Here is some interesting reading

[Pythos]

I found this today, thought it would be interesting to read some history concerning pants...and women wearing them.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... tml?cat=46

[DALederle]

I'm sorry Pythos! But that article is highly inaccurate!
Bloomers were a form of petti-pants and worn under a woman's skirts and petticoats. They were, basically, underwear, a foruner to underpants for women, which is a very recent historical item.
The mention of women during a world war wearing pants to go work in factories is something that occured in WWII, not WWI.
I'm going to go back and look at this again. But the author needs to do more research on his/her chosen subject.

Dennis A. Lederle

Grok?

[Gmerc]

Thanks for that, it was interesting reading - speaking, as it does, from a similar position to several posts I've read here, but looking at the debate from another direction. I don't have a full grasp of the history of this debate, so hearing another view is always interesting even if, as Dennis says, the facts may not be 100% right - I bow to his greater knowledge.

As for the comments... oh dear... oh dear. I think it is a long time since I have read so much rant so rarely peppered with reason & intelligence. Right from my first post here, I've made it clear I'm a practising christian & happy to be so but I am truly saddened by some of the responses (pro & anti) to the article, which seem harsh & condemning. If they are that steamed up about women in trousers, one would fear heart attacks & strokes being the result of seeing a man in a skirt!

Just to put another side to the story, since I started to be more open about my liking for wearing skirts, the response from my church leaders & christian friends has been accepting, supportive &, thankfully, questioning as well; they have made me think through my choices carefully & that has given me a deeper understanding of the thoughts & feelings that underpin this choice. No one has condemned me, even if they do not fully understand the whys & wherefores of what I do - even though the brand of church I attend could get very sniffy, they have chosen not to. I am valued for being me, for what I bring to the congregation & not for my toeing a rigid doctrinal line or accepting a certain, terminally dull, uk blokey style of dress.

OK, back to the article & thread. One of the things that intrigued me was the seeming unwillingness of people to actually listen to what other folk were saying. Conversation does not consist of each person restating their position with increased volume while jamming their fingers further down their own ears. I have read much here that I am not in accord with & I'm sure some have read my posts & decided they & I have little in common, other than a liking for monotubular clothing but no one has given me any grief over my postings (think I may have to duck now - just in case).

A forum is surely a place for debate rather than smacking each other with prejudice or exhibiting our own insecurities by trying to make everyone the same as ourselves. I am unique, there is only one me (here the world draws a collective sigh of relief) & when I am gone there will be a Graham shaped gap in the world that no one else can fill. I'm not Pythos or Dennis & they are not me but we all have value - as do the rest of you - something many of the postees/ers (of all the die hard opinions expressed) on the thread may actually struggle with.

Onward & Upward! Confusion the the enemy! Frocks for everybody!

Graham

[Charlie]

One of the comment is "if men can wear wat (sic) ever they want so can we!!!!!!!!!!" If only!!
Having said that, we can wear what we want - but most men choose not to because of ... fear?

Charlie

[Mindermast]

not sure if this is more accurate, but another interesting read:

http://www.fashionencyclopedia.com/fash ... Women.html
one quote from the first lines: "Throughout much of Western history, women's clothing has been very different from men's clothing, and society has made strict rules requiring individuals to dress according to their gender." I am not an expert, but this looks correct to me.

I think, one important milestone for women wearing trousers was the "wild 20s", where western women started to go berserk about their public appearance and really got noticed. From there, it took another 50 years perhaps, until women in trousers were considered normal.

[DALederle]

Okay, I may be wrong! I never read anywhere that in WWI women wore pants when working in factories. No where in my own history have I ever heard this before. My family did a lot of common labor jobs, from working in various factories to shops, like my grandfather's harness and bridle shop. They always wore their skirts and dresses until WWII came along. I seen pictures of women in factories during both World Wars, both from the US and Europe but it picture women in dresses up until WWII and then the women in pants scenes I've found showed US women in pants, but not over in Europe, were German and British women in pictures I've seen were in dresses of one sort or another.
But that doesn't make me the final word on this or any other subject.
If anyone can find more authoritive items on this subject I'd like to read them.
Even within my own family it was a common thought that WWII was the breakout time for women wearing pants.
Anyone one with other sources on this question.
I still think the first article was poorly researched and not very good as far as it went.

Dennis A. Lederle
Grok?

[Since1982]

Wrong war, Dennis...World War Two is when women wore coveralls to work in factories, Typical khaki "farmer john" style coveralls were the most popular. Pants as a garment were not worn by them. The "coveralls" were more like a dress than any other pants / shirt combination could be and since women of the time wore dresses far more than skirts, moving to "Farmer Johns" was a much easier choice.

[Pythos]

Dorry dennis. I have seen old news reel of WWI aircraft factories where JN 4 jennys are being assembled, and the women are indeed in wide legged trousers. Long skirts at such a place would be far too dangerous. So yes, during WWI at least some women in factories have worn trousers.