Anvil Al #59168 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 If it's so simple, RBK, define them. I am sure the ROC committee would like an easy to understand definition. Besides, they would like to know how retarded they are..... +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckshot Frank Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 How exactly do you define "designer jeans". Are we going to have a list of acceptable brand names? Colors? Do we have to start counting the number of stitches on someone's butt to determine if their jeans are legal? In establishing a new category for our local club matches, I read a lot of rule books from other shooting sports. I really liked the Zoot Shooters "ten foot rule". They have it written that it is a costume sport and that participants should try their best to adhere by that, but they did not feel the need to nitpick clothing and equipment. If it looked period correct from 10 feet away, it was acceptable. Now that is a common sense rule! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramblin Gambler Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 This is why we should deal with pictures. Aside from not knowing what a chemesis is, I was completely wrong on what you were calling a corset. I actually suspected we had different definitions for corset, because with my definition, it would be illegal in most places for a woman to go into public like you described. I've been told (by the woman who sold my wife her ren fest costumes) that corsets don't cover the chesticle area. If it does, it's a bustier. Under what rule in the book would you use to reinforce your request for them to change their attire? You thoroughly misunderstood what I wrote. I said if the girls were to come up to me, the ramblin gambler, lowly cowboy shooter that I am, and ask if they should wear those outfits to the shoot next week, I'd advise the agin it. I don't need rules to back that up, because my reasons are not even covered by the rules. Just like when I first posted in this thread, it's someone asking an opinion, and by gosh, I have an opinion on what oughta be acceptable. I'm not talking about interpretation of the rules, I even specifically said if I were MD, I would not throw them out. So I don't know wherefore the question about rules came from. Keep it and enforce it, and stop the wordsmithing trying to legitimize your personal want. The rules are there for a purpose. Any person with any degree of common sense knows the difference in standard Jeans and Designers. Anyone who doesn't, really shouldn't be allowed to touch a gun, because they are far too retarded for that to be allowed. RBK I choose not to take offense at that. As far as I can tell, the only way to know if any piece of clothing is 'designer' clothing is to be familiar with the particular designer and recognize their mark. I am proudly ignorant of clothing designers and their marks. Remember that wranglers aren't considered designer even though they put their names on the back pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramblin Gambler Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 How exactly do you define "designer jeans". Are we going to have a list of acceptable brand names? Colors? Do we have to start counting the number of stitches on someone's butt to determine if their jeans are legal? And who in the world are you going to get to volunteer for the butt stitch counting duty? Do they need to be counted at every stage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 At the risk of disregarding my own advice to Phantom and PWB's to me...The term "designer jeans" has been in common usage in referring to a fairly distinct cut and type of decoration for jeans for over 30 years. If you can't tell or have a hard time distinguishing the difference from "...clothing of the late 19th Century or B-Western period...", by all means, don't make said calls. Or, make an attempt to learn that distinction. But, calling for removal of the rule? That's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boggus Deal #64218 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 You thoroughly misunderstood what I wrote. I said if the girls were to come up to me, the ramblin gambler, lowly cowboy shooter that I am, and ask if they should wear those outfits to the shoot next week, I'd advise the agin it. I don't need rules to back that up, because my reasons are not even covered by the rules. Just like when I first posted in this thread, it's someone asking an opinion, and by gosh, I have an opinion on what oughta be acceptable. I'm not talking about interpretation of the rules, I even specifically said if I were MD, I would not throw them out. So I don't know wherefore the question about rules came from. It is quite possible, I misunderstood what you said. You said you would ask them to wear something else. I asked under what rule. If it were for another reason, you didn't specify and as we are discussing a ruling, that is why I asked what I did. Make sense? I certainly didn't mean any offense. I just took it as because you didn't like what they were wearing, you would ask them to wear something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiren Smoke GUNFIGHTER Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I know this is not be a complete answer, but it may be a step in the right direction. How about we treat it like the hit/miss guide line.... If you know they are are acceptable jeans they are acceptable. If you think they are acceptable they are acceptable If you think they are not acceptable they are acceptable If you know they are not acceptable they are not acceptable Now having typed all that, without a definition how would we know what is not acceptable? Smoke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Just ignore anything from the eye balls down.....type of guns, boots,clothing,, pants, SG belt location,....the works Head wear(hats) is optional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Dave Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I keep going back to the original question, do we need to address it. And I keep thinking 'is it really a problem? Someone seems to think so, where did they see the offending jeans?' And then I think maybe this all because of one poor gal at EOT who dared to wear quote unquote designer jeans because nobody ever told her not to, not at her home club, and not at EOT either. And then I think of how she must feel now, so humiliated she'll probably never set foot on a cowboy range again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Hombre Sin Nombre Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Just ignore anything from the eye balls down.....type of guns, boots,clothing,, pants, SG belt location,....the works Head wear(hats) is optional You really are becoming the master of hyperbole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Henry Quick Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I'm new to the game. The thing that attracted me is the authenticity. I would like to look as authentic as possible but cost prohibits this in the beginning. Maybe just look the other way on the rule. But I think folks should try to keep with the spirit of the game. My 2 cents. Now I remember why I watched Roy Rogers when I was a kid! Howdy, Tumbleweed! I'm halfway through my third year, so I'm still a bit of a newbie myself. I was a French & Indian War reenactor for about 13 years before getting into this and I was what some would call a Stitch Nazi because I believe that if you are going to try to recreate history for the public, then you have the responsibility to be as period correct as possible. However, in CAS we are not trying to recreate history for the public, but instead building a particular atmosphere for our own enjoyment. The mere fact that B Western exists as a category is a testament to that. I'm all for "spirit of the game" and you'll never see me wearing foo-foo pants, but I also think it's fair to remember that this is, after all, a game. If some people fall a little short, particularly when they are just getting started, then I figure life is too short for me to get my panties in a bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boggus Deal #64218 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Howdy, Tumbleweed! I'm halfway through my third year, so I'm still a bit of a newbie myself. I was a French & Indian War reenactor for about 13 years before getting into this and I was what some would call a Stitch Nazi because I believe that if you are going to try to recreate history for the public, then you have the responsibility to be as period correct as possible. However, in CAS we are not trying to recreate history for the public, but instead building a particular atmosphere for our own enjoyment. The mere fact that B Western exists as a category is a testament to that. I'm all for "spirit of the game" and you'll never see me wearing foo-foo pants, but I also think it's fair to remember that this is, after all, a game. If some people fall a little short, particularly when they are just getting started, then I figure life is too short for me to get my panties in a bunch. +100000000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckshot Frank Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I'll just add this. Clint Eastwood wore tight-fitting black jeans bought from a shop on Hollywood Blvd for his "man with no name" role. They would probably fall under the definition of "designer jeans" and are certainly not period-correct, but for my generation, Clint personifies what a cowboy looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I wud rather discuss crotch holsters and the 170 and holsters not worn appropriately!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I'll just add this. Clint Eastwood wore tight-fitting black jeans bought from a shop on Hollywood Blvd for his "man with no name" role. They would probably fall under the definition of "designer jeans" and are certainly not period-correct, but for my generation, Clint personifies what a cowboy looks like. No they wouldn't, they lacked the "bling" on the back pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 You really are becoming the master of hyperbole. Like this? Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world. Archimedes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I love the folks that think some of us are retarded or to afraid of making a call on this issue...yet when you ask them to clearly define what designer jeans are so that CONSISTENT calls can be made, they are SILENT! Whatever...I'm not going to lower myself and call folks retarded... Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Let's just make up a new "Town Dandy" category and let anything go, even welded firing pins to facilitate slam firing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I believe the topic is a minute issue. A ruling patiently waiting for a problem. I haven't seen a 'designer jean' issue in all my years of shooting. 'Designer jeans' is more a young woman's issue and we haven't got many of those. I haven't got a dog in this fight,, nor seeing a dog in the ring, so I don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Typical "Town Dandy." Of course, to be more "period correct," a cuckoo clock would be better suited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ventura Slim, SASS #35690 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Designer Jeans either cost over $300 or have the embroidery on the back pockets. They need to be allowed because...you cannot get extra shotgun rounds in the pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cinch, SASS#29433 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 i think the problem is with "designer" and folks will wanna lawyer that to death. If someone is wearing Rock Revival jeans with a giant "Fleur de lis" on the pocket we know that isn't from any western genre regardless of any double speak. The verbiage should be changed to reflect this. We all know Roy and Dale, Curly Bill, and Gus. I like Kenny Chesney well enuff but his version of western wear isn't quite what we are looking for I wouldn't think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Just some random thoughts. Corset: May or may not cover the boobs. If worn below the boobs, it is often called an under-bust corset, corselet, or Swiss waist. No one would wear an under-bust corset without a chemise to a SASS event. I was talking about corsets that cover the boobs or those parts of the boobs deemed to not be appropriate for public display worn without a chemise, like the photo I posted. I don't care about this. Go for it if you've got it. I meant my comment to point out that, if corsets without chemises are allowed, why are shorts or skirts as short as shorts (like the photo of Dale I posted) not allowed or are they okay? If we don't want men to wear shorts or women to wear modern shorts, maybe that should be said. I have seen men and women in shorts at summer matches, where clothing rules are relaxed. This is all so confusing to me. I do not like relaxing rules to the point that t-shirts, modern shorts, and ball caps are allowed. Would it break the budget to buy a gauze Ecuadorian outfit, a nightshirt (I can't think of anything cooler than a seersucker night shirt and moccasins), a Victorian Bathing Suit, or Chemise and Bloomers? Even Hubby, who is a jeans/overalls and T-shirt guy, would not wear a t-shirt and ball cap to a match, even if it were allowed. I remember one of my first matches when he forgot his cowboy hat, he bought one. IMO that just shows respect for the rules. Designer Jeans: IMO they have fancy stitching or bling (rhinestones) as trim. If we don't allow this in general, it is counter to the BW costume description. I think it might have come up in the early days of SASS when Disco was fading and no one wanted to see men wearing that stuff. Shady Brady: I remember seeing many photos in the Chronicle of a popular shooter/sponsor from Europe at EOT and other events wearing one. Bottom line: Make it clear and enforce it, or get rid of the wording. Flame away. PS I know hats are not required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boggus Deal #64218 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I love the folks that think some of us are retarded or to afraid of making a call on this issue...yet when you ask them to clearly define what designer jeans are so that CONSISTENT calls can be made, they are SILENT! Whatever...I'm not going to lower myself and call folks retarded... Phantom Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 ........when Disco was fading and no one wanted to see men wearing that stuff. Did I miss something? Disco faded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 i think the problem is with "designer" and folks will wanna lawyer that to death. If someone is wearing Rock Revival jeans with a giant "Fleur de lis" on the pocket we know that isn't from any western genre regardless of any double speak. The verbiage should be changed to reflect this. We all know Roy and Dale, Curly Bill, and Gus. I like Kenny Chesney well enuff but his version of western wear isn't quite what we are looking for I wouldn't think... Sooooo...now I have to study up on what these old time b-western...western actors/actresses wore in the movies for me to be able to make a call? Great... Phantom PS: Please also list the appropriate movie(s) so that I make sure I'm seeing the proper clothing. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cinch, SASS#29433 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Sooooo...now I have to study up on what these old time b-western...western actors/actresses wore in the movies for me to be able to make a call? Great... Phantom PS: Please also list the appropriate movie(s) so that I make sure I'm seeing the proper clothing. Thanks! Great... You really interpreted my post that way... How about if someone goes to the mall and buy white stitched pants in any color at The Buckle they probably aren't "cowboy" pants...? Look I like Star Trek and I am not 70 years old but I figure it shouldn't be that hard to watch Tombstone or the latest crappy version of True Grit to get the idea...? My wife has some of those damned torn up pants what cost $600 and I question the validity of them sometimes as a $40 pair of wranglers would make a better tow strap than those high dollar ones. A tank top of the same brand costs $150 or so... Not shooter wear either. Well off to study Lonesome Dove some more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Solo Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Rather responding to your statement of who would want to wear skin tight jeans and pointing out that they make stretchy material that resembles Jeans that can be worn skin tight, and be comfortable,,, Women would be more inclined to wear such attire, as seen everyday on the streets of our cities. Thats all. A lot of us wear cowboy cooler shirts that look cowboy but are made out of space age material. I doubt many women shooters would wear skintight spandex pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Phantom, I know you ain't, ya might be a little "off"... but then ain't all of us that play this game? Allie, there's a fairly wide gap between "designer jeans" and appropriate "B-Western" costuming. Do I need to regale you with the abuse I used to take from the WB for wearing snap western shirts... even tho' they were seen in many a western movie. If, in the early days of EOT, a feller from Sin City, could enter the costume contest dressed to the nines as "Sonny" from "the Electric Horseman", and WIN, I believe a few or even a lot of rhinestones on a clearly B-Western outfit is a far cry from a pair of "designer jeans". Some of y'all are getting a little too hung up on what you perceive should be details... when in fact, it ain't. There's the "letter of the law"... and then there's the "spirit of the law"... It's far more dangerous to ride along the edge of the cliff, than it is well back from that edge. What is it about the majority of Classic Cowboy shooters that makes it seem they're inspired to wear all of the items listed,, instead of just doin' the absolute minimum? It's the Spirit of the Game. Grab some, there's plenty to go around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark's Fork Hawk Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Forgive me, but has anyone simply tried to do an Internet search on the phrase "Designer jeans definition"? I quickly found this one at: http://www.apparelsearch.com/definitions/fashion/designer_jeans.htm I'll quote part of it here: " Designer jeans are jeans that were marketed as fashion and status symbols. ... Designer jeans are cut for women and men (but mostly for women), available in many sizes, and often worn skin-tight. They typically feature prominently visible designer names or logos on the back pockets and on the right front coin-pocket." Feel free to read the whole article, but it seems that someone, at least, has a working definition of "designer jeans" that could be used as a starting point, if nothing else. Whether or not the rule forbidding them needs to go is something that I will defer to those who have more knowledge and experience of SASS matches than I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Just some random thoughts. Corset: May or may not cover the boobs. If worn below the boobs, it is often called an under-bust corset, corselet, or Swiss waist. No one would wear an under-bust corset without a chemise to a SASS event. I was talking about corsets that cover the boobs or those parts of the boobs deemed to not be appropriate for public display worn without a chemise, like the photo I posted. I don't care about this. Go for it if you've got it. I meant my comment to point out that, if corsets without chemises are allowed, why are shorts or skirts as short as shorts (like the photo of Dale I posted) not allowed or are they okay? If we don't want men to wear shorts or women to wear modern shorts, maybe that should be said. I have seen men and women in shorts at summer matches, where clothing rules are relaxed. This is all so confusing to me. I do not like relaxing rules to the point that t-shirts, modern shorts, and ball caps are allowed. Would it break the budget to buy a gauze Ecuadorian outfit, a nightshirt (I can't think of anything cooler than a seersucker night shirt and moccasins), a Victorian Bathing Suit, or Chemise and Bloomers? Even Hubby, who is a jeans/overalls and T-shirt guy, would not wear a t-shirt and ball cap to a match, even if it were allowed. I remember one of my first matches when he forgot his cowboy hat, he bought one. IMO that just shows respect for the rules. Designer Jeans: IMO they have fancy stitching or bling (rhinestones) as trim. If we don't allow this in general, it is counter to the BW costume description. I think it might have come up in the early days of SASS when Disco was fading and no one wanted to see men wearing that stuff. Shady Brady: I remember seeing many photos in the Chronicle of a popular shooter/sponsor from Europe at EOT and other events wearing one. Bottom line: Make it clear and enforce it, or get rid of the wording. Flame away. PS I know hats are not required. She said BOOBS !!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warden Callaway Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I think designer jeans should be outlawed for wear in public by 90% of the people that wear them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I think designer jeans should be outlawed for wear in public by 90% of the people that wear them. Like this? JUST BECAUSE IT ZIPS, DOESN'T MEAN IT FITS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 · Hidden by Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217, July 31, 2015 - Typical Phantom unpleasantness. Hidden by Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217, July 31, 2015 - Typical Phantom unpleasantness. Great... You really interpreted my post that way... How about if you go to the mall and buy white stitched pants in any color at The Buckle they probably aren't "cowboy" pants...? Look I like Star Trek and I am not 70 years old but I figure it shouldn't be that hard to watch Tombstone or the latest crappy version of True Grit to get the idea...? My wife has some of those damned torn up pants what cost $600 and I question the validity of them sometimes as a $40 pair of wranglers would make a better tow strap than those high dollar ones. A tank top of the same brand costs $150 or so... Not shooter wear either. Well off to study Lonesome Dove some more... Wait I liked Mickey Rourkes character in Harley and the Marlboro Man... Maybe buckle boots and red leather pants... Well tell ya what - why don't you educate me and tell me what you meant by your comment: "We all know Roy and Dale, Curly Bill, and Gus" Looking forward to you straightening me out on my lousy interpretation. Phantom Link to comment
Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I quickly found this one at: http://www.apparelsearch.com/definitions/fashion/designer_jeans.htm " Designer jeans are jeans that were marketed as fashion and status symbols. ... Designer jeans are cut for women and men (but mostly for women), available in many sizes, and often worn skin-tight. They typically feature prominently visible designer names or logos on the back pockets and on the right front coin-pocket." As with many other attempts at definitions, that definition essentially provides "typical examples," and some of the examples provided are within margins of what I have seen deemed acceptable at major matches (standard Wranglers worn skin tight)(name or logo of jeans maker on rear pocket). I would not be able to make a good decision between "is it designer or not-designer" using the definition cited. Good luck, GJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.