"Girls can wear jeans and cut their hair short
Wear shirts and boots 'cause it's okay to be a boy
But for a boy to look like a girl is degrading
'Cause you think that being a girl is degrading" -- Madonna, "What it feels like for a girl"
The quote is from the film Cement Garden, and Charlotte Gainsborough is the one saying it. It was sampled by Madonna. I've thought about it before.
If a woman dislikes a boy who looks like a girl, it's not because she hates her own gender. It's simply because most women prefer a masculine man. She's likely going to give up a huge part of her life to have children, and wanting someone physically capable of protecting her (even of she doesn't need that much protecting) is important. Hence masculine is considered attractive and society values attractive people.
If you think this is just someone trying to defend traditional gender roles: I'm a guy who occasionally women's clothing, bakes, spends massive amounts of time in commercial dance classes, has done pole before, and looks great in booty shorts. I'm just being real. Straight women - the vast majority of them - find masculine men attractive and it's not because they hate women.
I don't think being a bit kinky on the side in any way legitimises the tired old biologistic narratives.
The problem here isn't just that they (in the best case) mix up what is (was) and what aught to be.
It's just that your argument has nothing to do with the question? Because you could just as easily make the same kind of argument for why feminine women are considered more beautiful, in perfect symmetry with your argument. Yet OP was wondering specifically about an asymmetric cultural standard.
Well yes, feminine women are considered more beautiful. Many women often wear more masculine clothing to hide their femininity for this exact reason. And yes, in the same way being unmasculine men are not highly valued by women, unfeminine women are not highly valued by men. Too much hair, or a taste in baggy flannel clothing makes a woman feel less loved by society in the same way. The culture is pretty consistent here.
You may find biology tired, but it's motivating most life including our own. That the observation is common doesn't invalidate it, any more than the year-zero style narrative about everyone hating women being fashionable invalidate them. The truth exists independently of popularity and fashion.
It’s more of a sizing / build shape thing that keeps some amount of separation in product lines. I wonder if we can come up with better, non-gendered names for common body builds.
It's quite simple. There are two common body builds (with some variation): male and female. It's gendered because of genetics. Why do we need to complicate matters?
That discounts some pretty radical variation on the (cis) female side (and some minor variation along the same lines on the (cis) male side.) Not all women have breasts, some women have huge ones, Not all women have hips, some women have huge ones.
Right now we do male/female, tall/short, short-limb/long-limb, fat/thin. It'd be nice if shirts and pants varied in standard breast and hip measurements, too, but thus far in society the number of SKUs required hasn't worked out.
Men at least can get shirts with shoulder, chest, and waist in any combination of proportions. Women just have S/M/L, never mind that not only do our waists vary in thickness relative to our shoulders and hips but we have an enormous variety of boob sizes.
Men never have to worry about the buttons of their shirts busting open across the chest. For many women, that's a constant struggle if they want to wear something that isn't 3 sizes too large in every other dimension.
I'm a man and I still have trouble finding things that fit my chest without requiring $60.00 in tailoring everywhere else. I can't count the number of times I've found a shirt that I love and been between sizes because of my chest and shoulders.
Lol no. That's what a tailor is for. The logistics of stocking clothing stores don't work out with that many combinations so humanity is stuck with XS-XXXL.
minor variation along the same lines on the (cis) male side.
Minor variation? Look at some pictures of real people. Here's Brian Shaw (with Arnold Schwarzenegger on the left) [1]. How about NBA legend Spud Webb? (next to Manute Bol) [2] By the way, Spud Webb would be considered average height for a man in over 50 countries.
There's more variation within the categories of men and women than there is between them. Matters are complicated because life is complicated.
The gender bins may exist because of biology but the contents of each bin do not. The fact that we paint baby boys' rooms light blue and baby girls' rooms pink is completely arbitrary, and in fact used to be the opposite.
As a tall but very thin man, I am convinced the clothes of a random northern European women would tend to be a better fit for me than those of a random US man, with something like 80%+ probability. That's partly because pants that are too wide just don't work, where can always put on pants that are too short and declare it the current italian style.
So my question is: is obesity genetic in the same way that genitals and breasts are? And, if yes, why have these populations seemingly diverged with the mutational speed of fruit flies at the Hanford Site?
"I came out at 18, in Helsinki, then moved to New York at 23, and I’d steadily grown more aware of the possibility to wear whatever I wanted
THis article doesnt have any pics - but if youre not familiar with FInnish Street Wear Style (or whatever name they are going by these days) - check it out, but although they feel themselves to be daring on the fashion scale - I just do not think that Helsinki fashion is flattering.
I wear women's clothing, and most people have no idea.
Womens 311 shaping skinny jeans were my standard for a long time: I only have a phone (these fit lengthways in a women's pocket) and a card carrier so I don't need giant pockets, jeans look cleaner without them. I know a bunch of (good looking) male dancers who wear them too: https://instagram.com/p/BUME5JpFhja/
Women's slogan shirts tend to be more upbeat, interesting and aggressive than men's. Get plus size / curve brands so they actually fit: https://instagram.com/p/BQ5VkrAArJ7 Watch out for super wide necks! These are common and won't look good on a guy.
Women's tanks are basically the same - look at reebok's womens range (WITTY THING HERE) versus mens (I LIKE DOING THE THING)
https://instagram.com/p/BOXHnC5g_S7/
I have a rocking set of petrol blue sparkly converse in men's sizes - if you like color, nearly all 'womens' chucks can be found in men's sizes.
After realizing my genderfluidity and letting go of caring about social constructs in general, I started playing with fashion. I've never had such comfortable clothes, nor have I dressed better or more colorful. Gender conforming fashion quickly became very boring and uninspired to me. I now play with combining all kinds of shapes of clothes and patterns in layers to come up with outfits. A common compliment is "I don't know how you pull this stuff off! None of this is supposed to go together!"
In short: innovate your own personal fashion style to expand your creative side by abandoning fashion rules.
Also, fuck the lack of functional pockets on women's clothing. I carry a purse out of necessity now. That's like requiring jQuery in a library to do something that flexbox would accomplish!
As a nonbinary person, I love seeing this in the NY Times. But I also have seen this question asked over and over again. (See the 90s where Utilikilts made a big splash over 'skirts'.)
The phenomena goes beyond just clothes, and includes makeup and grooming as well. There's a whole library of things that are available for managing your personal appearance, but men typically feel ashamed to try them out.
But that stuff is labelled 'girls stuff' and pretty aggressively mocked, yet we are much more comfortable when women are 'just one of the guys'. We're going to need more than just the occasional NY Times article to change that deeply held value.
> The phenomena goes beyond just clothes, and includes makeup and grooming as well.
There are many, many grooming products available for men with socially acceptable use, yet that market is much smaller compared to women. Even if the social constraints were shattered, would it really move the needle?
My favorite silk sleeveless t-shirts are actually sold as women's tops. They're less tight around the neck. And in the summer, I wear women's raw silk yoga pants, bought extra large, with the bottoms hemmed. It's hard to find men's pants like that.
You should check out bombsheller, custom 3d printed leggings, very high quality. (I’m not affiliated but I know the people running it.) http://bombsheller.com
Trying to picture how that looks. Can people guess at all you’re wearing womens clothes, or is that the look you’re going for? Can u share a pic if possible
They look a lot like silk suit pants, but cut very loose, and flaring at the bottom. It's obvious that I'm not wearing normal pants. But they're not fitted tight at the top, as most women's pants are. And they cost a lot less than silk suit pants.
I’ve often wondered why it’s so socially taboo for men to wear anything that’s typically worn by women. As a guy, I wear a plain silver toe ring because I think it looks cool, but I get more than enough strange looks for that (more so on the east coast than the west coast).
Yeah, don't get me started on men's shirts which are all cut for an enormous belly and billowing sleeves. God help you if you're not either really skinny or really fat.
I've found so many great shirts that I'm in between sizes on. And most men's shirts are so bland and boring. Men's fashion sucks.
I think men wearing 'women's clothes' changes by culture, period of history and status in society.
When the church ruled the roost the important people in the church would be wearing clothes that we recognise as robes but are essentially women's clothes.
Men have cars and watches to show their wealth, in previous times garments would be more decorative for 'high value' males, with wealth to flaunt. So again 'crossing over' was possible but different.
I can't think of an era where wearing women's clothes was desirable for straight male peasants though. But, for high status males, women's clothing seems to be a common thread in history and across lots of different cultures.
> When the church ruled the roost the important people in the church would be wearing clothes that we recognise as robes but are essentially women's clothes.
FYI, that’s because Christian vestments are descended directly from men’s clothing in the late Roman Empire, where men who weren’t clergy also wore robes. I don’t think they were “women’s clothes” unless you define all robes and dresses to be female specific.
I'm mid 20's and male-to-female transgender for about 6 years now. In good shape, average height, average sizes. Obviously fat has migrated over that time to give me a more feminine shape. I migrated entirely to Women's clothing like jeans and t-shirts a few years ago, I have dresses, skirts, etc, but most of it is really bland casual clothing for lounging around or going to work (no dress code at all), however I have way more options, all kinds of colors, all kinds of textures, all kinds of cuts, all kinds of patterns, everything feels absolutely amazing. I am so comfy in jeans now that I can sleep in them with no issues. I don't really pass well, but nobody has ever said anything to me negatively wearing a flowery women's cut long sleeve shirt and tight women's jeans that make my butt look wonderful. If anything, I feel much more stylish and totally physically comfortable now. Even bras aren't bad and I don't understand why they're always hurting women so much :D
Regarding pockets, I just carry a backpack with my laptop now. Phone in back pocket, tiny wallet for cards that fits in my front pocket. I will never buy women's jeans with really tiny pockets, but I feel like most retailers have figured out an acceptable size. Who even likes heavy jeans carrying around so much?
Mens clothes may have changed by now, but I remember them being stiff, feeling bad unless you paid a lot of money (not a problem for women's clothing!), having limited neutral colors with no patterns except thin stripes.
I'm so happy we're coming to a point where we can get rid of gender standards for what fabric people are allowed to wear on their bodies enforced by society.
If you had your boobs made, they're probably pretty close to the exact location and proportions that bra makers expect. But if your boobs are broad rather than projecting; or set closer or further apart than the typical bra in your size... underwire pokes in all the wrong places. (Don't get me started on all the assumptions built into women's clothing and bra sizing.)
Plus if you've got an extra layer of fat on your torso or wear it too tight, the band can dig into your skin. If your band is too loose and you have big boobs, the weight falls onto the straps and hurts your shoulders.
That said, a lot of women who find their bras painful are wearing the wrong size.
Mine are natural from years of estrogen, though I probably have a wider chest. Getting properly sized bras I don't even notice they're there anymore. If I get one that isn't sized right, it can actually leave bruises and make me want to scream during the day. I have also heard a lot of women are wearing incorrectly sized bras.
Shortly after we got engaged my wife and I happened to be in Macy's. We realized that all of the men's clothing was either blue black or grey. If I was a bit more adventurous I certainly would have started shopping in the women's section just for a better color selection!
>I believe no one is entirely masculine or feminine.
Talk about yourself. I know very well what I am and what I am not. If you don't, that's on you, but don't try to push it on others as if it's the new standard.
Women's clothing is terrible; it's flimsy, often meant to be worn very tightly, the sleeves, legs, and tops in general are too short, the collars are too open. Also, tops are cut with darts for tits, which, no matter how it's done, always burns a large number of women unless they wear a padded prosthesis or avoid many types altogether depending on how much and which way they fall out of an (mythical) average or the woman that particular designer has in mind. Same for pants being cut for hips. Gender may be a construct, but darts aren't.
Sounds like this guy just found a tight shirt. If you're wearing stretchy baby tees and extremely tight jeans, I don't think shape is an issue. You might as well be wearing saran wrap or a bodysuit.
>Also, tops are cut with darts for tits, which, no matter how it's done, always burns a large number of women unless they wear a padded prosthesis
I've only experienced this in poor clothing. T-Shirts don't have it, button down shirts don't have it, blouses don't have it, dresses will allow for some 'leeway', but can be worn with 'flat chests'. Padded bra's are really for making your boobs look better, not really any function.
>often meant to be worn very tightly
Tight is totally dependent on your size and what you prefer. I can buy women's clothing that's too big for me and feel comfortable but still have the fit cut. If you're looking at yoga pants, sure. There's also a difference between "tight" and fitting close to your skin, which is very comfortable in my opinion. A lot of women's material's are stretchy where men's aren't.
>it's flimsy
I don't agree. I have $15 jeans from Old Navy that I bought in 2011 that are still going strong. I never buy anything that's super flimsy in the first place, which is terribly easy to do even for cheap. Material on women's clothes almost always feels better than comparable priced items in Men's clothes as well.
I am a busty woman and the darts on shirts cut for boobs are the best thing to ever have on shirts. Regular loose tops without any darts tent out on me and make my petite frame look like a lumpy wide square. Should I not be able to find blouses that don't gape at the buttons or sit properly just because I have larger than average chest?
Darts actually allow me to wear blouses and tops that follow my shape and curves properly. I don't see why they would be an issue for smaller busted women? The darts allow the fabric to follow your body rather than just drape straight. I see those types of shirts being modeled and worn on smaller busted women all the time and they seem to look good. If you look at expensive fitted blouses they all have darts since they make the shirt fit the body rather than just drape loosely and straight on everyone . Women follow all shapes and sizes and its important to have all styles avaliable so that everyone can find something that works well.
I don't know if this'll get me to shop in the women's section the next time I need something (because that's when I go shopping for clothes: out of _need_), BUT:
I do think women have fare more variety and selection at their hands when going shopping. I wish we had all these options as men too.
I agree with you that there should be more options available!
It does strike me that if society nudges men a little towards buying clothing “out of need” then I could see how the market expresses more conservative options.
A lot of big stars, especially in music, fail to conform to gendered expectations. Very "manly" rock stars often have quite long hair. There's a great song that's a send up of such expectations called "Get a haircut (and get a real job)". Punchline: The long-haired rock star makes more money than the older brother he was always negatively compared to.
Prince had long hair and wore more colorful, feminine clothing. Madonna wore a mix of masculine and feminine stuff. There are probably lots of other examples.
A lot of big stars actually end up admired and even emulated to some degree. They do this and typically make it look good.
That observation plus firsthand experience suggests that doing it and making it look good goes a long ways towards other people being okay with it. So get an education in design. Learn a little something about working with color and that sort of thing and go to town to your heart's content, just take a look in the mirror and try to be something someone envies and most people won't care that you cross-shop.
53 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 44.2 ms ] threadIf a woman dislikes a boy who looks like a girl, it's not because she hates her own gender. It's simply because most women prefer a masculine man. She's likely going to give up a huge part of her life to have children, and wanting someone physically capable of protecting her (even of she doesn't need that much protecting) is important. Hence masculine is considered attractive and society values attractive people.
If you think this is just someone trying to defend traditional gender roles: I'm a guy who occasionally women's clothing, bakes, spends massive amounts of time in commercial dance classes, has done pole before, and looks great in booty shorts. I'm just being real. Straight women - the vast majority of them - find masculine men attractive and it's not because they hate women.
The problem here isn't just that they (in the best case) mix up what is (was) and what aught to be.
It's just that your argument has nothing to do with the question? Because you could just as easily make the same kind of argument for why feminine women are considered more beautiful, in perfect symmetry with your argument. Yet OP was wondering specifically about an asymmetric cultural standard.
Well yes, feminine women are considered more beautiful. Many women often wear more masculine clothing to hide their femininity for this exact reason. And yes, in the same way being unmasculine men are not highly valued by women, unfeminine women are not highly valued by men. Too much hair, or a taste in baggy flannel clothing makes a woman feel less loved by society in the same way. The culture is pretty consistent here.
You may find biology tired, but it's motivating most life including our own. That the observation is common doesn't invalidate it, any more than the year-zero style narrative about everyone hating women being fashionable invalidate them. The truth exists independently of popularity and fashion.
A minor point, but it's a book by Ian McEwan. He also wrote Enduring Love and Atonement (also great films).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cement_Garden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_McEwan
Right now we do male/female, tall/short, short-limb/long-limb, fat/thin. It'd be nice if shirts and pants varied in standard breast and hip measurements, too, but thus far in society the number of SKUs required hasn't worked out.
Men never have to worry about the buttons of their shirts busting open across the chest. For many women, that's a constant struggle if they want to wear something that isn't 3 sizes too large in every other dimension.
Minor variation? Look at some pictures of real people. Here's Brian Shaw (with Arnold Schwarzenegger on the left) [1]. How about NBA legend Spud Webb? (next to Manute Bol) [2] By the way, Spud Webb would be considered average height for a man in over 50 countries.
[1] http://upl.stack.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/09182618/Bri...
[2] http://i.imgur.com/ZE3SeaP.jpg
The gender bins may exist because of biology but the contents of each bin do not. The fact that we paint baby boys' rooms light blue and baby girls' rooms pink is completely arbitrary, and in fact used to be the opposite.
So my question is: is obesity genetic in the same way that genitals and breasts are? And, if yes, why have these populations seemingly diverged with the mutational speed of fruit flies at the Hanford Site?
THis article doesnt have any pics - but if youre not familiar with FInnish Street Wear Style (or whatever name they are going by these days) - check it out, but although they feel themselves to be daring on the fashion scale - I just do not think that Helsinki fashion is flattering.
https://www.hel-looks.com/
Womens 311 shaping skinny jeans were my standard for a long time: I only have a phone (these fit lengthways in a women's pocket) and a card carrier so I don't need giant pockets, jeans look cleaner without them. I know a bunch of (good looking) male dancers who wear them too: https://instagram.com/p/BUME5JpFhja/
Women's slogan shirts tend to be more upbeat, interesting and aggressive than men's. Get plus size / curve brands so they actually fit: https://instagram.com/p/BQ5VkrAArJ7 Watch out for super wide necks! These are common and won't look good on a guy.
Hair sucks, but t shirt is Forever 21 curve label: https://instagram.com/p/BTs5T27Fwok/
Women's tanks are basically the same - look at reebok's womens range (WITTY THING HERE) versus mens (I LIKE DOING THE THING) https://instagram.com/p/BOXHnC5g_S7/
I have a rocking set of petrol blue sparkly converse in men's sizes - if you like color, nearly all 'womens' chucks can be found in men's sizes.
In short: innovate your own personal fashion style to expand your creative side by abandoning fashion rules.
The phenomena goes beyond just clothes, and includes makeup and grooming as well. There's a whole library of things that are available for managing your personal appearance, but men typically feel ashamed to try them out.
For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyuB-Qyqu8
But that stuff is labelled 'girls stuff' and pretty aggressively mocked, yet we are much more comfortable when women are 'just one of the guys'. We're going to need more than just the occasional NY Times article to change that deeply held value.
There are many, many grooming products available for men with socially acceptable use, yet that market is much smaller compared to women. Even if the social constraints were shattered, would it really move the needle?
A really attractive person might still look good in an ill fitting piece, but they’d probably look even better in something that fit well.
Not talking dresses and stiletto heals, just jeans and T's
I've found so many great shirts that I'm in between sizes on. And most men's shirts are so bland and boring. Men's fashion sucks.
When the church ruled the roost the important people in the church would be wearing clothes that we recognise as robes but are essentially women's clothes.
Men have cars and watches to show their wealth, in previous times garments would be more decorative for 'high value' males, with wealth to flaunt. So again 'crossing over' was possible but different.
I can't think of an era where wearing women's clothes was desirable for straight male peasants though. But, for high status males, women's clothing seems to be a common thread in history and across lots of different cultures.
FYI, that’s because Christian vestments are descended directly from men’s clothing in the late Roman Empire, where men who weren’t clergy also wore robes. I don’t think they were “women’s clothes” unless you define all robes and dresses to be female specific.
Regarding pockets, I just carry a backpack with my laptop now. Phone in back pocket, tiny wallet for cards that fits in my front pocket. I will never buy women's jeans with really tiny pockets, but I feel like most retailers have figured out an acceptable size. Who even likes heavy jeans carrying around so much?
Mens clothes may have changed by now, but I remember them being stiff, feeling bad unless you paid a lot of money (not a problem for women's clothing!), having limited neutral colors with no patterns except thin stripes.
I'm so happy we're coming to a point where we can get rid of gender standards for what fabric people are allowed to wear on their bodies enforced by society.
If you had your boobs made, they're probably pretty close to the exact location and proportions that bra makers expect. But if your boobs are broad rather than projecting; or set closer or further apart than the typical bra in your size... underwire pokes in all the wrong places. (Don't get me started on all the assumptions built into women's clothing and bra sizing.)
Plus if you've got an extra layer of fat on your torso or wear it too tight, the band can dig into your skin. If your band is too loose and you have big boobs, the weight falls onto the straps and hurts your shoulders.
That said, a lot of women who find their bras painful are wearing the wrong size.
Talk about yourself. I know very well what I am and what I am not. If you don't, that's on you, but don't try to push it on others as if it's the new standard.
Sounds like this guy just found a tight shirt. If you're wearing stretchy baby tees and extremely tight jeans, I don't think shape is an issue. You might as well be wearing saran wrap or a bodysuit.
Quality is shit. If you want your favorite X to last or continue to fit correctly more than a year, laundering is a pain in the ass.
I've only experienced this in poor clothing. T-Shirts don't have it, button down shirts don't have it, blouses don't have it, dresses will allow for some 'leeway', but can be worn with 'flat chests'. Padded bra's are really for making your boobs look better, not really any function.
>often meant to be worn very tightly
Tight is totally dependent on your size and what you prefer. I can buy women's clothing that's too big for me and feel comfortable but still have the fit cut. If you're looking at yoga pants, sure. There's also a difference between "tight" and fitting close to your skin, which is very comfortable in my opinion. A lot of women's material's are stretchy where men's aren't.
>it's flimsy
I don't agree. I have $15 jeans from Old Navy that I bought in 2011 that are still going strong. I never buy anything that's super flimsy in the first place, which is terribly easy to do even for cheap. Material on women's clothes almost always feels better than comparable priced items in Men's clothes as well.
Darts actually allow me to wear blouses and tops that follow my shape and curves properly. I don't see why they would be an issue for smaller busted women? The darts allow the fabric to follow your body rather than just drape straight. I see those types of shirts being modeled and worn on smaller busted women all the time and they seem to look good. If you look at expensive fitted blouses they all have darts since they make the shirt fit the body rather than just drape loosely and straight on everyone . Women follow all shapes and sizes and its important to have all styles avaliable so that everyone can find something that works well.
I do think women have fare more variety and selection at their hands when going shopping. I wish we had all these options as men too.
It does strike me that if society nudges men a little towards buying clothing “out of need” then I could see how the market expresses more conservative options.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnOVKtBxSv0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su3HiXOjrfA
Prince had long hair and wore more colorful, feminine clothing. Madonna wore a mix of masculine and feminine stuff. There are probably lots of other examples.
A lot of big stars actually end up admired and even emulated to some degree. They do this and typically make it look good.
That observation plus firsthand experience suggests that doing it and making it look good goes a long ways towards other people being okay with it. So get an education in design. Learn a little something about working with color and that sort of thing and go to town to your heart's content, just take a look in the mirror and try to be something someone envies and most people won't care that you cross-shop.