Hello Russel, still keeping everyone on their toes I see
Denise xx

From what I've read - learned? - Ivy style on the campuses and around the haunts of the affluent was supposed to be safely asexual: non-threatening: and that is a look I've worked myself into: the glasses, the jackets, the brogues, the battered leather case.  Suits me now I'm middle aged.  Some women, however, respond to certain colours: navy, maroon.  They also seem to like a seersucker jacket.

I suppose this is one way in which the UK 'twist' comes into it - 'subversive' perhaps, 'alien' certainly.

"Flat fronts & heavy shoes.
Short hair and a streamlined appearance.
It's a hard look, albeit softly constructed, when compared to other style options.
It's very male."

I have allways deemed this to be a very male look. clean, sharp, intimidating even.
The few photos I have of my uncle in finest ivy shop regalia circa 69 are in this vein: 842 style, crisp ocbd, tapered trous, heavy wingtips or plains.
emphasis on hair, shirt, shoes. The anglo subcultral influence?

Talking to my dad..But it wasn't worn for fighting but for pulling. your not going to fight it out in your best no? 

I can't see this end of things being asexual either..

Certain anecdotal evidence suggests that birds were not a big deal even for some of the pre-RSG mods and that some were even overt homosexuals (see Melly's 'Revolt Into Style') as a way of rebelling against the dilution of the style (around 1962-63?)  I don't know because I was still playing with my tin toys at the time.

Fair point, I should have said 'added to their appeal' rather than 'played a significant part'.

Despite a number of books on the subject, the 50s/60s mod movement has not been properly documented imo.