Australian heatbusters

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

Australian heatbusters

Postby VoxClamantis » Sat Feb 17, 2018 4:07 pm

User avatar
VoxClamantis
Active Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Southeast USA

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Fred in Skirts » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:42 pm

:soapbox:
Having read the article I take umbridge with one thing he kept saying "MAN SKIRT".
It is either a skirt or it isn't. Skirts are unisex garments. There isn't anything called a "MAN SKIRT". :x :x
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: 1724
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby moonshadow » Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:29 am

Fred in Skirts wrote:It is either a skirt or it isn't. Skirts are unisex garments. There isn't anything called a "MAN SKIRT". :x :x


I do agree with you, but we all know there are a few out there who have might have their masculine ego's bruised if they call their "man skirt" what is is... a skirt... :wink:

Real men wear whatever they want, even if it's not the world approves of...

Pansies wear clothes only if the world applies the appropriate label!


Incidentally, I feel the same way about witches.... woman witches and man witches... a witch is a witch!

There's no such thing as a man witch, aside from Manwich™ but that's something you mix with ground beef for a quick and easy meal!

I like the patchwork skirt....
"We all have the tendency to make simple things difficult, but the spirit that abides within us achieves its own ends by making all difficult things simple."
-Manly Palmer Hall
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lebanon, Virginia

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby crfriend » Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:43 am

moonshadow wrote:Incidentally, I feel the same way about witches.... woman witches and man witches... a witch is a witch!

Do they both weigh the same as a duck and, hence, are made from wood, which is good for burning? {dives for cover so as not to be seen}
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby moonshadow » Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:50 am

crfriend wrote:
moonshadow wrote:Incidentally, I feel the same way about witches.... woman witches and man witches... a witch is a witch!

Do they both weigh the same as a duck and, hence, are made from wood, which is good for burning? {dives for cover so as not to be seen}


Which witch is good for burning? :lol: :wink:
"We all have the tendency to make simple things difficult, but the spirit that abides within us achieves its own ends by making all difficult things simple."
-Manly Palmer Hall
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lebanon, Virginia

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby denimini » Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:54 am

I hate this man-skirt term. Is that all it takes, print man-skirt on the label and men will start wearing them?
When I visited friends in Sydney who hadn't seen me in a skirt before, two separately commented on my 14" khaki denim mini without a pleat to be seen:
"Hmmm, kilt eh?"
I replied casually, "No, it is a mini skirt"

For goodness sake guys, call a skirt a skirt.

When women started wearing pants they didn't come up with a new term (lady-pants?), although "slacks" seemed to be used more for women and trousers wasn't.
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby VoxClamantis » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:44 am

LOL, DM. I've gotten the same "is that a kilt?" question and I always answer, "no, it's just a skirt." The interlocutor then usually falls silent.

You make a good (and humorous) observation as to the "lady-pants." Personally, though, if marketing man-skirts will bring the garment unto wider usage, I'd be totally ok with that. Just as "short pants" eventually became "shorts", I don't think it would take too many years for the "man-" to fall out of usage.
User avatar
VoxClamantis
Active Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Southeast USA

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Jim » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:53 am

If some are so unconfident in their desired masculinity as to need a "man-skirt", that's fine with me. After "man-skirts" become more common, we can start educating folk the term shows a lack of confidence. I don't even see "masculinity" as a desired trait, although I like the outdoors, fishing, fixing things and such.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby VoxClamantis » Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:14 pm

Now that I think on it a bit more, I suspect that "is that a kilt" is just a codeswitch for "is that a man-skirt." Code switching (a linguistic term) happens when speakers try to map one language on top of another. People may say "kilt" but aren't they really thinking "a skirt or skirt-like garment worn by men"? Anyone who knows what a kilt actually looks like would immediately be able to answer that question for themselves. So what they're doing is searching for a word to describe something that doesn't exist in their head. (One time a dude actually asked me if I was wearing a "quiche" but I knew he meant "kilt"!)
User avatar
VoxClamantis
Active Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Southeast USA

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Caultron » Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:19 pm

denimini wrote:?..Is that all it takes, print man-skirt on the label and men will start wearing them?...

For some people, especially beginners, it does make a difference. For example, they'll buy no-fly mantyhose for three times the price of pantyhose sold to women, despite the fact that the products are essentially identical.

Skirts for men might be slightly more marketable if they carried dual markings, such as, "Men's 34, Women's 16," on the size tag.
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby VoxClamantis » Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:22 pm

Caultron wrote:Skirts for men might be slightly more marketable if they carried dual markings, such as, "Men's 34, Women's 16," on the size tag.


Very, very perspicacious and very well said.

This forum needs a moderated topic listing those types of ideas and observations to empower and equip manufacturers and marketers to successfully launch a skirt line for men.
User avatar
VoxClamantis
Active Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Southeast USA

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Sinned » Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:55 pm

Caultron, it'll never happen. The clothing manufacturers can't even agree on what size 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 etc mean. And S, M, L, XL etc is even more vague. I have a wardrobe full of skirts varying i size from 8 ( elasticated waist ) to 20 ( a bit loose and needs a belt ) AND THEY ALL FIT!!!! I have a ( small ) number of black dresses of M, 16 and 18 in size and they all fit. Conversely I have trousers of 34 and 36 waist and they all fit, more or less. So how can they ever get together to get an agreement between men's and women's sizes.
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: 3175
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Caultron » Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:02 am

Sinned wrote:Caultron, it'll never happen. The clothing manufacturers can't even agree on what size 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 etc mean. And S, M, L, XL etc is even more vague. I have a wardrobe full of skirts varying i size from 8 ( elasticated waist ) to 20 ( a bit loose and needs a belt ) AND THEY ALL FIT!!!! I have a ( small ) number of black dresses of M, 16 and 18 in size and they all fit. Conversely I have trousers of 34 and 36 waist and they all fit, more or less. So how can they ever get together to get an agreement between men's and women's sizes.

Agreed, the meaning of 8, 10, 12..., and of S, M, L, XL, and even of 30, 32, 34... will likely never be standardized.

But I think just having Men's (gibberish), Women's (gibberish) on the tag or floor sign will, at least for some, partially legitimize the garment as being for men.
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Australian heatbusters

Postby Sinned » Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:33 am

Yeah, I suppose it will be a step in some direction or other. Probably not forwards, maybe sidewards of diagonally. Still a load of obfuscation I'll grant you that. As for the man-skirt business I don't care what they end up calling them ( and they will think up some fancy name to obscure what the garment really is ) as long as they get them on sale with the right design and at the right price. What is the right design? Well we've had this discussion before with some good ideas but only moderate consensus.
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: 3175
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England


Return to In the News / Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest