Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context. This is NOT about transvestism or crossdressing.
jamodu
Active Member
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:15 pm

Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by jamodu »

Out shopping this week, I stumbled on 'Boyfriend Pyjamas'. These were obviously in a Men's style, fashioned for Women's proportions. On past occasions, I have similarly seen 'Boyfriend Cardigans', 'Boyfriend Shirts' and 'Boyfriend Shorts' (underwear). On the radio today, some young Girl, on discovering a pair of Shorts that she wanted to buy, was informed that the style was for Boys only. Her response was to state that it was 'sexist' for the aforementioned Shorts to be only available for the opposite gender.

This is another example of double-standards in society and in the fashion industry. For the sake of equality, how about 'Girlfriend Skirts', Girlfriend Dresses' and 'Girlfriend Tights', for example, being similarly available for Men to buy?
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2139
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Bloomington MN USA

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by r.m.anderson »

jamodu wrote:Out shopping this week, I stumbled on 'Boyfriend Pyjamas'. These were obviously in a Men's style, fashioned for Women's proportions. On past occasions, I have similarly seen 'Boyfriend Cardigans', 'Boyfriend Shirts' and 'Boyfriend Shorts' (underwear). On the radio today, some young Girl, on discovering a pair of Shorts that she wanted to buy, was informed that the style was for Boys only. Her response was to state that it was 'sexist' for the aforementioned Shorts to be only available for the opposite gender.

This is another example of double-standards in society and in the fashion industry. For the sake of equality, how about 'Girlfriend Skirts', Girlfriend Dresses' and 'Girlfriend Tights', for example, being similarly available for Men to buy?

There are "Boy Friend" jeans cut to fit the low waist and hips just a pinch larger than that.
I have had them in the past but kilts and skirts (skorts) are my forte now.

That girl buying those shorts should have ignored the Boys Only quip - if it is fair for us to cross the aisle to find clothing that we cater to -
why not the reverse and that is not perverse ! Certain items of clothing excepted befitting unique to the sex (bras).
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Sinned »

Don't let JohnH say that bras are unique to the female sex lol! Anyway there are plenty of men with gynowhatever that probably should wear bras due to breast growth. I am not unique in have some small boobs but probably not enough to wear a bra ( yet ). It's natural for men to have slightly developed breasts as they get older - it's just that some are luckier ( or unluckier ) to have bigger boobs than others. Do I wish that mine were bigger? Perhaps, maybe just a little bit more but certainly not DD's. I don't know.
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.
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2716
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by dillon »

jamodu wrote:Out shopping this week, I stumbled on 'Boyfriend Pyjamas'. These were obviously in a Men's style, fashioned for Women's proportions. On past occasions, I have similarly seen 'Boyfriend Cardigans', 'Boyfriend Shirts' and 'Boyfriend Shorts' (underwear). On the radio today, some young Girl, on discovering a pair of Shorts that she wanted to buy, was informed that the style was for Boys only. Her response was to state that it was 'sexist' for the aforementioned Shorts to be only available for the opposite gender.

This is another example of double-standards in society and in the fashion industry. For the sake of equality, how about 'Girlfriend Skirts', Girlfriend Dresses' and 'Girlfriend Tights', for example, being similarly available for Men to buy?
The double standard will continue as long as we allow it. The problem is that women care more about chasing that which was once reserved for men than men do about chasing that which has mainly been reserved for women. That is men’s collective decision - and loss. It says that male sexism still exists in the same proportion as male gender insecurity, conjoined twins.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
User avatar
JohnH
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 871
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:46 am
Location: Irving, Texas USA

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by JohnH »

Sinned wrote:Don't let JohnH say that bras are unique to the female sex lol!
:lol:

John
Gusto10
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 711
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Gusto10 »

jamodu wrote:Out shopping this week, I stumbled on 'Boyfriend Pyjamas'. These were obviously in a Men's style, fashioned for Women's proportions. On past occasions, I have similarly seen 'Boyfriend Cardigans', 'Boyfriend Shirts' and 'Boyfriend Shorts' (underwear). On the radio today, some young Girl, on discovering a pair of Shorts that she wanted to buy, was informed that the style was for Boys only. Her response was to state that it was 'sexist' for the aforementioned Shorts to be only available for the opposite gender.

This is another example of double-standards in society and in the fashion industry. For the sake of equality, how about 'Girlfriend Skirts', Girlfriend Dresses' and 'Girlfriend Tights', for example, being similarly available for Men to buy?
I guess that it will be the girlfriend who will say "no" if het boyfriend would decide to wear - if such a brand would exist - girlfriend jeans, shorts, boxers, whatever
Last edited by Gusto10 on Wed Feb 27, 2019 3:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Sinned »

A loser from the start. It starts with and has "girl" in the word. That will ignite the flames of male inferiority and insecurity in most fellows. "Oh yeah, I'm going to wear my girlfriend jeans [0], girlfriend T-shirt [1] or girlfriend kilt [2]." No, can't see your average chest-beating gorilla going for it.

[0] Either traditional girl jeans or girl jeans now designate boyfriend jeans and cut similar to men's jeans.
[1] How do you tell the difference in a true T-shirt, as opposed to other girl's short-sleeved tops except maybe by the lettering or logo on the front?
[2] Here I mean a kilt of any length that has pleats and a front apron irrespective of which side the opening is on. I know that women's kilts can be anywhere from ankle length to micro whereas men's kilt mostly are a standard knee-length. So as a rough calculation the chances of a man wearing a kilt would probably be inversely proportional to the distance the hem is from the kneecap in either direction. A suggested constant of proportionality of 20 should be about right. So a hem 5" above or below the knee would, for nearly all men, be 100% guaranteed not to be worn. Not perfect, I know, but you get the picture, right?
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
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2139
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Bloomington MN USA

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by r.m.anderson »

Hey take it easy there -

"I RESEMBLE THOSE REMARKS" !

1] How do you tell the difference in a true T-shirt, as opposed to other girl's short-sleeved tops except maybe by the lettering or logo on the front?

One way is the hem length (not planned to be tucked in)
Less material at waist (hour glass shaping)
Sleeve length - think sleeveless - cap sleeve - semi tank top
The collar is wider to allow hair styles to be unruffled in pulling on the shirt (aka blouse)
Henley or polo shirts with reverse button plackets
Lace or detailed trim on sleeves collar
MORE - - -

[2] Here I mean a kilt of any length that has pleats and a front apron irrespective of which side the opening is on. I know that women's kilts can be anywhere from ankle length to micro whereas men's kilt mostly are a standard knee-length. So as a rough calculation the chances of a man wearing a kilt would probably be inversely proportional to the distance the hem is from the kneecap in either direction. A suggested constant of proportionality of 20 should be about right. So a hem 5" above or below the knee would, for nearly all men, be 100% guaranteed not to be worn. Not perfect, I know, but you get the picture, right?

I have 2 regulation formal kilts with the knee length parameter measurement.
Also casual kilts with 19 to 16 inch hems and a few at 14 inches and 2 at 12 inches - yes pushing the envelope but damn the dress codes !
Who wrote the dress code bible anyway ? Someone evicted from the Garden of Eden that could only find fashion with fig leafs.
Kilts usually have pleats but the utilitarian type don't necessary have some or any pleats - some replaced with cargo pockets fixed and detachable.

I throw the rule book away - a kilt is a man's skirt - got that - and whatever length (hem) it is still going to be a man's skirt.
Admittedly the fair lassie is more attractive in some of the shorter versions but that is an opinionated view point.
What compliments the kilt in jackets - tops and footwear can do a lot making a statement about the man's skirt.

Those boyfriend jeans are nothing more than men's (boys) jeans with enhancements to fit the female frame - maybe the fabric is lighter in weight
or has a degree more spandex for custom fitting; but it is the same 5 pocket design with the inseam length maybe shorter riding lower off the hips.
Nothing to prevent guys from wearing guys jeans designed for gals except the precise fitting of the curves.
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
Darryl
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:32 am
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Darryl »

Well...I try not to wear anything below the knee, though I have a summer weight midi and a maxi in the closet. Generally knee-length or just barely below the knees and I'm pretty certain I've gone up to 4" above the knee. Will pull out a ruler tonight or tomorrow and do some measuring.

Some fine day I'm going to find a micro-mini and a mini in my size (22-24) and while that is no guarantee I will wear them in public, the possibility DOES exist....for the mini. Depends on what I and a friend can see (or not) as I move about. I'm also in the market for a nice tunic or dress that would be either mini-length or an inch or two below. I'll probably have to visit Torrid and some of the other shops for the younger set for that quest.

Edit:

Yup, three of my favorites run to 4" above the knee. My salt-and-pepper skirt is 5" above the knee and I got that from Torrid. All else from Lane Bryant, including the skort I call my 'running skirt' which has been worn in Iroquois and Cherokee parks as well as the St. Matthews 5k and it is at 4.5" with an outer shell that is a thin mesh that offers the hint of being see-thru, all black with thin white stripes down the sides...and pockets!

It is also a given that I am in some kind of legwear: support hose, tights and/or leggings depending on the weather.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Sinned »

hey, rma, I've started to wear tops like those, sleeveless, camis, shorter, wider neck, scalloped hem. Sorry, I didn't realise that they were meant for the fairer sex LOL. In fact, camis are now my favourite top for warmer weather.
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
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2139
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Bloomington MN USA

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by r.m.anderson »

Sinned wrote:hey, rma, I've started to wear tops like those, sleeveless, camis, shorter, wider neck, scalloped hem. Sorry, I didn't realise that they were meant for the fairer sex LOL. In fact, camis are now my favourite top for warmer weather.
"FORMERLY" worn by the fairer sex -
women in pants
men in skirts
crossing the aisle fair game

ONLY thing is some clothing fits some people better than others no matter what the labels description states !
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by moonshadow »

jamodu wrote: This is another example of double-standards in society and in the fashion industry. For the sake of equality, how about 'Girlfriend Skirts', Girlfriend Dresses' and 'Girlfriend Tights', for example, being similarly available for Men to buy?
I can't see many investors going for that.... and rightfully so, those things would just sit on the shelves.

Besides, its rather unnecessary anyway. Most female clothes will fit a good number of men if sized properly, those that don't can be easily modified by an experienced taylor.
User avatar
mishawakaskirt
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2015 9:59 pm
Location: Mishawaka, INDIANA USA
Contact:

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by mishawakaskirt »

Sinned wrote:A loser from the start. It starts with and has "girl" in the word. That will ignite the flames of male inferiority and insecurity in most fellows. "Oh yeah, I'm going to wear my girlfriend jeans [0], girlfriend T-shirt [1] or girlfriend kilt [2]." No, can't see your average chest-beating gorilla going for it.

[0] Either traditional girl jeans or girl jeans now designate boyfriend jeans and cut similar to men's jeans........
I have to agree Sinned. put girl, girl friend, lady, or woman in the name and it's a instant loser. Love the chest beating gorillas comment.

I know many that have trouble with adding man to a item. Eg man skirt, man bun, man bag. All kind of kill it for most men.

Skirt for now just has a feminine stigma.
What is the difference between a woman s skirt and a man's Skirt? What would it be made out of? Look like? A skirt is a tube with a hole in the top and one in the bottom. Nothing more.

The stigma is so strong if a man put on a self made black canvas skirt with dried mud, blood, motor oil, paint, a few lengths of chain. He would still be seen as having crossed the aisle for a womans Skirt.
Mishawakaskirt @2wayskirt on Twitter

Avoid the middle man, wear a kilt or skirt.
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2716
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by dillon »

I have to differ with Dennis. I found the term “girlfriend” an attractive nomenclature. Maybe because I like anything that sticks its finger in the eye of “the man.” It would attract me to the clothing, not for my orientation but for my contempt for conventionality. No balls, no glory.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Never-mind 'Boyfriend'. How about 'Girlfriend'?

Post by Sinned »

Yeah, dillon, I can see the attraction of the term "girlfriend" preceding something for such as us ( the converted ) but I still feel that to call a garment "girlfriend jeans", "girlfriend shirt" or "girlfriend skirt" would discourage your average man in the street from buying or even considering buying said article.n They would still consider it for the female as the "boyfriend" prefix is too new to have impinged the surface of their consciousness never mind achieved a deeper understanding of the concept of women wearing men's items deliberately marketed to women even though the items may be ever so slightly amended to appeal to the feminine market.
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.
Post Reply