Jeans Turned Away on Gala Night

Thanks for your mention of my post on this thread. I totally agree with cruisemom42. Unfortunately we are living in a time where society is "dumming down". There is little regard for what I believe is common acceptable behavior and dress. To many people believe they should be able to wear what they want when and where they want. They are lazy, crass, and care only about themselves. Very unfortunate!! I know some of these people. They are my wife's relatives. They would come to a funeral or a wedding wearing sweat shirts and ball caps, and be wearing the ball caps indoors as well.

dmg1956

One thing I cannot tolerate, no matter where people are dining, on a ship or otherwise are men who wear caps at the dinner table. I don't care if they come in "NEKKED", I HATE ball caps at the dinner table. :(

 

If you think most passengers read "the published rules", then how do you explain the numerous posters asking questions about "the published rules"?

Many of those posters write some variation of this: "I read the rules/website/FAQs but I wanted to find out what people really wear on gala nights/smart casual nights..."

Based on the follow-up conversations, it appears most have read the rules and are looking for validation not to follow them.

No, OP said: "jeans with multiple holes in them, a T-shirt and a ball cap".

Perhaps IF they WEAR the ball cap at the table, they MAY be asked to remove it?

HAL's revised guidelines are perfect for us. We can pack casual in our carry on and have no issue at any dining venue regardless of what day it is.

The new guidelines were LONG overdue and we applaud HAL for finally doing something concrete to actually attract the passenger demographic that they appear to be targeting.

Now they just have to deal with the entertainment and ship maitenance issues that some TA's caution prospective cruisers about. If you are long in the tooth like us a TA might not say anything. If you are on the younger side of 55 or 50 a TA might well provide insights to the 'HAL' on board environment and vibe (or lack thereof).

We are on the Zuiderdam Panama Canal Cruise and this is a whole new ballgame. The demographic appears to be a bit older ... or at least there are fewer young to middle aged people onboard.

On smart casual

Nights, the overwhelming majority of guests are dressed to Gala Night minimum guidelines or higher. No jeans, no T-shirts and no ball caps.

Just an observation.

HAL's revised guidelines are perfect for us. We can pack casual in our carry on and have no issue at any dining venue regardless of what day it is.

 

The new guidelines were LONG overdue and we applaud HAL for finally doing something concrete to actually attract the passenger demographic that they appear to be targeting.

 

Now they just have to deal with the entertainment and ship maitenance issues that some TA's caution prospective cruisers about. If you are long in the tooth like us a TA might not say anything. If you are on the younger side of 55 or 50 a TA might well provide insights to the 'HAL' on board environment and vibe (or lack thereof).

And just what "passenger demographic" do you think HAL is now "targeting"?

Had they read Porter's "Competitive Advantage" a few years ago, they might have recognized, and emphasized , what they had that made them special - and competed on that basis. Instead, they simply initially went after the same mass market Princess, Celebrity, and Royal Caribbean sought --- until they decided to open it up even wider and started after Carnival's and even NCL's shares - where lowest price seems to be the only "competitive advantage" left to them.

And just what "passenger demographic" do you think HAL is now "targeting"?

 

Had they read Porter's "Competitive Advantage" a few years ago, they might have recognized, and emphasized , what they had that made them special - and competed on that basis. Instead, they simply initially went after the same mass market Princess, Celebrity, and Royal Caribbean sought --- until they decided to open it up even wider and started after Carnival's and even NCL's shares - where lowest price seems to be the only "competitive advantage" left to them.

The demographic that Holland that was Hollands niche is dying off. You may not like it, but Holland has no choice but to emphasize a different demographic.

The demographic that Holland that was Hollands niche is dying off. You may not like it, but Holland has no choice but to emphasize a different demographic.

By "different," I assume you mean younger. As pointed out before, people still age and, if anything, the 65+ population is increasing in size. Besides, the longer itineraries for which HAL is known can only be taken by retirees for the most part.

The demographic that Holland that was Hollands niche is dying off. You may not like it, but Holland has no choice but to emphasize a different demographic.

To the extent "demographic" means age/income/employment status group, which is what "demographic" means, it is kind of silly to say that it is "dying off".

As individual members do "die off", don't you realize that they are replaced by others who, because of aging and retiring and simply gaining the interests of people at that stage of life?

Your contention is about as silly as saying that colleges will become obsolete because the "demographic" attending them is graduating.

To the extent "demographic" means age/income/employment status group, which is what "demographic" means, it is kind of silly to say that it is "dying off".

 

As individual members do "die off", don't you realize that they are replaced by others who, because of aging and retiring and simply gaining the interests of people at that stage of life?

 

Your contention is about as silly as saying that colleges will become obsolete because the "demographic" attending them is graduating.

Of course, I realize that each year group is replaced with another.

What is "silly" is not recognizing that each year group differs from the preceding group. Small difference but significant over time. Those that turned sixty in 2010 have different perspectives than those who turned sixty in 1990. See how that works?

To be specific, those that turned sixty in 2010 probably have a different perspective on wearing jeans that those who turned sixty in 1990.

Cruise lines that fail to evolve are bought out after they go bankrupt.

Of course, I realize that each year group is replaced with another.

 

What is "silly" is not recognizing that each year group differs from the preceding group. Small difference but significant over time. Those that turned sixty in 2010 have different perspectives than those who turned sixty in 1990. See how that works?

 

 

 

To be specific, those that turned sixty in 2010 probably have a different perspective on wearing jeans that those who turned sixty in 1990.

 

 

 

Cruise lines that fail to evolve are bought out after they go bankrupt.

I agree totally, but we appear to be in the minority with the HAL defenders here, lol. I was on my first HAL cruise 2 weeks ago and will probably not return, at least in the Caribbean.

Dress standards change over time. How many people dress up to go to a baseball game, a chain restaurant for dinner or even eat dinner at home now? But look at photos of these events prior to the 60s-70s and you will see this regularly occurred.

The dress code was not an issue for me, but the lack of (and quality of) entertainment and activities was. I have never been bored on a cruise until that one. Had I never been on a cruise, I may not have known any better and been happy, but I may very well have decided that cruising wasn't for me. Luckily I just found that HAL is not for me.

Just because people age, doesn't mean they automatically want to start dressing up or listening to music their parents and grandparents liked. I am 56 and would have liked to have heard music from the 70s through current artists offered in at least one venue on the ship.

I am sure that HAL analyzes this constantly and has to decide which direction to go. There will always be a market for a more subdued environment on a cruise, but it will be limited and grow smaller, in my opinion. Maybe HAL should primarily focus on the longer cruises to unique ports and Alaska rather than trying to compete in the Caribbean with the other mass-market lines that appeal to more people. Trying to please everyone never usually goes well.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I agree totally, but we appear to be in the minority with the HAL defenders here, lol. I was on my first HAL cruise 2 weeks ago and will probably not return, at least in the Caribbean.

 

...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

What “HAL defenders”? I see a lot of HAL mourners - expressing regret at the way HAL has trashed itself - and a fair number of gloaters - who seem to take pleasure at its self-destruction - but very few defenders.

Sure, there are a few who still see it as a notch above Carnival or NCL - but I would not call them “defenders”.

What “HAL defenders”? I see a lot of HAL mourners - expressing regret at the way HAL has trashed itself - and a fair number of gloaters - who seem to take pleasure at its self-destruction - but very few defenders.

 

 

 

Sure, there are a few who still see it as a notch above Carnival or NCL - but I would not call them “defenders”.

Maybe it's only a few, but I noticed any negative comment is immediately disputed and have been told several times "Go back to Carnival", as if that is some type of insult, lol. Obviously they haven't cruises Carnival lately.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

What is "silly" is not recognizing that each year group differs from the preceding group. Small difference but significant over time. Those that turned sixty in 2010 have different perspectives than those who turned sixty in 1990. See how that works?

 

To be specific, those that turned sixty in 2010 probably have a different perspective on wearing jeans that those who turned sixty in 1990.

 

While I agree that large shifts occur over time and from one generation to the next, I'm not sure I'd hang my standard on "jeans" as a differentiator.

I have yet to turn 60, and I have never been a big fan of jeans. I own one pair, which I seldom wear (generally only on the very rare casual Friday at my workplace to avoid looking like a stick in the mud...). They are very nice jeans, just south of $200 per pair, yet I don't kid myself that they are "dressy" in any way, shape or form.

Also, my son and his group of friends, all around age 25 and recent college graduates, seem to have a greater appreciation for dressing up than, say, my generation -- who I already consider somewhat more likely to dress up than many of those who came of age in the 1960s. When they go out I am more likely to see cute dresses on the girls and slim khakis in dark colors (or heck, in bright colors) on the guys, a la Banana Republic.

Here's an interesting example: as I'm a single mom, I often take DS on a holiday cruise around New Year's, something we both enjoy. Despite having had a great time on Celebrity three years ago, DS did not want to go back for this previous year because X did away with formal night; he selected Princess.

I think bigger differentiators between lines than dress will be technology, food, and entertainment. The coming generations feature a great many foodies, technophiles (e.g., internet that is fast and reasonably priced; in-room technology), and those who expect to be provided with a variety of entertainment options.

While I agree that large shifts occur over time and from one generation to the next, I'm not sure I'd hang my standard on "jeans" as a differentiator.

 

I'm not sure either, however, I will say this. My generation always associated jeans with (dirty) work and I use my one pair for that activity. Younger generations view jeans as just another clothes style and, hence, feel its appropriate to wear on almost any occasion. With respect to ball caps or hats of any type, I was taught to remove my hat in the presence of a lady as a mark of respect. Clearly, that gesture has fallen by the wayside.

I'm not sure either, however, I will say this. My generation always associated jeans with (dirty) work and I use my one pair for that activity. Younger generations view jeans as just another clothes style and, hence, feel its appropriate to wear on almost any occasion. With respect to ball caps or hats of any type, I was taught to remove my hat in the presence of a lady as a mark of respect. Clearly, that gesture has fallen by the wayside.

I am not sure what is considered "younger generations", but I am 56 and wore jeans to school and still do in many (most?) situations. I would think someone would have to be 70+ to consider jeans are only primarily for "dirty work" and not a normal fashion for the last 50 years.

As far as hats, I only wear one when in the sun, but it doesn't really bother me when someone wears one in the dining room. I will say I don't understand the wearing of knit stocking caps year round, but it has become very common. I figure it's their head, they can wear what the want.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I am not sure what is considered "younger generations", but I am 56 and wore jeans to school and still do in many (most?) situations. I would think someone would have to be 70+ to consider jeans are only primarily for "dirty work" and not a normal fashion for the last 50 years.

 

As far as hats, I only wear one when in the sun, but it doesn't really bother me when someone wears one in the dining room. I will say I don't understand the wearing of knit stocking caps year round, but it has become very common. I figure it's their head, they can wear what the want.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I graduated from college in the late sixties. When I started college, jeans were considered "grubbies" and only to be worn on rainy days or when attended a lab. Shorts were never worn. Guys often wore suits to class and football games. Girls wore Sunday School type dresses. I visited campus last October. Lots of guy/girls from fraternity/sorority row were wearing shorts to class. Things have changed.

I retired a couple of years ago. I started work for that company in 1974. Guys were required to wear jackets and ties. My last 10 years, I wore blue jeans every day.

While I agree that large shifts occur over time and from one generation to the next, I'm not sure I'd hang my standard on "jeans" as a differentiator.

 

I have yet to turn 60, and I have never been a big fan of jeans. I own one pair, which I seldom wear (generally only on the very rare casual Friday at my workplace to avoid looking like a stick in the mud...). They are very nice jeans, just south of $200 per pair, yet I don't kid myself that they are "dressy" in any way, shape or form.

 

Also, my son and his group of friends, all around age 25 and recent college graduates, seem to have a greater appreciation for dressing up than, say, my generation -- who I already consider somewhat more likely to dress up than many of those who came of age in the 1960s. When they go out I am more likely to see cute dresses on the girls and slim khakis in dark colors (or heck, in bright colors) on the guys, a la Banana Republic.

 

Here's an interesting example: as I'm a single mom, I often take DS on a holiday cruise around New Year's, something we both enjoy. Despite having had a great time on Celebrity three years ago, DS did not want to go back for this previous year because X did away with formal night; he selected Princess.

 

I think bigger differentiators between lines than dress will be technology, food, and entertainment. The coming generations feature a great many foodies, technophiles (e.g., internet that is fast and reasonably priced; in-room technology), and those who expect to be provided with a variety of entertainment options.

There certainly are multiple differentiators. I only used jeans as an example of a demographic perspective that might/will change with each new year group. And, we also should remember that not all members of a year group will share the same preferrences just as all cruise passengers will have differening opinions. Then, we also should remember that preferences are like a pendulum swinging from one preferrence to another. Right now, the pendulum appears to be swinging towards a more casual style. That certainly can change.

We should also remember that preferrences do not make the person. Good people can abhor baseball caps and other good people can prefer to wear jeans to dinner. Just because we disagree doesn't mean it's appropriate to tell them to find another cruise line. It's a big ship.

I retired a couple of years ago. I started work for that company in 1974. Guys were required to wear jackets and ties. My last 10 years, I wore blue jeans every day.

Congratulations on your retirement. I hope to retire in 3 years.

I had to wear suits and ties in the 80s as well. Since then I have worn khakis and a collared shirt (minimum Gala Night attire, lol) and jeans on Fridays.

My daughter just graduated college and started a job in an office environment with a fairly large company and jeans are considered appropriate every day. Times and fashions change.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

The worse cap wearing people are the ones who wear them BACKWARDS. There is no punishment that is bad enough for those people. Ignoring the fact that they look awful, there is a reason for the brim on a cap - it keeps the sun out of your eyes. I guess that the red neck louts who wear them backwards have to keep the sun off their red necks.

 

DON

I have to differ with you on this: the worst by far are those who (presumably thinking it makes them “cool”) wer them with the brims to either side - shielding neither their faces nor their reddening necks.

 

I have heard a theory that wearing it to the left means you were born stupid and to the right that you just spent too much time huffing glue - but perhaps it is the other way around.

I miss the time when grown ups didn't resort to name calling to get their point across.

We should also remember that preferrences do not make the person. Good people can abhor baseball caps and other good people can prefer to wear jeans to dinner. Just because we disagree doesn't mean it's appropriate to tell them to find another cruise line. It's a big ship.

I think you may have missed the subtle point in my post. My son, when he found out that X no longer had his preferred style of evening dress, did not bombard the Celebrity board with reasons why they shouldn't have changed. He just made a decision to go with a cruise line that better met his own criteria.

Through years of cruising, I have done the same thing myself. I can never really understand those who decide that one cruise line is the be-all and end-all for them and become unwilling to consider that other lines may be a better fit for them.

I miss the time when grown ups didn't resort to name calling to get their point across.

As others have mentioned repeatedly and pointedly, times have changed. Any chance there is a relationship between informal (to some sloppy) dress styles and crude behavior?

As others have mentioned repeatedly and pointedly, times have changed. Any chance there is a relationship between informal (to some sloppy) dress styles and crude behavior?

In this case it appears that other people's casual dress is bringing out rude behavior in those who disagree with it.

I think you may have missed the subtle point in my post. My son, when he found out that X no longer had his preferred style of evening dress, did not bombard the Celebrity board with reasons why they shouldn't have changed. He just made a decision to go with a cruise line that better met his own criteria.

 

Through years of cruising, I have done the same thing myself. I can never really understand those who decide that one cruise line is the be-all and end-all for them and become unwilling to consider that other lines may be a better fit for them.

Cruise critic is a place to discuss cruising. It would have been appropriate for you son to discuss his concerns about the new dress code and it would have been inappropriate to tell him to find a different line.

As others have mentioned repeatedly and pointedly, times have changed. Any chance there is a relationship between informal (to some sloppy) dress styles and crude behavior?

Often they try to equate sloppy dress styles with crude behavior. For example when they accuse those who dress differently with exhibiting a lack of respect.