Gendered clothing - grrr.

I just found this:
"It doesn’t matter your age: If you’re a female, your clothes cost more than similar male clothing. The NYC study found that adult women, on average, pay 8% more for their clothes than men do. The largest price discrepancies were in shirts (15%), dress shirts (13%) and jeans (10%).

What’s more, girl’s clothing costs 4% more than boy’s clothing. Children’s shirts have the largest discrepancies (13%), followed by baby pants (9%) and children’s jeans (8%). (Incidentally, children’s toys geared for girls are also priced more, by about 7%, the study found.)".

It is referring to (I think), this study from New York City Consumer Affairs:
www1.nyc.gov/assets/dca/downloads/pdf/partners/Study-of-Gender-Pricing-in-NYC.pdf

A real eye-opener! Especially the blatant difference in some of the babies and kids stuff pictures -- pink dye and sparkles obviously just cost so much more!

Conclusion seemed to be that even allowing for 'excuses' based on complicated curvy cuts for women, or more fabric 'wastage', the bottom line is women have to pay more because they are willing to expect to pay more (apart from knickers! Even kids underwear, where for the same price girls get a 7-pack of panties, and boys get a 5-pack of briefs.............does masculinity training mean it is impossible to get boys into clean pants at the weekend????).

So, we get paid less, and we pay more. Whoopee-Do!

Trump's hair kinda proves how unusual a man's look has to be to get commented on at all.
Besides, the toupee's Twitter account is the only good thing about this whole campaign!

I remember when Margaret Beckett was the first female Foreign Secretary and got a lot of stick in the media for essentially being 60 and not being arsed to put on makeup and make herself pretty, and one interviewer asked her how she felt about being critcised for her looks. She replied that she took it as a compliment as they obviously couldn't find anything in her policies to argue with! Good on her, though I suspect in private it must have got to her sometimes.

My 3yo had her only tantrums when I tried to put her in a pair of trousers without pockets. I had much sympathy and have felt the same way when trying to buy trousers! Goodness knows how she will react to school shoes and her 4yo classmates asking why she's wearing boy clothes if we get the no-longer-labelled but still intended as boy shoes...

Is that his real hair? >

More choices so you can get it wrong in more ways.

Yes, his hair. The first thing on the news last night was Trump's new haircut.

No one comments on what Trump, Cruz, Kasich, and Sanders are wearing

Apart from Trump's hair. There's been plenty about that.

This is playing out during the US presidential election campaign. No one comments on what Trump, Cruz, Kasich, and Sanders are wearing, but comments and jokes from comedians on Hillary Clinton's choices are common.

It's safe to say you've, shall we say, a slightly skewed idea of what butch might look like, right?

How patronising and wrong actually.

It's safe to say you have absolutely no idea whether or not I know what butch looks like (although given I referred to the St.Harridan site that might have given you an indication) or whether I know or have met women or have friends who fit into that category. Would be kind of difficult not to really.

I'd not heard of Karl S. before, but the one suit for a year experiment really does make the point!

Apart from the poorer quality, more expensive, lack of pockets, lack of practicality, and lack of relatedness to the actual part of the body in question (by which I mean the fact that fashionable womens shoes seems to have very little relation to the actual shape of the human foot or the process of walking! ), women and what they wear are subject to the sort of scrutiny that man aren't. It isn't, as far as I can see, about what exactly they are wearing, but whether or not they are doing the 'proper' obsession with their appearance that is expected of women doing femininity. So, think 'Annie Hall', where Diane Keaton was wearing a considerable amount of male clothing, yet it was/became just another fashion.

The supposed plethora of choices available to women (but not men) is just disguising the social stigma for women who make the wrong choice! The fact that womens choices are low on practicality, functionality, and durability, and high on fripperies, appearance and cost. Looks over substance.

Google Karl Stefanovic. (I'd put links, but phone doesn't seem to play ball.)

Yes I remember - the man who was disgusted at the amount of criticism on the attire of his co-presenter who was a woman so he wore the same suit for a whole year.

That's true - there was that Aussie newsreader. It's all coming back to me...

There's been some pretty compelling evidence that people don't notice if men wear the same suit every day. Even if they're in the public eye every day. Even if they do it for a year as an experiment. So (and I have no clue who said that, and I can't be arsed to read back and find it) I call bullshit.

I think some of it is because we all have different views on clothes anyway - someone upthread said they'd notice if some man at work wore the same suit every day. I don't think I would. I would notice if someone who normally wears jeans came in in a suit, but not if they wore the same thing every day, if it was the same sort of thing they wore every day. So I'm not sure I'd particularly notice if a woman wore masculine dress, if that's what she always wore - though I suspect I'd notice a man who came in wearing a skirt. I am sure there will be some people in the office who look at what I wear, and notice that I sometimes wear the same trousers as the day before, or a top from a couple of days earlier, but plenty of others won't. But I expect those who do notice will indeed be thinking why doesn't she make the effort, but I don't really care.

The two friends I mentioned above are lesbians and they wear men's clothes almost exclusively. I work with one of them. It would be very much contrary to our workplace policies for someone to police her dress because of her gender expression.

I think that's a fair assessment, yes.

Possibly it's the different versions of what 'wearing men's clothes' might mean?

Most people have mentioned wearing men's clothes that are actually pretty unisex, hoodies, jeans etc, which might have some bearing on it.

And those who have mentioned wearing clothing that is predominantly gendered male, suits etc, have had positive experiences when they've worn it very very occasionally or once. Maybe it's when it's habitual that it becomes a problem for everyone?

Robins It was a thread a long long time ago. Stayed in my mind.

That's pretty much my experience:

Being read as a lesbian

and

being offered 'helpful' advice on how to dress, because obviously I chose to dress in that way out of ignorance.

It's the affront thing that got to me in the end. Like I was dressing in a way I felt comfortable as a direct challenge to the person who took offence IYSWIM?