Most guys buy their clothes too small.

It’s something I’ve noticed consistently over years spent working with guys to help them dial in their fits and refine their closets. A certain amount of my work often involves helping a guy realize that he is, simply, no longer a medium.

One of the most common shirt-tucking errors I see is what I call the mannequin look.

It’s not his fault, it’s not because he got fat, it’s just he grew as we all grow, and he didn’t update his sizing to reflect the fact that he is 31 now, not 21. Sometimes he has an inkling that this is the case, and it’s my job to help confirm his suspicions.

Stay loose

Some of it is also that we are in the long process of coming out of the decade-long slim-fit era. Guys are essentially having to retool their understanding of what proper fit means, and it means bigger than what they previously thought.

So do you have an inkling that you might be buying your clothes too small? If you have that suspicion, you already know the answer.

You are.

Embrace it. Looser shirts are better than tighter shirts anyway.

Why?

Wiggle room

Well, they are more comfortable, of course. They also look better. Lastly, they give you wiggle room for fluctuations in weight. Yes, the guy who lives in the gym hopes that his weight only fluctuates exactly how we want it to fluctuate. That would be good for all of us. However, down here on earth, things aren’t always the way we want. We can’t all live in the gym. We all have weight fluctuations.

It happens sometimes over months, sometimes over years. It’s just how it goes. If your clothes are so tight that they can’t accommodate just a few pounds of fluctuation, they are not sustainable. It’s no wonder why people have to buy new clothes all the time.

This is one of the reasons shirts were looser in the old days. People didn’t have unlimited money. Money was tight so shirts were not. A shirt needed to last as long as possible. That practicality became an aesthetic.

Comfort, flexibility, durability. That’s what you get with a looser shirt.

There is a method to the madness.

RELATED: My first sign of spring? A peach-colored OCBD

The tuck stops here

And consider this: A looser shirt is also easier to tuck.

Is it hard to tuck in your shirt?

No, not really. It isn’t rocket science or any great and difficult task. But you can do it “wrong.” And the funny thing is it’s usually the result of trying too hard.

One of the most common shirt-tucking errors I see is what I call the mannequin look. You know what I am talking about, right? It’s where the shirt is pulled really tight against the abdomen and all stuffed down the back of the pants, often cinched with a clip in the back. That’s how they style mannequins.

It looks pretty cool on an inanimate object that stands under warm lights all day, but it looks a lot less cool on a living and breathing human male moving about his day.

Watch an old movie, make note of how the guys’ shirts are tucked in when they take their jackets off. Basically their shirts will be equally tucked all the way around their bodies. They won’t be pulled back so their shirt is flush against their abdomens. Their shirts will be equally loose around their trunks, and there will basically be an equal billowing on all sides.

The proper, classic way to tuck your shirt in is to tuck equally on all sides and then pull some of the shirt up and out so you have a nice little balanced billow all around your waist. It feels better, and it looks much stronger as well. The mannequin tries to hide the billow, but the mannequin isn’t a man. Man enjoys his billow, and he enjoys it nice and good.

Editor’s note: This article is adapted from material previously published on the Fitting Room Substack.

​Men’s style, Lifestyle, Clothing, Menswear, Classic, The root of the matter 

Vice President JD Vance took a shot at Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) of New York after an embarrassing episode from her interview at the Munich Security Conference.

The 36-year-old firebrand socialist Democrat was trying to explain her position on whether the U.S. should defend Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion when she stumbled through about 20 seconds of silence and rambling.

‘Does anybody really believe that AOC has very thoughtful ideas about the global world order or about what the United States should do with our policy?’

“Um, you know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is, this is of course a very long-standing policy of the United States,” she said.

Vance mocked and ridiculed her during his own speech at the meeting of President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” on Thursday.

“I knew exactly what I wanted to say, but then after the president said that I was so smart and that I didn’t want to repeat our congresswoman who froze for 20 seconds over in Munich,” he said.

“Now I’m tempted sir, just to freeze for 20 seconds and just stare at the cameras. and maybe they’ll say nice things about me like they do about Congresswoman Cortez,” he added.

Ocasio-Cortez was likely trying to grow her name recognition in order to seek higher offices, but that effort was badly damaged by her bumbling performance.

She responded on social media to Vance’s jab to try to regain some semblance of dignity.

RELATED: ‘Right out of the Marxist playbook’: Bishop Barron dismantles Ocasio-Cortez’s criticism of Western culture

“The only thing longer than my pause to think was their silence to his joke,” she wrote, adding a skull emoji.

Vance reiterated his criticism in an appearance on Fox News.

“I have seen this way too much in Washington with politicians, where they are given lines, and when you ask them to go outside the lines they were given, they completely fall apart,” he said, “because, look, does AOC — does anybody really believe that AOC has very thoughtful ideas about the global world order or about what the United States should do with our policy in Asia or our policy in Europe?”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Vance vs aoc, Ocasio cortez humiliated munich, Ocasio cortez is not that smart, Foreign policy ocasio-cortez, Politics 

Amid escalating tensions over Iran’s nuclear program and a massive U.S. military buildup in the Middle East, rumors are swirling that President Trump is on the verge of authorizing military strikes against Iran in the near term, potentially leading to prolonged conflict.

But what does this mean for the United States and the Middle East?

To get some clarity, Glenn Beck is joined by his chief researcher and former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill, who explains what we need to be looking for in the coming days.

“Axios is reporting: ‘Trump moving closer to a major war with Iran.’ What does that mean, Jason?” Glenn asks.

“A broader regional war is what we’re looking at here. I think it’ll be primarily an air war, the likes of which we haven’t seen since the Gulf War,” says Jason, noting that “every 12 hours or so, we’re doubling” our “military hardware” in the Middle East.

But a war with Iran will likely be “very dirty,” he warns.

For one, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf monarchies agree that Iran is a major problem in the Middle East, meaning they are likely to be “drawn into” the conflict.

However, they face a tough “conundrum,” says Jason: Right now, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries “don’t have to compete” with Iranian oil because “Iran’s portion … is sanctioned” and “not a lot of it comes out,” allowing Saudi Arabia and allies to dominate the oil market and prices. If war breaks out, however, “suddenly a scenario that’s very real” emerges where the Saudis “have to compete with Iran” on “oil prices, gas prices — everything.”

“If we are correct that the war is about to happen soon, Iran is about to go into regime survival mode, which everything that they have planned since 1979 to maintain control and power — they are now going to put those into effect,” Jason explains.

“What does that mean?” he asks.

It means Iran will likely “shut down the Strait of Hormuz” and possibly activate “sleeper cells” for attacks or sabotage.

“You better believe that the Iranians will look at all those options once this happens,” he predicts.

For the U.S., says Jason, such a war would be a “massive air campaign to take out the ability for Iran to shoot long-range missiles, to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and to do whatever else they want.”

Even though Trump has made repeated vows to avoid prolonged U.S. military entanglements abroad, Jason says if this war happens, it’s not going to be a Venezuela situation.

“This will take a while,” he confesses.

But Glenn is conflicted. “Here’s the thing I know about Trump, though. He doesn’t do long, drawn-out war. … He knows if he gets into a long, drawn-out war, it’s going to be horrible for him — horrible. So what do you think his advisers are saying?” he asks.

To hear Jason’s in-depth response, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Blazetv, Blaze media, Iran, War with iran, Jason buttrill