I am honestly surprised how this statement seems to get applied to what for all intents and purposes is a very viable argument.
Why is the statement that men being blocked from wearing skirts AS MEN, while women can wear whatever style pants they wish is unfair, is considered an argument that is "kicking at a dead horse"?
I don't understand this. Is this thought prevalent because too many have given up?
Now, I am not talking about the argument that Full fem looking cds being blocked but women wearing pants are not being a moot argument, cause as sad as it it, it is in fact a dead argument. Women do not try to emulate men (though often times they do) when they wear pants.
But as I have stated, as far as I am concerned I am doing full on CDing when I put on breast forms, and tuck. Otherwise I am going either male or androgynous (and androgyny is a whole other can of worms...yet another thing women can do with little problems but a male...eh, not so much)
I have presented some male in skirts look here that are in no way tying to be anything BUT male. Turkey Jive on Rye does likewise.
The argument that it is not fair that women can wear pants but men cannot wear skirts because a very valid argument when taken in the context of men wearing skirts as men as demonstrated by the referred to pics.
I also really really really dislike the idea that men should be limited to kilts. NO WAY. Why is that in anyway fair when women can wear 100s of styles of pants, ranging from super spandex, to ultra baggy denim?
