Common Vision

General discussion of skirt and kilt-based fashion for men, and stuff that goes with skirts and kilts.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Common Vision

Post by Sinned »

I would ideally register at a 0 as I think that clothes shouldn't have gender and a person should be able to wear what they like. Of course the same garment would have to be cut and styled to suit different body shapes but that is a challenge for the clothes makers! MOH's opinions notwithstanding I would love to wear dresses as well as skirts and am surprised to get away with some of the tops I wear. At the moment I am compelled to wear about a 7 but would love 0 with all the problems of coordinating colour, materials, patterns etc that entails.
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
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Common Vision

Post by Jim »

I'd put my choice of vision about 2. Anyone should be able to wear anything, but I don't care for men wearing padded bras or breast forms or such. (Seems an attempt to be deceptive to me). I would still choose to wear practical clothing with good pockets that was not designed for attracting attention most of the time.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by moonshadow »

Jim wrote:... but I don't care for men wearing padded bras or breast forms or such.
Nor do I. In fact, I think that's what should separate us (men in skirts) from "crossdressers". I know that "to crossdress", means quite broadly "to wear the clothes intended for the opposite sex", thus most of us here do it all the time, yet I do not agree with that definition. To me, crossdressers seek to impersonate women and we do not.

I do not think that transgender women are crossdressers either as the identify as women and are not simply trying to impersonate one. But that's just my thoughts on it. Doesn't change what is.
skirts4me wrote: However, many of us, in our work and personal life, have to relate to other people who do not wish to associate with someone dressed inappropriately (in their eyes), so exercising our right to choose what we wear can have negative consequences. If I were to turn up in a skirt, preparing to give a talk to oil executives, I wouldn't be allowed near the presentation area, even though such discrimination is technically illegal. If I turned up in a skirt to provide pastoral care for a family about to lose a loved one, I'm fairly sure the encounter would not be pleasant for someone not used to me being so attired - even though there are no legal or ethical reasons why I shouldn't wear skirts.
This is true, of course, under the "common vision" we are dealing in hypothetical situations. If the bulk of society fell under the "zero to one" category it wouldn't matter anyway because a skirt wouldn't have the submissive and feminine stigma it carries now. Of course, wearing some boho-gypsy skirt (the type I wear some times) would probably be inappropriate if I were a top ranking board executive negotiating all matters of big business, or even a car salesman, however many of the outfits that "Mark as in Mark" wear I I might consider a sort of "skirting power outfit" might work better. The boho skirt would also have the same effect with women, and this is true even in the present day. How often do you see women of power and authority show up in some frilly lacey, or hippie style skirt or sun dress? If it's not an outright power suit, it's a least something more business professional. I think it comes down to "fun clothes" and "serious clothes". I have no problem with this, that being a distinction between something one wears just for fun, and other outfits when an element of professionalism is called for.. I Just don't think gender should come into the equation. This also applies to matters of safety. In my line of work a skirt is just downright inappropriate for men and women. In fact, this new job has us wearing fire rated clothing, a fabric I'd imagine few skirts are made of.
kilty wrote:It is very few who have been able to just wear a skirt / dress with minimal social impact or have to deal with flak from others, ie teasing, puzzled looks, social exclusion, issues with work and HR etc. We try to tough it out and "unsee" them, the way they might wish to "unsee" us.
Also true, and I suppose this is it might be argued that a man in a skirt has no place in a position of power, but remember, under the hypothetical situation, if most of society fell in the zero to one range, it wouldn't matter. We need to separate the human from the clothes. We run into problems today because the skirt is considered a garment of submission and femininity. This mentality applies to both women and especially men. Women who wear PJ's the the store, and men who sag their pants below their asses garner more overall respect in society than most men in skirts do. Why? Because women who wear PJ's in public look easy, and men love an easy girl. Men who sag look like thugs, and women love thugs. I'm sure assumptions of well endowment comes into the equation. I'm sure it's all about sex appeal.... it's always about sex appeal... :roll: I used to think only men were obsessed with getting laid, then I heard women speaking freely on the subject.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Common Vision

Post by oldsalt1 »

ZERO = an end to the association of gender and clothing. There is no such thing as male/masculine/female/feminine clothing any more. Anyone can wear anything without the slightest stigma. It is just as natural to put a boy in a pretty summer dress as it is to put a girl in a tee-shirt and jeans; it is just as natural for a man to turn up for work in a pencil skirt, tights and high-heels as it is for a woman to wear slacks, shirt and tie.

I think that I am closer to this point.

However I would like some items to be designed to better fit the male figure. Especially dresses where the shoulders and usually the arms are way too small for the male figure. While everything doesn't have to be specifically designed as male or female the size marking should be able to relate better. or possible dual marking example you pick up a skirt and it is marked "womens large mens 34"
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by crfriend »

moonshadow wrote:I'm sure it's all about sex appeal.... it's always about sex appeal... :roll: I used to think only men were obsessed with getting laid, then I heard women speaking freely on the subject.
Men are stereotypically equated with being all about sex, but believe me, women can be even more so -- and aren't ashamed about it. This can, of course, cause all manner of problems in relationships, and from personal experience and observation more women engage in outside-the-main-relationship sexual antics than do men. The potential cost to the man is very high and for the woman virtually nil [0] which encourages libertine behaviour.

As far as PJs and droopy-drawers go, I'd posit that it's not about sex at all but rather about slovenliness and overt laziness. They simply can't be bothered -- and neither is attractive: more like sleazy.


[0] This is slightly less true in the modern era what with the lovely assortment of sexually-transmitted diseases running around, but it's the financial aspect usually makes men keep their heads down. One mistake can ruin a guy for life financially.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote:As far as PJs and droopy-drawers go, I'd posit that it's not about sex at all but rather about slovenliness and overt laziness. They simply can't be bothered -- and neither is attractive: more like sleazy.
Not attractive? Perhaps to people like you and I, and other men of class, however to the masses, "sleazy is eazy" [0] and I believe most men "would hit that" [1], (to use a term from my generation, and the millennials).

[0] Misspelling is intentional here for effect

[1] For those of you who don't know, to say "I'd hit that" is another expression for saying you'd have sex with the person in question. However, given the culture we are discussing here, chances are after the sexual activity, matters of domestic violence are probable, especially when the babys daddy comes home to find his woman in bed with the thug she picked up at the bus station, so the traditional meaning may also apply.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by crfriend »

moonshadow wrote:Not attractive? Perhaps to people like you and I, and other men of class, however to the masses, "sleazy is eazy" [0] and I believe most men "would hit that"[. ...]
Be careful of what you fish for. You may catch it. (with all meanings of "catch" in play)
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote:
moonshadow wrote:Not attractive? Perhaps to people like you and I, and other men of class, however to the masses, "sleazy is eazy" [0] and I believe most men "would hit that"[. ...]
Be careful of what you fish for. You may catch it. (with all meanings of "catch" in play)
HA! touché! :P :wink:

To which there's another maxim of the good ole boys and rednecks... "remember son, better wrap it in latex, or she'll getcha paychex!"

A little crass? Yes. Politically incorrect? Oh hell yeah... but wisdom no less! 8) :lol:
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
JohnH
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1013
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:46 am
Location: Irving, Texas USA

Re: Common Vision

Post by JohnH »

skirts4me wrote:I have always held the belief that clothing is functional, not sexual, but it needs to be styled according the body shape of the wearer. I know plenty of men who are big enough on top for a bra to be helpful, and I know plenty of women who are so small that a bra is useless.
There are some men, including myself, who should wear bras. It's one thing to see breasts jiggling on cute young women, but it's disgusting to see the jiggle on older men.

John
Happy-N-Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:39 pm

Re: Common Vision

Post by Happy-N-Skirts »

I like practical and functional. I wear short skirts around the house because of the comfort and freedom. I wear them when checking the mail.
I wear skirts for hiking because of the unlimited stride, ventilation, comfort and freedom. I think skirts should be marketed to hikers, walkers, and outdoorsmen.
I drove six hours to a meeting, stayed overnight, and returned while wearing a skirt. Freedom and comfort plus the ability to pull the skirt up for sunshine and air conditioning. Much better than being sweaty and having my crotch squished. It is very easy to adjust "things" while wearing a skirt.
I stopped for lunch, gas, and a little shopping along the way. I think those are appropriate occasions for wearing a garment that allows the comfort of skirts. My skirts look "masculine" in the fact that they resemble shorts, and there is very little difference between shorts and skirts.
Kilty
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:47 pm

Re: Common Vision

Post by Kilty »

oldsalt1 wrote:ZERO = an end to the association of gender and clothing. There is no such thing as male/masculine/female/feminine clothing any more. Anyone can wear anything without the slightest stigma. It is just as natural to put a boy in a pretty summer dress as it is to put a girl in a tee-shirt and jeans; it is just as natural for a man to turn up for work in a pencil skirt, tights and high-heels as it is for a woman to wear slacks, shirt and tie.

I think that I am closer to this point.

However I would like some items to be designed to better fit the male figure. Especially dresses where the shoulders and usually the arms are way too small for the male figure. While everything doesn't have to be specifically designed as male or female the size marking should be able to relate better. or possible dual marking example you pick up a skirt and it is marked "womens large mens 34"
Pencil skirts look great as they are comfortable, practical for work as there's not lots of material to deal with when you sit down (which makes it great when you need to lift it up to pee as well), a well placed vent for ease of movement as well as showing some leg if one wishes... UK Political activist Eddie Izzard loves his
0363e6de9d3c0cc02c666a30ec6b03cb.jpg
and I saw a guy on the internet who was showing what he wears to his office
fddddcc43683ca00e0bf067404f1e0ca.jpg
a great picture as plum is such a bold colour. But no mistaking him for a guy!

This type of skirt just looks great, some may find then tight or restrictive, but I find them snug and practical but we all have our choices :wink:
Gordon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Western Washington, USA

Re: Common Vision

Post by Gordon »

Kilty
I followed Crystal James too till she dropped off the web. I hope she's doing ok.
-----------------------------
Namaste,
Gordon
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Common Vision

Post by Jim »

JohnH wrote:
skirts4me wrote:I have always held the belief that clothing is functional, not sexual, but it needs to be styled according to the body shape of the wearer. I know plenty of men who are big enough on top for a bra to be helpful, and I know plenty of women who are so small that a bra is useless.
There are some men, including myself, who should wear bras. It's one thing to see breasts jiggling on cute young women, but it's disgusting to see the jiggle on older men.

John
My opinion differs. I think letting everyone jiggle naturally is best.
Kilty
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:47 pm

Re: Common Vision

Post by Kilty »

Gordon wrote:Kilty
I followed Crystal James too till she dropped off the web. I hope she's doing ok.
Hopefully, I guess she reached a point where once the transition was made, there's no need to show your daily life as a woman, and your cute dresses. The Lookbook pics were great, some transition and just get on with life with new supporting friends, others sadly realize it was not for them and it ends very badly after losing support of your nearest and dearest (see Caitlyn Jenner), while some others demand everyone recognizes their new life and forces it on others by talking about misgendering etc (India Willoughby, Celebrity Big Brother 2018) ...

There was a guy from Holland who used to post here who transitioned, also there was a guy who had his flickr page on here around 2009 who did stand up comedy who I now think is a woman. Still, each to their own, for those not going down that path you may just get bored of posting what skirt you wore that day, as it becomes as natural as wearing jeans.

I have no edit function in my profile so I have to think what I post which hinders me from posting much, so easier forums are where I'm at right now.

Still, blogs like New Male Fashion and instagram or tumblr searches for #menskirt shows there's countless more out there that aren't here :mrgreen:
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Common Vision

Post by moonshadow »

I guess unless you kept in touch with Crystal, it's hard to say what happened to her. I know when I had my old facebook account, she was on it, and I believe she had minor dramas here and there (job losses, occasional friction with the friends and family, etc), really about what you'd expect. When you think about it, the decision to transition to a different gender is a pretty big and jarring one. Hell, people who know me personally still can't fathom that I'm just a "man in a dress", can you imagine the trouble they'd have wrapping their mind around me if I told them I was going to be a woman??

A while back I did wonder if I was going down that road, but decided it was much easier to just be me. I'd say if I did hypothetically transition all the way, we'd just have to leave here. It's hard enough for a straight white Christian guy to find a good job in these parts, the odds of finding gainful employment and thus having a somewhat normal American lifestyle diminish when one deviates from any of the characteristics I just mentioned.

At any rate, I'm sure she's surviving. She'll be fine as long as she doesn't allow herself to become a "victim". Once you allow yourself to become a victim the system has you now, and all hope is lost.
kilty wrote:India Willoughby, Celebrity Big Brother 2018
Never heard of it... (had to google it)

You know, is it any coincidence that I discovered the joys and pleasures of skirt wearing while I was disconnected from the world of mass media? That's right, no TV or internet (save for a couple gigs on my phone each month) for two years. It's amazing what the mind conjures up when you're not being told how to THINK by that damned flickering box!

Since July of 2017 we have been without TV service again, and it looks like I'm not missing much...
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Post Reply