RSVP for #StopSexism Weekly Calls
Hana Pesut’s Switcheroo photos expose how gender and identity are defined by the clothing we choose to wear.
—-
Hana Pesut’s Switcheroo photos are simple, but fascinating. A couple stands together, looking straight ahead. in the next photo, the couple is in the exact same pose, but have switched spots—and clothing.
Aside from beautiful exposures (Hana uses a Hasselblad medium-format film camera), there’s something captivating about seeing how people change when wearing another person’s clothing. Most of the groupings are a man and a woman, and it’s funny to notice how deviant both the man and woman instantly become when wearing the other’s clothes.
After we profiled Switcheroo on The Good Feed Blog in February, Hana offered us our own Switcheroo photo session. When my husband and I showed up on Ocean Avenue overlooking the Santa Monica Pier to meet Hana for the first time, I realized that part of the whole experiment is the process of taking the photo. Standing in front of everyone in the crowded park having photos taken, even in our normal clothes, was sort of embarrassing.
Standing in front of everyone wearing each other’s clothes was… well… sort of insane. I was really self-conscious, but my 6’2″ Eastern European husband was amazingly confident and proud in my v-neck crop-top and flouncy skirt. I was surprised at us, and proud of him.
Here we are in the first series, followed by 8 more awesome pairings. For more of Hana Pesut’s photos, head over to her Tumblr. For more art from Hana, visit her blog, Sincerely Hana.
♦◊♦
♦◊♦
♦◊♦
♦◊♦
♦◊♦
♦◊♦
For more of Hana Pesut’s photos visit her Tumblr and her blog, Sincerely Hana.
RSVP for #StopSexism Weekly Calls
—
What Now? Participate. Take Action. Join The Good Men Project Community.
The $50 Platinum Level is an ALL-ACCESS PASS—join as many groups and classes as you want for the entire year. The $25 Gold Level gives you access to any ONE Social Interest Group and ONE Class–and other benefits listed below the form. Or…for $12, join as a Bronze Member and support our mission. All members see the site AD-FREE!
Register New Account
◊♦◊
Your ANNUAL PLATINUM membership includes:
1. Free and UNLIMITED ACCESS to participate in ANY of our new Social Interest Groups. We have active communities of like-minded individuals working to change the world on important issues. Weekly facilitated calls that lead to the execution of real-world strategies for change. Complete schedule here, with new ones starting all the time. We now offer 500 calls a year!
2. Free and UNLIMITED ACCESS to ALL LIVE CLASSES. Learn how to build your own platform, be a better writer, become an editor, or create social change. Check out our training sessions. As a Platinum member, you can take them all.
3. Invitation to the MEMBERS ONLY Good Men Project Community on Facebook. Connect with other members, network and help us lead this conversation.
4. Access to our PREMIUM MEMBER LIBRARY with our recorded ConvoCasts and classes. ConvoCasts are a new form of media—and you are in them! Only Platinum Members get access to our recordings. And recordings of our classes are really valuable for those who do not have time to take the live classes or just want to review.
5. An ad-free experience. No banner, pop-up, or video ads when you log in.
6. Weekly conference calls with the publisher and other community members. Our weekly calls discuss the issues we see happening in the world of men in a friendly group setting.
7. PLATINUM member commenting badge. Only members can comment!
Price for ANNUAL PLATINUM membership is $50/year.
♦◊♦
Your ANNUAL GOLD membership will include:
1. Free access to any ONE Social Interest Groups.Try them out! We have active communities of like-minded individuals working to change the world on important issues. Weekly facilitated calls that lead to the execution of real-world strategies for change. Complete schedule here, with new ones starting all the time.
2. Free access to any ONE of our live classes. Each month, we have the following: Learn how to be a Rising Star in media, build your own platform, become an advanced writer, become an editor or create social change. Check out our classes here. RSVP for any one class—if you want to take more, just upgrade to an Annual Platinum Membership.
3. Invitation to the MEMBER-ONLY Good Men Project Community on Facebook and all Weekly Friday Conference calls with the Publisher and community. Connect with other members online and by phone!
4. An ad-free experience. No banner, pop-up, or video ads when you are logged in.
5. GOLD commenting badge. Only members can comment on the website!
Price for ANNUAL GOLD membership is $25/year.
♦◊♦
Your ANNUAL BRONZE membership will include:
1. Invitation to weekly conference calls with the publisher and community. Connect with other members, network and help us lead this conversation.
2. An ad-free experience. No banner, pop-up, or video ads when you are logged in.
3. BRONZE member commenting badge. Only members can comment on the website!
Price for ANNUAL BRONZE membership is $12/year.
We have pioneered the largest worldwide conversation about what it means to be a good man in the 21st century. Your support of our work is inspiring and invaluable.
◊♦◊
“Here’s the thing about The Good Men Project. We are trying to create big, sweeping, societal changes—–overturn stereotypes, eliminate racism, sexism, homophobia, be a positive force for good for things like education reform and the environment. And we’re also giving individuals the tools they need to make individual change—-with their own relationships, with the way they parent, with their ability to be more conscious, more mindful, and more insightful. For some people, that could get overwhelming. But for those of us here at The Good Men Project, it is not overwhelming. It is simply something we do—–every day. We do it with teamwork, with compassion, with an understanding of systems and how they work, and with shared insights from a diversity of viewpoints.” —– Lisa Hickey, Publisher of The Good Men Project and CEO of Good Men Media Inc.
I’m a really big guy. I’ve never been in a relationship with a woman anywhere near my size. It’s a totally foreign concept to me, size-wise, to be able to switch clothes with a woman. There is no way in hell I would try this experiment with my wife. She would be totally depressed at the very idea that I could even get her clothes past my butt. She would probably get a little upset at the nerve of me to suggest that such a swap would even be possible. “My God, how big do you think I am?”, she… Read more »
Has anyone considered that the clothing each sex wears as simply a symbol of toughness or softness? Consider these terms for womens’s attire: dresses, skirts, lace, ruffles, delicate fabrics, flowers, light, breezy, sexy, available, form-fitting, sultry. And consider these for men’s attire: straight, rigid lines, colorless, covered, professional, unrevealing, comfortable, closed-off. It seems that the attire we wear says a lot about the gender roles we play in society. Women’s present themselves more about looks, submission, and availability (less important traits), and men about action and obligation (more important traits). It’s only natural that the former would be encouraged to… Read more »
Women’s clothing is designed to make them seem younger. While a man’s clothing makes him seem older. As nature goes, there is much more need for a woman’s youth than a man’s for reproduction. And that is how things work. The side effects of it include a woman being seen as – 1 – Delicate (which other women will also infer as pretty) 2 – Vulnerable (notice the exposed necks on women’s clothing as opposed to men’s) This leads to further corollaries likes – 1 – Women need to be protected. 2 – A man is stronger. 3 – Women… Read more »
I like the last one best!
Nuttiest part of all is when you know some of the people in the photos. Weird.
This was fascinating. Utterly fascinating. Finally, we’re on the path to true equality. I think with things like this we can show people of both sexes what it’s TRULY like to be in the shoes of the opposite sex. And on a mass scale. She photographed a lot of people. Some of the men truly looked happier, it was like a spark lit up in their faces, a sass, something lit up and you could see they were happier in the women’s clothing than in their own men’s clothing. But they looked ridiculous, mostly. You could see they looked ridiculous,… Read more »
I’m really not sure how you are seeing this difference in their pictures.
Wow, you must really have a low opinion of women if that’s what YOU see when you observe men in women’s clothing… ether that, you or hold men to very demanding expectations of utility.
I think that this has been engrained in us over thousands of years. A males value to society was seen as hunter, gatherer defender. A female as gatherer & mate to produce offspring to maintain & grow the tribe. If a female takes a male role it does not affect her ability to carry on her “normal” female role. If a male takes a female role he can only do a small part of it. This makes him a burden. (it only takes a few males to sire hundreds of children, so he is of no real use reproduction) .… Read more »
“I don’t see it as shamefull to dress as a woman because I don’t see any shame in being a woman.”
-Iggy Pop-
I had a guest speaker in my sociology class years back who was a straight average joe smo guy. but he wore dresses and make up and jewelry. He was not gay or trying to make a statement. He honestly just felt that he looked BETTER in women’s clothes. I thought it was refreshing to see him in feminine attire and his reason for doing so was out of personal prefrence and not out of some comic/political/sexuality statement. Maybe I’m just WAYYYYY to old school in my thinking. It wasn’t all that long ago that ALL people wore dresses/skirts. The… Read more »
I believe the view that women can dress in masculine clothes because the male role is higher status is a mis-identification of the dynamic at work. As many many people pointed out in the femmephobia article: https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/femmephobia-girls-are-gross-writ-large/ The dynamic I (and others) believe is at work is this: Women’s role is reduced to her biology (which carries it’s own bag of privileges and disadvantages). Men’s successful role is earned through utility and proven ability to sacrifice for others. Women are shackled to their biological role. This disadvantages and advantages both sexes. It means women will (almost) never do any act… Read more »
Agree, agree, agree John D..!! We’d do well to speak a little less about the “glass ceiling” and start talking more about the “glass floor”. Men are constantly denied access to the full range of their humanity and it is one of the most insidious and covert abuses of all time. It is the cause of much depression, many suicides and dare I suggest it, violence. This is one egg that is going to take a long time to crack, because we are still obsessed with the erroneous supposition that inequity affects only women. To address the type of inequity… Read more »
I think there’s actually a sex-symmetrical thing going on here. It’s not about privilege or one sex outranking the other. It’s just that people look silly wearing clothes that obviously don’t suit them, and don’t match our mental model of how people are ‘supposed’ to look. A LOT of women’s clothing is designed with the female form in mind: designed to accomodate a bosom, to show off wide hips, a narrow waist, the feminine appearance of the face, and so on. Relatively little men’s clothing is designed specifically to show off the male form. So when husband and wife switch… Read more »
How can women be perceived as inferior and be put on a pedestal at the same time? That’s a complete contradiction. Men’s clothes tend to be more functional and women’s more decorative which correlates with women having higher status. A peasant would by defenition apppear more utilitarian than an aristocrat for example, and the aristocrat would certainly wear more decorative clothing I would assume as a general rule. By the way no one is shouting at you.
So. I guess it’s just me that looks at the switcheroo pictures and marvels at how folks mostly continue to look like the same people regardless of how they’re dressed?
Some interesting ideas in the discussion here though. 🙂
yes, totally. how do photographs of people wearing clothes that don’t fit them make a statement about gender relationships, besides that old trite saw: “underneath our clothes, everyone is the same.”
this looks fun in the way that putting on a costume is fun. if that’s the photographer’s intention, i think she’s done a great job. the rest of the gender blahblahblah sounds like projection.
Yes. Exactly.
“I don’t think it’s so much to with status. In the area of clothing, women have greater choice because their feminist foremothers fought for it — whereas, with a few exceptions, men haven’t really fought that fight yet.” I don’t think there was this much resistance against working class women wearing utilitarian clothing. But it’s only been in recent eras (since 150 years ago) that “maleness” became associated with “working class”, as in working with his hands, getting dirty, doing heavy lifting. Even at higher levels of professions, it’s still manual labor that is dirty and often physically demanding, like… Read more »
I don’t think it’s so much to with status. In the area of clothing, women have greater choice because their feminist foremothers fought for it — whereas, with a few exceptions, men haven’t really fought that fight yet. As for the pictures, I think most of them are potentially pretty good. The women mostly look okay. And two of the men (#3 and #6) look better after the swap, especially #6. I would seriously recommend that #6 throws his own clothes away! The main drawback for the other guys is that their partners’ clothes are too small. For these it’d… Read more »
Actually in #3 they both look better. In the original photos they look like tourists, but in the swap they both look really cool. Similarly the woman in #5.
That’s numbering them from the pairs of photos below the article btw; i.e. discounting the wedding picture (although I prefer the swap to the original in that one too).
http://sincerelyhana.tumblr.com/post/20915485724/switcheroo-will-petra-august-jessie-kalia
A five-way switcheroo 🙂
I think the predominance of sport/casual in American fashion already infuses a lot of androgyny into people’s appearance. I was struck by how, with a few exceptions, much of the women’s clothing was already similar to menswear. The significant distinction, for me, was how the cut of women’s clothing, even casual/sport, is so much more body-oriented. And this wasn’t noticeable, I felt, until the men were in women’s clothes. Immediately, the shape of their bodies, the beauty of their body line, became apparent. It was hidden in men’s clothing. I think this is very much a gendered starting point in… Read more »
“It means that aesthetically, the female body is the more interesting, and hence representative of the concept of “body.””
Interestingly, at various points in history fashion has moved to give men a more hourglass shape, mimicing the large hips of women, because it was considered more beautiful.
Dressing in bad-fitting clothes makes you look like a dork, regardless of style and gender (mostly).
What’s funny is that when I put on my husband’s clothes, it reminded me of the early to mid 90s when my friends and I dressed like a skater boy most of the time, and in baseball caps you couldn’t tell the girls from the boys unless you got close. Talk about ill-fitting!
Women are allowed to dress like men and not the other way around because dressing male is higher status. That makes sense. It’s like how rich people are kept out of wall mart, but poor people are welcome in the country club. Society cosiders women to have inherent value (though not necessarily in a way women want to be valued). For a man to be feminine is basically to say that he doesn’t see himself as needing to work to justify his right to exist in the ways that men are usually expected to. Because women are cosidered to have… Read more »
and trans women are trying to “steal” this inherent value No one cares about trans men, because they’re becoming “worker ants” sort of. More hands to do the work is always welcomed. Trans women present at the buffet, and get told they didn’t pay the ticket price of being born with a vagina. I’ve NEVER seen maleness valued as above in itself, outside of what he can do, while I have seen femaleness valued in itself, just for existing. My value has gone up with transition. I was a geeky guy, so a nerdy loser according to culture. But as… Read more »
Thank you for presenting the position of someone who as actually experienced both sides.
“I’ve NEVER seen maleness valued as above in itself, outside of what he can do, while I have seen femaleness valued in itself, just for existing.” Yep! At least, not by society in general, short of celebrities. I’m going the opposite direction you are (I’m a trans man, so female to male), and I’ve found that being perceived as male has given me a form of invisibility. When I was a woman, it was something I “was”, other than just being a person. Now I’m a white male, which makes me largely the default in our society, and therefore nothing… Read more »
Got to say, other than the clothing being way to large, the women look far more natural (within socially acceptable bounds) than the men.
In my mind (and I know I’m out of it), its a visual reminder that while we’ve largely broken down gender norms for women, men still have a ways to go. She can wear the pants, but he’d better not put on a dress.
Yeah, it’s like dressing “up” to be more masculine is ok, but dressing “down” to be more feminine is well, not ok.
Curious…why would you say masculine is “dressing up” whereas feminine is “dressing down”? If its a status thing you’re referring to, I’d say that in at least three of those photos the women appear to be dressed up relative to their dressed down male partners.
I’m not talking in terms of look or formality, I’m saying that if women dress like men it doesn’t cause social reactions. It’s ok (currently, though it used not to be) to dress up to the default, men. And if men dress like women, it’s as if they are losing status. To be feminine as a man is not ok, but to dress masculinely doesn’t seem to cause problems.
To dress “straight” wouldn’t cause problems, but to dress “gay” would.
I see….and maybe this is a matter of the grass being greener on the other side, but I would tend to perceive the default (masculine) is dressing down while the exception (feminine) is dressing up, at least the language would appear internally consistent to me any how. Although not particularly evident in this photo series, masculine clothing tends to signify what you do whereas feminine clothing tends to enhance what you are. I don’t think either purpose is particularly desirable when gendered, but I do think women today have greater liberty to use clothing with a larger vocabulary of social… Read more »
You do get cross dressing women, but it I’m not sure it’s a sexual fetish. More like, drag for shows or a desire to change genders.
My up and down is not indicative of fanciness or utiltarianess, but of status is all. Up is default and expected and such. Down would be lower status.
If you look at the historical stereotype of what men and women “should” wear, it’s men in pants and women in dresses/skirts. Now it’s considered normal for women to wear pants or dresses/skirts, but it’s not considered normal for men to wear dresses/skirts. My perception of this is the same as Julie’s, it’s considered normal to dress masculinely (pants), but still considered ‘other/feminine’ to wear dresses/skirts. When women started wearing pants as a norm, the first few may have been considered cross-dressers, but now nobody gives it a second thought. Western women started wearing pants regularly just before the social… Read more »
“and I see it as being linked to women wanting to up their status to be equal with men.” And I see it as women entering the realm of utilitarian workers. Women would wear pants, even before the 60’s, when they needed to get down and dirty. When doing manual labour, riding hard, were children or in the gutter. Do you see many homeless wearing dresses? “Dressing ‘femininely’ lowers a man’s status” But why is this the case? You are suggesting it is because masculine is good and feminine is bad, but this is clearly not the case, as even… Read more »
Those ‘dirty’ jobs are part of what women saw as part of men’s power in a way, because men had the ‘option’ to work outside the home in many different fields. The value of any job has to do with whether you actually want the job, or just need the job, but when you don’t think you have any option, the job you can’t have can seem better. Not only that, but by relegating women to ‘style’ clothing, we (both sexes) reenforce the expectation that women are useless unless you want something nice to look at. A woman wearing a… Read more »
“Those ‘dirty’ jobs are part of what women saw as part of men’s power in a way, because men had the ‘option’ to work outside the home in many different fields. ” What time period are you talking about?Because prior to the 60’s, the jobs weren’t generally glamorous, except for the very privileged few, which were limited to those of the right social class, not gender. Moreover, an obligation, dictated with a legal responsibility, to provide for others means men didn’t have a choice. This is the problem with feminism, they think men choose to go out and work because… Read more »
It’s the opposite. It’s OK for a powerful person to dress down (the woman) but it’s an offense for the lower status man to dress up. Similarly there are laws against impersonating powerful groups like the military or the police. Again it’s OK for women to have only-female groups where men are excluded because they have power so men are excluded naturally. Men are weaker and have no rights to be exclusive. A woman can enter a male typical job but a man can’t enter a woman typical job. A transgendered woman will get hassle going to a women’s bathroom… Read more »
While I’m not saying your outright wrong, I do think you’re taking it a little far with the “men have no right to be exclusive”. That is a relatively modern prospect, and male only spaces were very prevalent prior to second wave feminism. As such, the modern tendency can’t be used to explain the past, if the modern is a direct reversal of the past.
I’m not explaining the past but the present. In the past as you say women couldn’t invade men’s places either and neither could they dress freely in men’s clothes.
It’s Julie’s / the feminist position that fails to address the facts of the past. If women can dress as men because men are more dominant then it ought to have been even easier for women to dress as men in the past, but the reverse is true.
It’s a position, David. But thanks for trying to totalize me. I’m actually curious. That’s a position and one I’ve strongly considered. I’m also exceptionally interested in everything that Schala is saying. And what people have been saying about lines of bodies and fashion and utility vs…what’s the opposite of utility? If men are dressed for use, and women are dressed for art/entertainment or to be seen for pleasure…and each gender is thinking the other gender has more power…it’s like a house of mirrors. I would think each gender is seeing something better on the other’s side, saying that female/female… Read more »
“what’s the opposite of utility?” Not sure. I would guess style. I think of the term “form over function” or “function over form” here “what kind of power? Social power? Political power?” Social sounds right. The ability to influence others. It does not need be in the form of manipulation, though can be. A co-worker the other week, upon coming back from lunch, turned to me and said “I should wear a dress more often. people were so nice to me”. She was the same person, but a dress, a more feminine attire, opened doors for her (literally and figuratively).… Read more »
“what’s the opposite of utility?” Not sure. I would guess style. I think of the term “form over function” or “function over form” here Social sounds right. The ability to influence others. It does not need be in the form of manipulation, though can be. A co-worker the other week, upon coming back from lunch, turned to me and said “I should wear a dress more often. people were so nice to me”. She was the same person, but a dress, a more feminine attire, opened doors for her (literally and figuratively). Now, this may seen trivial in most cases,… Read more »
“Because I see men wanting power that women seem to have and women not seeing it as a power. And I see women wanting power men seem to have and men not seeing it as a power.” But why must there be only a singular form of power that counts? I’ve recently begun sailing. On a keelboat, you have the engine to motor you around, and the wind to power your sails. The engine is a consistent form of power that remains so long as you have fuel… fuel that costs money. Fuel that runs out. Alternatively, you have wind… Read more »
“Running in high heels and a tight skirt doesn’t feel like power to me” So don’t do it. The point is women have a CHOICE and men do not. And it goes beyond women can wear men’s clothes. Women’s choice is vastly greater than men’s even without the addition of the possibility of wearing “male” clothes. Power is about having choices so it is a certainty that women have more power in this situation. Also just because men’s dress is utilitarian doesn’t mean women’s is decorative. Women can chose to be either or something in between. Nor does a woman… Read more »
Oh btw Julie, can you remind me how to get italics and bold on these forums?
I’m not julie, but here’s the answer anyways. Use HTML code. The arrow brackets (<) surrounding ether i (italics) or b (bold) at the start of the word/s and /i (close italics) and /b (close bold) at the end.
LOL I was just going to ask the same question. It struck me as odd to see the feminine as beneath the masculine. After all, when women dress up, they often dress more feminine. when they are just longing, or on laundry down, when your as down as you can get, it is often masculine. In the old days, women would dress in men’s clothing largely for the rough and tumble, down and dirty activities (hard travel by horse, for example). When men dress up, that is when the ornamental attire (watch’s, medals, etc) and the fashion accessories (hats, gloves,… Read more »
Ultimately, I should clarify (and I should have finished reading the thread). I don’t see one as defaulting above the other. I see the masculine attire as utilitarian and the feminine attire as the social. Which is above the other is really dependent upon the situation.
Again not talking fashion, talking status. Not dress up like for a
A party but up like reaching up to power
I know. It’s why the next comment acknowledged I should have finished reading the thread. That said, does not dressing up for a party often equate to dressing up to the peak of your social standing? But I’ll forget about that for a moment, and ignore the formal vs casual nature of dressing up and down… Is it not generally easier for the higher stats to bring themselves down to the lower, than vice versa? Women have been dressing in men’s clothing for centuries (not commonly, but still occasionally), but not the reverse (discounting toga’s, robes and kilts). Speaking of… Read more »
Would you or men you know be willing to wear dresses in public? If not
Why not?
Why is is supposedly funny or demeaning f in a comic way for men to be in ladies clothes?
Or another example. At my kid’s middle school. If his female friends come to school in jeans, tshirts, converse and no makeup, there would be little to no social ramifications.
But if a boy comes to school in a dress or ponytail, there would be. From mocking, to fights, to “you’re gay” to administrators being called in.
Why?
Simply because the male is breaking a social taboo and must therefore be punished. The male has no right in our society to dress as a woman.
I think this is just the answer. I am very suspicious of arguments that try to frame restrictions purely on men as misogynist.
A man could even be running the risk of being physically assaulted if he displays femenine characteristics and breaks the rules. I’ve never heard of a woman risking being bashed for wearing trousers, not in the western world anyway. My friend’s brother walked the entire length of the main street of my town in drag, in my friend’s words a very brave thing to do in this area.
“Would you or men you know be willing to wear dresses in public? ” A kilt? yes. A dress no. I’m curious, does a poor man feel he is funny or demeaned when he wears a fancy suit to a rich man’s soiree? I would argue yes. He feels out of place, like he doesn’t belong. Does a rich man feel equally as funny and demeaned dressing in a pair of jeans and tshirt at a soup kitchen? Possibly, but I doubt he feels it so much. Remember, my position isn’t actually that one is superior or inferior to the… Read more »
“Is it not generally easier for the higher stats to bring themselves down to the lower, than vice versa? Women have been dressing in men’s clothing for centuries (not commonly, but still occasionally), but not the reverse (discounting toga’s, robes and kilts).” I don’t think I understand you. If men are (in my example) higher status then why would it be easier for them to give up status. People, as a generality, want to gain it, thus women dressing “up” to be like men. Since this has happened throughout history, I’d think it means that women have been trying to… Read more »
finally, Mark, I’m gonna be off for the fourth….have a good one!
Men are not permitted the same level of freedom of expression as women. Women in men’s clothing are sexy whilst men in women’s clothing are not sexy. Men are generally kept in a very narrow cultural groove in terms of what is considered acceptable behaviour and dress sense. There is much about manhood that remains unexplored and there are assumptions made against the backdrop of feminism that might be convenient for some but that are in fact totally false.
So why is the range narrow for men, especially I our culture when in other countries it might not be, or in other historical periods?
Research conducted in the eighties revealed that when a boy and a girl (aged around 5) started crying simultaneously, 9 times out of 10 an adult would comfort the girl, but not the boy. The message that the boy gets from this is obvious, that his feelings are not valid and that he needs to learn to deal with them himself. He also learns nothing about empathy, which needs to be taught to children by example (you can join those dots yourself). This behaviour has been played out in increments throughout all cultures throughout history. Fast-forward to adulthood and you… Read more »
Yes. Makes me so sad. I hope that as we raise our own boys we help them escape from those limits placed on them.
“But high status people aren’t taking on the long gowns or frilly headdresses of women so does that mean it would lower their status?” Reverse for a moment your presumption that it is the masculine fashion that is the high status. Throughout history, it was disallowed, sometimes even criminal, to impersonate those above your station(read status). it continues to remain so in some places (IE military. Impersonating an officer is a BIG offence). The reverse is not the case. Those of high status may dress bellow their stations as they deem fit. When a woman dressed as a man, it… Read more »
I don’t think your view (which I guess is the standard feminist explanation for this “issue” and is pretty much the go to explanation for everything) makes any sense.
> If men are (in my example) higher status then why would it be easier for them to give up status
Powerful people can do things that the powerless cannot. That’s what it means to have power.
Nice scare quotes there David. I’ve seen this scenario play out on my campus. Girls in jeans and tees and converse and little makeup. No commentary from men A trans woman, a male in a dress, etc. “Fag,” “queer” and laughter from men. Why? Why can women dress like men and it’s not a big deal but if men dress like women it is? Cultural construction? Gender norms? Status and power? Social and Utilitarian roles? Cause women are smaller and just less physical threatening? Cause fashion is fashion? I’m interested in all answers. Thanks for assuming so much about me,… Read more »
I must say there’s a difference here in degree. I wear “boyish” clothes most days (not in this photo, but that’s because I tried to be a bit more feminine here). I wear Vans or Cons, Levis and tee shirts, I don’t color my hair, I do wear some make up, etc, but mostly not. My husband and I have the exact same RayBan Wayfarers sunglasses… But I don’t look like I’m cross-dressing, because that’s still not manly dressing. I have biggish boobs, wear the tees moderately fitted, v-necks so you see cleavage, and I wear tight enough jeans to… Read more »
The man in a dress or trans woman in your scenario, is seen as trying to usurp certain privileges that he, as a man, shouldn’t be afforded according to society. And it goes beyond freedom of expression. The less it “shows” that this person is trans or a guy, the more it is threatening. Because while the butch trans women who would never be seen as cis as considered a laughing stock, the young pretty trans woman is considered a threat – she can blend in, even probably have sex with you without you even knowing, go in the public… Read more »
“The distinction is huge. My cousin Ann is a lesbian and literally wears men’s clothes. button-up shirts, blazers, the occasional tie, very butch haircut, men’s jeans that fit very loose, and Converse” Wouldn’t a man doing the opposite be pretty much in a dress with pantyhose, maybe heels, a handbag, generally appropriate (but visible) make-up and very long hair? Your “tomboy example” is much closer to a man wearing a skirt or dress and just that (no make-up or anything else). Except he’ll probably get a lot of crap for it, except for specific subcultures. And if all it takes… Read more »
Mm. Well I didn’t assume or state anything about you in that comment as it happens so perhaps you just put that in there on the basis of our prior conversations? For that matter since I do know you somewhat why would it have been bad for me to make those assumptions (that I didn’t make) if I had? Maybe you jumped the gun a bit there? The opinion you expressed is indeed the feminist position. The issue seems to deserve scare quotes (do you disagree?) because it’s a non-issue. > Why can women dress like men and it’s not… Read more »
You were like, “Julie’s taking the feminist position” and then back slashed me and feminism as if that’s the only connection or position I’m taking.
I’d say that women’s clothing is for attraction and pleasure then it means perhaps we aren’t useful, except as objects?
I guess I’d say men are used as utilities as are women only in different ways.
People afford clothes all the time on low salaries, it’s called credit cards
Great comments Julie! I was going to say the exact same thing, but you a
Ready said everything 🙂
And right there, that’s good stuff. Culture at work.