On men’s clothing: That’s often true, but I have been frustrated when the ONLY think they can think of is stuff that is deliberately, blatantly feminine. People with an ideology frequently manage to come up with stuff that looks more femme than 17th century clothing does, and which looks more femme than a woman wearing a tuxedo does. In particualar, I am a little bit annoyed by the praise being heaped on Yoko Ono by somebody I normally respect.
For some examples of stuff I think is kind of cool and which doesn’t look too femme, you might want to check out the male clothing in Girl Genius (the female clothing is fairly par-for-the-steampunk, except without punkyness, and also very inconvenient.)
Although it might be just that I am seeing it in the middle of all this other fantastical stuff.
People with an ideology frequently manage to come up with stuff that looks more femme than 17th century clothing does, and which looks more femme than a woman wearing a tuxedo does. In particualar, I am a little bit annoyed by the praise being heaped on Yoko Ono by somebody I normally respect.
I think I may have read that article. With a couple of exceptions the Ono line mainly struck me as silly, but that’s at least as outre as being overtly femme in menswear. (Imagine Brad Pitt in a dress. Then imagine Tom Green wearing a skinned Muppet.)
Then again, that’s sort of the point. As best I can tell, clothes coming out of that segment of the fashion world aren’t meant to be worn in quantity by mere mortals, they’re meant as an artistic statement—which, the art scene being what it is, almost always means a political statement. And in that context, I think I can get behind (e.g.) nipple cutouts on dudes a lot more easily.
My frustrating isn’t with Yoko Ono. It’s with a feminist and masculist I normally respect who always comes up with Yoko Ono, or a strange male equivalent of a rave girl, or something when they try to talk about men’s clothing.
On men’s clothing: That’s often true, but I have been frustrated when the ONLY think they can think of is stuff that is deliberately, blatantly feminine. People with an ideology frequently manage to come up with stuff that looks more femme than 17th century clothing does, and which looks more femme than a woman wearing a tuxedo does. In particualar, I am a little bit annoyed by the praise being heaped on Yoko Ono by somebody I normally respect.
For some examples of stuff I think is kind of cool and which doesn’t look too femme, you might want to check out the male clothing in Girl Genius (the female clothing is fairly par-for-the-steampunk, except without punkyness, and also very inconvenient.)
Although it might be just that I am seeing it in the middle of all this other fantastical stuff.
I think I may have read that article. With a couple of exceptions the Ono line mainly struck me as silly, but that’s at least as outre as being overtly femme in menswear. (Imagine Brad Pitt in a dress. Then imagine Tom Green wearing a skinned Muppet.)
Then again, that’s sort of the point. As best I can tell, clothes coming out of that segment of the fashion world aren’t meant to be worn in quantity by mere mortals, they’re meant as an artistic statement—which, the art scene being what it is, almost always means a political statement. And in that context, I think I can get behind (e.g.) nipple cutouts on dudes a lot more easily.
My frustrating isn’t with Yoko Ono. It’s with a feminist and masculist I normally respect who always comes up with Yoko Ono, or a strange male equivalent of a rave girl, or something when they try to talk about men’s clothing.