Let's never speak this word again

[Mouse]

When I was younger I worried about what I was and my solution was to keep every thing private and secret. As I have got older I have let more of me out and worried less on what others labelled me as. Of course UK society has changed too and created so many labels for people that many of us no longer keep up and just take people for what are or what they tell me they are.

[Barleymower]

When I was younger I worried about what I was and my solution was to keep every thing private and secret. As I have got older I have let more of me out and worried less on what others labelled me as. Of course UK society has changed too and created so many labels for people that many of us no longer keep up and just take people for what are or what they tell me they are.

Same here mouse. Except as I got older I got better looking 'normal' until was the norm. And then suddenly it wasn't again.
I think the current attempt to label everything is not hugely different between now and my childhood. The only difference was there were fewer labels then. Humans have yet to realise that everyone is different and no amount of labels will cover it.

[Myopic Bookworm]

Almost on topic! I just visited a local opticians to see what styles they had in the showroom. The receptionist motioned to the other side of the shop saying "the gentlemen's frames are over there". I responded (perhaps slightly abruptly) "I don't care: I'm looking for the shape, not the sex". At that, the manager hastened out (a friendly lady that I have often dealt with). She and a colleague had just been to a trade convention of some sort, and were considering options for refitting the showroom. There had been some discussion as to whether dividing the display into "men's" and "women's" was useful, or whether it would be better to group frames by shape. My comment increased her inclination to go for the latter choice. Yay!

[JohnH]

A lot of times women don't recognize the double standard of clothing conventions. When I'm wearing a dress on Sunday mornings occasionally some women mention upon passing in a mild way maybe I should observe clothing conventions for men while wearing TROUSERS.
I point out.to them the history of trousers on women and that ends that topic right there. It's interesting it's only the elderly women who makes such comments.
I understand the first time women wore trousers there was widespread disapproval. I myself have received almost no disapproval for wearing dresses as a man.

John

[FLbreezy]

There had been some discussion as to whether dividing the display into "men's" and "women's" was useful, or whether it would be better to group frames by shape.

My few local Costco opticals don't have them divided by gender, just by style and designer, it's quite nice.

[moonshadow]

There had been some discussion as to whether dividing the display into "men's" and "women's" was useful, or whether it would be better to group frames by shape.

My few local Costco opticals don't have them divided by gender, just by style and designer, it's quite nice.

You mean they mixed gendered frames in Florida and it nobody made an actual federal case about it???

Could people finally be starting to chill out... or did this one just slip under the radar?

Anyway... I've been wearing my sixties style RED cat eye frames for about two months now... nobody has made any negative remarks as of yet.

[Myopic Bookworm]

It is interesting how even spectacle frames can be gendered or neutral. My 16-year-old is currently identifying as non-binary/genderfluid, but has chosen to wear rectagular black glasses which seem rather assertively masculine compared to some of the available options. I tend to head for neutral-ish frames myself, and do not go for anything with a winged/angled top corner, which seems to be a feminizing marker in styles; unlike colour, which seems entirely ungendered nowadays, and you see men (OK, perhaps mainly gay men) sporting a startlingly polychromatic range of eyewear.

[FLbreezy]

You mean they mixed gendered frames in Florida and it nobody made an actual federal case about it???

A state case maybe, instead of a federal one.

It's good to see some pointlessly gendered things being treated as such, at an rate.

[STEVIE]

Spec frames are no more gendered than any other item MB.
I have an exceptionally good and long term relationship with my optician.
I have been a client for about forty years and their shop has changed little in that time.
Compact, it's the easiest example of "aisle hopping" that I can think of.
Colour and style in spectacles is as subject to fashion as anything else, but glasses by themselves have evolved too.
When I got my first ones sixty years ago it was for necessity and remained like that for most wearers until recently.
Nowadays, there is a trend for specs, but not for assisted vision, plain lenses.
I have always gone neutral in the past for clothing choices and still do, expensive.
Oddly though, cataract surgery does mean that I could join the cosmetic spectacle brigade if I chose.
Oooh, I can feel a startingly polychromatic moment coming on as I type.
Nought queerer than folks.
Steve.
PS In my TV/CD days, the specs were a dead giveaway and not wearing them not advisable.
Ooops, that word again, sorry!

[mr seamstress]

Post by STEVIE » Sat Feb 24, 2024 2:31 pm

The infant/unisex dress thing had pretty much died out in Britain very early in the 20th century, was America not similar.
Where in 1970 would a woman have been arrested for wearing trousers, did it happen?
Some clergy are still claiming men cannot wear dresses, but what about their sons?

I did a internet search when boy as infant wore dresses and web pages stating that mothers was still putting dresses on boy into the 50's. I did another web search it along that subject showing a major catalog company here in America was selling dresses as unisex for all infants up to 1957.
I did a web search for current crossdressing laws, but came back with 19th century crossdressing laws. As I was reading about that time period it showed that Detroit, Michigan was enacted such a law in early 1970's. In 2023 several states put forth new crossdressing laws. Here in the state I live in state legislators created a new crossdressing law, but never made it out of State House legislators, was pass by State Senate. If I memory correctly it was bill 105.
I don't know if anyone was arrested in Detroit, Michigan at that time.
When clergy claims men can't wear dresses, he means all males including sons.

[mr seamstress]

I failed to mention one fact, that was I was made aware by that clergy I wasn't welcome because of my attire. I was kick out of church. They didn't like my dresses or skirts.

[STEVIE]

I failed to mention one fact, that was I was made aware by that clergy I wasn't welcome because of my attire. I was kick out of church. They didn't like my dresses or skirts.

In Tudor England, 15th and 16th centuries, there were "sumptuary" laws, the wrong clothes could get you executed.
After that restrictions were based more on social convention than legality.
This would have been largely true of most of Europe, but I had no idea that America was so backward in this respect.
As for the quote, churches and organised religion have got a lot to answer for.
Tolerance and forgiveness, sad?
Steve.

[STEVIE]

PS

There are still something in the order of thirteen countries where a man in any form of female clothing will be deemed homosexual.
Most CDs aren't actually gay, but that could still get you executed in these places.
Furthermore, there are many more places where any form of non-conformity to clothing norms will have adverse consequences for men and women.
Perhaps not state sanctioned, but condoned by tacit agreement, the world can be very nasty no matter what words we use.
Steve.

[moonshadow]

I failed to mention one fact, that was I was made aware by that clergy I wasn't welcome because of my attire. I was kick out of church. They didn't like my dresses or skirts.

You're better off. Such an establishment clearly lacks the spirit of everything Christ stood for. That's not a church... that's a social club.

[Barleymower]

Such a simple thing. What's wrong with people?