The post that was quoted here has been removedA ban on foot-binding in Japan affected women more than men.
A ban on skirts would be absurd but not sexist, ditto a ban on trousers.
One rule for all!
My wife remembers a boy at her school turning up in a skirt on a hot day the same
year the school had earlier allowed girls to wear trousers. It was a point well made.
Rules on attire should ABSOLUTELY make no reference to gender and any
such rules should not inconvenience any gender due to their gender.
(eg A rule banning bras)
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
The post that was quoted here has been removedNonsense, for several reasons.
First, many women have a leading role in the fashion industry. Chanel, Versace, Wang... and who has ruled Vogue with an iron fist for decades?
More impotantly, though, women have the most powerful position in women's fashion: they decide what they buy, and what stays on the shelf. When it comes to women's fashion, women themselves are all-powerful, by determining what is bought and what is not. We are not in Maoist China; there is no government ruling on what women must buy and wear. Nor are we in Mediæval England; there are no sumptuary laws.
It's quite common to counter this by saying that The Evil Industry doesn't give women this choice, but that's obviously fatuous; there are more than enough small shops and small producers that any number of women can make a stand against the ukazes of fashion and bring their own to the market.
Men do not dictate what women must be wearing. Rather, women show no agency, preferring to complain about the "bad" choice rather than look for, let alone (help) create a good one. Women accept the "dictates" of fashion, rather than create their own. Men tend either not to, or not to complain about the result. I recommend this course for women, too: if you want influence, grasp that agency! It's there for your taking, just as it's always been ours.
Here's a case I've heard about repeatedly:
*women*: We want pockets! Men have pockets and we don't.
*industry*: Every time we put pockets in skirts, we don't sell them and make a loss. Buy trousers or make your own skirts with pockets.
*women*: That's sexist! I'm going to the press!!!
*industry*: *sigh* Ok, but promise you'll buy these skirts with pockets.
*women*: Of course! We asked for them, didn't we?
*industry*: *produces skirts with pockets*
*women*: We can't buy these! They're ugly, and all other women will laugh at us, and it's all the patriarchy's fault even though men are fine with us wearing them. *refuse to buy skirts with pockets*
*industry*: *makes a loss* Well, since they don't sell, we'll retract these products.
*women*: It's the patriarchy's fault that we don't have pockets!
Da capo, ad nauseam.
If you want to change what the industry sells, vote with your wallet - I'm pretty sure yours is fuller than mine - and get involved. Stop standing at the side-lines griping.
@shallow-blue saidThe reason is most women are stupid.
Nonsense, for several reasons.
First, many women have a leading role in the fashion industry. Chanel, Versace, Wang... and who has ruled Vogue with an iron fist for decades?
More impotantly, though, women have the most powerful position in women's fashion: they decide what they buy, and what stays on the shelf. When it comes to women's fashion, women ...[text shortened]... m pretty sure yours is fuller than mine - and get involved. Stop standing at the side-lines griping.
The same as most men are stupid.
They put up with it.
The post that was quoted here has been removedMen may have a disproportionate influence in high fashion but I strongly
suspect (from personal experience) that most of the Store Buyers of
womenswear are women. (I reckon quite a lot of the menswear Buyers
are women too.) So regarding what ends up on the racks I do not think
men have more power than women.
