Are we engaging in fashion freedom?

[Ozdelights]

I'm not quite advocating a free for all - "there is a time and a place" for casual to formal wear.

This brings up another problem. Increasingly there's nothing but "casual" anywhere in general society, and this is having the effect of dumbing the population down in terms of understanding how to put good-looking outfits together.

And then it becomes complicated like 'All gentlemen must wear a coat and tie'. We shouldn't mandate a standard but it is right to 'inspire' people to be proud of their appearance.

Appropriate style for the situation. To me Volodymyr Zelenskyy's casual appearance is more appropriate and inspirational to his fellow citizens than appearing in a suit and tie or high ranking military uniform.

[crfriend]

Appropriate style for the situation. To me Volodymyr Zelenskyy's casual appearance is more appropriate and inspirational to his fellow citizens than appearing in a suit and tie or high ranking military uniform.

This is true, and I believe Zelensky's attire is tailored so that he looks like a common man in the midst of a really nasty situation. So, kudos to him.

Mark Zuckerberg showing up in front to Congress in a t-shirt was merely laughable and, in some ways, pitiful.

Personally, I try to set the bar just a bit higher than those around me, which isn't all that hard.

[Ozdelights]

Mark Zuckerberg showing up in front to Congress in a t-shirt was merely laughable and, in some ways, pitiful.

Personally, I try to set the bar just a bit higher than those around me, which isn't all that hard.

I would agree he should have been more suitably attired but conversely Congress seems to have a standard that appears more about impression than substance. A compromise from both sides would seem appropriate.

I am all for presenting a neat and clean appearance but 'robes' for authority or class are something I would challenge.

[Barleymower]

I'm not quite advocating a free for all - "there is a time and a place" for casual to formal wear.

In reply and going back to the original post and your last post:

"I feel like I'm just trading one fashion jail for another."

You should be advocating a free for all. Its the "time and place" way of thinking by mankind that got us all into this mess. Personally I would tear the lot down, stamp on it, set fire to it and dance around the flames.
It's all so unnecessary.
If people choose to come to my funeral in swimwear holding a surfboard, I would laugh and be happy I was once alive.

[MrSoapsud]

Question:
You may not like the skirt below but is it too much. When do clothes become too girly?
Screenshot_20240618_204315_eBay.jpg

Just catching up on this very rapid thread! I don't think I'd wear that skirt as I think, *for me*, it's too flowery and (not sure why) too "girly" (whatever that means!). Having said that, I don't think I'd wear a shirt of material like that with a pair of trousers either.

[denimini]

Question:
You may not like the skirt below but is it too much. When do clothes become too girly?

When you believe that the majority of viewers think it is too girly. If you don't care what others think then it will not be too girly.

[r.m.anderson]

Question:
You may not like the skirt below but is it too much. When do clothes become too girly?

When you believe that the majority of viewers think it is too girly. If you don't care what others think then it will not be too girly.

Maybe not the skirt itself - but what it is paired with - perhaps a billowy puffy peasant blouse ?
And leg wear to boot !

Yes girly sort of feminine upon first reflection ?

[crfriend]

It's all about perception. What do you perceive it as? I'll be what you think it is. This is a surprisingly common blind spot that we all have some of.

[Stu]

For me, trousers is what I normally wear. A skirt is something to be worn occasionally when the weather is fine and I'm not doing anything strenuous. It's just a change from the usual trousers.

The "fashion freedom" aspect for me is that I shouldn't feel that I don't have a choice. I also see it as a men's rights issue.

[Barleymower]

For me, trousers is what I normally wear. A skirt is something to be worn occasionally when the weather is fine and I'm not doing anything strenuous. It's just a change from the usual trousers.

The "fashion freedom" aspect for me is that I shouldn't feel that I don't have a choice. I also see it as a men's rights issue.

With respect Stu this is not a men's rights issue. Men have the right to wear whatever they want. Nobody is going to stop men from wearing whatever they want. Not in this country.

[TSH]

Question:
You may not like the skirt below but is it too much. When do clothes become too girly?

When you believe that the majority of viewers think it is too girly. If you don't care what others think then it will not be too girly.

Maybe not the skirt itself - but what it is paired with - perhaps a billowy puffy peasant blouse ?
And leg wear to boot !

Yes girly sort of feminine upon first reflection ?

I say to hell what anyone thinks. Things are only "girly" because people deem them as such. There's nothing innately girly about fabric. Just stupid labels humans put into material as designations. It's all just stupid.

For me, trousers is what I normally wear. A skirt is something to be worn occasionally when the weather is fine and I'm not doing anything strenuous. It's just a change from the usual trousers.

The "fashion freedom" aspect for me is that I shouldn't feel that I don't have a choice. I also see it as a men's rights issue.

With respect Stu this is not a men's rights issue. Men have the right to wear whatever they want. Nobody is going to stop men from wearing whatever they want. Not in this country.

While I will say that this is less of a men's rights issue, and more of an equality issue, Stu's right about the rest. People should just wear whatever they feel like. The world would be a better place if this sentiment was educated by more people than just us on this tiny space of the Web.

[crfriend]

While I will say that this is less of a men's rights issue, and more of an equality issue, Stu's right about the rest. People should just wear whatever they feel like. The world would be a better place if this sentiment was educated by more people than just us on this tiny space of the Web.

With respect to Stu's position, and in opposition to Barleymower's, this IS a men's rights issue until equality is properly achieved. Until men have equality with women in attire (and everything else) -- full equilibrium -- is has to be a men's issue because we're the second-class citizens in this fight. Once equilibrium is established, then it's no longer a problem. But right now it's not.

[Barleymower]

My reasoning for saying that this not a men's rights issue is because men cannot and are not stopped from wearing the clothes of their choice. I can't speak for america but not here in the UK.
The problem runs much deeper. In order to resolve the problem, we must delve into places we are not really questioning. They are so ingrained in our pcyche that we dare not question them. To do so would start a war that invades the principles on which our existence relies.
Masculinity and femininity has nothing to do with it.

When did we become second class citizens? Were we ever anything else?

[crfriend]

My reasoning for saying that this not a men's rights issue is because men cannot and are not stopped from wearing the clothes of their choice. I can't speak for america but not here in the UK.

Except by societal prejudice and self-policing.

The problem runs much deeper. In order to resolve the problem, we must delve into places we are not really questioning. They are so ingrained in our pcyche that we dare not question them. To do so would start a war that invades the principles on which our existence relies.

Then let's bring it on -- in all of its fury. It'll be instructive. Sometimes "rattling the cage" is important when it comes to progress.

Masculinity and femininity has nothing to do with it.

It, unfortunately, has everything to do with it.

When did we become second class citizens? Were we ever anything else?

It's been quite recent, and likely well within your lifetime. It started up in earnest in the 1950s, and gained velocity through the 1980s when the "2nd Wave 'Feminists'" took over from the original "Equality feminists". The original feminists had a point, and won it; the 2nd Wave set were not about equality but about absolute dominion -- the enslavement of men. They, sadly, "won". Men, at least where I am, amount to nothing more than wallets, sperm-donors, and (very sadly) prisoners. We have no rights compared to the women. It's now, "She says, he goes to jail". BTDT, and have the scars to prove it. (Fortunately, the PTSD has passed because I recognised it and was able to fight it.)

[Modoc]

I would have to say that I'm not sure what practicing fashion freedom means if it's not wearing what one wishes with little or no regard for fashion norms. If you do that, then you are practicing fashion freedom. Having the courage to do so publicly also advocates for the same. To be a promoter, a person doesn't have to be a flag waver. It would be great if more men embraced the idea of dressing outside of the box, but if they don't, I'm perfectly fine being one of the odd men out. That has been my life, and I don't really expect that to change.