Mannish tailoring for women (again)

[veletron]

This winds me up so much: http://www.riverisland.com/Online/women ... -elle-edit

Read the text half way down. Surprise surprise, in the mens dept for the same company its just the same old rubbish for sale...

[img]Untitled.jpg[/img]

Nigel

[couyalair]

What do you expect?
Few -- if any -- of their male customers are as adventurous as you, Nigel.

Martin

[JRMILLER]

Dude,
I often search the women's skirt section looking for skirts and overall looks that would be believable for a guy. This company is helping us out whether they realize it or not. Don't let it "wind you up", rather, learn from it and plan your next outfit from it if it suits you...

[crfriend]

I often search the women's skirt section looking for skirts and overall looks that would be believable for a guy. This company is helping us out whether they realize it or not. Don't let it "wind you up", rather, learn from it and plan your next outfit from it if it suits you...

Indeed that's the basic principle behind integrating "non-traditional garments" into one's own look -- the critical eye. There's quite a lot of stuff from "the other side of the aisle" that can work on men's frames, but it takes some time to find it, and it takes some work to integrate it successfully; it's not just a matter of trading trousers for a skirt.

[veletron]

Hi

Its the wording that 'winds me up'. Anything any-way any-time for women, usual restrictions apply for blokes. I ignore said restrictions of course. Agreed that making masculine women gear can only be good for men that wear skirts - they are still blurring gender lines to an extent - just from the wrong side!

BTW, 'winds me up' may have been an over statement on my part!

I emailed them anyway, regarding balancing things out with some mens wear that borrows from womens wear.

Nigel

[Kirbstone]

It's interesting how 'Mannish tailoring for women' can be a marketing attention-getter tool used by one chain (River Island) who probably aren't alone in this.
On the other hand any mention of 'girly tailoring for men' would go down like the proverbial lead baloon.

Tom K.

[SkirtRevolution]

You’re not alone in this frustration. Attitudes in men’s fashion has become extremely sexist and restrictive and I refuse to conform to this. I am sick and tired of society and fashion telling me that I have no options as a guy yet women are free to dress as they please. Just last night my wife and I were talking about this, she was getting angry herself because she saw in the new catalogue for one of the shops we shop at that all the men’s clothing was exactly the same as the men’s clothing 2 years ago, and then to top it off all the women’s clothing had become more like men’s clothes. I am infuriated when I go into Target and see that the women’s section is 10 times the size of the men’s section. There is absolutely no variety in the men’s section yet you can get lost in the women’s. In fact there are more jeans, pants and shorts in the women’s section than there are in the men’s. I refuse to conform to this sexism.

[skirtyscot]

I am infuriated when I go into Target and see that the women’s section is 10 times the size of the men’s section. There is absolutely no variety in the men’s section yet you can get lost in the women’s. In fact there are more jeans, pants and shorts in the women’s section than there are in the men’s. I refuse to conform to this sexism.

Even if MUGs became widely worn and were sold in major stores, the women's dept would still be several times bigger than the men's. Judging by the photos posted on this site, the men's dept would still not have anything frilly, flouncy, shiny or flowery - I for one wouldn't want anything like that. So the women would still have much more variety. If that's sexism, few men on SC would want to get rid of it!

[crfriend]

Its the wording that 'winds me up'. Anything any-way any-time for women, usual restrictions apply for blokes.

I feel the need to mention that this was not always the case, and that we may not be in a "better place" than we, generally, were before.

Recall that for quite a while women were expected to maintain vastly more complex wardrobes, usually of expensive and sometimes fragile fabrics, that men were not -- all the while making 60 to 70 cents on the dollar for what their male colleagues earned. I will admit that it looks like a free-for-all now (at least where I work) and that anything goes, and I will also admit that I feel that the modern "all casual, all the time" notion has cheapened the workplace. Perhaps the pendulum has just swung too far in an unanticipated direction.

I ignore said restrictions of course.

Indeed your imagery more than adequately drives that point home! Not to mention the fact that you pull it off masterfully if the shots from the Mountainerring Club's dinner are any example.

[... A]ny mention of 'girly tailoring for men' would go down like the proverbial lead baloon.

I am given to understand that a few boffins on this side of the pond have actually fabricated a lead baloon that, once filled with helium (or, better yet, hydrogen) that floats in a standard atmosphere of air. I am not sure if there are any advantages to a lead gasbag, but at least it's been done.

Joking aside, if the advertising copy focussed on elegance or grace in the garments described, it might do better than terming it "girly" or "womanly". Men can be graceful and elegant just as well as the womenfolk can.

Attitudes in men’s fashion has become extremely sexist and restrictive [...]

This may be an artefact of our sampling techniques. We certainly sense the attitude to be so, but do we have any concrete proof that is really is so? I posit that what we're seeing is an artefact of general laziness on the part of most blokes who just want to cover up what needs to be covered up and don't much care about any sort of embellishment at all. Personally, I find that I like looking sharp (when I have the emotional strength to stand out, for if I don't have that, I go very drab), and I would hope that many men might feel the same way (Cue ZZ Top's "Sharp Dressed Man").

I rather doubt that there's any sexism involved in it at all; I suspect it's all about marketing and how that's targetted.

[SkirtRevolution]

Even if MUGs became widely worn and were sold in major stores, the women's dept would still be several times bigger than the men's. Judging by the photos posted on this site, the men's dept would still not have anything frilly, flouncy, shiny or flowery - I for one wouldn't want anything like that. So the women would still have much more variety. If that's sexism, few men on SC would want to get rid of it!

I 100% agree, I would not want to see feminie styles like frilly, flouncy, shiny or flowery garments for men either, my point being though that men have NO options, yet women can choose between skirt/dresses and pants/short. What I want to see is men having the same freedom of options like skirts (for men, in a manly design) in the mens section. I believe the difference betweens mens clothing and womens should be in style but not funtion (i.e Skirt or pants) I don't advocate androgynous feminie looks for men personal (and nothing against others who do, as that just isn't my style). Moreover, I wouldn't have a problem if the womens section was bigger as long as men had the same freedom of options in fashion, such as mens skirts. The target comment was more to highlight a point about atitudes towards mens fashion (by sexist I mean, women can weart pants but men can't wear skirts)

[crfriend]

Judging by the photos posted on this site, the men's dept would still not have anything frilly, flouncy, shiny or flowery - I for one wouldn't want anything like that.

I believe this is a matter of personal taste. I have several skirts in all of the categories listed above, some of which have more than one characteristic at the same time (e.g. my tiered skirts that I wear in summer). I have velvet skirts, which can look shiny, I have a taffeta one that is positively amazing to look at in bright light that's shiny; I have a muted floral skirt (that needs work and no longer fits either my wife or I) that looks great with a purple dress shirt and tie; and I have very long skirts that include netting and remarkably "loud" colours. I integrate all of these into my wardrobe, including my work wardrobe.

True enough, a floor-length purple skirt may not be right for you, but it's also not right for lots of the gals either. Similarly, not all the styles that might appeal to some will necessarily appeal to all -- and I view this as healthy.

In essence, what I am trying to say is, "Do not exclude something out-of-hand. Experiment with it. If it does not fit your aesthetic, then that is absolutely fine and right. Just don't close off options needlessly."

[alexthebird]

You’re not alone in this frustration. Attitudes in men’s fashion has become extremely sexist and restrictive and I refuse to conform to this.

This may not be what you all want to hear, but I think you've all got the wrong end of a chicken and egg argument. Let me be blunt - no fashion manufacturer or retailer has any obligation whatsoever to offer goods where they don't perceive a market. Their business is not to further issues of gender equality - their business is to make money from things that people want to buy. If I'm in the business of selling clothing, why in the world would I want to produce a line of skirts for men when I NEVER EVER see a man on the street wearing a skirt?

As I see it, we have ONE option. Wear skirts in public, act as if it is no big deal, and look good doing it. If lots and lots of us do that, then maybe some of our closeted brethren will feel encouraged and then an avant garde clothing company will test a design and that will sell out and they'll do it again and a slightly less wacko company will copy them and then Urban Outfitters (or River Island) might join in and sooner or later, J Crew will test the waters. But until the sight of men in skirts in grocery stores, restaurants, on the street, at baseball games, at work, and in locker rooms at the gym are commonplace, manufacturers have no reason to produce skirts for men and retailers have no reason to carry them.

As someone who was in the retail business for 20 years (before moving to nonprofits), I can tell you that demand ALWAYS precedes supply.

BTW, I really liked the ad Velotron posted. My style is longish, straight skirts in subtle colors but I have difficulty matching skirts to tops because of the way that men's shirts are tailored. That ad gave me a couple of good ideas about how to match tops to skirts.

[SkirtRevolution]

You make a great point, who is influenced first...society influencing fashion or fashion influencing society, I think it can be both and the men’s skirt is one that is a difficult taboo for society to break. I agree that we need to just be bold and let the fashion industry know men are wearing skirts so start supplying them, but if we cannot be bold like women were over the last 100 years then either way we explain it, men’s fashion will still remain sexist and restrictive.

[Milfmog]

Even if MUGs became widely worn and were sold in major stores, the women's dept would still be several times bigger than the men's. Judging by the photos posted on this site, the men's dept would still not have anything frilly, flouncy, shiny or flowery - I for one wouldn't want anything like that. So the women would still have much more variety. If that's sexism, few men on SC would want to get rid of it!

I'm a little ambivalent on this. Right now, I do not choose to wear anything too frilly etc, but that is largely because just wearing a skirt creates enough mental confusion in others that I have no wish to push it further. If the skirt itself was sufficiently commonplace to not gather second glances then I'd feel far more tempted to push the fabric, cut or colour choice.

The point made by alexthebird, that demand will drive supply, is spot on the money. So it all boils down to us; if we want to see men's skirts in the shops, we have to wear skirts on the street. We have to be seen and noticed. We will not get anywhere by waiting for someone else to do it for us; that just will not happen. However, we need to strike a balance and not appear so outlandish that we alienate the people we need to try skirts for themselves. Frills, flouncy cuts, floral patterns etc all risk turning the wearer into such a freakshow that no one else will think "Hey, that's kinda cool; maybe I should try a skirt". If we can not engender that thought in other men there will never be a mass take up of skirts for men in our society.

Have fun,


Ian.

[Stu]

If I'm in the business of selling clothing, why in the world would I want to produce a line of skirts for men when I NEVER EVER see a man on the street wearing a skirt?

This is the classic chicken-and-egg situation.

Men don't wear skirts because they don't make skirts for men.

They don't make skirts for men because men don't wear skirts.

As I see it, there are two ways to break this cycle:

1. Designer-led. That means designers create skirts for men, perhaps exclusive styles at first and male celebrities are seen wearing them so other men copy.

2. Wearer-led. This means that men gradually start experimenting with unbifurcated garments like kilts, Utilikilts, sarongs and so on. First it is a rarity to see a man in such a garment, then it becomes a bit more common and some of the more cutting-edge shops (like H&M) start to market them.

Back on my old hobby horse - both 1 and 2 would be facilitated by the establishment of an organised movement. Such a movement could claim to represent at the very least its own membership - and we should be able to get a few thousand people interested - and that could inspire designers. With regard to the second approach, when anyone shows any interest in why a man happens to be wearing a skirt, part of the answer is to claim membership of a named movement - a movement shows that you are not some kind of sartorial aberration, nor are you some kind of half-hearted crossdresser, but you are one of many men who are challenging the male fashion taboos and status quos - strength in numbers!

Stu