything except particular festivals. What's weird is that nearly every guy wants to dress like the characters in fantasy fiction, action movies, and sci-fi, and many women also want men to dress like that... but it somehow doesn't make it into the department stores' tiny men's clothes sections.

Combine those limited available options with the 250-year trend that a "manly" man doesn't care about the look of his clothes but only the function (and yet, in the magazines or films, he still is tailored in well-appointed clothing that emphasizes his figure and contrasts well with his skin and hair colors), and you get a real desert for menswear.

I don't like to compare suffering, but looking at the recent looksmaxxer trend - there's definitely some suffering there. Many women have also had fashion-based suffering over the decades, and when you are suffering, it doesn't really matter if someone else somewhere is suffering too, or has it worse, or whatever. It still hurts. It doesn't help that most things that make a man unattractive by society's standards are outside of his control - height, whether he goes bald, and so forth.

"Mogging" is a terrible idea long-term, because people tend to grow to resemble their peer group over time, in looks, finances, and opinions. Surround yourself with people who are slightly better than you in the ways you want to grow, then learn and adopt their habits into your own life bit-by-bit.

As a teen boy, I thought the most fashion I could do was pick the color of my T-shirt and jeans, and then wear a standard suit to formal functions. It took me most of college to accept that I could have a more eccentric fashion sense, and another 5 years to develop it into a relatively consistent, conscious style. And that's with me being a really eccentric fop of a person in general!

NOOR_ASAKZ05 2026-01-17 09:46:24 UTC #3

This might seem off-topic, but physiologically, women are attracted to men with healthy, athletic builds who can provide protection. However, as humanity has evolved, social status and wealth have become the primary criteria. Men, on the other hand, are generally attracted to women with large breasts (indicating their ability to breastfeed) and wide hips (a sign of their potential for pregnancy). Well, these standards haven't changed drastically over time, so you'll find women focusing on their appearance and beauty, while men focus on their reputation or achievements, as this is what attracts them to each other. (This is one of the worst summaries I've ever written.) Anyway, I hope this is a kind of answer.

kyupol 2026-01-17 11:39:54 UTC #4

There's a limit to looksmaxxing.

Yes you can improve by going to the gym for the most part. Then there's plastic surgery to fix the face. And there's leg lengthening surgery to fix the height. But there's limit to that. I heard you can only do 6 inches max. I think its more body proportions vs actual height itself. Head to body ratio.

Style... is just a small factor in my opinion. A Chad can be naked or wear mismatched unfashionable clothes and not care about hygiene yet still slay.

And yes your confidence and bearing works wonders too. Can make you look more capable than you really are.

For example I remember walking into a gym and just asked the guy at the desk to show me around... and one of the things he said to me to advertise the gym is "we go up to 350 pounds on most of our equipment unlike that other place that only goes to 250 pounds"

As if.. . Im built like a bodybuilder when I'm not THAT muscular. I was wearing a jacket that conceals my form. Its hard to tell a person's real physique when they're wearing a sweater or jacket.

But I know its my bearing (stomach in chest out no slouching look sharp overall) that made him think I'm more muscular than I really am.

And I also get all kinds of rumors spread about me... that Im a gangsta who did 20 years in jail, or combat veteran or something to the effect of some sort of "ass kicker"... ALL BECAUSE of the way I carry myself IRL. 🤣

.
.
.
.
.

... or tldr... this flesh suit is just passing and its not really you. Who cares... 🤣

moontokkym 2026-01-17 12:33:19 UTC #5

Idk if it's making them miserable, but it's certainly making me miserable lol
I like to present androgynously and my style is either "prim English teacher" (for my work in a school) or "sexy + fancy", and I've really noticed that if I want to go more masc it's really difficult to find stuff, especially in the "sexy + fancy" category, it's either full thirst trap excentrism or tailored suit and neither is fully my vibe.

You're also 100% right that there's one way to look good as a man for men, but for women it's way more varied from what I've heard from hetero women. I know mutliple women who specifically love dad bods (think Thor from God of War Ragnarok), others who love kind of "twinks" thin, not very muscly, hairless... One of my friends loves any and all men with long straight hair and straight noses, no matter the body type. It's so frustrating to hear men say "no woman will love me because women only go for the ripped chad" when anyone who has talked to any women outside can see that the only people who tend to enforce that standard is men to other men, just making eachother miserable and blaming women for their feelings of inadequecy.

PS: "mogging" as a term is genuinely hilarious, but I don't want to take it from the incels because the practice is pathetic and I don't actually need the word, nor do I know anyone who does that lol i think I'm pretty attractive (or I can be when I make an effort) and I have friends who can be gorgeous, but I've never thought to directly compare our "levels of attractiveness" because I don't need to? Like if they're pretty today I tell them but I'm not about to make a scoreboard lol.

TheOGB 2026-01-17 13:52:58 UTC #6

Honestly, that outfit would cool af. There should be an international holiday or something where people dressed like that.

Lensing 2026-01-17 15:20:50 UTC #7

I wouldn´t be miserable if this was my only style option.
That´s what I thought in the 80s and I still think the same.

Sorry for probably not answering the questions, I´m not
smart enough to understand.

NickRowler 2026-01-17 15:21:39 UTC #8

I think the raise in lookmaxxing for men has more to do with men spending a lot of time of social media.

We now have more media depicting men pushing a body standard which has men as the target audience (not in a homoerotic way). Men end up doomscrolling this content and it sort of messes with their grasp on reality. If anything I feel like there is a bigger pressure on what men wear and a push for more style. Heck look at media from the 90s or 2000s, most men just wore a polo with khakis or a t-shirt with jeans.

I feel like this issue has also effected women/girls as well. Look into videos talking about the new Chinese beauty standards, these trends are caused by women being influenced by social media.

EDIT:
I also recommend looking up men's 70s fashion. It was very bright and varied and "out there".

Mod shirts became very popular. Despite some of them having floral patterns, they were still seen as macho for the time.

NickRowler 2026-01-17 15:25:02 UTC #9

I read a book that said that Marlon Brando in Wild Ones caused a whole generation of men to become obsessed with motorcycles and wanted to dress like him.

Lensing 2026-01-17 15:30:45 UTC #10

That´s how it was for me. I first watched the 3 James Dean movies and I still like plain white T-shirts
like he was wearing in rebel without a cause, then I watched the Wild on with Marlon Brando and
bought my first leather jacket that I´m still wearing 35 years later, I also got the cuffed blue jeans and
I´m still wearing the engineer boots. Then I got my Elvis influenced hair cut and never changed
it and that´s still how I look today

DokiDokiTsuna 2026-01-17 15:58:09 UTC #11

BECAUSE PATRIARCHY SAYS NO

I don't know if I articulated it well in the OP, but that's kind of the main element of the misery I was seeing-- like, it feels like no matter what anyone says they actually like when it comes to men's styles, nothing will change...until powerful men make a sustained, concerted effort to accept other kinds of clothing. One powerful man will change nothing; many ordinary men will change nothing, at least not anytime soon (like what happened with the 'performative male' trend...notice how the takeaway wasn't "maybe hetero women are looking for different things in men nowadays", and was instead "you can game the system and get girls if you act like an effeminate weirdo").

It feels like we need permission from the 'system' to make any progress...which, again, makes people feel helpless.

Yeah...hearing about leg-lengthening surgery was what really convinced me we had a serious problem; people are gonna be making documentaries about this stuff someday...

Interesting...usually my masc clothing has more of a 'skater boy' or 'business casual' vibe; easy to mix and match with the other stuff in my wardrobe. I've considered going for more formal menswear looks, but...they just don't excite me the way they used to, as evidenced by the OP. ^^ I feel like I get more mileage out of a nice dress shirt when girlmoding rather than boymoding-- like, literally; there are just more options.

...Fair. (¬‿¬)

So I've studied 70's fashion pretty closely, and this is a good point (the 'rockstar androgyny' of the 80's also fits with this, I think).

However...as someone who's also gotten to know 70's culture pretty well, I don't think it's actually indicative of the kind of thing the average man would wear. It's like 'classy if you're rich, trashy if you're poor'...or in this case, 'classy if you're rich, gay if you're poor'. Movie stars and other celebrities could get away with floral prints and ascots; normal men would just be made fun of. At best...

NickRowler 2026-01-17 17:07:31 UTC #12

This mindset sort of reminds me of the "metrosexual" fashion of the 2000s. The term was often used to mock straight men for dressing nice and self-grooming. Shows like the original Queer Eye often would use the style in makeovers. The style came from metropolitan fashion but often looked very odd and out of place in more suburban or rural environments.

jwabeasley 2026-01-17 17:17:20 UTC #13

"Patriarchy" might be a bit imprecise, it's not like the basic structure of having men lead in a social order automatically leads to constrained fashion choices - men in the 12th-18th centuries had many varieties of color, cut, and silhouette, in pretty much any era. Those fashions depended on one's wealth and access more than gender. It was the Victorians who got us into dark suits and trousers, and every broad shift since then has been to decrease the amount of clothes men can choose to wear. And it was the general adoption of the automobile by society that got rid of capes, long coats, and hats, because who needs those things when you're just walking from the car to the front door?

Maybe 'capitalism' could be blamed for the general downtrend, but I find those broad bugaboos to be unhelpful. I'm not capable of making a dent in crony capitalism and I doubt any institution of matriarchy or mythical egalitarianism would get us out of this mess...pursuit of egalitarianism and profit is how men's clothing became trousers-only, why the Victorians insisted on dark suits, why civilian wear in the early 20th century became so standardized, and so on, until we got to today where luxury brands are indistinguishable in quality from basic brands and the pants choices are only between slacks and jeans.

Maybe a trend towards more handmade and personalized clothing would help. I don't know of anyone IRL who takes clothing commissions the way we do art commissions, but I have a few choice items in mind if I ever do find one.

TAMAnnoying 2026-01-17 20:50:43 UTC #14

Short answer: no

Long answer: nah

DiegoPalacios 2026-01-18 00:33:12 UTC #15

kyupol 2026-01-18 00:45:28 UTC #16

Yep. The human psyche always focuses on the negative and finding problems.

When you've gotten rid of survival issues (3rd world problems), it becomes about pleasure seeking, reputation enhancement, etc.

In the 3rd world, many worry where their next meal is coming from. But when you get to the upper classes there, you see behavior like destroying CD ROMs for no reason. As well as other behaviors common in 1st world nations even among the lower socioeconomic classes of the 1st world.

A CD cost PhP 250 at that time (1990s... equivalent to USD $5). That was the daily minimum wage in the Philippines. I've seen the rich snobby kids smash them like its nothing. It irritated me...

DokiDokiTsuna 2026-01-18 03:27:35 UTC #17

Strangely, women never stopped wearing those things, despite also driving cars...

...I mean, I get the idea that the utilitarian purpose of flashy outerwear faded away with the convenience of car travel, relegating them to the 'frivolous' domain of women's clothing...but there is a reason that 'frivolous' clothing items are considered for women and NOT for men.

I just call that 'patriarchy' as in 'socio-cultural norms determined by traditional values that center men'; the key word being 'tradition' rather than 'men', tbph. It's not that I think a matriarchy would fix this problem (who can say, honestly), it's that men in power, i.e. the people who currently get the most say in this, do not want to break tradition, despite this tradition being formed relatively recently in Western history, let alone human history.

To put it another way: the simple fact that this will not change until men in power allow it to change is the reason why I blame 'patriarchy'. Because women are open to change, and less powerful men (for instance, men from other cultures that allow greater style diversity) are open to change, and yet it's still generally unacceptable for men to wear anything other than pants + shirt in different fonts. Someone besides us is clearly calling the shots, and considering that the patriarchy we live in famously does not listen to anything but itself when determining what is 'normal' and 'respectable'...I'm just drawing a conclusion. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

If there's a more specific term for this phenomenon, I'd love to learn it. I'm just working with what I've got.

LunarScyphozoa 2026-01-18 05:42:36 UTC #18

Yeah it’s.. pretty dire out there. I have some pretty personal beef with the state of modern menswear for reasons personal and it just makes me sad to watch half of society not even realize they have this many options. So, I have a pretty large interest in historical fashion and fiber crafts. I have been making clothes since before I transitioned, and it’s really depressing to look at the sewing patterns marketed to women vs men. Women get dresses, coats, pants, skirts, overalls, hats, cowls, fluffy blouses, fitted waistcoats, etc. while men tend to get dress shirts and maybe pants. What gives?!
Skirt styles you can wear to lunch with a dress code of conventional and casual? There’s so many lengths to choose from, in terms of shape you can wear any level of fitted from circle skirt to pencil, then there’s gathers, pleats, wrap styles, ruffles, bubble hems, and so many more. Pants styles you can wear? Well there’s a million styles of jean out there. I mean, you can have low waisted jeans that end just at your hip bone, or high waisted jeans that.. also end at your hip bone. I know there’s more styles of pants out there, but go outside and just walk about town. How many guys do you see wearing those vs how many kinds technically exist? Which brings me to my next point..

This is a very recent phenomenon, and I posit this is less the fault of patriarchy directly and more the fault of homophobia. Ever since being fashionable became seen as “feminine” (also a surprisingly recent development!) it quickly turned into a fear many straight men have of being perceived as gay for being “too” elaborately or eccentrically dressed. There’s a general trend amongst some men that seems to be just.. paralyzing fear of being an individual? Of being a specific person instead of just A Man™️. I’m sure there’s a lot of factors that contribute to that but I am not qualified to speak on them since I just wasn’t raised with those expectations. But it seems most (cisgender) guys just don’t even think about the fact that they might like fashion, let alone want to dress unconventionally. This goes for a lot of stuff too, but the thread is about fashion. My current theory is that it’s not that men have less options, it’s that they’re scared to use them. To circle back to my sewing pattern example, for every near-identical-save-a-slightly-shorter-cuff pattern for a button up shirt I see today, I can go look at similar patterns from less than two centuries ago and see so much more variety! It seems to be a vicious cycle of insecurity and inability to look past the status quo of what options men do have for acceptable interests and creative outlets reinforcing itself until it’s harder for guys to even be exposed to the idea they might like “girly” stuff like caring about their clothing and having a personal style, which leads to more men never discovering that hobby, which leads to less interest and thus less resources for guys to explore.. rinse and repeat. And this starts not with men, but with boys (I have found men who were girls in their youth tend to not have this problem nearly as much, but that might just be personal bias from my experiences) who get told as little kids, out loud or not, that they can’t want to dress up. It’s pretty sad.

One last note is that a lot of the boring-ness tends to come from a lack of layering. Please bring back layering for men, for style reasons and for “it’s so hard to hide a pair of breasts when you only have a shirt and an undershirt on this is why I never pass” reasons. Sorry for any typos, I haven’t slept very well lately.

Also, this?

This the funniest thing I’ve seen all year. Oh my god. People do that??

TheGentleArtist 2026-02-19 06:32:33 UTC #19

Mogging isn't an incel term and is just a way more recent name for a concept that's been going on for a long while. Various media depicted this relatively evenly between the sexes doing this where they keep the less desirable one around to look better themselves when around other people; usually it's in romance shows though not strictly. That and mogging is moreso showing off how good you are to everyone else solo and "accidentally" making others feel bad, jealous or envious with said beauty.

From my experience, this tends to happen more from the girls and women in their lives (mom, sister, grandmother etc.,) moreso then from the men and boys in their lives when boys are told what not to wear whenever they want to branch out in fashion.

DokiDokiTsuna 2026-02-19 17:53:58 UTC #20

I hate that this is true...ugh... >_<

It's a discussion that's definitely (thankfully!) being had in the Black community right now; how women play a not-insignificant role in upholding traditional patriarchal standards. Because when it comes to influencing men's behavior, the only thing as desirable as earning male validation is avoiding female mockery. Especially when it comes to fashion, which is generally considered a 'female' interest-- usually, women will clock gendered clothing inconsistencies faster than men will, because they're trained to do it.

I still believe that powerful men have the most say when it comes to fashion standards (to this day, they still get to police women's appearances in the workplace), BUT, particularly when it comes to young boys, if we could stop snickering and/or screaming bloody murder whenever they're in arms reach of glitter or the color pink, I think it would help. ^^;

Red_Dog 2026-02-19 17:57:44 UTC #21

I think deep down we all feel a little self conscious about the way we look. God knows I do.