Rod Stewart is just full of opinions these days: The aging rocker revealed in a radio interview yesterday that he’s not at all bothered by his lack of knighthood, he’s not at all depressed by blatantly performing for money, and he’s not at all happy with the way dudes are dressing out to dinner nowadays.

Calling guys who dare to leave the house in jeans and sneakers “tramps,” Stewart seemed absolutely floored by the idea that said tramps “can even get into most restaurants without wearing trousers. I used to love dressing for dinner.” Sure, if “dressing for dinner” means animal-print jackets and man jewelry. Stewart also offered some downright charming dating advice for ladies who want to whip their slovenly significant others into place: “If I was a woman I’d say: ‘Are you taking me out looking like that, toerag?'” In other news, Stewart sounds like he’d make a great boyfriend.

The Telegraph‘s Stephen Bailey quickly offered up a rebuttal, dismissing Stewart’s proposed solution of mandatory restaurant dress codes. Bailey warms up by pointing out the hypocrisy of a guy who used to rock “a faux-fur ocelot two-piece with radically tight trousers and drape jacket, two rows of black glass beads and the haircut that looks like a detonated chinchilla” demanding that men dress more conservatively.

But Bailey also points out that mandatory restaurant dress codes “would simply become an efficient mechanism for excluding undesirables,” formalizing the unwritten (and always changing) rules that already governed what we wear and where we wear it: Don’t wear a polo to the Ritz, and don’t wear a tie to the club. As someone who’s never given a shit about said unwritten rules before, though, it’s understandable that Stewart might be a little behind the sartorial program.

[via The Telegraph]