Coder wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 1:22 pm
I think it's more than that Dust. There is a perception that men become sexually excited when they wear anything feminine. Put crudely they "get off" on it. This gives a totally wrong impression of MIS.
There is a sensual side to the clothes "given" to women and they like / enjoy it. Men should be allowed to experince that without making them feel guilty and telling them its a fetish.
Practicality and this other point have always been my main concerns:
Will people think my outfits are impractical for doing field IT work (on occasion, not often)?
Will people associate me with those weirdos who appear in the news?
The first I try to convince myself "being practical isn't a necessity" but I draw the line at pain/discomfort, which is a real thing with some clothing options
The second - this might be a touchy subject - and I don't want to start a contentious discussion - but a lot of the advertising around women is made for "the male gaze". Perhaps women's garments are made for women's benefit and they like the feeling - but I'd want to see some survey data of women to know for sure. I could point to numerous advertisements targeted at women with the words "soft luxurious" or "silky smooth" or even the words "sexy". This covers everything from care products to clothes. Women and their clothes have been sexualized, and therefore many things they wear or do have connotations. Whether we agree or not, or see it the same way is irrelevant. I don't quite agree with the "male gaze" idea in total - it makes men fully culpable for sexism in today's world, and I think men AND women are guilty of what we see today (some would argue - oppressor/oppressed, etc...). The opposite "female gaze" does not have any negative connotations - and I don't think women are any more perfect than men. I want to see both sides say this is a problem, both have contributed to it, and through a maturing of the culture, we can root out sexist behaviors and ideals. Advertising for men pushes different ideals - roughness, toughness, and strength, and all of those are opposite of what are advertised to women. Occasionally you'll see a tough ranch lady getting into her pickup truck, but the minute you have one male do something soft in a commercial you hear all kinds of trash about it on social media. My point really, what I think at least (opinion) is that this stereotype comes from how society looks and sees women as objects of desire, and that clothing is made an integral component of that desire.
My wife doesn't like to have mirrors around the house, with the result that the only one is that above the wash-basin in the bathroom - I get a view of my face and neck as I shave, but nothing else. So I rarely get to see how I appear to the world, and my principal concern with my clothing is not "how will others see me?" but rather issues of comfort and practicality. I simply like the feeling of a skirt on my bare legs (I never wear tights or socks) and I always wear sandals, summer and winter. In the past four years I have worn trousers just twice, both times for funerals. Until this autumn I favoured rather short skirts, up to mid-thigh, but I am now starting to wear them more often at the knee or even slightly below. I dress to be calm and at peace with myself and the world around me.
Now, I don't wish to appear to be impossibly virtuous, but, as a very long-lapsed believer, I still retain some memories of the bible; Matthew 5:27-28 says
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart", and I follow the intent of this sentiment. I think that I do manage to resist looking at women with a male gaze, and simply consider them as my equals in the community. Overt sexiness (female, or even male) in dress or demeanour are off-putting to me. Nor do I feel compelled to exhibit those "different ideals - roughness, toughness, and strength" in my own self, either public or private. Perhaps people do comment behind my back or on social media, but I am totally unaware of it.
After all, most of us are only being genitally sexual for a very very small part of the day, and for the rest of the 24 hours we use clothes to cover up those bits from the public sight; if we wear clothes for reasons of modesty or because the law compels us to do so, then the actual nature of these coverings should be immaterial, provided they do the job and satisfy the requirements of comfort and practicality.
