Policing Men's Clothes

[MalagaNights]

There's an interesting debate going on twitter between many of the GC feminists I follow and Sarah Phillimore and Helen Pluckrose.

It seems to hit on some of the themes we've been involved in discussing on here previously. Particularly linked to the man in a dress at Genspect.

https://x.com/SVPhillimore/status/1748983536785190951?s=20

Helen Pluckrose states somewhere that there is a a streak of authoritarianism in GC feminism. With some wanting to control what men can wear.

Sarah and Helen seem to be saying you can't legislate for this which I actually don't think anyone is arguing for. They're arguing with a straw man I think.

But what I think they're missing is the societal shift that has socially accepted men in women's clothes has allowed many men permission to have their fetish publicly celebrated.

We could turn that around with a change in social attitude. E.g many companies have now allowed men to wear the women's uniform at work. They don't have to allow this. We could return to men and women's uniforms including practical options for both.

We could openly discuss and express our discomfort about men who do this is usually sexual, instead of pretending it's just fashion. Everyone used to know this about cross dressing and that's why it was done privately.

Then we hit on the tricky issue how do we discriminate between men who are AGP and men who like exploring fashion?

Helen Pluckrose is arguing it's not usually sexual and if you are uncomfortable deal with your own feelings.

We could ensure that where men still insist on performing feminity we at least don't have to listen to why they're so brave and their 'story' to self discovery, as has been happening in work places.

I actually think the 'it's just clothes' ' let's abolish gender' stance of some feminists has led to this opportunity for men to queer the boundaries and bring their sexual fetish into every day life. I think we're discovering that some of the boundaries we had around the sexes, performed a role which we've thrown away.

I agree with Sarah that we can't legislate for this. But we never had legislation on clothing we just had socially acceptable rules which change over time with common consent.

Anyway, it's very heated over on twitter and I think we've actually reached a point of having to address this issue. How do we deal with men who get a sexual thrill from wearing women's clothes. Once we've all agreed they're men. Then what?

Thing is, Gender Critical Feminism knows exactly why that's the case and would like to get rid of it. It's literally the point of Feminism.

Sadly Phineas feels the need to be a they rather than a he.

However the point remains that men don’t have to wear trousers.

What we need is a way of identifying sexualised clothing that goes beyond a gut instinct.

There just aren't men wearing dresses in modern western culture as a fashion choice.

I know many of you want this utopian non gendered world. But we're not there.

The examples you give are rare or historical or cross cultural.

I'm not arguing there is anything intrinsically feminine about a skirt. Just that at this point it is a woman only item culturally and the change we've been forced to accept isn't a mens fashion movement. That does not exist in any meaningful way as much as you'd like it to.

We were nearer to it in the 80/90s and it looked like there could be a shift in fashion. Being lead by cool influential men.

But now it's been co opted by the cross dressers and there's no way of judging whether they're a cross dresser or an edgy fashion boundary pusher. So fashion has moved away from this.

If there was going to be a fashion movement then dresses and skirts for men would be designed and sold to men. It would be seen as cool, edgy and then eventually mainstream.

That's not what we've got happening, and your wanting this to be true means that we've had to accept the cross dressers.

I think GC feminists are so blinded by their beliefs that they can't see the unintended consequences of abolishing social rules around clothing for men.

Even when the results are being paraded before us.

. What does 'gender critical feminism' resolutely know is the reason for differing clothing for the sexes, across all cultures?

and what is 'literally the point of feminism'? this is a large statement.

I think it’s a great question and worth a bit of unpicking.

I don’t think GC feminism is responsible for men performing their fetish in public.

I don’t think men are wearing sexualised women’s clothes because of feminism.

Men’s bad behaviour isn’t women’s fault.
Women don’t start fights because they’re wearing trousers and flat shoes.

In fact maybe if we put men in restrictive clothes and impractical shoes they’d be less physically aggressive! Though video evidence of trans women beating up a lad on a train platform, or aggressively pointing while shrieking ‘It’s Ma’am!’ Suggests otherwise.

@MalagaNights If you think that men around the world are not wearing lungis and kaftans and the like
you need to look beyond the rich west

many AGPs wear a caricature of American 1950's dress

go to Cambodia and the rules are UTTERLY different

I saw a man in a skirt recently. Black, knee length, coupled with boots. Looked great. Just a bloke shopping with a toddler. There was a time when it was shocking for women to wear trousers but fashion changes.

On another occasion I saw a man with a beard, trousers and lacy top with fake boobs. To be fair, it was at a festival but I felt it was an insulting appropriation of the female body.

At the end of the day, we can't police clothes when people are walking down the street, but I think it's reasonable, especially at work to say no fake body parts ( unless they replace a part you would normally have) and no inappropriately sexual clothing, even if you have a very special identity.

Women generally seem to have no problem not accidentally wearing fetish gear to a meeting or evening wear in school. We just have to be unafraid of insisting on sensible attire that is appropriate to the situation.

Gender. The unequal and oppresssive difference in societal expectation towards men and women. That's the thing that Feminism (at least until some people co-opted the word) wants rid of.

I know this.

I think you've either not read my posts or failed to understand my argument.

I have never seen a man wearing a skirt or dress where it looks like a stylish male fashion choice.

Apart from kilts and cultural dress.

The examples of this are vanishingly rare. You are grasping at straws. It's not a current movement.

What I have seen is men wearing women's clothes imitating women. That is a current movement we've been forced to accept.

Sorry, MalagaNights, I do recognise you & know you’re not new here - I just noticed the juxtaposition 😊

You may well be right, and I guess most of my opinions around how your sex shouldn’t impose (non-biological) boundaries were established in the 80’s & 90’s….. perhaps I’m demonstrating my dinosaur credentials!

Getting rid of stereotypes doesn't mean getting rid of sex based differences, quite the opposite.

I actually think that there is some truth to your suggestion that Genderists have used the liberalisation of social norms around Gender and the success of feminism as a cover for their own agenda- I don't think that is in any way Feminist's fault or a repudiation of Feminist ideas.

The stereotypes pushed by Genderists are just as harmful as the traditional patriarcal stereotypes (and often basically the same). Feminists are not responsible for men's creepyness.

On another thread I was told that I was wrong when I reported that many women on here want to abolish gender.

I see though you're definitely about.

I think you are mistaken that that is a generally held view of feminism.

I think you are mistaken that that is a generally held view of feminism.

It's the defining view of Gender Critical Feminism, otherwise it's not Critical of Gender. It's the generally accepted view of radical feminism.

I'm quite sure that lots of feminsts don't go that far but I don't really get it from a theory point of view.

I wonder if you equate such a radical notion with a radical application? Saying that Gender (I'm deliberately capitalising to be clear that by Gender I mean sex stereotypes and the structure that support them) should be dismantled doesn't imply the dismantling of other instituions and norms that (for example) Queer Theory does.

Giving women the vote, allowing women to become doctors, legalising same sex marriage and letting women wear trousers and no makeup are all dismantling Gender.

Skirts as fashion items for men absolutely do exist - Google it. They might be in a minority but there absolutely are men wearing skirts for fashion, and not just celebrities. Just because you haven’t seen it, doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. Go and have a wander around Peckham or Shoreditch and you’ll probably see several stylish young men in skirts.

This is your belief on why clothing is different: oppression. I would argue that this isn't the definitive reason for differences in clothing for males and females. It may sometimes be a reason, but there could be plenty of other reasons.

Maybe all cultures accross the world have different clothing for men and women because:

Practicalities - breastfeeding, bumps, boobs, big hips, women who have had ten kids won't fit into men's clothing. Also I don't know if you have ever taken wild wees, but if you have got trousers on you put yourself in a very exposed postion, having to pull you trousers down to your ankles and squat with your bum out. On the other hand if you have a full length skirt, you can crouch down really easy and no one around you would know.

Safety - Maybe there is a benefit into being able to distinguish someone's sex whilst they are still far away from you. Maybe women can keep themselves safe if they can establish the sex of someone from afar without them getting too close before realising they are a man. Maybe Children benefit from clearly distinguishing a male or a female based on their attire. Especially so for small children who see clothes more than other features, to them a man wearing women's clothes might actually be a woman. Maybe this keeps them safe. The same could be said for people who have bad sight, especially women with bad sight, in countries where they can't access glasses. Maybe having clear outfits helps them to see who is male and female.

Maybe that having some level of 'conservative' ideas around sexed clothing actually keeps women safe. Maybe having clear lines around acceptable behaviour helps us see red flags when we observe a male who is crossing that line.

This is what I mean by we need psychological/sociological understanding of why this clothing difference occurs across all cultures, before we just do away with it. I don't think GC feminism knows that answer, I think it is an ideological belief to say that it is merely down to 'oppression', and getting rid of it might very well negatively affect women and children.

Allowing women to be doctors, and giving us the vote etc are definitely dismantling oppression, but is it dismantling gender? Is gender always linked to oppression?

For everyone who is arguing that men don't / shouldn't wear skirts or 'female' clothing, what do you think of women wearing 'male' clothing? I am female but I haven't worn a dress or skirt in at least 5 years and I haven't worn heels in 10+ years. I wear trousers to work everyday (in a traditionally male industry) and jeans at weekends.

if you are claiming that men shouldn't wear skirts, are you also going to claim that I shouldn't wear trousers?

As a GC feminist, I think we should not be policing any clothing beyond basic standards of decency and covering genitals.

Women's clothing is a well-established fetish for some men, whether they're stealing it from washing lines or baggage belts or their step-daughter's underwear drawer or buying their own.

Which is why there's always been a lot of social repulsion to men wearing women's clothes, especially 'sexy' ones, and a lot of comedy about it for at least the last couple of generations.

Now idiots want this kind of public sexual behaviour to be 'normalized'.

The feminist objection isn't about the clothes, it's that this is sexual behaviour. Curbing male sexual behaviour in the workplace, in parliament, on the trading floor, on the streets etc has been huge for women's rights and freedoms. That's why MRAs push back on it.

Lots of men don't think through why they support the rights of men who want to wear high heels to work, but they know instinctively that it's about pushing male sexual power back into the public sphere, and they are ready to scream at women who oppose it.

There is a practical reason for you to want to wear trousers, trousers are more practical for many things.

What is the reason a man would want to wear a skirt? in our culture?

Lots of those things probably are factors. I don't think they can be determinative because lots of men wear what are 'women's' clothes in another culture and vice versa.

Of course some aspects of social conservatism are for valid reasons, as you suggest, but cultures with strongly enforced dress codes for men and women are more oppressive in general. There just isn't a valid reason to try to enforce dress codes based on sex.

Because he likes it and he wants to? The only reason anyone needs to wear whatever clothing they want.

I think there is some balance in all of this, anything strictly enforced is oppressive and a problem, and stifling. Yet no cultural norms whatsoever mean that we can't notice when men are crossing social contracts and breaking boundaries, and we conditon people not to notice red flags. No cultural norms are chaos and mean we are moving to a place (such as we are now) where perverts can wear more and more outrageous displays of public fetish, yet no one can call them out. I also regularly see young teenage girls wearing bondage strap tops as fashion attire out and about. We have lost all sense of 'decency'

Somewhere in the middle of these two is probably ideal.