i'm sorry...
i thought most men don't wear skirts bcause that sort of thing is only for gay homo fags, and we cant have that now!
right?!?
r1g0r
Why men don't wear skirts ...
-
crfriend
- Master Barista
- Posts: 15176
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
- Contact:
Perceptions and labels
I suspect that one of the reasons that many, if not most, men never get up the gumption to actually wear a skirt in public is that they're worried that they'll get labelled as something that they're not. R1g0r's comment (which was very crudely worded) speaks to that. The interesting thing is that from everything I've heard on the matter, homosexual males tend to shun skirts even more than do the hetero guys and even out-and-out transvestites are overwhelmingly "straight".
I think it's really important that we disassociate sexual preference from fashion choices; if we continue to perpetuate ignorant stereotypes then we're doing ourselves a big disservice. Too, I believe it's time we dropped the term "femme" as a descriptor of our fashion choices. "Soft" might be a decent starting point (referring to fine and luxurious fabrics stereotypically reserved for women) along with "hard" (heavyweight stuff like denim, heavy boots, and the like). By disassociating gender from fashion, and by concentrating on what works on guys so they don't look like parodies of women we'll be reinforcing the message that clothes do not make the man, the man wears the clothes -- of his choice..
I think it's really important that we disassociate sexual preference from fashion choices; if we continue to perpetuate ignorant stereotypes then we're doing ourselves a big disservice. Too, I believe it's time we dropped the term "femme" as a descriptor of our fashion choices. "Soft" might be a decent starting point (referring to fine and luxurious fabrics stereotypically reserved for women) along with "hard" (heavyweight stuff like denim, heavy boots, and the like). By disassociating gender from fashion, and by concentrating on what works on guys so they don't look like parodies of women we'll be reinforcing the message that clothes do not make the man, the man wears the clothes -- of his choice..
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Hi. I’ll tell you why I don’t yet wear skirts publicly: it’s out of respect for my wife, who is clearly not ready to accept this style of clothing for me. I respect that, principally because change is always hard to accept, especially when you've been married for many years.
Anyway, I am in the process of getting her to slowly accept that her man can wear skirts and still be masculine. OK, not much success there yet, but there’s been progress on the home front since I changed tactics: as skirts were off limits, I went for kilts, even though they’re more expensive – I hate paying more for basically the same thing, but one must do what one must do... I guess that in the long run, the difference between a skirt and a kilt will become pointless, as both are unbifurcated garments.
In the mean time, we don't really talk about it much, but she knows I am stocking slowly but surely on kilts (I have one, and 2 more on order). I know my wife: badgering her will only aggravate things. I guess that through the silence on this subject, the acceptance is filtering like osmosis.
At 48, I have been in love with her for the last 31 years. I will not choose skirts over my wife, but I believe I won't have to. This challenge will be overcome with time, love and understanding.
Anyway, I am in the process of getting her to slowly accept that her man can wear skirts and still be masculine. OK, not much success there yet, but there’s been progress on the home front since I changed tactics: as skirts were off limits, I went for kilts, even though they’re more expensive – I hate paying more for basically the same thing, but one must do what one must do... I guess that in the long run, the difference between a skirt and a kilt will become pointless, as both are unbifurcated garments.
In the mean time, we don't really talk about it much, but she knows I am stocking slowly but surely on kilts (I have one, and 2 more on order). I know my wife: badgering her will only aggravate things. I guess that through the silence on this subject, the acceptance is filtering like osmosis.
At 48, I have been in love with her for the last 31 years. I will not choose skirts over my wife, but I believe I won't have to. This challenge will be overcome with time, love and understanding.
-
crfriend
- Master Barista
- Posts: 15176
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
- Contact:
Actors, why'd it have to be actors?
I believe there's a problem here -- those folks are actors (Giuliani, a politician, may be considered close) and the costumes worn by those folks were just that: costumes. They got paid for the work, and, as professionals, did a fine job at the roles they were paid to play. It just doesn't translate down to the man on the street. After all, the interest here is to get the notion of skirted garments accepted at the street level, not on the stage or silver screen.Wearing women's clothing has not hurt the careers of Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis, Dustin Hoffman, Robin Williams, John Travolta or Rudy Guiliani
I'm very interested to see how much guff gets raised about Giuliani if he gets close to the Republican nomination. I suspect some of that old footage will be replayed with some real nastiness behind it. It won't sway thinking people, but it might well sway the automatons.
Who, sadly, if I recall correctly, came in for some serious ridicule over that. Ridicule well beyond the usual "shots" that ones friends are likely to take.Almost forgot: Joe Namath in pantyhose
Last edited by crfriend on Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Re: Perceptions and labels
Totally on line. This is exactly what I keep saying. We, the men wearing skirts, need te redefine many old terms, into new definitions as how to name a man in unto now women's clothes. Clothes maketh the man or woman. You are not a man or woman by the clothes you wear. Ie we don't say: there goes a woman in pants, or there goes a man in a skirt. We say there is a man. or a female, totally irregardless of what they are wearing. As to referring to their sexual preferance, well we would have to ask them first.crfriend wrote:I suspect that one of the reasons that many, if not most, men never get up the gumption to actually wear a skirt in public is that they're worried that they'll get labelled as something that they're not. R1g0r's comment (which was very crudely worded) speaks to that. The interesting thing is that from everything I've heard on the matter, homosexual males tend to shun skirts even more than do the hetero guys and even out-and-out transvestites are overwhelmingly "straight".
I think it's really important that we disassociate sexual preference from fashion choices; if we continue to perpetuate ignorant stereotypes then we're doing ourselves a big disservice. Too, I believe it's time we dropped the term "femme" as a descriptor of our fashion choices. "Soft" might be a decent starting point (referring to fine and luxurious fabrics stereotypically reserved for women) along with "hard" (heavyweight stuff like denim, heavy boots, and the like). By disassociating gender from fashion, and by concentrating on what works on guys so they don't look like parodies of women we'll be reinforcing the message that clothes do not make the man, the man wears the clothes -- of his choice..
And wearing pantys as we call them over here, or tights, or even nylon stokkings, makes you no more or less a man. It can make you look good, and often is the all important finishing touch for an outfit.
Peter v
Peter v.
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
Firstly, I am glad that you can at least talk about wearing skirts um kilts. ( this is ridicules, there's no difference to other people at least) And thank you for sharing your situation with us. I hope your wife will see the light soon, as waiting a decade is no real option. This is again an example of how difficult it appers to be for women to deal with men in skirts, even if it is a man whom they LIVE togerther with, intimately. Or is it in fact that, which for them is a shock that their manly man wants to wear clothes which the women reguard as "only for women" ( whatever that would entail) ?sambuka wrote:Hi. I’ll tell you why I don’t yet wear skirts publicly: it’s out of respect for my wife, who is clearly not ready to accept this style of clothing for me. I respect that, principally because change is always hard to accept, especially when you've been married for many years.
Anyway, I am in the process of getting her to slowly accept that her man can wear skirts and still be masculine. OK, not much success there yet, but there’s been progress on the home front since I changed tactics: as skirts were off limits, I went for kilts, even though they’re more expensive – I hate paying more for basically the same thing, but one must do what one must do... I guess that in the long run, the difference between a skirt and a kilt will become pointless, as both are unbifurcated garments.
In the mean time, we don't really talk about it much, but she knows I am stocking slowly but surely on kilts (I have one, and 2 more on order). I know my wife: badgering her will only aggravate things. I guess that through the silence on this subject, the acceptance is filtering like osmosis.
At 48, I have been in love with her for the last 31 years. I will not choose skirts over my wife, but I believe I won't have to. This challenge will be overcome with time, love and understanding.
If your wife (women) are scared of comments, then you (men)shouldn't wear anything else than pants.
Men generally wil wear skirts oustide in public, so that's not the big problem. The problem seems to be that women have great difficulty understanding why anybody but themselves would want to wear a skirt,
and either women don't love their men and stand by them in what they do, as the marriage vows state, or are scared shitless for what OTHER people may think about her man wearing a skirt. Stick by your partner in thick or thin, but don't let your man wear skirts. 
If I'm wrong, please say so. Why do women think that they can deny men their right to wear a skirt and not expect the man to get pissed off. Women do have the right, as we all have, not to fully understand all things around us, but that's not the same as treating a mature man as a little child of 4 years of age. "no you may not go play outside". I thought marriage was to stand by each other, not to ban the other partner from things that you yourself need some time for to understand. I believe that is not fair, not just.
You need all the support you can get. Ask your wife, does she choose her husband, the man who she knows inside and out for years, above skirts? Will she leave you if you wear outside? At first we may react offensively at such a suggestion to say things that way, but I believe we men should stand up for ourselves more. I would suggest the bold way, to suggest to your wife, that you want to wear skirts, then put on a skirt, and present that as your new choice of clothing, you being a free and modern man. Then she cannot back out. This may be drastic, and not wise, and may not go down well, so is not for the faint hearted. It is just that I think it is so unjust to let men wait decades maybe longer before the woman decides to let their little boy wear a skirt. We are Men, not children.
As this is a delicate situation, every person must handle it in his own way, as he (or she) finds fit.
I know wives in general don't accept their men wearing women's things. But I do think that is very short sighted. And what's the pshchic in all of that? Why do women apparently have such difficulty in understanding it?
I am also very happy that men, like yourself share their situation with us, and respect every one in their own right.
There is only one real way to alleviate this problem, and that is to band together, and get the whole shift in mens fashion public. So that there be no need for fear or not understanding by the wife, partner. We're not there yet, but every litle bit helps, so if we all do our bit, then there may be some result visible in the near future. In the mean time, persevere, wear when you can, and try to swing the vieuw of your partner the right way.
Peter v
eter v.
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
I'd like to try to clarify my previous post.
Although I mentioned some actors, a football player and the mayor of a large city, my point was that these were men who were brave enough to take on what might consider risque roles and still be thought of as men.
Joe Namath, a football hero, was brave enough to appear in an advertisement for pantyhose, modelling the pantyhose. Yes, he faced a lot of negative comments, but he was brave enough to get past them.
Rudy Guiliani was brave enough and had enough of a sense of humor to appear in public "in drag". Yet as Mayor of New York City, he cleaned up a lot of crime, and as Mayor, led the city through the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the city.
It is true that actors get paid for their roles. However, actors can, and do, decline roles. Lemmon, Curtis, Hoffman and Williams all played roles in which they were men, dressing as women for various reasons: to escape the mob, get a job, be close to his children. Those were all comedies. Hoffman and Williams achieved significant professional and artistic recognition for their work. Their masculinity has never been questioned.
In "Hairspray", John Travolta plays a woman's role, that of an overweight, mousy housewife who takes in laundry and is the mother of the leading character. Travolta plays the role honestly and sensitively. He normally plays rather macho parts, so this is a departure for him. "Hairspray" is a movie about tolerance. The main theme is tolerance between blacks and whites. A subtheme is tolerance for people who just do not fit the traditional ideas of "attractive".
The entertainment industry can present new/different ideas in a safe and non-threatening way. The important thing is that these ideas are presented and no one thinks less of the actor.
In Guiliani's case, his excursion into crossdressing showed that a powerful man can take himself lightly and yet rise to serious challenges.
What these men have done is probably not what MIS hope to achieve, but it does put the idea in front of the general population in a non-threatening way.
One needs to look behind the role, the joke, whatever and look at these men in the overall context of their work and their accomplishments to see that a skirt is only a piece of cloth and it is the man that matters.
Although I mentioned some actors, a football player and the mayor of a large city, my point was that these were men who were brave enough to take on what might consider risque roles and still be thought of as men.
Joe Namath, a football hero, was brave enough to appear in an advertisement for pantyhose, modelling the pantyhose. Yes, he faced a lot of negative comments, but he was brave enough to get past them.
Rudy Guiliani was brave enough and had enough of a sense of humor to appear in public "in drag". Yet as Mayor of New York City, he cleaned up a lot of crime, and as Mayor, led the city through the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the city.
It is true that actors get paid for their roles. However, actors can, and do, decline roles. Lemmon, Curtis, Hoffman and Williams all played roles in which they were men, dressing as women for various reasons: to escape the mob, get a job, be close to his children. Those were all comedies. Hoffman and Williams achieved significant professional and artistic recognition for their work. Their masculinity has never been questioned.
In "Hairspray", John Travolta plays a woman's role, that of an overweight, mousy housewife who takes in laundry and is the mother of the leading character. Travolta plays the role honestly and sensitively. He normally plays rather macho parts, so this is a departure for him. "Hairspray" is a movie about tolerance. The main theme is tolerance between blacks and whites. A subtheme is tolerance for people who just do not fit the traditional ideas of "attractive".
The entertainment industry can present new/different ideas in a safe and non-threatening way. The important thing is that these ideas are presented and no one thinks less of the actor.
In Guiliani's case, his excursion into crossdressing showed that a powerful man can take himself lightly and yet rise to serious challenges.
What these men have done is probably not what MIS hope to achieve, but it does put the idea in front of the general population in a non-threatening way.
One needs to look behind the role, the joke, whatever and look at these men in the overall context of their work and their accomplishments to see that a skirt is only a piece of cloth and it is the man that matters.
Peter,
Ref your comments... ... or are scared shitless for what OTHER people may think about her man wearing a skirt. Stick by your partner in thick or thin, but don't let your man wear skirts.
In the case of my wife, it's the "what are people going to think" and also because of the kids. Well, OK, it may seem to you that she is forbidding me to wear a skirt, but it's not that: I am quite capable of deciding for myself - and she knows it. As you rightfully alluded to, men generally will wear skirts oustide in public, so that's not the big problem. As I said, it's a question of respect, a self restraint that I impose upon myself, as I believe this issue, minor in essence, does not merit the nuclear war approach.
When you say why do women think that they can deny men their right to wear a skirt and not expect the man to get pissed off?, I think that in my case, it would be an overstatement. First, I am not pissed off - as I keep saying to the woman I love, it's just a "morceau de tissus", a piece of fabric, unimportant by itself. Getting pissed for that is putting a premium on something I spend time arguing is not important.
I thought marriage was to stand by each other, not to ban the other partner from things that you yourself need some time for to understand. I believe that is not fair, not just. Interesting comment; I know where you're coming from, but I think you got this reversed. Indeed, I believe it is me right now who needs to stand by her, as I am the one bringing change to a pretty stable situation. Also, fair and just has nothing to do with it, as I believe I (we) are not dealing with a logical situation or bringing about logical feelings.
In the end, she won't leave me if I just said the hell with it, and donned a skirt tonight. But as you so eloquently put it, it's not for the faint hearted!, and as I believe we only have a certain number of heartbeats per heart in life, putting ourselves in a situation where we might skip a few is not where I want to go.
Thanks for the conversation Peter.
PS: what or who is eter v.?
Ref your comments... ... or are scared shitless for what OTHER people may think about her man wearing a skirt. Stick by your partner in thick or thin, but don't let your man wear skirts.
In the case of my wife, it's the "what are people going to think" and also because of the kids. Well, OK, it may seem to you that she is forbidding me to wear a skirt, but it's not that: I am quite capable of deciding for myself - and she knows it. As you rightfully alluded to, men generally will wear skirts oustide in public, so that's not the big problem. As I said, it's a question of respect, a self restraint that I impose upon myself, as I believe this issue, minor in essence, does not merit the nuclear war approach.
When you say why do women think that they can deny men their right to wear a skirt and not expect the man to get pissed off?, I think that in my case, it would be an overstatement. First, I am not pissed off - as I keep saying to the woman I love, it's just a "morceau de tissus", a piece of fabric, unimportant by itself. Getting pissed for that is putting a premium on something I spend time arguing is not important.
I thought marriage was to stand by each other, not to ban the other partner from things that you yourself need some time for to understand. I believe that is not fair, not just. Interesting comment; I know where you're coming from, but I think you got this reversed. Indeed, I believe it is me right now who needs to stand by her, as I am the one bringing change to a pretty stable situation. Also, fair and just has nothing to do with it, as I believe I (we) are not dealing with a logical situation or bringing about logical feelings.
In the end, she won't leave me if I just said the hell with it, and donned a skirt tonight. But as you so eloquently put it, it's not for the faint hearted!, and as I believe we only have a certain number of heartbeats per heart in life, putting ourselves in a situation where we might skip a few is not where I want to go.
Thanks for the conversation Peter.
PS: what or who is eter v.?
-
crfriend
- Master Barista
- Posts: 15176
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
- Contact:
Since when is anything "fair"?
This is rather telling of the situation, in and of itself, and it points up one of the very deep issues that keeps wives and girlfriends from accepting "their man" in anything that might look, even vaguely, "non-masculine" -- it's not a rational response and most men tend to think rationally. So, almost from the get-go, here we (men) are stating, "It's just a piece of cloth! What's the big deal?" and our wives/girlfriends are positively aghast at the thought (and may well be very angry for it) and we have no clue why. One would hope that good communications between the couple would eventually sort the situation out, but there seems to be a fair weight of anecdotal evidence that isn't the case.Also, fair and just has nothing to do with it, as I believe I (we) are not dealing with a logical situation or bringing about logical feelings.
I count myself incredibly lucky that I have a loving wife who is not only supportive, but actually encouraging (so long as I don't do anything really stupid with my wardrobe). Over time, I seem to be converging on a look that I like, and am getting more interested in the actual design of the garments than just the notion of breaking all manner of "rules" by wearing a skirt.
No, but she might make your life a living Hell, and that's a powerful disincentive which explains the "self denial" (some of which can be healthy, but too much is destructive). I'm sorry I don't have any hard-and-fast answers to the conundrum; if a "magic bullet" could be found it'd be really welcome in this community.In the end, she won't leave me if I just said the hell with it, and donned a skirt tonight.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
sambuka wrote:Peter,
Ref your comments... ...
Thanks for the conversation Peter.
PS: what or who is eter v.?
It was my pleasure, sambuka. AND thank you, very much for such a interesting level headed answer. This is conversating at it's best. And I am sure other members will profit from such discusions about the same family situations.
Sorry, eter v is a type fault.
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
And thank you too, crfriend.
As there are infinite personal variations in any two people married or living in close harmony, it's nearly impossible to define the real problem. That's not what we are trying to do here. But discussing it as we do, can help clear up some cloudy issues. As you stated, when it does give problems on the wifes side, it's back to the men come from mars and women from venus learnings which dictate misunderstanding from the start. Luckily for many other couples, the women do understand the man's free dressing desires and there is harmony.
I am also here in the Netherlands a very dedicated converstaionist
on the site http://herenpanty.6.forumer.com/ which is all about men wearing pantys (tights). In much the same way as I discuss things here. Even though most wear them under their pants, purely for the comfort, and no one else can actually see them, those men go through roughly the same as we skirt wearers do. How about that?
If only we men could find a way to help women understand what we are doing more easily, in the cases where the women aren't able to comprehend the situation, so that recognition and acceptance could be easier and quicker for them. Helping them and us. By holding these discussions I hope to be a part of the ultimate answer. And am very thankful for all those who participate. In the meanwhile, we just have to persevere, taking careful steps that we see fit as they are needed. One step at a time.
Peter v
As there are infinite personal variations in any two people married or living in close harmony, it's nearly impossible to define the real problem. That's not what we are trying to do here. But discussing it as we do, can help clear up some cloudy issues. As you stated, when it does give problems on the wifes side, it's back to the men come from mars and women from venus learnings which dictate misunderstanding from the start. Luckily for many other couples, the women do understand the man's free dressing desires and there is harmony.
I am also here in the Netherlands a very dedicated converstaionist
on the site http://herenpanty.6.forumer.com/ which is all about men wearing pantys (tights). In much the same way as I discuss things here. Even though most wear them under their pants, purely for the comfort, and no one else can actually see them, those men go through roughly the same as we skirt wearers do. How about that?
If only we men could find a way to help women understand what we are doing more easily, in the cases where the women aren't able to comprehend the situation, so that recognition and acceptance could be easier and quicker for them. Helping them and us. By holding these discussions I hope to be a part of the ultimate answer. And am very thankful for all those who participate. In the meanwhile, we just have to persevere, taking careful steps that we see fit as they are needed. One step at a time.
Peter v
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
-
AMM
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 841
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:01 pm
- Location: Thanks for all the fish!
Sambuka, I think you have put it beautifully. "Respect," "not a question of logic", these are all important concepts when two people try to live and stay together.sambuka wrote: ... it's a question of respect, ...
... fair and just has nothing to do with it, as I believe I (we) are not dealing with a logical situation or bringing about logical feelings. ...
Despite being divorced, or perhaps because of being divorced, I see the complexities that go into maintaining an intimate relationship. When you are sharing a life with someone, you can't just make decisions unilaterally, without thinking how it will affect the other person. It doesn't matter whether it's "fair" or "logical." Saying "I have a right to do X" doesn't even make sense. In fact, I think that if you are thinking in these terms, you aren't really mature enough to have an intimate relationship.
If your wife (or SO) is uncomfortable with the idea of you wearing a skirt, you have to deal with that, with (as Sambuka says) respect. If you don't value her feelings in this matter, or if you judge whether it's "logical" or "fair" before deciding whether to take her feelings seriously, you are essentially telling her that you only love/accept the part of her that fits in with your idea of "logical" and "fair," and are rejecting the rest. If you stand on your position that you "have a right to wear a skirt," the message that she will get is that you value your skirt-wearing more than her. Imagine if things were reversed: if she gave you the message that she was going to stick to her fingernail polish, or her bowling night, and to hell with you!
On the other hand, it goes both ways. It is important to let her know how you feel about the skirt-wearing, so that she has the opportunity to respect your feelings. I believe that if you both respect one another and are humbly honest with one another, and patient with one another, you leave space for the miracle of love to do its work, and sooner or later you will find a way forward. Perhaps something different from, and better than, anything either of you expected.
-- AMM
P.S.: Sambuka, just out of curiosity: is your native language French? Knowing whether it is might help me better interpret (or not mis-interpret) some of your phrases.
-
AMM
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 841
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:01 pm
- Location: Thanks for all the fish!
Actually, knowing you're francophone (=native French speaker?) removes whatever confusion there might be.sambuka wrote:Yes, french is my native language. Am I writing in a strange style that may lead to confusion?
I've noticed that native French speakers who speak English sometimes phrase things in certain ways that aren't the way most native English speakers would phrase them. It's not that it's incorrect or hard to understand, it's more like a regional style (cf. Texas English, or Australian English), except that it's different from any regional style I'm familiar with. If I thought you were anglophone, I would wonder what it meant that you were saying things that particular way. Knowing you're francophone removes any confusion.