Men's Dress Reform Party

[ChristopherJ]

I've just got a book out of the library on fashion in the UK between the wars (WW1 and WW2).

Lots of interesting stuff - but I was particularly fascinated to read of the Men's Dress Reform Party - which "attempted to extend many of the Bohemian ideals of the late 19th century aesthetic dress for men, such as loose open-necked shirts, on the grounds that they were healthier than stiff collars and three-piece suits. In addition, they tried to encourage the wearing of shorts for everyday wear, including office work".

These people would be wearing skirts today!

Here's a photo . . . I can identify with this guy so much. As he walks down the street and EVERYONE is staring at him. Because he is wearing . . . . shorts!

And all the other men are dressed in grey drab drabness . . . .

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1372/120 ... c5.jpg?v=0

"With shorts for men strictly for beach or countryside rambles, it is little wonder that this supporter of the Men's Dress Reform Party won few converts on his stroll down London's Strand in July 1930."

[ChristopherJ]

Ooooooooooh . . . .

I just stuck the 'Men's Dress Reform Party' into Google to see what came up - and I found this very interesting paper - written in 1930 - taken from a book entitled: THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CLOTHES.

It's VERY good - take a look:

http://www.charlie.tcwirefree.co.uk/psychology.htm

I recognise the website! Maybe others here do as well.

[Skirt Chaser]

Charlie! What a fun article to delve into. So much remains unchanged in 77 years. Other things were so off and even comical. The links purported to prove narcissism leads to homosexuality are just wacky.

The fact that nonconformity in clothes tends naturally to express nonconformity in social and political thought.

I think this gets to the heart of part of the unspoken risk about different clothing styles, it is showing off more than a clothing choice. If you don't accept arbitrary clothing guidelines you probably don't buy as easily into other things as well.

In conformity with the ruling convention that woman is beautiful and man is not, there has grown up a very considerable intolerance of the male body; the characteristic signs of maleness, e.g. the greater hairiness, muscularity, and angularity, are in some ways much more apt to arouse embarrassment or repulsion than is the rounder and smoother (and of course much more familiar) female form.

We certainly have this problem lingering today when men are encouraged to pluck their body hair to be presentable.

There's other good stuff like the idea that manufacturers just don't know how to make any other styles for men so they keep producing the same designs over and over. I also think there is a lot of truth to women not being the force of opposition to a loosening of what is considered appropriate for men.

The fact that here, as elsewhere, men punish those who dare to do what they themselves would like to do but dare not.

That is straight out of Christopher's recent encounter with the man who wanted to dress differently yet his first comment about Christopher's mini-skirt was negative.

Most men of the upper social classes experience a curious feeling of guilt and embarrassment if surprised by a woman without a collar and tie or in their shirt-sleeves.

That one is just plain funny in these casual days, it has been a while since tieless has been synonymous with practically naked. Yet at the same time the feeling of unease does apply to many men trying to get used to being seen in a skirt.

Wonderful, meaty reading. Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Christopher.

Quiet Mouse

[iain]

Fantastic article. You can see how the mind in those times was able to assemble a forceful opinion by knitting together many diverse aspects and find the unifying thread. I've read some books and works from the late 1800's and the whole approach is so different from today! Rather than a long rant, you have someone calmly using logic like a battering ram.

Really great article!