Two books that might be interesting to read

[Coder]

Terrible post title, but it is what it is.

There are two books I have on my "list" - haven't gotten to read them yet but I ran across an article that describes both and figured it would be of interest to those here:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... -lululemon

Both Ford and Chrisman-Campbell make much of recent GQ features on men wearing skirts and ponder whether this will lead to the un-gendering of dress in general. But I highly doubt whether your average plumber in Ohio is clamoring to wear a skirt simply because a GQ editor decrees it from on high.

The books:

Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History; By Richard Thompson Ford; Simon & Schuster; 464 pp

Skirts: Fashioning Modern Femininity in the Twentieth Century; By Kimberly Chrisman-Campbell; St. Martin's Press; 272 pp

[crfriend]

Thank you much for that link, Coder. It speaks volumes in many dimensions.

I particularly like this bit:

Dressing well isn’t only about respectability politics but the politics of self-respect. We need a return — if not to big codpiece energy, then to anything that will save us from the scourge of athleisure. “Are yoga pants,” Ford asks, “really all that sexy?” The answer is a resounding no. So make a different choice: These days, sartorial rigor is an act of subversion.

How true that is -- and that is one place we -- as Men In Skirts" -- fit in spectacularly. We may commit gaffes now and then, but for the most part may, just possibly, be the hard nose -- the tungsten point if you will -- of the wedge that will finally make things right again.

[Daryl]

Thank you much for that link, Coder. It speaks volumes in many dimensions.

I particularly like this bit:

Dressing well isn’t only about respectability politics but the politics of self-respect. We need a return — if not to big codpiece energy, then to anything that will save us from the scourge of athleisure. “Are yoga pants,” Ford asks, “really all that sexy?” The answer is a resounding no. So make a different choice: These days, sartorial rigor is an act of subversion.

How true that is -- and that is one place we -- as Men In Skirts" -- fit in spectacularly. We may commit gaffes now and then, but for the most part may, just possibly, be the hard nose -- the tungsten point if you will -- of the wedge that will finally make things right again.

I for one enjoy dressing a little "better" whether in women's clothes or (very rarely anymore) in men's clothes. I don't view it as an act of vanity. I don't really think about it, actually, but on self-reflection it's more like taking a posture of respect, putting out the effort, and so on. I don't dress for others, to "impress" anyone, nor to signal anything other than, I suppose, having my **** together enough to think about what I am wearing.

[crfriend]

I for one enjoy dressing a little "better" whether in women's clothes or (very rarely anymore) in men's clothes. I don't view it as an act of vanity. I don't really think about it, actually, but on self-reflection it's more like taking a posture of respect, putting out the effort, and so on. I don't dress for others, to "impress" anyone, nor to signal anything other than, I suppose, having my **** together enough to think about what I am wearing.

I have taken to this tactic as well, partly as a result of my own internal outlook, and partly to poke a stick in the hideous world of shredded denim, black yoga pants, and general brutalist (as in the architectural sense) styles of today. I figure if it makes even one person smile it'll have been worthwhile as a relief from the utter sartorial desert we're trapped in, and in the worst case, it can't do any harm.

[FLbreezy]

But I highly doubt whether your average plumber in Ohio is clamoring to wear a skirt simply because a GQ editor decrees it from on high. A much more salient trend to discuss would be the shameful masking of workers and servers in an age of populist revolt and the class structure this practice seeks to uphold.

Allrightythen!

[Coder]

But I highly doubt whether your average plumber in Ohio is clamoring to wear a skirt simply because a GQ editor decrees it from on high. A much more salient trend to discuss would be the shameful masking of workers and servers in an age of populist revolt and the class structure this practice seeks to uphold.

Allrightythen!

It’s a political newspaper, I think it leans right, hence the anti-mask bias.

Honestly, masking while skirting really helped me ease into unmasked skirt life.

[FLbreezy]

Honestly, masking while skirting really helped me ease into unmasked skirt life.

I never really thought of that before, but I think it helped me as well.

[ScotL]

But I highly doubt whether your average plumber in Ohio is clamoring to wear a skirt simply because a GQ editor decrees it from on high. A much more salient trend to discuss would be the shameful masking of workers and servers in an age of populist revolt and the class structure this practice seeks to uphold.

Allrightythen!

It’s a political newspaper, I think it leans right, hence the anti-mask bias.

Honestly, masking while skirting really helped me ease into unmasked skirt life.

Ha! I’ve had the exact same experience. Hat, sunglasses and mask and who could tell you from Adam?!

[Dust]

So I've been reading the book by Ford, mentioned above. Some interesting stuff. I want to argue with the author occasionally, but overall a good read so far. Apparently there was a men's dress reform movement in there 1920's:

The reformers insisted that men's clothing was physically and psychologically damaging... Starched collars were uncomfortable, suit coats were hot, trousers impeded movement, underwear cut off circulation, and the dream colors of masculine apparel had a "depressing effect." As a consequence, men were "hot, uncomfortable, tired and bad tempered." In place of these oppressive garments, the reformers advocated blouses with soft collars, worn with loosely knotted scarves, and - instead of long trousers - skirts, kilts, or short pants. They advised that costs and hats were to be worn only as needed to protect against cold or rain.

Of course, it is noted later that this went nowhere. The claim was that menswear was "keeping the social fabric together." There was even a debate on the matter, where the following is reported to have been said:

"The man who, alone in the jungle, changes into his dinner jacket does so to convince himself that he is not a savage - soft, floppy clothes are symbolic of a soft, floppy race... [the] sturdy and virile man [is] capable of withstanding the rigors of a stiff shirt."

[Fred in Skirts]

So I've been reading the book by Ford, mentioned above. Some interesting stuff. I want to argue with the author occasionally, but overall a good read so far. Apparently there was a men's dress reform movement in there 1920's:

The reformers insisted that men's clothing was physically and psychologically damaging... Starched collars were uncomfortable, suit coats were hot, trousers impeded movement, underwear cut off circulation, and the dream colors of masculine apparel had a "depressing effect." As a consequence, men were "hot, uncomfortable, tired and bad tempered." In place of these oppressive garments, the reformers advocated blouses with soft collars, worn with loosely knotted scarves, and - instead of long trousers - skirts, kilts, or short pants. They advised that costs and hats were to be worn only as needed to protect against cold or rain.

Of course, it is noted later that this went nowhere. The claim was that menswear was "keeping the social fabric together." There was even a debate on the matter, where the following is reported to have been said:

"The man who, alone in the jungle, changes into his dinner jacket does so to convince himself that he is not a savage - soft, floppy clothes are symbolic of a soft, floppy race... [the] sturdy and virile man [is] capable of withstanding the rigors of a stiff shirt."

That is one of the reasons that I do not agree with the idea that the clothes make the man theory. The man makes the clothes!!!
My take is restricting style clothes restrict the man and all of his ideas. When I worked in an office I had to wear a tie, I could not stand it at all and would pull on it and loosen it and get yelled at because it looked sloppy. When I got out of that office I burned all of my ties and never looked back. The same idea happened when I decided that I would never wear trousers again, I do not have a single pair in my house. I wear skirts and dresses to do everything I have to do. I wear them to funerals and weddings, birthday parties etc. We as MEN do not need trousers since we don't ride horses any more and we don't need neckties either since we seldom hang anyone these days.

Fred

[crfriend]

We as MEN do not need trousers since we don't ride horses any more and we don't need neckties either since we seldom hang anyone these days.

Every so often I will occasionally "stir the pot" (which I am infamous for doing) and show up in public in full-blown Corporate attire. This might seem odd because of my ponytail, but I did full-on Corporate for years with that ponytail (which was a lot fuller then than it is now!). The results are, sadly, predictable. The women fawn over me and lavish me with praise about "how good I look", but that's just part of trying to shove me back into the box. It's also a statement of overt power. Even in a very soft rig I am "somebody to reckon with"; in full-blown Corporate mode I scare people.

So, I keep a couple of pairs of trousers around, and I've got an amazing collection of ties, which I have been known to wear whilst wearing a skirt below. Done properly, ties do not strangle in the least -- and can look really, really sharp with a skirt-rig.

[Myopic Bookworm]

I find that a tie is generally no problem if you have a collar that fits properly (and is designed to be worn with a tie). For those who wish to keep a masculine vibe when wearing a skirt, a tie can be a very useful accessory. (My 14-year-old has just inherited some rather ugly vintage ties from his grandfather, and is wearing them with great enthusiasm. Ties are cool!)

[Fred in Skirts]

One of the reasons I do not wear ties and hate doing so is when I was a small boy ( O Lord that was almost a thousand years ago!) I was playing in a tree with some friends and we had some rope. Well I slipped and fell the rope got caught around my throat and I was left hanging with my toes just touching the ground. The rope was pulled tight but I could still breath (barely) as long as I stood on my tip toes. My so called friends ran away and did not tell anyone I was hanging there. I was there for about an hour before some one came along and saw me, cut me down and called for an ambulance and my parents. And since then anything that was around my neck was not welcome. I hated going to church because I had to wear a tie, and no one would listen to me about how much I felt like I was hanging again.

The other reason is I can't stand being in starched shirts and collars.
Now every one go get a cold one from the fridge and relax.