From Yahoo

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.

From Yahoo

Postby beachlion » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:34 am

https://www.yahoo.com/style/little-boys ... 14730.html

At least it is under the heading Beauty.
User avatar
beachlion
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 3:15 am
Location: Allentown, PA, USA

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Stevie D » Sat Aug 05, 2017 1:47 pm

I started reading some of the comments and was appalled that nearly all of them expressed such right-wing vitriolic conservatism. I would hope that these people are in the minority and that most of them are only posting their comments as a result of feeling emboldened to do so by reading the shameful opinions of others.

It's just the same on the BBC website's 'Have Your Say' where, regardless of the original subject, it nearly always degenerates into the rabid squawking of the EU leavers: "it's democracy, we're leaving, get over it", etc.

Such unnecessary hate saddens me beyond belief and truly undermines my faith in humanity as being basically decent. :(
Stevie D
(Sheffield, England)
Stevie D
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Stu » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:33 pm

I think it's brilliant that we have moved from something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago to it being no big deal for most people. That is certainly progress - now let's see designers and manufacturers making dresses and skirts unisex and shops etc selling them as such. The problem is still that they are associated with the trans/gender fluid thing rather than just being accessible to all without the gendered associations.

You will always get negativity from some in comments - like in the Daily Mail or BBC. Change, especially when it relates to core identity issues like gender, can be difficult for people. When such comments occur, if we intend to respond, then it must always be in a constructive way and detached from wider political issues. I don't see this as a right-wing / left-wing matter. If we respind, we must just point out the usual arguments, that girls and women have been able to wear pretty much anything for over a century while us poor males have been denied any kind of choice aside from which style of trousers we want to wear.

I note Stevie is frustrated by the BBC reader comments on Brexit. I have not seen these personally, but they do sound like comments I have read in The Guardian. I have discussed the EU issue with colleagues and there is divided opinion here, too. While most Swedes think that the EU is a positive organisation, others are hostile to it as they regard it as undemocratic and part of a wider agenda of globalisation that aims to eradicate national identity. My closest neighbour, a cattle farmer, thinks the UK has taken leave of its senses in voting for Brexit. I have another acquaintance, who is Hungarian by birth and father of my daughter's boyfriend, and a retired economics journalist, who has a passionate dislike of the EU and envies the UK in having the referendum and the chance to leave. If there is hatred, though, it seems not to be based on xenophobia, i.e. directed at the people of Europe, but rather the Brussels-based institution itself. In the end, we either accept democracy or we don't. Rightly or wrongly, the issue was put to the people in a referendum and they made up their minds as they were entitled to do, and will now have to live with that decision, for better or worse. Democracy isn't just there for when we get the result we agree with.

This is a highly controversial topic and we all have our own views, so maybe we should leave it at that. Instead, let's celebrate another bit of progress with the young son of Chris Evans being able to step into the limelight in a dress. Good stuff! :D

Stu
Stu
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: From Yahoo

Postby JohnH » Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:57 pm

Stevie D wrote:I started reading some of the comments and was appalled that nearly all of them expressed such right-wing vitriolic conservatism. I would hope that these people are in the minority and that most of them are only posting their comments as a result of feeling emboldened to do so by reading the shameful opinions of others.

It's just the same on the BBC website's 'Have Your Say' where, regardless of the original subject, it nearly always degenerates into the rabid squawking of the EU leavers: "it's democracy, we're leaving, get over it", etc.

Such unnecessary hate saddens me beyond belief and truly undermines my faith in humanity as being basically decent. :(


That goes to show rednecks exist outside the United States. They show an appalling ignorance of history, that is, not too long ago it was normal for boys to wear dresses. A famous example was John D. Rockefeller, Jr. wore dresses handed down from his sisters. His father founded Standard Oil in the 1800's in the United States.
User avatar
JohnH
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:46 am
Location: Irving, Texas USA

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Fred in Skirts » Sat Aug 05, 2017 10:06 pm

John D wasn't the only man in history to wear dresses. So did one of our Presidents. He was photographed as a child wearing a dress it was Roosevelt. :lol:
Fred :kiltdance:

:whistle: Hi I am Fred and I wear skirts all of the time. :hooray:
"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not"
Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951
User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: From Yahoo

Postby crfriend » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:42 pm

Fred in Skirts wrote:John D wasn't the only man in history to wear dresses. So did one of our Presidents. He was photographed as a child wearing a dress it was Roosevelt. :lol:

Highly likely both of them. The first one was much more impressive than the second.

When one actually thinks about it, it makes perfect sense to have non-housebroken humans wear dresses. It makes access so much easier.

What's all the stink about?
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 8754
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Grok » Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:04 am

Could it simply be that these celebrity sons were curious, decided to try on a dress, and decided that they liked the garments?
Grok
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:21 am

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Sinned » Sun Aug 06, 2017 5:02 am

Stu, you have commented on the Brexit issue and I agree wholeheartedly that there seems to have been polarisation here - you either love the EU or you hate it and no amount of discussion will change those opinions. You'll not convince me to love the EU and I wouldn't try to convince those that are pro to be otherwise. Live and let live. I am anti and my reasons have nothing to do with the people but with the UNdemocratic way in which the EU is run and the leadership agendas that involve the stripping away of national identities. The US is a confederation of states each with their own identity, character and local laws. There doesn't appear to be a subtext to eliminate statehood and replace it with bland global Americanism so why should the EU try to be the opposite. Even I see that the population where Moon lives has a completely different character than where Carl lives. I have a book by Enoch Powell called The Common Market - The Case Against and in it he is quite incisive in highlighting precisely the problems we have come up against. In it he notes that he was originally pro but on analysis became anti.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Kilted Musician » Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:14 am

Fred in Skirts wrote:John D wasn't the only man in history to wear dresses. So did one of our Presidents. He was photographed as a child wearing a dress it was Roosevelt. :lol:

Hi Fred and all...

I remember seeing a pic of my father, born in 1924 in Michigan, when he was around 1 or 2 years old, wearing a dress. If I remember correctly, it was quite common for boys at the time to wear dresses. I'm not sure if it was only for portraits, special occasions, or everyday wear. I wish I could get a hold of the pic. Not sure where it is...

--Rick
I'm allergic to Stupidity. I break out in Sarcasm...
Kilted Musician
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:50 pm

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Sinned » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:31 am

I read to the second page of comments and did think about logging in to post an item of sanity in an increasingly insane and bigoted world then I felt a wave of what's the use wash over me and I didn't bother.

I have spoken to many members of the grey generation and they have confirmed that until about four years old boys and girls were dressed more or less identically as there was little need to differentiate. There was little of the blue for boys and pink for girls as the fashion industry hadn't invented it yet. Garments were practical and warm, suitable for romping around and playing around outdoors in.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Stevie D » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:05 am

Stu wrote:In the end, we either accept democracy or we don't. Rightly or wrongly, the issue was put to the people in a referendum and they made up their minds as they were entitled to do, and will now have to live with that decision, for better or worse. Democracy isn't just there for when we get the result we agree with.


Sinned wrote: I agree wholeheartedly that there seems to have been polarisation here - you either love the EU or you hate it and no amount of discussion will change those opinions. You'll not convince me to love the EU and I wouldn't try to convince those that are pro to be otherwise. Live and let live.


I respect both of your viewpoints in your full posts, but I've pulled out a couple of sections for comment.
A true democracy ought to work as far as possible for the benefit of everyone. If a government action has left such a huge proportion of the population so disaffected and in many cases angry and bitter, then to my mind the democratic process has failed. It isn't just a case of one side saying 'it's the will of the people, get over it', nor do I believe a simple re-run of the referendum 'until we get the result we agree with' would solve the problem either, because it would almost certainly just shift the disaffectedness from one group or the population to another.

Whichever way it went, the EU referendum result was always intended to be advisory only (in fact still is, in theory) but it has apparently become mandatory. Months before the referendum actually took place I was deeply dismayed because I could foresee that to attempt to solve such an incredibly complex set of issues which the UK's relationship with the EU involves by a simple remain/leave vote was going to cause the polarisation that Dennis has mentioned. During the campaign, the fact that both pro- and anti-EU factions stoked up emotions and told outright lies was despicable.

"You either love the EU or you hate it and no amount of discussion will change those opinions" illustrates the polarisation. However, it is not a simple either/or. There are good things about the EU and there are bad things too. Acknowledging that some things need to be improved or changed is part of the responsible management of any complex system, whether it is a factory, a farm, or indeed the EU.

I don't presume to know fully how the problems of the UK's membership in the EU could have been solved differently but I am firmly convinced that a simple yes/no referendum was not the way to go about it. We needed consensus, not polarisation. As Stu put it: we "have to live with that decision, for better or worse". I'm afraid it is going to be for worse, not because of the actual decision to leave the EU, but because of the way it was carried out and the effect it has had on our population. If that's 'democracy', then I think it's broken.

Pulling all this back to the original thread topic, what is happening in the world today - not just the UK/EU thing nor pro-Trump/anti-Trump, nor again how people perceive and react to LGBT issues, mens' fashion freedom, etc, - seems to be generating more extremely voiced opinions than ever before. Gut, visceral reactions often prevail over careful, considered, well-thought out arguments. It's so easy to sit anonymously in front of a screen and keyboard and vent opinions which then take on a hideous life of their own.

It saddens me.
Stevie D
(Sheffield, England)
Stevie D
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Stu » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:55 am

I can broadly agree with Stevie, but would argue with a couple of his points.

I don't think anyone can seriously claim the referendum was " always intended to be advisory only". First, the Conservative General Election Manifesto of 2015 promised a referendum on membership of the EU in the following terms: “We believe in letting the people decide: so we will hold an in-out referendum on our membership of the EU before the end of 2017.” It should be noted that the election promise was to “let the people decide”. It was not a promise to hold an advisory referendum, with the final decision being left to Parliament. As a matter of constitutional practice, the inclusion of a policy in the election manifesto of a political party which achieves a majority at a general election gives rise to a constitutional mandate to implement that policy. Secondly, in opening the second reading debate on the Referendum Bill, Philip Hammond himself said: "This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017." He concluded with: "Few subjects ignite as much passion in the House or indeed in the country as our membership of the European Union. The debate in the run-up to the referendum will be hard fought on both sides of the argument. But whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber. The decision must be for the common sense of the British people. That is what we pledged, and that is what we have a mandate to deliver. For too long, the people of Britain have been denied their say. For too long, powers have been handed to Brussels over their heads. For too long, their voice on Europe has not been heard. This Bill puts that right. It delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised, and I commend it to the House." This is not a speech you give to Parliament if a referendum is intended to be advisory. Lastly, during the referendum campaign the government spent £9.5million of taxpayers’ money on printing a leaflet and distributing it to all households in the UK. On the page headed “A once in a generation decision” it stated: “The referendum on Thursday 23rd June is your chance to decide if we should remain in the European Union.” It did not say “it is your chance to advise on whether we should remain, the actual decision being taken by Parliament.” But it went on to be even clearer and more emphatic: “This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide.”

Now Stevie is correct that, technically, the referendum was advisory and I recall a briefing sheet being handed to MPs written by a clerk to the House of Commons Library telling them that. It is certainly only advisory in terms that the referendum result can not be enforced by the court, but I really can't imagine any government being able to simply overrule such a referendum, not without another referendum at any rate.

I totally agree with Stevie that the issue has divided the nation - and I suspect the nation will remain divided on this for years to come. And it saddens me, too. My own two older children live in the UK and they disagree on this issue themselves. It's now looking certain that the UK will leave the EU, but on what terms is still very much a mystery. While I wouldn't say "get over it" to anyone, I agree with the politicians from all sides who say that the referendum result must be respected and we all need to pull together, take account of everyone's view, and start the healing process. Bravado and arrogance by Brexitters and resentment and recriminations by remainers will get us nowhere. Let's be a united United Kingdom again. :-)

Stu
Stu
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Uncle Al » Sun Aug 06, 2017 2:10 pm

To get back on topic, and away from politics, check out
this link from the original Yahoo story. It was written
May 26, 2016 and was included in the Yahoo story.

Here’s to Boys in Dresses — and the Parents Who Support Them

Uncle Al
:mrgreen: :ugeek: :mrgreen:
Kilted Organist/Musician--Secretary-North Texas Chapter-American Theatre Organ Society.
Grand Musician of the Grand Lodge, I.O.O.F. of Texas 2008-2009 & 2015-2016
When asked 'Why the Kilt?'
I respond-The why is F.T.H.O.I. (For The H--- Of It)
User avatar
Uncle Al
Moderator
 
Posts: 2223
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 10:07 pm
Location: Duncanville, TX USA

Re: From Yahoo

Postby Sinned » Sun Aug 06, 2017 5:39 pm

Stevie D,

"Acknowledging that some things need to be improved or changed is part of the responsible management of any complex system, whether it is a factory, a farm, or indeed the EU."

The trouble is that there seems no will to fix what, from our pov, is broken only to go for further and further integration.

Back to topic I note that a lot of the comments were in the same vein as in the first example. Why can't they just connect two brain cells and realise that the current dress codes of trousers for everyone and dresses/skirts for girls only is just social conditioning and that those adults have been so steeped in it that they can't see the ludicrousness of their arguments.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: From Yahoo

Postby phathack » Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:32 pm

Only People can claim a Gender, Clothing is just Clothing it has no Gender.

:ugeek:
User avatar
phathack
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:41 pm
Location: Grapevine, Texas, USA

Next

Return to In the News / Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: john62 and 2 guests