What if we never wore suits again?
Bongi D D M Radipati | Monday July 14, 2025 15:24
Whilst it is perceived as the compulsory uniform of politicians to wear a suit, he always wears a monochromatic set of dark colored trousers paired with dark coloured long sleeves shirt. Asked when he would wear a suit, he answered that when his country's war with a much bigger country is over, he will wear a costume. His answer conveys a truism easy to miss. In hard times, clothes have sometimes been a bridge between believers (in say, victory) and unbelievers. In all other times, sometimes in our clothing, we are minded to juxtapose the clergy and the laity and to differentiate between the sacred and the worldly. Consider this: the leaders of some of the world's largest religions (Catholicism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism), ordinarily wear a cassock, or robe or gown, or unstitched cloth that typically features loose styles and long hemlines. They dress like this against how their flock, who during religious services, wear anything deemed modest, but which is not a cassock or robe or gown or unstitched cloth. I have often wondered if the point of this differentiation is to get us to reckon with the possibilities of our own uniqueness even during worship services.
Now that we dispensed with suits for some of the believers who wage peace and faith, can we find suits somewhere else interesting? It appears to me that we can't. In a secular context, the “black tie” requirement in a party invitation means that the event is the most formal of functions. Here again, a suit, even one which is black or is a three piece is unacceptable. At a minimum, a black tie ensemble must consist of the following: a tuxedo, which is a black, single breasted, single button jacket, with lapels that point upward, and black pants that have a silk stripe on the outside seam of each leg. Mark that, the jacket and trousers are not a suit.
Beyond the elite and those who serve or aspire to serve them, thanks to the 2010s dress sense of Silicon Valley, a suit was almost functionally obsolete when the global pandemic, COVID-19, enveloped the world in the early 2020s. Those decades allowed a late expression of a single-minded commitment to dressing for comfort or even a deliberate dressing down, at the expense of the formality and fussiness that typically surround the wearing of a suit. How could this happen? The question answers itself. Because wearers of suits always knew that they were measured by their standing with tradition, class, conformity and status, matters in which non-suit wearers knew that they themselves were probably deficient in. A non-suit sartorial choice, true to its origins as a standard attire for the working class, the countercultural activists, Silicon Valley techies and now professionals working-remotely, puts comfort and convenience first. It also honours men who make it in life no matter who they are, where they come from, or who, if anybody, they serve or aspire to serve. Over time, a non-suit man became and is now emblematic of a certain type of a modern man striver. He is the kind of man intent on gaining entry into the glamour orbit of dressing grandely and brashly. Yet he does so on his own terms: not by being inside that orbit, but by going his own separate way.
There is another reason why it could be a good idea to ditch a suit now. Spend time observing how unchallenging it is to wear a suit. Start here. A suit is two or three pieces of attire in identical formats-in fabric, color, texture, cut and design. It is, with respect, a close approximation of an elevated and pricey jumpsuit or dungaree. The only difference is that while a jumpsuit or dungaree is essentially in one part, and to wear it, you can quickly lift your legs into it, a suit is in two or three parts and thus will require just a little bit more time to wear it. Other than that, as with a jumpsuit or dungaree, because of its identical-ness there is little to think about when one decides to wear a suit. This vital part of engaging in small-time personal enlightenment on a daily basis is lost each time a man decides to wear a suit, every working day. This is a pity, for anecdotally, the world becomes a little better each time men think about what they are doing!
There may be more men now than ever in the past. But every man desires to be a limited edition of himself. A combination of thoughtfulness and personal style in how men dress guarantees that in a world run by men, any man can still retain his individuality. Jettisoning a suit for garments such as a blazer and slacks that go together, will accentuate the level of uniqueness, respect and seriousness that every man (and their significant other) desires for himself. Then we have to reckon with how technology, aesthetic choices and lifestyle preferences now allow certain professional men to earn a living working anywhere and dressing anyhow they want. Yet they largely do not do that because they do not seek to be slovenly dressed. They still want to dress for function and utility, but a suit may fail to give them that. A sports jacket paired with dress pants is best placed to give them that. This is especially so for men who live in climates that subject them to heat, humidity, dryness and year long sunlight. There is little logical reason why those men must dress as others do in climates significantly different from theirs.
As a man, next time you too wish to stand out for a good cause just as the unusual politician and religious leaders we referred to at the beginning, or you want to carry the day for whatever reason, if you can, ditch the sartorial homogeneity of a suit. Instead choose a non-suit. Soon enough, that non-suit will beguile you with its appropriateness, utility and pleasure in itself rather than merely in its effect. Importantly, it will reinforce your scarcity. After all, everything that is scarce, is of a high value.
*Radipati is a regular Mmegi contributor