What's new

Is clothing or grooming a requirement to define a gentleman?

Is clothing or grooming a requirement to define a Gentleman?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
This question has been a result of a debate in this thread. I was asked to make a poll so I decided to do just that.

http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php/444510-Pimps-vs-Gentlemen

I would encourage you to read it. I made a statement in post #9, which said "Being a gentleman has absolutely nothing to do with how you look" and have been debating it throughout the thread. And rather than retyping it over here, I decided to just link it so you could get both sides of the debate to make your own decision.

For those of you who don't wish to read it, I will give you 2 people who would be considered a Gentlemen in my eyes. It's up to you to decide if these 2 people are gentlemen or only 1 is.

1. A man, who is absolutely kind to his fellow human, generous with his giving, and spends all of his free time helping little old ladies across the street, opening doors for the handicapped, and generally doing things that help others that day. This man dresses in a nice pair of shoes, properly fitted pants, shirt, etc. His hair is combed to perfection.

2. The exact same man above, but all of his good clothes are dirty or wrinkled. He decides to be absolutely kind to his fellow human, generous with his giving, and spends all of his free time helping little old ladies across the street, opening doors for the handicapped, and generally doing things that help others that day. For the sake of argument, let's say he just decides to wear jeans and a t-shirt. His hair is a little scraggly.

3. A man, who is absolutely kind to his fellow human, generous with his giving, and spends all of his free time helping little old ladies across the street, opening doors for the handicapped, and generally doing things that help others that day. This man is homeless, only has a few pairs of ripped jeans an t- shirts with holes in them, an his hair is kept by running his fingers through it only.

It's my opinion that clothing, while nice if one wants to dress well, isn't a requirement to whether or not I can call someone a Gentleman, or if I have to contemplate whether or not I want to correct someone who I hear use that word incorrectly because of clothing or grooming.

What say you?

I will set it up to leave the results as anonymous. I hope that this poll is allowed to be a representation of what the members feel. I'm not calling shenanigans, i'm just saying the possibility exists to alter the results.

I'm generally interested in the results, even if I'm wrong about what I think the outcome will be
 
Voted no. That's not to say being attractive or being conscious about your appearance somehow makes you a lesser gentleman, but it's certainly not a requirement either in my opinion.

I realize we're only four votes in, but so far it's not looking too good for those 90% who would vote yes ;)
 

captp

Pretty Pink Fairy Princess.
I've known a number of men who dressed to the nines, wore 1-2 thousand dollar watches, had a huge variety of ties, all the trappings. They were absolute pigs in their dealings with other people, especially folks who don't dress to their standards. I have a very close friend who dresses rather shabbily (even to my low standards, and my dress standards are quite low), but he is one of the most gentlemanly guys I know. So, no, a gentleman is not, and can not be defined by how he dresses
 

Claudel Xerxes

Staff member
Absolutely not. A gentleman is defined by his character and actions. A gentleman who wears nice clothes and keeps up a nice appearance is simply a well-dressed, well groomed gentleman.
 
It's mostly character, but grooming is an element of behavior.

What about clothing?

Again, there can't be any grey area. Two people act and do the exact same thing, one of them is dressed to the nines, the other is dressed in jeans and a ripped shirt because that's all he owns (can't afford anything else ) The second person combs his hair but needs a haircut that day, and just got done changing a flat tire and has a little grease under his nails, although he tried to clean them the best he could. I call the first guy a Gentleman, what am I supposed to call the second one?
 

captp

Pretty Pink Fairy Princess.
If the 1st guy acts like what you consider to be a gentleman and the 2nd guy acts the same way, he is as much a gentleman as the 1st, maybe a little shabbier, but so what?
 

Mike H

Instagram Famous
While clothing and grooming would fit somewhere is most people definition of a gentleman, I think there is more to it than just outward appearance.

See if you can spot the gentleman in all these finely dressed New Yorkers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really appreciate you posting that Mike. That video is basically the heart of my debate. How many people saw the cloths instead of the act?
 
Mike, saw similar videos to this when I did my first aid course; it is known as the bystander effect. It is shocking, and repulsive, how people justify their inaction.

This is the video that was shown, it is absolutely shocking. What is even more shocking, is how clothes change peoples actions.
20minutes and no one does a bloody thing because of how the guy is dressed. 6seconds before someone steps in when he is dressed in a suit.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've known a number of men who dressed to the nines, wore 1-2 thousand dollar watches, had a huge variety of ties, all the trappings. They were absolute pigs in their dealings with other people, especially folks who don't dress to their standards. I have a very close friend who dresses rather shabbily (even to my low standards, and my dress standards are quite low), but he is one of the most gentlemanly guys I know. So, no, a gentleman is not, and can not be defined by how he dresses
Does anyone think clothes make the man/woman anything other than well-dressed (whatever that means) or not?
Ditto, captp, but that's not really what it's about.

The question is whether a well-mannered sharp dressed man is more a gentleman than a well-mannered not so sharp dressed one? Not "Are sharp dressed men automatically gentlemen?"
 
I think that very well-groomed people are often trying to present the illusion of being a gentleman ... but it's a smokescreen. People with a little more depth understand that what matters is beneath the surface.
 
No, however a gentleman should be aware that others may rightly or wrongly judge him on his appearance. A true gentleman is one who regardless of appearance is defined by his actions and his attitude towards others.
 
I vote absolutely no, but I would say that part of being a gentleman is being in a position to help others before himself, and, because we realize that people for the most part do judge individuals on their appearance and not their interior merits, a gentleman would realize that he may best be of service by dressing in a manner that socially puts others at ease.
So no, clothing and grooming are not requirements that define a gentleman, but I do think presenting yourself well in public allows you to exercise your usefulness to others in a wide range of circumstances.
 
IMO a lot of the examples you guys are giving make a man or a human. (Which in most cases is better to be). Gentlemen was a termed used to describe a social ranking in early English times that over the years has been watered down to include anyone in any numer of situations. Example being "Will you gentlemen please follow me?" Or "gentlemen this way please". Really both sides of this argument can be right depending on the age you are in reference to as you look up the meaning. Now with that said stive to be a man and you will be better off.
 
I vote absolutely no, but I would say that part of being a gentleman is being in a position to help others before himself, and, because we realize that people for the most part do judge individuals on their appearance and not their interior merits, a gentleman would realize that he may best be of service by dressing in a manner that socially puts others at ease.
So no, clothing and grooming are not requirements that define a gentleman, but I do think presenting yourself well in public allows you to exercise your usefulness to others in a wide range of circumstances.

Couldn't have said it better myself. A requirement? No. A part of being a gentleman? Yes.
 
Top Bottom