Clothes distinguish the sexes

[Frédérique]

Now that the apocalypse has come and gone, we can all get back to discussing the many reasons why males (by birth) would wish to wear female clothing...:doh:

Recently I read the following broad passage in the book The Importance of Wearing Clothes by Lawrence Langner. Keep in mind that this book was published in 1959:

“Contrary to established beliefs, the differentiation in clothing between men and women arose from the male’s desire to assert superiority over the female and to hold her to his service. This he accomplished through the ages by means of special clothing which hampered or handicapped the female in her movements. Then men prohibited one sex from wearing the clothing of the other, in order to maintain this differentiation. In order to maintain his masculine domination as head of the family and food provider, man invented “man-clothes” which were the exclusive property of the male sex, gave him complete mobility, and made him feel superior to his woman. He also devised “woman-clothes” for the female, which made it difficult for her to wander far from the campfire and the children. He also found in these “man-clothes” a bond with other males in his group and this gave him even greater security since he was not equated with the women and children of the group. As a result of the female’s dependence on the male, her apparel became a badge of servitude. It also served to announce certain other facts; as a female, she was entitled to the protection of the males of the tribe; in war, she did not participate as a warrior and was exempt from slaughter, thus assuring the continuity of the race, an exemption which no longer applies under our so-called civilization of today.”

Since the aforementioned text is historical in context, I’m left with the idea that old habits die hard, at least when it comes to clothing, and crossdressing is still very much a no-no. By wearing female clothes, I am effectively neutralizing the differentiation between the sexes, throwing a monkey wrench into the finely-tined machinery of gender that someone (a man) decided upon many thousands of years ago. OK, if the sexes are to be endlessly differentiated, why am I so happily engaged in crossdressing? I’m not transgendered, I’m not a woman trapped in a man’s body, and (get this) I’m comfy being a male, so why am I sitting here in a cute skirt, striped panties, a very feminine blouse, and adorable shoes? Do you suppose that I am declaring, through my choice of clothing, a lack of interest in bonding with other males, an acute dislike of slaughter, distaste for male domination, and a certain amount of sympathy for all those females who have lived in servitude since the dawn of MAN? Yeah, something like that...

You can still see many instances of women’s movements being hampered, or their freedom being curtailed (for one reason or another) in various societies around the world, but I’m not here to point fingers. Even in the liberated West, females are obliged to wear certain things, at least in public, in an effort to “jibe” with this long-standing differentiation between the sexes. Just look at any display of current magazines and you may begin to see that women are still dressing to please males and keep their inherent inferiority complex flowing along, damn the ambient temperature. Males AND females are responsible for this, and it smacks of fear – fear of change, or fear of upsetting this unfair gender dynamic that has made our fragile civilization tick for so long. Crossdressing, especially MtF crossdressing, is considered to be wrong by its very nature – a male is not supposed to wear so-called “women’s clothes,” for they do not in any way define his sex, nor do they help him dominate the proceedings. In terms of clothing, the sexes are supposed to be separated. Oh, how I LOVE to upset the societal apple cart, my friends...

So, when I crossdress, i.e. actually wear what the females are expected to wear, I’m gravitating towards their allotted space near the historical campfire (home) to engage in female concerns. I show emotion, unlike the male warrior; I listen to children, unlike the father-provider, and I don’t mind being dominated by my more aggressive peers. I shall bond with males like me, or females if I cannot locate any adventurous effeminate souls. Since women can now assume the roles of men, with clothing that displays freedom of mobility (previously exclusive to males); surely I can be allowed to try on a frock or two, or three. I am willfully submerging my masculinity in doing so, knowing there are plenty of males who will keep the torch of male-ness burning bright for all eternity. I would rather slump languidly in the shadows, thank you, while the manly men gain their precious yardage, fashion their phallic instruments of war, or assert group control over other, less fortunate individuals. This has all been going on since time immemorial, just like the need to crossdress; in fact one level of existence obviates, or balances, the other. Not all males are created alike, but someone, way back in time, decided that men and women shall always differ in appearance by way of clothing, since they already differ in physical appearance. Are males still obligated to dominate? I think so, in fact I believe so – why else would my innocuous, innocent crossdressing be so unwelcome?

I could go on and on (you know me!), but this willful dipping into the world of females is what interests me – the very fact that the sexes ARE differentiated causes people like me to step over the highly visible borderline and frolic in a forbidden garden. MtF crossdressing is an act of revolution, whereby I wear the clothing of women and assume the traditional trappings of their sex. The clothes change everything. I am no longer as mobile as a male can be, and I will attract the attention of others whether I want to or not. Obviously, women’s clothing is much more “free” these days, but how can I dash about in these heels? How can I go anywhere in this skirt without attracting an unwanted gaze? How can I wear this dress, in this pretty color, and go unnoticed out in the hostile (and drab) real world? I will also makeup my face, style my wig, and adorn myself with tasteful jewelry, all in a subconscious bid to be attractive to someone, perhaps someone I can be subordinate to. I do all of this with aforethought, for crossdressing fulfills a need I can barely acknowledge – since women’s clothes must MEAN something, or indicate something, I am mysteriously drawn to them. They are an expression of who I am. If only the males of the “tribe” would protect ME...

I find it amusing that clothes initially meant to “contain” or limit the mobility of females can be so...liberating...for males who crossdress! In many ways, I use “woman-clothes” to escape from being male, at least for a little while. I once believed that my MtF crossdressing had little actual meaning, but I can now see that I am aligning myself with a chosen life of quiet servitude, announcing to all that I will not be exercising my inherent “right” to male domination. I’m not alone, as any thread OP about an un-accepting (dominating) spouse will attest to. I am male by birth, but I wish to be something truly different, or downright taboo. I enjoy being meek, meaning patient and mild, gentle and kind, but not necessarily spineless or spiritless. Since the meek shall inherit the Earth, I am well-poised in this post-apocalyptic world, thanks to my MtF crossdressing...

I guess the question is this: do you identify with the traditional “role” of women, and dress the part? If you’re not TG, and you don’t necessarily dress for a sexual means to an end, are you turning your back on male domination? Do you distinguish your “self” in doing so?

Lots of words! :whew!:Merry Christmas...

[Angela Campbell]

Cause you were bred for humanity
and sold to society
One day you'll wake up
In the present day
A million generations
removed from expectations
of being who you really want to be

[Kate Simmons]

Only if we "buy in" to others' expectations of who or what we should be. We are full of surprises it seems, however, and make them work for their "ups". ;):battingeyelashes::)

[NicoleScott]

And so, we have football players and their uniforms, and cheerleaders and their uniforms (male cheerleaders notwithstanding).

[Jenniferathome]

“Contrary to established beliefs, the differentiation in clothing between men and women arose from the male’s desire to assert superiority over the female and to hold her to his service. This he accomplished through the ages by means of special clothing which hampered or handicapped the female in her movements..."

Nonsense. Historical context is critical. Today, and for decades prior, women choose thier clothing. They wear pants or shorts when they want. There is zero control over women today in choice.

But, think there is an asthetic that lends itself to preferring women have more choice. Remember the 'Seinfeld' episode where Jerry's GF liked to hang out in the appartment naked? Elaine clarified that the is good naked and bad naked. Women's bodies are an art form(good naked), men's bodies are utilitarian (bad naked). Throughout time, artists have painted female nudes. Other than David, Vitruvian man, and a few cherubs how many naked men are considered art?

[LaraPeterson]

Nah! I'm just nuts--and you are too.

[Rogina B]

Freddy,You have way too much time on your hands!! Life goes on!

[Frédérique]

Freddy, you have way too much time on your hands!!

Oh, so THAT’S it...:sigh:

You know, its fun to compose these pointless crossdressing essays and then sit back and watch them sail gracefully over everyone’s wigged heads. It really is. Thank goodness I don’t take this “discussion” forum very seriously, otherwise I would end up like those hundred or so friends I once had – you know, the ones who couldn’t take the negativity, so they headed for the nearest exit at the earliest opportunity. Since I have declared myself to be meek, I cannot comment on negativity hurled my way. One of these days I should write a thing about how discussion forums distinguish certain aspects of human behavior, but I don’t have THAT much time on my hands...

Nonsense? Really? Don’t you find it at least a little interesting that clothing is split into two distinct camps, based on historical precepts and preferences, and everybody has mindlessly bought into the concept to the point of numbness? Don’t you think this has a lot to do with WHY crossdressing (MtF variety) is still so taboo in the 21st century? Do you care about this stuff? Can you swallow a complete sentence without gagging? Don’t worry – I can write something about what I did today, or a complete description of my pantsu inventory, or if I’m feeling attractive enough to sally forth into the unknown that awaits me, or if my SO (if I had one) has just read me the riot act, but this is what I would rather write about. It means something, and it means absolutely nothing, depending on how you look at it. I look at it sailing over yonder head, and I can't help but giggle...
:heehee:

Apparently the readers (and comprehenders) are all out a-wassailing...:doh:

[Nanaya]

I dunno. I wear girl clothes because I like them, not because they're girl clothes. I don't think it makes me any less of a man.

[Miriam-J]

Freddy,

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your postings and trust that you will give little regard to those who don't. In fact, your writing has been one of the most important influences in my emerging understanding of crossdressing since I joined in February. I generally agree with your points, though there are occasional ones that I can't quite reconcile with what I feel and observe - and even those just give me more food for thought. Please keep them coming.

I've hesitated to respond to this little essay as I've wanted to consider the historical perspective a bit longer. It doesn't ring fully with my memories of the history, though there's really very little in the historical record to support one way or the other. But it certainly does seem to jive with what I understand of sociological behaviors, especially in many of our male-centered cultures. But an equivalent argument could perhaps be made that men imposed a dressing variation on women that simply emphasized the sexuality of the females for our own pleasure, or that less economic support was provided for the clothing of those kept largely in the home necessitating clothing that requires less material.

In any case, modern western culture is a poor guide to any thinking on the matter since women's fashions have been freed from the forced impositions of the past. In fact, it's fascinating that women's fashions have continued to embrace attractive expression even without that imposition. Contrary to the predictions regarding women's liberation, many of the women who were freed have now chosen to freely express their own attractive qualities and embrace rather than suppress their sexuality.

But as you indicate, this has little benefit to those of us who are men wanting to embrace the same freedoms to express ourselves in the same fashions as women, and it doesn't appear that this will greatly improve in the coming years - though it at least doesn't appear to be going backwards.

Keep those thoughful postings coming. This faithful reader will always look for them, even if often too lazy to respond.

Miriam

[Kaz]

Hang in their Freddie. I am with you, but just at the back end of Christmas day with the family!

One post is just that... get it in balance my good friend!

You have too many friends and followers to justify a negative - especially at this time of year when many of us are preoccupied with other pressing events in our lives!

[Leah Lynn]

I, for one, I tend to feel feminine regardless of what I wear.

[Robbin_Sinclair]

The final portion of the post asks: ...do you identify with the traditional “role” of women, and dress the part? If you’re not TG, and you don’t necessarily dress for a sexual means to an end, are you turning your back on male domination? Do you distinguish your “self” in doing so?

My answer to Part A is: Yes, I do feel more comfortable dressing as a woman when I am in a conventional woman's role. I relish doing dishes, preparing food and cleaning the house dressed as a woman. You asked my preference, not why I feel this way. That answer is more difficult.

My answer to Part B is: Male domination is a big part of it. Even dressed drab, if I keep something to remind me of my femininity such as an item of jewelry or hose, this helps me surrender the dominance that I once felt necessitated by my male role. Discovering a comfort in dressing (methinks the term "cross" dressing will be eventually regarded as dated) allows me to surrender to those around me, regardless of whether it is a spouse, waitress or gas station attendant. Taking it further, can we compare this subordinate role to the role of a stripper? Doesn't she actually control the mind, heart and being of every person in her audience?

Answer to Part C: Yes I do.

A portion of your post really hit home. It reads: Do you suppose that I am declaring, through my choice of clothing, a lack of interest in bonding with other males, an acute dislike of slaughter, distaste for male domination, and a certain amount of sympathy for all those females who have lived in servitude since the dawn of MAN? Yeah, something like that...

My answer is absolutely! That has a great deal to do with why I dress. Thank you, Freddy. Posts like yours and this site in general help me keep my sanity. It was another Christmas present on a day that was quite lovely for me. Happy Holidays, to all. xr

[noeleena]

Hi,

Theres two groups of people youv missed out on us highlanders , Kilts & all wether women or men could & did & do wear similar highland wear, not much difference,

the American indian now what did they wear, & the other island people, both had flax skirts, similar in lengh just below the knees ,

im a woman & i can wear what ever i like i dont have to comforn to convention, Im not under the king or queen as to thier dictates, not like in the 1400 to 1700 Renaissance times & even then our women rent thier dress's in defience against the dictater kings , we sewed in panals of colour yet when we stood still the panals could not be seen when the king went past.

.....WE WON...... in the end, or have the upper hand. 1860's on. early 1900 '

Do clothes distinguish the sexes. maybe for some , they dont for me what would if you line every one up against the wall as in the 2nd w war, with no clothes on then youll see the difference for many. a big difference. those who were child bearing age & many others who had children & would have later had they lived. you get my point different from men. clothes played no part then,


...noeleena...

[sometimes_miss]

Right now, the reason for wearing clothing is to keep me from freezing my butt (and other selective body parts) off! Clothes aren't always just decorative to distinguish who and what we are; often, they are simply functional for whatever work we have to do. Wearing my pretty maid's uniform while doing a brake job on my car might be related to being of service, but it's certainly not what you'd want to wear while doing such a filthy job.

[Helen_Highwater]

I would back many of Frédérique's assertions. If you look to the natural world evolution was driven by necessity. Species altered in response to changes in their environment. In some where camouflage wasn’t so important males and females developed differently, birds are a good example, plumage being used to attract a mate. In many mammals however size is the only real differentiator. Can you easily tell the difference between a male and female Tiger?
This leads me to ask that surely in the early evolution of man there would have been a rudimentary garb, a simple set of common garments driven by need. Many isolated tribes to this day wear clothing that has little differentiation between the sexes. So what was the catalyst that drove the diversification?
The desire to make one gender look good is an invention of society facilitated by the growth in the technology that enabled better and more diverse fabrics. There was an evolutionary advantage to this. Females who dressed in drab clothing did drab manual work. “Ladies” dressed in finery didn’t. Looking good promoted your chances in western society.
As for women having choice. Females wearing trousers owes a lot to 2 world wars and the need for women to fill the gaps in the workforce as a result of men going off to war. The assertion that women now choose by it’s very nature dictates that in times gone by they didn’t, or couldn’t.
That then prompts one more question. What’s stopping males from choosing to wear skirts, dresses etc. Could it be a controlling society that to this day still asserts gender roles?

[Robbin_Sinclair]

Re: Noleena's post. Ah, the Highlanders. As I type this, my coming out into society dressed will be in a place far from home today. It will be hose, high heels, bra, forms but the rest will be a salute to a distant heritage a fine woolen manly Scottish Stewart Royal kilt, kilt “stockings”, a large belt and a tradition dress top.

Re: Frédérique's post. She quotes a passage from a book, beginning with: Contrary to established beliefs, the differentiation in clothing between men and women arose from the male’s desire to assert superiority over the female and to hold her to his service.

Moving beyond early campfire societies to Eurocentric cultures in the past few centuries, male’s desire to assert superiority over the female and to hold her to his service is certainly shown by student dress codes. Men in power could demand that they see a woman’s lower extremities, regardless of weather. This carried to public formal functions, especially the courtroom and other public places.

That said, can one really argue that all petticoats, foundation garments, bonnets and ladies shoes were imposed by men? Frédérique writes that women dress for men but the cliché that I know is women dress for women. I am not sure I agree with it but this is often said.

Back to the eternal question, why do men dress as women? Is this really an act of defiance? I suspect not but I look to other CD posts on this site for answers. But now, my railroad car is warmer, forms are in place and I-tunes are playing an ongoing feast of Scottish music. I am looking at the scene of newly falling snow in rural Michigan from a moving railway car. Robbin is home in her imaginary world and smiling. xr

[noeleena]

Hi.

oh aye , theres no like a bonne wee lass is there, only from the Highlands o yon fair lands away, no like a dancer o ye sword '

come to think of it we have a few here ye know, & a place similar to home misty grags & hills, & bloody cold as ......

...noeleena...

[Krististeph]

happily engaged in crossdressing? I’m not transgendered, I’m not a woman trapped in a man’s body, and (get this) I’m comfy being a male, so why am I sitting here in a cute skirt, striped panties, a very feminine blouse, and adorable shoes? Do you suppose that I am declaring, through my choice of clothing, a lack of interest in bonding with other males, an acute dislike of slaughter, distaste for male domination, and a certain amount of sympathy for all those females who have lived in servitude since the dawn of MAN? Yeah, something like that...


Funny that you should use the word ‘bonding’, I can’t cite the source off the top of my head, but with a nod the above paragraph, much (if not most) ‘femininzation’ of clothing (either men’s, unisex, or already female styles) has at least the secondary effect of making the clothing less utilitatian, more restrictive or encumbered, to the extent of extreme female styling very close to bondage type fetish clothing.

Granted, there is the route of ‘feminization’ of clothing that follows the ‘cut it shorter’ or ‘cut it away’ along with the ‘snug it tightly’ (spandex) route, which albeit is generally a feminine attribute- exercise clothing of both sexes also follows that route.

Anyway, to your question, in my own mind, I’m looking for identification with the feminine traits associated, BUT WITH RESPECT to the generalized image portrayed by popular culture- I grew up in a time where women were no longer expected to do ‘women’s work’, female doctors were accepted (if not common), and any female who decided to take on a traditional male job or role was allowed to do so, even if some notice was taken.

I’m trying to point out that although I was/am aware of the misogyny and prejudice that had and still occurs, the public face of common social parlance and the popular media portrayal was of females who were valued and well as adored.

There is a large portion of the female population which was not represented, and also a large portion of the lives of most of the female population that was not represented truthfully, of being relegated to a subservient class by the zeitgeist of male attitude. That this was not as visible, I must believe, has had an effect on the attractiveness of being female, especially to persons who may have already been on the fence or at least looking at the greener grass…

So while the overall effect of the clothing may have been less than a perfect attraction, the public and popular associations were disproportionately skewed towards the positive traits, perhaps.


a male is not supposed to wear so-called “women’s clothes,” for they do not in any way define his sex, nor do they help him dominate the proceedings. In terms of clothing, the sexes are supposed to be separated.

Start bicycling and check out how both men and women dress at the next century (100 mile) ride- Everything spandex, and women’s styles are mostly defined by touches of pastel colors. An significant amount of men’s jerseys are in hot pink or other vibrant colors once associated as only female territory.

I often wonder, how many guys take advantage of this to blur the lines. And it’s good exercise as well.

Now this cycling clothing thing is quite opposed to the assertations of the traditional modes of clothing, but does it make me less interested in the female versions of and less likely to want to dress ‘feminine’ while cycling?

Pffffffttt. Not in the least. It’s not what the clothing is actually like, it is the fact that is it associated with females.

Oh, how I LOVE to upset the societal apple cart, my friends...


I’d have never guessed… :-)


So, when I crossdress, i.e. actually wear what the females are expected to wear, I’m gravitating towards their allotted space near the historical campfire (home) to engage in female concerns. I show emotion, unlike the male warrior; I listen to children, unlike the father-provider, and I don’t mind being dominated by my more aggressive peers. I shall bond with males like me, or females if I cannot locate any adventurous effeminate souls.

This is where it gets a little confusing to me- I agree to a certain degree with this- yet I cannot say I am in anyway satisfied only with traditional female concerns. I have no desire to find a provider- when my wife is earning money for us when I am going to school, I feel bad that I am not bringing in a significant proportion. Yet when the roles are reversed- I’m happy that I can put her through school, yet prefer when we BOTH can be making money, regardless of who actually earns more.

In fixing things around the house, I hate to have to dive in and fix things- but I’d rather do it and provide the service for us than hire someone else to do it. Roofing, electrical work, additions, plumbing… Granted, I probably do these things in a more ‘feminine’ manner- a little more attention to detail, cleaning things as I go along, etc. but this is something I’d expect anyone to do who wanted to do a good job.

This gets more into transgender behavior than just crossdressing, but it is from my point of view very un-gendered. Either as a male or female, I dress so as to be somewhat attractive (more so as female, but since I do not go out in public as much as female, I guess you can’t make a direct comparison with much meaning), and this attractiveness is a BIG THING. I’ve always maintained (since my teens) that competence is more attractive than incompetence, so no matter if you thing is raising kids, cooking, felling trees, tuning V-8’s, or dressing fashionably- it is better to do it well than not, regardless of sex, gender, orientation, or identification.



I find it amusing that clothes initially meant to “contain” or limit the mobility of females can be so...liberating...for males who crossdress! In many ways, I use “woman-clothes” to escape from

Consider however, in poetry- free verse is rather intimidating, even though the rules are ‘fewer’, whereas although it may take a little more time, and a few more tries, and fixed meter and rhyme scheme can be liberating in that you can more easily be sure of what is good (competent) and what is lacking…

It may be a form of institutionalization, it does seem to increase somewhat with a more complex society, although again, my observations are anecdotal and unsupported.

I’ve posted before about the physical brain structures that are highly correlated with transgenderism and CD, and while I have to believe these are a strong factor- I wonder if the issues of a more stressful, complex, and less strictly defined society might also be an influence in activating this predisposition of crossdressing.

This seems like it reduces the validity of the crossdressing, at least from an unsupportive or antagonistic view, but to those of us who are CD, TG,TS or otherwise gender-non-rigid, it IS a very complex issue by definition.

Yeah, I could choose to hide and suppress my desires to crossdress, but I’d be rather more miserable, angry, unpleasant, and even more profoundly distracted.
And a hell of a lot less creative, supportive, self-reliant, neighborly, and most critically: able to stay married for more than 20 years when none of my siblings of inlaws (or ex-inlaws) have been able to do so.

Hell, I should come out just so I jeer at them (siblings) for not ‘even’ being able to make a marriage work as well as a crossdresser. Except that I don’t see it as being a negative, nor as anything specifically antithetic to marriage, assuming full disclosure (on both parties) well prior to act of wedding. But I fear it would simply be pearls before swine... and that is an insult to swine.


I guess the question is this: do you identify with the traditional “role” of women, and dress the part? If you’re not TG, and you don’t necessarily dress for a sexual means to an end, are you turning your back on male domination? Do you distinguish your “self” in doing so?

I’m asserting against male domination, as well as against female domination (except during certain mutually agreed upon elective situations,,, <ahem>), moreso against the male I guess, because there is generally more male domination. It was interesting when I did biomedical field service- 90% of my clients were female. I got along great with most all of them (the ones I didn’t get along with were interestingly ones I would never consider as role models for my female self, even for instance one lady who was rather pretty, even wore a wonder pink dress one day, but her attitude was just lousy- not that she was nasty, but she had the air of no liking her job and the people working for her, and did not exude competence in her job- this was noticed of half a decade- not just some passing glance).

I liked following the nurses or females lead at their facilities- I’d always use the hairnet instead of the surgeon’s cap, with scrubs. But I’d still keep my own little quirks- I’d put scrub pants on over my pants- thus retaining my belt which I could keep my pager, tools and other things on while tuck the scrub top in to cover all of the ‘civilian’ clothing with scrubs.

Another of my little rules is that always leaving the equipment/site a little cleaner than I found it worked great too- over time the equipment looked better and better, and taking a few minutes to clean up really ingratiated myself to these clients.

Even the lesbian clients seemed to appreciate this, which is VERY interesting, as a number of my male clients were gay, and I actually did not seem to get along with them as well as I did the gay friends and acquaintences I had outside of work.

Now some of this might have been imagined, and some might have been subconsciously directed, but I did notice the overall effect and it did underscore my association with the female sex, regardless of orientation. The counselor I was seeing at the time never rendered any judgement when I related this (and I fully admitted I may have been biased in observation) but it was the subject of some exploration, and I could tell it interested him because he related some analogous observations- we had fun coming up with hypotheses and tearing them down…

That was the best job I had, in terms of gender- a few locales I did experiment with showing some more feminine aspects- all of them except at the catholic hospital were more than accepting. Even a department that was suing my company welcomed me… but not other techs.

Also- interestingly- none of them ever asked if I was gay, even though I’m sure many of the mannerisms and aspects could have been viewed as such by a consciously heterosexual population. And I don’t think they just assumed I was either- I did my share of looking at pretty girls all over the hospital---

So to answer your question again- my self is self-actuated, I may allow more feminine aspects to come forth when dressed female than when I am male, but I am still the same person, for better or worse. And for the record- if I could dress female all the time, with no exceptional repercussions, I would do so in a heartbeat, although I’d probably still wear sweats and t-shirts around the house, albeit less often or less frumpy versions.

[Foxglove]

I have all sorts of questions here, but I suppose I'll limit it to just a few.




“Contrary to established beliefs, the differentiation in clothing between men and women arose from the male’s desire to assert superiority over the female and to hold her to his service. This he accomplished through the ages by means of special clothing which hampered or handicapped the female in her movements. Then men prohibited one sex from wearing the clothing of the other, in order to maintain this differentiation. . ."

How exactly does your man know this? Peering myopically back into the mists of time, how do we know that men invented women's clothing and for what reason? Perhaps women invented their own clothing--or are we going to contend that the poor dears wouldn't have been capable of that? It's fashionable in certain circles to look back in time and assume that we can know what prehistoric people did and why, but I personally think we need to be very careful about that.

Oh, and by the way, what exactly are these "established beliefs"? I didn't know there were any concerning the differentiation between men's and women's clothing. In any case, I didn't have any myself.


Even in the liberated West, females are obliged to wear certain things, at least in public, in an effort to “jibe” with this long-standing differentiation between the sexes. Just look at any display of current magazines and you may begin to see that women are still dressing to please males and keep their inherent inferiority complex flowing along, damn the ambient temperature.

I'm just curious: what exactly are women obliged to wear these days? I assume that just about all of them wear bras and panties, but apart from that I see women wearing pretty much whatever they want to wear.

And is there anything inherently wrong with the differentiation of the sexes--as long of course as neither sex is being oppressed? If a man does something manly because it makes him feel good about himself, or if a woman does something womanly because it makes her feel good about herself, is that wrong? Maybe most people like some sort of differentiation between the sexes. I can't see that it's to be condemned out of hand. I think it depends on what sort of activity we're talking about.

Looking in magazines is one thing. Looking at real-life women all about us is something different. They don't always dress to please men. And when they do, is that necessarily bad? After all, most women like men. So is there something wrong with them trying to please them? Similarly, most men like women and will do a fair bit of stuff to please them. Is there something wrong with that?

Finally, I wasn't aware that women have an inherent inferiority complex, but maybe I need to read more (feminist?) literature on the subject.

Best wishes, Annabelle