skirtcafe.org

STEVIE wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2026 3:35 pm This is a discussion on the subject of fashion freedoms for men!
It is only a comment on POTUS in as much as the policies reflect on that very freedoms .
Here we have irrefutable proof that politics and clothing are inextricably linked, denial of that fact is futile.
NB, anything else, economics and foreign policy must be avoided!
Steve.

Stevie, Susie ask a question and i reply to her question along with an example. Don't get so hot under your collar. By the way traditional masculinity is also anti fashion freedom, have you forgotten? We have a moderator is in denial of the fact that politics and clothing are inextricably linked. My protest within the rules of skirtcafe.

STEVIE wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2026 3:35 pm This is a discussion on the subject of fashion freedoms for men!
It is only a comment on POTUS in as much as the policies reflect on that very freedoms .
Here we have irrefutable proof that politics and clothing are inextricably linked, denial of that fact is futile.
NB, anything else, economics and foreign policy must be avoided!
Steve.

Stevie, you are 100 percent correct that politics and clothing are linked because of conservatism and traditional masculinity. According to our Constitution, we are guaranteed freedom of expression, however our government is currently challenging that guaranteed freedom of expression and other constitutional rights. The newly enacted anti-drag laws in the very conservative South will indirectly affect us. Even though we are not drag queens, we will be lumped in the category simply for wearing skirts in public. It is important that we are politically proactive to ensure that we maintain freedom of expression in America. Carl (CR) was correct that the current political climate in America is attempting to move us back to he 1950’s and there are a lot of very conservative and/or religious Americans that would love to return to the constraints of that era. We are living in a really scary time and need to be proactive. It is time to remove our heads from the sand and be proactive regarding our destiny.

Hola all;

My post in response to Susie's question about what are we doing to make sure legislation does not arise that would make wearing some "gender designated" article of clothing illegal was to validate that question as more pertinent, and focused, than Stevie's "What If" that I saw as having too many 'qualifiers' to be useful -- entertaining maybe, but helpful -- not so much so.

My own answer was incomplete, but noted that my style my motives included trying to get men out of the "man box". That may well have political overtones; and Susie did inquire about what we are doing to preclude suppressive legislation. However, I see the Man-box more as a psychological prison than a political one (at this time) -- and though I do not dismiss the validity of the political side of the narrative, I don't think it is all that useful to point fingers, deserved or not, at particular parties, leaders, or influencers -- as strongly as I may disagree with them. Likewise, we do have a "rule" at SC about no-politics (unless directly related to skirts/attire) to avoid flame wars which only distract us from the content of merit for the SC. We can use the "off-topic" section for a little less circumspect discussion. The Mods do have to moderate and they should personally be exemplary examples of good behavior. UA & some of us routine posters have fallen short of that standard at times. Even though I may heartily agree with some of the finger pointing -- it does not help to name-call it or them. Mr. SS, I share your concerns but not all here do...we might do better with a carrot than a stick!

Susie says we don't have to reply to her question -- only think about it; and it certainly is a useful thing to ask ourselves, but I would encourage us to openly discuss it as well, as we can pick up ideas and learn from one another. I'm pretty sure there are some good answers out there -- I can pick and choose, learn from what resonates for me, and not spout retorts -- pro or con.

So again: What are we doing, if anything, to preclude legislation and social conformity that could make harmless personal choices illegal?

Faldaguy wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2026 12:30 am
I see the Man-box more as a psychological prison than a political one (at this time) -- and though I do not dismiss the validity of the political side of the narrative, I don't think it is all that useful to point fingers.

The predicament of men is nothing to do with Trump. It existed before he was born in that respect. If the question is asked "can men wear skirts?" The answer probably would be "They can wear whatever they want, but no man worth his salt would wear one" or "men have choices, women have choices. Where's the problem?" In order to untangle the problem we face, we have to agree what the problem actually is?

mr seamstress wrote: ↑Sat Apr 25, 2026 5:27 pm My protest within the rules of skirtcafe.

I had no doubt that it wasn't Mr S and I was trying to support you too.
I really feel that Uncle AL should make some contribution here as well.
AL, the question is, do you believe that fashion freedom for men and politics are inextricably linked?
The relevance to POTUS is that Donald Trump is steering America in a direction which will end in no, or very little options for men like ourselves.
The fact that the policies are specifically targetting the transgendered community will not prevent MIS being victims of collateral damage.
Steve.

BTW I do believe that the world and his dog don't care for MIS, so any government of any hue would not have to face popular resistance to such legislation.
Steve.

This statement is quite true.

Barleymower wrote:The predicament of men is nothing to do with Trump.
It existed before he was born in that respect.

Some people try to blame him but "The Predicament" started
back in the late 1400's to early 1500's, well before his time on this earth.

What I dislike is the "Name Calling", calling a person

king clown at the White House

There have been many "clowns" in leadership positions.
We've suffered through many of them. I won't state names
as that is not what this is about. I'm against the "woke agenda'
that tells our children what they are and should be, instead of
inspiring them to be what ever they want. We, as adults, should
support our kids choices in educational and occupational endeavors.
If they ask questions, we should answer them honestly, to the best
of our knowledge and ability. Nothing more

My oldest son(52), now divorced, is teaching digital animation and visual
effects at S.M.U.(Southern Methodist University). My other son(47) is gay
and a make-up artist in, and around, Hollywood, CA. I wasn't too happy
that he came out but I'm proud of what he has accomplished.

The main thing is, they are both happy and fulfilled with their lives.
What more can a parent ask or wish for

So, can we PLEASE stop putting blame where it doesn't belong
Society is to blame, not a single person.

Uncle Al

In reply to the original question, I would be fine with wearing just kilts, as I am sure that fabrics and fittings could and would be adjusted to taste. I have a hard time participating in what-if scenarios because they're wormholes full of pitfalls. In some places, those restrictions exist today. What do the men who want to wear skirts there do? And are their lives noticeably better or worse than the rest of us?
We see post after post from men who live as if those kinds of restrictions are already in place. What do they do?

I imagine this thread will soon be locked as soon as Al feels he has sufficiently defended his position. Funny thing that power always gets the last word.

Modoc wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2026 2:55 pm I imagine this thread will soon be locked as soon as Al feels he has sufficiently defended his position. Funny thing that power always gets the last word.

I’ve been a lurker/infrequent poster here for close to 20 years (Bob was Barista Emeritus when I joined and Since1982, Mary Jane Boy, and Kilted John were among the frequent posters) and I’ve been a "woke liberal" for even longer than that (anti-Vietnam protests in 1968), but I’ve really started changing my mind about the value of “political” conversation these days.

The biggest problem I see is that there is no conversation. There is childish insulting name-calling from both sides, a refusal to actually listen to what people who disagree with us have to say, and a complete unwillingness to be open to new ideas, old ideas restated, or anything that that might alter what we believe to be truth today.

It’s as if both sides are playing catch with Molotov cocktails.

I don’t agree with a lot of Uncle Al’s politics but if this were a different world, I’d really like to talk to him on a deeper level to see if there was something for me to learn and something for me to teach. But this isn’t a different world and that kind of real interpersonal communication is almost certain to spin out of control once in the public forum. I’m sympathetic to an approach where the mods have a VERY heavy hand in shutting down obviously political off-topic posts in an effort to keep the focus of this board on target.

PS - Thank you to ALL the mods for all they do, even that which may be seen as unpopular

Modoc wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2026 2:55 pm I imagine this thread will soon be locked as soon as Al feels he has sufficiently defended his position. Funny thing that power always gets the last word.

Thanks Modoc,
I have one question to ask of AL before that happens.
What has the current regime done in the United States to preserve individual freedoms of non-conformity to societal norms?
Naturally, this is slanted at men in skirts and wider individual freedom.
Nb I consider this post fully on topic for Skirt Cafe, this is an issue for Men in Skirts, last time I checked that's the whole point.
Steve.

Uncle Al wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2026 12:23 pm This statement is quite true.

Barleymower wrote:The predicament of men is nothing to do with Trump.
It existed before he was born in that respect.

Some people try to blame him but "The Predicament" started
back in the late 1400's to early 1500's, well before his time on this earth.

What I dislike is the "Name Calling", calling a person

king clown at the White House

There have been many "clowns" in leadership positions.
We've suffered through many of them. I won't state names
as that is not what this is about. I'm against the "woke agenda'
[Note part post deleted ro save space]

Don't get me wrong AL, Trump did not start the annihilation of gender non conforming people but he sure as hell trying finish it.

On the first day of his administration, he signed an executive order directing the federal government to no longer consider a person’s gender and to recognize only male or female

That directive served as a basis for a series of subsequent orders that called for defunding of protections for transgender people His executive order targeting gender-affirming medical care, claimed that health care providers are “maiming and sterilizing” children and referred to gender-affirming care as “chemical and surgical mutilation.” That language is misleading and wrong.

Trump’s policies affect nearly 1.6 million people over the age of 13, or about 0.5% of the U.S. population on the trans basis alone.

How does this affect MIS? The attitude by Trump towards a vulnerable part of our community will inevitably spread to men who choose to be gender non conforming, that includes MIS.

As for the Woke Agenda as you put it, Woke means awake. People are waking up to the nonsense they have been told for decades. Being Woke is to truly understand what is happening in this world and we should take the opportunity to change world for better not shut down the "woke agenda".
Being woke is a new unblinkered view of the world. They want it shut down because it is not aligned to their aims.

Trump is no friend to MIS, it's better to understand that and stand against him before the wheels of his administration grind you into the ground.

Uncle Al wrote: ↑Sun Apr 26, 2026 12:23 pm Some people try to blame him but "The Predicament" started
back in the late 1400's to early 1500's, well before his time on this earth.

Uncle Al

The fact here is the person who sits in the oval office has pick up that agenda and made it his and that matter the most. Going further he would make legislation to put to put every member in skirtcafe in behind bars for not conforming to traditional masculinity. That is a major problem whether you agree or not. This alone is total disrespect to me and all skirtcafe members.

.........."woke agenda".......

This reference is an insult to my views and is name calling. This represent how little of respect you have who disagree with your political views.
You as a moderator only condemn those who are anti-Trump, but you support those who support Trump. This is heavy handed toward to one side and is called abuse. As a moderator your job is to be 100% neutral and to cite those political views whether they are pro or con regardless your own personal views. You are just like the person who sits in the oval office demands respect while being total disrespectful. Who is going to punish you for your disrespect? I respect those who respect me regardless of their political views. With my blind eye i' can see things better than you can see with both your two eyes. Have good day Al.

Just a reminder to show respect to other members and be polite whilst disagreeing.
Uncle AL was invited to respond and gave his opinion as an ordinary member of the forum as he is entitled. What he may have said as a moderator on a different thread should not be addressed on this one.
Thanks, Anthony

Three thoughts for the day:

1. Asking you to give me equal rights implies that they are yours to give. Instead I must demand that you stop trying to deny me the rights all people deserve. Elizabeth Peratrovich

2. It takes a lot of little people, in a lot of different places, in a lot of different steps to change the facce of the Earth.

3. I sincerely hope you can all find your way through this, the Cafe is too important to lose over egos, don't let the bigots divide and conquer.

denimini wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2026 5:41 am Just a reminder to show respect to other members and be polite whilst disagreeing.
Uncle AL was invited to respond and gave his opinion as an ordinary member of the forum as he is entitled. What he may have said as a moderator on a different thread should not be addressed on this one.
Thanks, Anthony

Susie wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2026 6:20 am Three thoughts for the day:

1. Asking you to give me equal rights implies that they are yours to give. Instead I must demand that you stop trying to deny me the rights all people deserve. Elizabeth Peratrovich

2. It takes a lot of little people, in a lot of different places, in a lot of different steps to change the facce of the Earth.

3. I sincerely hope you can all find your way through this, the Cafe is too important to lose over egos, don't let the bigots divide and conquer.

I agree with the above. Well said Anthony and Susie.
We are grownups so we should be able to discuss any subject even if we disagree. Politics and religion included. Experience might tell us that it doesn't work and we will end up fighting. That is ridiculous really, that at our age we can't regulate our emotions.
One simple rule always works for me: Don't have one rule for my actions and expect others to refrain from what I am doing. The phase "don't do as I do, do as I say" is wrong.