Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rational Dress Society

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 204 posts

Re: Rational Dress Society

#161

Post by AlecSchueler »

globular-toast wrote: post #68
AlecSchueler wrote: post #21

It's kind of scary that this looks so quaint and antiquated but we still live in a time when the dress of women is limited both legally and socially, with restrictions on everything from where they can breastfeed to the number of pockets they can get. The older I get the more egrarious it all feels. It also seems more normalised for younger men to hold explicitly misogynistic viewpoints about these issues.

Comments like this are so weird. It's like you put women on the same level as children or animals. Like they just get what they're given and have to put up with it. Women are free to choose their own clothes. They are free to make their own clothes or start their own clothing companies. If they really wanted clothes with pockets then they would get them. But they don't. I think it's a bit silly that I can't just urin…

You're comparing breastfeeding to urination and then telling me women are free?

Re: Rational Dress Society

#162

Post by AlecSchueler »

cubefox wrote: post #106
AlecSchueler wrote: post #21

It's kind of scary that this looks so quaint and antiquated but we still live in a time when the dress of women is limited both legally and socially, with restrictions on everything from where they can breastfeed to the number of pockets they can get. The older I get the more egrarious it all feels. It also seems more normalised for younger men to hold explicitly misogynistic viewpoints about these issues.

I think the opposite is true. For example, formal outfits for men are restricted to suits, while for women a much wider range of outfits and colors is acceptable. You can see this on group photos of politicians.

I'd actually see this more as supporting my position.

Men simply wear the standard suit and forget about it, and no one rips into their fashion choices.

A woman wearing the same kind of suit will be seen as manly and be made fun of for that. The expectation is she will find something functional yet feminine, not wear it repeatedly and contrast with her female colleagues. Makeup must be enough to be nice for the camera but not so much as to look provocative.

While in a sense there are more available options we can see there is more social pressure.

Re: Rational Dress Society

#163

Post by AlecSchueler »

dalbasal wrote: post #114
AlecSchueler wrote: post #21

It's kind of scary that this looks so quaint and antiquated but we still live in a time when the dress of women is limited both legally and socially, with restrictions on everything from where they can breastfeed to the number of pockets they can get. The older I get the more egrarious it all feels. It also seems more normalised for younger men to hold explicitly misogynistic viewpoints about these issues.

I think there's a limit to freedom as a compass, especially if we emphasise social limitations. At some point you're not after freedom. You're after change to social norms, not people's right to break them. Depending on the specific beach/society/group bikinis can be either normative or anti-normative. IE, a woman can, and likely will feel pressured to conform. A 1950s bathing gown or a modern burkini is often as una…

Isn't part of exercising our freedom to change them having open conversations about how they do and don't serve us, calling attention to how certain norms have become entrenched and quietioning that etc.?

Re: Rational Dress Society

#164

Post by miriam_catira »

gardenhedge wrote: post #102
bprieto wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they say is one thimg, what they buy is another. If women really wanted clothes with big pockets, women clothes would have big pockets. But big pockets, specially when they have some things in, are not esthetically pleasant, and most women value esthetics more than utility.

This is exactly correct. Maybe 30 years ago it would have been difficult to get pockets on clothes because the shops in your locality didn't sell them.. but now we have this wonderful thing called the Internet.

It's still a problem - and then you're stuck not able to try it on to see if it fits properly and is comfortable.

I've finally decided to take up mending just to be able to add pockets to more of my clothes - esp stuff for around the house. Most of the time if you find pockets, they're too small to put anything in! I'd rather put in the effort to make clothes match my style AND be comfortable/useful than wait for shops and brands to figure it out. Because they really don't seem to care.

Re: Rational Dress Society

#165

Post by mikrl »

Mezzie wrote: post #141
emptystation wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am one of those women who would wear an ill fitting bra over a well fitting one if a well fitting one accentuated my back fat. When you're conditioned to look and present themselves a certain way, it's almost impossible to fight it with rational arguments. It's anecdotal, of course, but I've seen a certain degree of conditioning in practically all the women across different cultures, just that the details differ. B…

> I've seen a certain degree of conditioning in practically all the women across different cultures, just that the details differ. I would agree with that, although my experience is mostly limited to America. I see substantial differences in how that pressure presents across different generations. (Somebody needs to check on Gen X women, Jesus. Mass media did a number on them.) I don't understand personally (I'm 'pre…

>Mass media did a number on them

IMO the same can be said for every generation of women that came of age from the 1990s until today, but yea heroin chic and size zero culture really hit Gen X women.

In fact it’s so bad, that even male zoomers are falling victim to the social media powered mass culture these days; there is really no escape for anyone anymore.

Re: Rational Dress Society

#166

Post by UncleOxidant »

flappyeagle wrote: post #154
chlodwig wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried the J.Crew 1040 Athletic tapered-fit stretch chino pant? It's designed with a bigger thigh for guys who don't skip leg day -- https://www.jcrew.com/m/mens/categories/clothing/pants-and-c...

Slim is on its way out. OP might as well wear something aggressively comfortable and forward looking https://www.jcrew.com/p/mens/categories/clothing/pants-and-c...

Yeah, I thought slim was already out for a while now?

Re: Rational Dress Society

#167

Post by hollandays »

frodetb wrote: post #100

This is a premise I can get behind. One of the silliest battles I have found myself fighting against society has been my search for comfortable yet attractive men's pants. I deeply dislike the restricting fit of modern pants, especially tighter fitting jeans, but also the semi-current fashion in suits and pants in general. It may be that a catalyst for this conflict has been my anatomy. My thighs and butt are huge, c…

[dead]

Re: Rational Dress Society

#168

Post by Wowfunhappy »

frodetb wrote: post #118
masklinn wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My thighs and butt are huge, compared to other guys of similar proportions Have you considered looking at the women’s? Might be no better in the end, but this reads like what’s conventionally a feminine anatomy, and garment designers will generally go with conventional anatomy, if not outright prescribe completely imaginary ones you have to conform to.

I absolutely have! Didn't think it was worth the tangent so I'm glad you're bringing it up. Women's fashion is so much more varied in shape, size, style, and fit, and some of it even looks comfortable. As a matter of fact, if you search for high-rise trousers online, most of the results are precisely in the women's section. I think that will have to be my next stop, though it's a line to cross and somewhat of pill to…

> though it's a line to cross and somewhat of pill to swallow.

If the pants fit, I really don't think anyone is going to notice.

Avoid the pants with pink flowers on them.

Re: Rational Dress Society

#169

Post by Mezzie »

mikrl wrote: post #165
Mezzie wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen a certain degree of conditioning in practically all the women across different cultures, just that the details differ. I would agree with that, although my experience is mostly limited to America. I see substantial differences in how that pressure presents across different generations. (Somebody needs to check on Gen X women, Jesus. Mass media did a number on them.) I don't understand personally (I'm 'pre…

>Mass media did a number on them IMO the same can be said for every generation of women that came of age from the 1990s until today, but yea heroin chic and size zero culture really hit Gen X women. In fact it’s so bad, that even male zoomers are falling victim to the social media powered mass culture these days; there is really no escape for anyone anymore.

Gen X women in particular had to deal with all the pressure of mass media and fake pictures, etc. at a vulnerable age before there was much push back. Of course Millennials and Gen Z are pressured, but there's also substantial pushback to and discussion of that pressure in a way there really wasn't in 1993. And things are a bit more fragmented now in that the monoculture has a little less sway so it's more possible to find a niche of people who agree with your aesthetic/presentation choices. Gen X also had the misfortune of being the first generation to deal with a more sexually permissive/post pill society and so things like continually looking attractive are more 'important' than for Boomer or Silent Gen women. The older Boomers and Silent Gen women I see don't like their bodies but they also don't feel like they should look 20 at 60+ because a lot of their examples growing up were still women in their lives + the cultural ideal was to get married young and keep the same man. The Gen Xers had the double whammy of 'be sexually liberated and by the way in order to do that, we're going to tell you to look 16 forever' without the counterbalance of any body positivity at all.

Re: Rational Dress Society

#170

Post by Arrath »

hgsgm wrote: post #120
karmelapple wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. The secret I’ve found: look for athletic cut. That’s the cut many hockey players wear, who typically have huge thighs and a rumble seat because of the muscles skating works. Those are the only pants I buy now. I even got Michael Strahan suit pants recently, since they were the only ones in the store that fit me nicely.

> and a rumble seat What?

Junk in the trunk
Post reply on HN