+1 Thistle, your reply said most of what I was thinking. When it's a matter of making ends meet, sometimes fashion is not a high priority. And I think it's a good thing that 'appropriate' dressing is now accessible enough that it's not something we use to divide people into classes.

I was raised by generations of proud Southern ladies who wore dresses (and gloves and hats!) to church, and I do raise an internal eyebrow when I see people wearing jeans to the symphony. But I'd rather have people wear jeans to the symphony than never go to the symphony, you know? I try to make an effort to be pulled-together and thoughtful about my wardrobe whenever possible, but there are days that I don't/can't, and I try to be nonjudgmental about other people's priorities, which are not my own.

If you think about it, the difference between pajama pants and jeans is arbitrary, in the sense that one was thought of as street clothes and one is not. What's the actual literal difference between yoga pants and stretchy skinnies? The line is very thin (Lulu Lemon puns not intended). What I'm trying to say is that all this stuff is culturally determined, and it changes, and like it or not what's considered acceptable to wear in public, or for particular occasions, is constantly shifting.

Reading over my comments I sound dismissive of other posters' points, which I'm not trying to be. I agree with you all in a lot of ways, I'm just saying that it's never as simple as "this is lazy, this is not" when it comes to clothes, or any other kind of cultural performance.

The tone of the article was quite strong, to the point where I think she was trying to be funny, but I couldn't always tell.

I believe we live in an infinitely more tolerant, accepting society than before. The tolerance has mostly good aspects but this is one that is negative. However I will take today's more open society any day over the rigid cultural codes of the 50s -60s. It's all good, people. I choose to dress better than a slob, and my whole family is this way unless we are lounging at home. This includes my size 22 mother, for whom it is very difficult to shop. When she goes out she dresses really well for her body type (with my help) and accessorizes with fantastic (real) jewelry.

Thank you, rhubarbgirl and rae, for voicing some of what is in my head. This is a subject that is very dear to me, and frankly I am surprised by some of the comments on this thread. I remember a recent thread where people were lamenting all the comments they get about how "dressy" they look all the time and the judging that went along with it.

As one of the people who commented on my style of dress not affecting my work product, I assure you that I dress perfectly "appropriately" for work. I know how to blend in when I need to. It's exactly like some board members who have stated that it takes a lot of effort for them to dress casually. That is how I feel about my work attire. Casual comes much more naturally to me.

I'm not saying that a person going out in their pajamas is good or right or whatever, but I'm saying that maybe a certain style just doesn't resonate with us so we don't recognize it as such (cowboy style anyone?). Sweatpants (or birkenstocks or yoga pants) can be worn intentionally and styled, and not necessarily because it was the first thing the person found on the floor that day.

Liz, what you said is true, and it's why I try to be aware of my own thought process and avoid assumptions about why people do or don't dress a certain way. At the same time, isn't clothing one of the ways we communicate who we are socially, or who we perceive we are? (Cowboys, surfer chicks, rock stars...)

Take this scenario (which has happened): Older male client comes to the office. He's well-spoken, but unkempt and in a stained t-shirt and torn Carharrts. Now, I can think any of the following:

1. He doesn't care how he presents himself in this situation.
2. He is making a deliberate statement of some kind - proud of hard work, defiant of social norms, etc.
3. He's suffering some type of dementia and thinks he's fine but isn't.
4. He is clueless.
5. He is broke.

(Turns out to be 3 - this guy is a multi-millionaire with no family, suffering from mild dementia.)

It's all so interesting.

Very interesting article and topic. I'm with others that do not care for the super casual to the point of sloppy dress I often see. I don't leave the house in sweat pants, or pj's or slippers and frown when I see others dong so. Of course I don't know their reasons for doing so but I still end up judging it against my own personal standards for how one should dress for whatever the situation is.

I do think that environmental norms are so much more casual nowadays. Even more so than when I was growing up. I remember being so annoyed at my mom for wanting us to dress up and always being overdressed herself like she was going to a gala instead of a grocery. Like once there was an awards ceremony at my school and she made me wear a prom-type red gown. I was so embarrassed. I used to complain that my mom wore high heels all the time, and now DD asks me why I wear such loud cloppy heels.

Now that I have started dressing up a little (ack, I'm turning into my mom!), I get the "why are you so dressed up" comments from others. Today I was wearing a casual dress, jean jacket and sandals to drop off DD at school and another mom asked me if I was going to work. And this is one of the dressier moms (wears Kate Spade, Tory Burch, etc)!

Agree with the others, I don't really judge others, but I do think in general attire is so much more casual these days. I don't see that changing much...I mean who is going to give up hoodies and yoga pants for tweed skirt suits, gloves and pillbox hats?

But, PS...confession of a slob...I do wear my pajamas to take out the trash. And I live on a busy street.

But don't the college students wear only a particular style of pajama bottoms to class?

DD returned from freshman year of college a good 10 lb. heavier, but on this short girl it looks like 15, as in the Freshman 15. She reported that all her friends and classmates are quite a bit heavier, too. So maybe these kids can't get into their old skinny jeans, etc.?

I let her know that I don't like her leaving the house wearing sweats/yoga pants/leggings as pants/hoochie wear, etc., but there's only so much I can do. . .At least she's never worn pjs out, but I think that happened once or twice at school.

As someone on the outside looking in I read statistics about the long working hours of the average American (clopenning anyone?) and can understand why comfort at work becomes such a huge issue.

I also see the importance of sport to American culture and can see how gear associated with these sports becomes prized.

I have to admit I struggle with the PJ wearing, is it roll out of bed and onto the street? It is not the clothing more the hygiene which I have an issue with.

At smith, zimmerli nightgowns and a string of pearls were de rigeur classroom wear.

I'm finding this discussion fascinating since I'm not sure where I fit on the spectrum. On the one hand, I think that public dress ought be different than private dress. But I also think that calling people "slobs" or "too-dressed-up" for preferring to wear outfits that are not to my taste seems a bit arbitrary. Why, for example, are slouchy boyfriend jeans OK but not loose-fitting, elastic-waisted pants? Does styling with a half-tuck read as sloppy or fashionable? And exactly why does a fleece vest invite condemnation but a fake-fur vest provoke oohs and aahs? As I said, I'm not quite sure....

I'm going to split hairs because I can

There is a huge difference between PJ pants and jeans. And yoga pants and stretchy skinnies. Making these types of distinctions is part of what makes fashion fun, and makes dressing for different settings appropriate. There is no fashion fun in no dress code.

If you have a keen and appreciative eye for aesthetics, than seeing well dressed people around you increases your quality of life and vice versa. Also, dressing up is a sign of respect to yourself and others. This might be an old fashioned concept but it's one I personally hold in high regard.

I agree, Angie.

I never said I have a problem with yoga pants or hoodies. I will run errands in mine if I'm coming from a workout, and I know plenty of people who do wear them for casual days out and about. I DO have a problem with pajamas. They are for sleeping and lounging. My personal rule of thumb is, if it looks like you can sleep in it, don't wear it out of the house.

Of course, situational appropriateness is key. If everyone in your workplace dresses a certain way, it's hard (and often not advisable) to go against the grain. But to Liz's point, I have never worked in an environment, ever, where that second photograph would be acceptable work attire. And I've worked in art departments, which are often about as free and casual as it gets.

I blame the grunge movement.

That is intersting about the client with dementia. Part of the psycho-neurological exam is to comment on the appropriateness of the patient's clothing (i.e. clean, appropriate for season, bizarre, etc.). This just gets more difficult all the time!

High, five, Janet.

Nicole, I am so with you - if I had to blame an era!!! The hippie movement made it's contribution, but the other side of the '70s was very glam. And the '80s were glam. Then it all fell to pieces in the '90s. And every time fashion tries to bring back dressy as a fashion statement - it has little traction.

There are definitely cultural differences at play. I come from an Eastern European country and was brought up to believe that one had to dress "nicely" when leaving the house. That meant no workout gear, loungewear, or PJs, and most definitely nothing stained or dirty. Living in the States now, I do find myself overdressed for my environment 99% of the time. I have tried dressing to fit in, but have realized that it just does not feel comfortable or like me, to me. I do perceive people dressed slovenly as less competent and not professional - of course, some may and will disagree. And of course, some people do prove me wrong, but rarely.

Taking care of your clothes and appearance has absolutely nothing to do with income, but a lot to do with habits and self-respect, in my opinion. Our family had little money, but my parents taught me how to mend clothes, sew on buttons, and do laundry to maximize the wear of my clothes. I also do know many people with very limited incomes who take great care with their appearance and always look polished and nice, and some very wealthy people who always look like they've been living in their clothes for weeks.

Now that I work from home, and having been unemployed for several months prior to that, dressing up has become even more important to me. On the days when I did not take the time to get dressed nicely, I would find myself slipping into a very dark place mentally. I guess it does stem from the fact that I do sincerely believe that clothes make the man, and lolling about the house in PJs or sweats all day negatively affected my self esteem, which in turn made looking for work and forcing myself to get out of bed that much harder.

ETA: I think some people are conflating looking fashionable, trendy, or whatever, with not looking sloppy. I did not think the article was about fashion or expensive clothes, but rather about dressing to look like you've made an effort, which is possible at all income levels.

I couldn't have said it better than Thistle. I sort of bristle at the notion that it's "easy" for everyone to look nice on any budget. Is it possible to look groomed? Yes, but I attribute that more to fixing one's hair and looking clean-scrubbed than by anything someone wears. Being fashionable is a whole other animal influenced by time, budget, resources, etc. I thought Thistle's point that many of us look at the fashion industry and say "nope, not me," is well taken. I know I've often felt that way, and I'm youngish and have an average dress size. If I had more fit issues than I have already, I can imagine that shopping would be more demoralizing than fun.

I'm not sure what to think of the budget angle, Stacey. I've lived in developing countries - more like Second World - for many, many years and am always in awe of how how well dressed the less privileged people are. It does take time and resources to be fashionable and trendy each season. I fully agree with that statement. But when you've lived in Asia and Africa for a while, you also think about this differently - which is the perspective I'm sharing here. There is a cultural component at play. In other words, it is definitely part of the culture in Southern Africa for example, to look dressy despite your budget.

Yes, it's not necessarily a budget issue, it's more of a cultural norms issue. We live in a fairly high income area (at least, it feels like people are more well off than we are), and people aren't any more dressed up here than when we lived in SF. The uniform is still gear and yoga pants, but they're Athleta and Lululemon.

@Una, yes I absolutely agree that clothing is an option that people have for communicating social cues with each other. If you knew my history, you'd understand why I dress the way I do on my own time

@Janet, I absolutely agree that 99% of offices would not accept such attire. Although truth be told I wore some version of that when I worked an admin job alone in the back office of a restaurant... not every day, but it happened. My point is that many jobs could be performed equally well regardless of the employee's clothing. And that I really just wish I could wear jeans to work. And end rant.

I know people who make very little and always look well-dressed and like they care. I know people who make a lot and always look like they cannot be arsed.

It's just a matter of priorities. If you want to look nice, you do. If you don't think it's important, you don't.

I agree it's also a matter of social norms. When I first moved to NYC from LA, I was stunned how rude salesladies were to me in my jeans - in LA, someone wearing jeans could be a bazillionaire and salespeople acted accordingly. Not in NYC back then! (That has of course changed, and it's *which* jeans you wear now, and with what.)

Maybe people in pajama pants think they look practical and cute for traveling, and they don't care if you disagree. I don't think money enters into it much.

I suspect that "dressing like a slob" is as much cultural as it is about money or comfort. And I don't think that you can necessarily infer how much thought has gone into putting an outfit together based solely on your judgement of how the outfit looks to your eyes.

I get a bit uncomfortable, though, with arbitrarily labeling this as fashionable and that as unfashionable. I'm not sure that I totally agree with Angie that there is always an aesthetic difference which elevates one item from another. More often I think we either become accustomed to seeing something which renders the item more acceptable to us or are taught to view an item in a more positive way by someone whose opinion we choose to trust.

I think Rachylou is right when she says we dress according to our "tribe". That college student in her PJs is wearing what her tribe deems currently acceptable. And, I guess, if Helmut Lang starts featuring $$$ flannel, elastic-waisted pants with bunnies on them in his next collection, those bottoms just might end up on the red carpet worn by a member of that "tribe". Do I label one as a slob and another as a trend-setter?

Gaylene, it already happened. Here is Rihana wearing a little number from Acne.
As a side note, I think it is possible to look nice with very little money. Growing up in Colombia we did not have much, but both my mom and grandma always look pristine. That holds for most of the country too.
I am pretty laid back with stuff like this, but what gets me about cases like my coworker's, is that it denotes lack of care for your environment.There is also the issue of cleanliness. Wearing the same pants and the same fleece for 5 straight days is a bit unsanitary, sorry. That to me is sloppy. The rest, not so much.

I also don't like the judgment associated with the word "slob." To each his/her own. It's all relative to your tribe, as rachylou so astutely states. But I do give the stink eye to dirty, stinky, stained clothes. Yuck.

I guess the guys on Star Trek looked like they were wearing pajamas--my brother had some in the 1950's that were amazingly like a Star Trek uniform. And yet I guess that was intended to evoke the future of fabric and function.

I like a sense of the right outfit for the time & place--even if just an effort. As in, our rep theater is quite casual, but I prefer not to see someone dressed as though he just got in from yard work or rolled off the couch. Just look a little nice, even if casual. However I really can't give a super rational reason why, so have given up, and just tried to do what's right for me.

I'm not on the yoga pant exclusion team for lunch or errands. Even though they're not in my wardrobe, I think you can actually look very nice and put together and they look like stretchy something. Why is all denim elevated to better? Why leggings under a tunic better ? I think the faded boyfriends are not as formal-looking as very nicely fitted flared bootcut black yoga pants that might be worn as just part of a very put-together outfit, for example. So to me that is fashion and culture--eye of the beholder, depends on the fit and fabrication and intent of the outfit, and all that.

I confess I don't believe women can really be comfortable during a 10-hour work day in 90% of "stylish" shoes they wear--so there! So then that part of me wants to defend the track-shoe crowd, even though I've upgraded to a few other sorts of shoes that I can wear doing errands, or on casual outings.
But for any real walking, or long days of sight-seeing, I think my fallback may always be some form of lace-up athletic shoe or leather laceup like Ecco or Clarks or Privo--with socks!--no fashion oxfords, even.

Hmm.. where was I? So, I like people to dress at least aimed at the occasion, but differentiate that from fashion or style--many people trying to dress nicely would be jeered by the fashion police for looking dated, or maybe too tight, or too boxy, or whatever.

Unfrumped, I wrote, and then deleted, the basic same premise. Dress to your according surroundings and /or occasion and all else is just gravy IMO.

Unfrumped, can I join you in the "I'll wear my lace-up shoes with socks when I'm doing a lot of walking" club? Maybe I don't have the right kind of skin to wear sockless oxfords because, whenever I've attempted to wear my shoes without socks, I end up limping along the pavement with blistered, bleeding toes and heels, swearing under my breath. And those little sock thingies just make matters worse by rolling off my heels and balling up under my feet, making my toes even more unhappy!

I'll put up with the jeers of the fashion police just to keep my feet happy.

Interesting discussion...I think "don't judge" rule works both ways here. I don't really care much what people around wear including my workplace (unless they look positively dirty and smell bad). Unfortunately it does happen - I mean the smell - more often than I care to endure. I guess it is a natural progression in thinking that how you look is not important...then you begin to ignore things like keeping your clothes and body clean on regular basis as well...on the other hand I think when people try to make you feel bad because you dressed with more care that they is equally bad and in bad taste!
On another note my female colleague who is very careful about her appearance and grooming told me that she cannot work efficiently if she dresses up so she keeps it very casual (but still nice) at work and by the end of the week she is so sick of it that she dresses up all weekend. I guess everybody is different and have different needs - I definitely need to dress up (even when I dress casual) to work well
My point is that I don't want to judge anybody by how they dress unless it is really offensive to my senses but I do enjoy seeing people who care about their appearance. I agree with Angie on aesthetic on seeing nicely dressed people - similar to seeing a nice landscape or beautiful building - it gives you more pleasure than seeing something drab. Which reminds me of my first trip to Italy together with my two male colleagues. Every time after we came to our hotel from the bank they would change into baggy shorts and t-shirts for dinner - and then comment how different they look from Italians. Yeah - I did not see any locals in baggy shorts at the restaurant. They also commented that Italian girls are all very beautiful - more so than in Canada. I wanted to laugh out loud at them and point out that Italian ladies are all nicely dressed and groomed including makeup and that really sets them apart from majority of Canadian girls in our overly casual city...so yeah, aesthetic angle is definitely there!

I thought that Jezebel's article was a piece of pointed humour and that she intended to open up the kind of discussion that is being had. Maybe I need to go read it again more closely. Interesting discussion though.
As I said, I have bookmarked her. Maybe be all of you in the USA should do that too because she is probably headed for a political career.

How many bosses have we seen on What Not to Wear who say that they value the work, but the person is being overlooked for promotion due to their appearance? Showing that you care about how you look is a level of respect expecially in the work environment....Seems like there is a definitle defensive mindset that others should she them for what they do and get past them not caring about appearance. I love how that mindset changes with the makeove experience and the "awakening"

This is such a great conversation. I wish I had more time today to respond with all my thoughts. For now I just wanted to thank you, Una, and thank everyone for chiming in. I found myself nodding along with so many of you -- even with contradictory viewpoints! Which is why I can't write a full response now -- too many ideas.