My dad just told me I'm not supposed to sear suit pants

well if he meant just trousers that aren't chino's/jeans hes fucking retarded. If he literally means suit pants hes right.

>>11857383
theres a difference between dress pants and suit pants

>>11857397
>>11857401
he meant dress pants vs suit pants

does it really matter?

>>11857405
It matters a lot, dress pants can be worn casually depending on the material, fit, and so on. Suit pants are generally made to be a part of.....you guess it, a suit.

Good thread to ask, what are some good casual black dress pants?

>>11857405
yes dont walk around wearing suit pants without a jacket

http://www.express.com/clothing/men/dress-pants/cat/cat280012

i think the pictures here do justice in showing the difference between the two.

>>11857425
Thrift, I got a pair that I fucking love for $3.

>>11857383

don't wear trousers that came with a jacket, it's as easy as that

also don't wear a tie without a jacket, unless you're a 6 year old at a wedding

Yes desu. You should have some sort of jacket but it doesnt have to be formal. Just stay away from youthwear like hoodies or bombers probably.

File: Jeff-Goldblum-2016-Photo-Shoot-El-Pais-Icon-005.jpg (117KB, 800x975px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 800x975px

what's wrong with suit pants and casual top?

your dad and the other posters in this thread are half right. if the gloss on your pants is too high, there are out-of-place pinstripes, or it just looks 'off', then it isn't going to work. however, you can certainly wear 'suit pants' with a button down or even a casual shirt as long as the colors and fabrics look appropriate together.

well dress pants can look good with polos, sweaters etc.
suit pants cant be worn casually i guess
he kinda got point

>>11857383
>wearing a tie without a jacket
shiggy diggy do

Unfortunately most ignornant work places will insist on this fashion cringe.

I hate ties and the culture that surrounds them. I really fucking do.

>>11858457
meant for>>11858115

>>11858457
Ties are great

So long as they're repp ties and worn with a jacket

>>11857383
You shouldn't be doing shirt and tie without a jacket AT ALL, you mongrel. This isn't a "look", this is you "acting like a tard".

And yes, you shouldn't wear suit pants (= pants that came with a matching jacket) with an odd sportcoat/blazer. That's just weird. If you want to go casual like that, it's blazer/chino, sportcoat/cords, sportcoat/moleskins etc.

Anyway your dad's right and you seem to have not even grasped what he was telling you.

>>11857383
suit trousers, by definition, do not exist without a corresponding suit coat (jacket is not the correct terminology unless it's a dinner or smoking jacket)

trousers made in the same fashion as suit trousers are perfectly acceptable to wear with just a shirt, or with a mismatching blazer or sport coat. for separates though, I would encourage you not to go with bland worsted wool, and certainly not pinstripe.

get some nice flannel or tweed. maybe even a herringbone or windowpane?

>>11858948
listen to this guy OP, he knows his shit

>>11858931
Upvoted

>Buy suit
>Throw away jacket
>The remaining pants are now suddenly 'dress pants' instead of 'suit pants' and completely different Reddit fashion rules apply to them

/fa/ is usually not retarded enough to think there's still a real difference between most suit jackets and blazers these days but apparently with trousers it's different.

>>11857672
Jeff Goldblum can pull off anything, though.

It would look shit on most people

lmfao this thread

theyre just pants wear them if you think they look good

>>11859528
this

fucking mugs on this board i swear

>>11857672
>Wanting to look like that
wow

>>11857383
>the simple shirt and tie combination
Are you an 8 years old asian kid at a wedding?

>>11857397
>>11857401
>>11857413
>>11857427
>>11857940
>>11858931

All wrong.

A pair of suit pants can be worn with a shirt/tie without a jacket no problem. I work in financial services where dress clothing is required. When going jacketless, a shirt can be worn with suit pants, slacks/trousers no problem. When jacketless, formal pants are all interchangeable.

Suit pants can even be worn with a sports coat so long as the suit pants are a solid color and do not have a pattern. For example, the pants to a solid grey suit can be worn independently from the grey jacket and instead be worn with a navy blue sports coat.

Consider your source OP, most of these fucks are clueless when it comes to formal wear. The fact that someone used Express to demonstrate the do's and don'ts of formal wear is laughable.

The only concern with wearing suit pants without the corresponding jacket is that if you do it enough, the pants may look to be more worn than the jacket so that when they are worn together, one looks older than the other which is not ideal.

File: fishtail-trousers-bespoke-menco-650x257.jpg (25KB, 650x257px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 650x257px

>>11857383
There isn't a meaningful difference between modern suit pants and wool trousers made to be sold on their own.

Early-to-mid 20th century suits often had weirdly styled pants like ones with adjustable side tabs on the waistband instead of belt loops, or a "fishtail" back meant to work better with suspenders/braces. These pants looked great with a jacket on, but ridiculous on their own with just a shirt. That's where the rule came from.

Now that most suits are made with pants that are identical to regular trousers, it's bullshit.