Why Don't Men Wear Skirts? The Female Image of Skirts

A major factor that puts men off wearing skirts is the fear of ridicule. The skirt, along with the frock are such powerful female images in modern society, that to wear one risks being thought of as a cross dresser. Some people will also associate it with homosexuality, but I would argue that is probably more to do with confusion over homosexuality and cross dressing.The fundamental association is with femininity.

When a man wants to dress like a woman-whether it be a cross dresser, a drag artist, a transexual, or for fancy dress-he will wear a frock or a skirt. His hair may be long or short. He may wear make-up, jewelry or neither; but he will always wear a frock or a dress.

Women seem to be able to wear anything without judgement. They have subsumed the male wardrobe and adapted, trousers, suits, ties, even the DJ and made them look feminine.

Darren Fernandes wrote in his article Androgyny as an Abomination or Aphrodisiac for Notjustalabel; to consider fluidity in sexuality, it must be understood that, when women play with incomplete androgynous fashion to still attain an overall feminine look, androgyny is released from being an abomination and may actually be considered an aphrodisiac.

That is not to say that women can not also cross dress. The bottom three pictures are of lesbians from http://www.afterellen.com/people/2010/11/hide-seek-uncovers-lesbian-images-in-art

Why Don't Men Wear Skirts? The Power of The Skirt

The kilt, the fustanella, the toga-there are lots of examples of skirts associated with military or political power from ancient times. But what about more modern times- since skirts have been considered as female dress?

The frock coat is cut to accentuate the neoclassical ideal male form. It is not a skirt, but in silhouette can give the impression of one. The frock coat also flows and swirls like a skirt; a quality also shared by the cape.

What got me thinking along these lines, was when I drove past a small group of people on their way to a wedding. There were two men dressed in kilts, and two ladies in dresses. The ladies were made up with new hair does and wearing jewelry, but it was the men who looked the more impressive; in a way that wouldn't have been the case if they were wearing trousers. The swish of the kilts were accentuated by the swagger of the men as they strode down the road knowing that eyes were on them.

Jewelry is another form of attire, albeit an accessory, that can convey power. It is interesting to compare jewelry with skirts. Jewelry has been used by both sexes throughout history but in the modern western world it is usually seen as a feminine accessory. Whereas jewelry is ostensibly worn for its prettiness, there is a strong association with showing off. I am thinking of those women who wear expensive jewelry and are more concerned with the size of their diamonds than their aesthetics. Jewelry or "Bling" has also been adopted by the Rap culture and is worn by men as a show of power. The lyrics of Rap songs are often about men exerting sexual power over women and bling seems to form a visual illustration of this power.

In contrast to this and despite my feeling that the skirt can convey power, it may be that it is the fear of the loss of power that stops men from wearing skirts. Just think of the expression ' You can tell who wears the trousers in that relationship.'

Why Don't Men Wear Skirts? Gender Identity

When it comes to gender roles and identities there is often debate, just as with other human characteristics, about how much can be attributed to nature and how much to nurture.

Having established that trousers are a relatively modern form of clothing, I think we can confidently say that the assignment of skirts as female dress has nothing to do with any inherited predisposition and is entirely a social construct. By this I mean that when, in the modern western world, parents choose to dress their sons in trousers and their daughters in skirts; this is because of social convention not because of natural instinct.

We very much recognise this behaviour from our grandparents and parents, and no matter how enlightened we feel in comparison today the tradition continues. See this website that I found for a shop that sells unisex children's clothes. It markets itself on its uniqueness, and prides itself on its progressive stance, but obviously the policy is not profitable enough, because it also has a boys and a girls section.

It is therefore a natural threat to our ingrained model of the world when men wear skirts. But hold on, don't we all try and challenge convention these days. Well, designers might do so because that is their job, but there are plenty of walks of life in which people have a vested interest in preserving traditional gender roles. I am imagining a "traditional middle-class couple". The husband happily follows his profession or chosen work and his housewife is happy to give up work to support him. She may even have been raised for just such a role and finding the right husband may have been akin to the husband finding the right workplace. Such a couple are likely to oppose a threat to traditional gender roles as vehemently as a designer is likely to promote it.

So what if we try and take this social construct out of the equation. Take the Goth scene. "Goth Culture: Gender, Sexuality and Style" is a book written by Dunja Brill. It was reviewed last month by Catherine Spooner in "The Times Higher Education"-http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=406767&sectioncode=26 and referenced extensively in a student essay I found on the internet by Simon Pascal Klein-http://klepas.org/files/doc/a-critical-examination-of-gender-relations-within-goth-subculture.pdf.

The impression I get is a world stripped of any expectation to conform to traditional gender identities so that natural and intuitive expressions of gender can emerge. The result is men taking on androgynous appearance and other men using make-up, jewelry and skirts as a form of power dressing to accentuate their masculinity. In turn it seems that some women need to go even further to express their femininity. Brill adopts the term "hyperfeminine" to describe them.

Could this mean that women could feel threatened by men wearing skirts. Is there a certain power associated with skirts that women would prefer to keep for themselves and as a result consciously or subconsciously discourage men from wearing them?

Why Don't Men Wear Skirts?

Of course some men do wear skirts. Before trousers were invented, all men wore skirts and some parts of the world have still not adopted trousers.

But I don't think you could say that skirts are commonly found in the wardrobes of your average western man.

Designers have tried to introduce them. Look at this video.

In 2002 the Victoria and Albert Museum hosted an exhibition called Men in Skirts. It was complimented by a catwalk event and featured skirts designed for men by the following designers: Jean-Paul Gaultier, John Bartlett, Walter Van Beirendonck, Ozwald Boateng, Dries Van Noten, Kenzo, Maharishi, Midas Clothing, Jean Charles De Castelbajac, Philippe Dubuc, Burberry, Dolce and Gabana, Paul Smith, Vivienne Westwood, Vohji Yamamoto, Daniel Moloney, Michiko Koshino, Anna Sui. The following year in 2003, The Metropolitan Museum hosted an exhibition called Bravehearts: Men in Skirts, which again explored the taboo of modern men wearing skirts. A march entitled Million Skirted Men was organised to support the event. Men were invited to gather, wearing skirts of course, at the Guggenheim and march to the Metropolitan. Apparently only about a hundred men took part, but it illustrates the efforts that have been made to promote the wearing of skirts by men.

So, why have skirts for men consistently failed to take off? Even Marc Jacobs, a designer who personally favours wearing skirts recognises the limitations of their appeal to the mainstream. Here is a quote from Androgyny An Abomination or Aphrodisiac for Not Just a Label, Darren Fernandes (2011) Whether there is greater acceptance of androgynous outfits shown on the catwalk, because they are protected and perceived as works of art that are disconnected from the ‘real’ world, there are definite socio-cultural limitations within which designers must work within to sell their pieces. For instance, when asked if he will introduce the skirt into his next men’s collection, even skirt-clad Marc Jacobs frankly answered “No.”

In terms of the history of clothes, trousers are a modern invention. Breeches, which were knee length with stockings worn on the lower legs, became established in the 1700's. Pantaloons were tight full leg length garments fastened down by foot straps, that were made fashionable by Beau Brummell in the early 1800's. Trousers originally referred to a garment worn over breeches to protect them from getting dirty when riding. Apparently sailors were early adopters of trousers for practical reasons. In general it seems that trousers are the practical choice compared to skirts, but I don't think this is the sole reason that men choose trousers. After all, women have just as much need for practicality. There are reasons for skirts being more practical for men than trousers. Anatomically a skirt should be more comfortable and less restricting than trousers. From a medical point of view, fertility is lessened if the temperature of the scrotum is raised (why else are the male testicles placed in such a vulnerable position-outside of the body). You could say skirts are the choice for virility.

They are also cooler in summer, and a wrap around skirt can be a lot easier in terms of fit and ease of putting on.

Nevertheless, I would concede that some men would baulk at the vulnerability that a skirt can confer. Take a look at this article by Neil Robinson for "Helium" and his own personal experiment.

I don't think that a skirt is intrinsically feminine. I would challenge anyone to call a Highland kilt or the Greek fustanella feminine.

It is the cut of a garment, along with the choice of fabric, colour and pattern that give it its gender.

These trousers are a lot more feminine than these skirts.

So what is it about skirts that put men off?

Judging from the articles above and just asking around, some men are afraid of ridicule. Is this because of an association with homosexuality, or cross dressing? How much of this is associated with gender stereotypes, and do women have a role in suppressing mens appetite for skirts because they feel threatened in some way. Is there an innate power associated with the skirt in terms of its shape and form that could be responsible for these strong feelings. Or is the skirt destined to be a niche garment, and instead of wondering why men don't wear it more, should we assume that women are lagging behind men in largely abandoning skirts as everyday wear?

These are the questions I will tackle in future postings.

Bibliography:

http://www.poloindia.com/historyoftrousers/right_frame.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers

http://www.france24.com/en/20091214-skirt-men-democratize

http://trendland.net/2010/06/30/men-in-skirts-from-the-runway-to-the-street/men-in-skirts_runway/

http://www.helium.com/items/1667621-why-men-dont-wear-skirts?page=3

Google Images

Blythe House visit with Kay

I loved this trip, not only because I adore looking at vintage fabrics. Love big old dusty books. It was a beautiful building, but mainly it brought back memories of my grandad.

I did not know what to expect to see on the tour. I knew Blythe House held the archives for the V and A, and also the science museum. What awaited me was a wonderful collection of fabric and wallpaper samples. I was like a child in a sweetie shop, not knowing where to look first. My grandad as a profession used to design wallpaper for stately homes. I suppose to be more accurate, he was an artist who hand painted and restored wallpapers in stately homes. His house was always filled with samples of his designs, colour wheels, and the smell of paint. As a child I completely took them for granted. Even got told off for scribbling with felt tip pens over some of them. I had wondered why the adults were making such a fuss, "I had enhanced them had I not?" were my thoughts.


Here at Blythe House were samples just like his. Beautiful, delicate designs, and I felt emotional seeing them. It never had hit me until then that I was doing a degree in a field in which my grandad had worked. I knew he had gone to Art College where he studied to become a painter, something his father had done before him. I wanted now to ask him all the questions about his artistic life. All those questions as a child you never consider. Why ?.... he was just grandad. He whistled, and gave me fruity polo's.

Blythe House had a wonderful collection of fabric sample books out for us to look through. Heals fabric sample book for example, an invaluable guide to a company renowned for promoting modern design in Britain. My firm favourite on display was the collection of Presage Paris Fashion Forecast books. Amazing they were, all like pieces of art in themselves the way they had been compiled. I could have scooped them all up and taken them home with me.

It was a wonderful morning, and certainly a source of inspiration, which I would use to research into any future designs I may do. Thank you Kate for introducing me to it, and reminding me what a clever grandad I did have.

V and A visit - Textile Collection

The V and A does house a marvellous collection of textiles. In fact, as far as collections go, it is amazing how many collections the V and A does have. A rambling beautiful old building, filled with an Aladin's Cave of collectables.

On Making my way up to the textile collections I have to confess to getting side tracked into other galleries which intrigued me. I especially liked The Modern 20th Century Collection, with it's unusual chairs of all various shapes and styles, one even made from paper!! The collection of radio's throughout the years. The paper dresses. The quirky 1950's and 1960's ceramics, all very patterned and shape related. Lots of item's in this section I found I could easily draw idea's from to produce new designs, either through drawing or photographing the objects.

The Theatre and BBC Archives Collections with the elaborate costumes, and posters from years gone by. The Fashion Collection showing styles and fabrics throughout the years, all again proved interesting and a useful tool to draw information from both visually and also to tell a story about that time in history.

The textile collection was very informative if not a tad conservative for my tastes. Set up in darkened rooms, which I appreciate is required to protect theses precious fabrics, but also gave an oppressive feel. The cabinets which housed the Japanese and Chinese fabrics, were beautiful cabinets, but to view the fabrics you had to pull out slides within the cabinet. A novelty at first, but actually made the process of viewing the samples difficult, and I have to confess to not viewing them all because of this.

What did strike me was how much information can be gained from the textile collections about the various cultures that made them. The techniques they used. How different countries produced their own style, basically how they lived their lives at that time in history. How the textile had become a useful tool to depict life at that time, like a photograph today for example.

I particularly liked the peasant art shown here in embroidery, which was the easiest technique for amateurs at the time. The pieces were worked by the women of the household, mainly for domestic use, but sometimes for sale or exchange at a local market. The peasant art from the nineteenth century seemed to strike a cord in me as to how I research for my art today. Careful examination of the peasant art motifs and designs usually showed that the original sources of inspiration were early seventeenth century patterns. Over the decades these patterns percolated down the ages creating new designs with a renewed vitality. The peasant artist obviously looked at older collections for their inspiration, as I do today.

I also became aware as I wandered around the textile collection, that although a valuable source of information, it is ONLY collections of things. Further research on a subject/culture/design would need to be obtained to gain a truer picture of the subject/collection being looked at. This dawned on as I was looking through the Japanese kimono designs. I researched this topic for The Alternative Fashion Show earlier this year, and found the information given on this subject in the textile collection very limited, and rather poor if I am honest. Regardless of this I kept reminding myself that it is only a collection, a slice of history, and we are lucky to have such information to help us to learn. I also felt lucky I was able to fill in the gaps with the knowledge I had researched myself on kimono's. On saying this, The Japanese Collection within the V and A has a very impressive collection of kimono's.


The priests vestments (The Chasuble Collection) were very beautiful. Each one elaborately embroidered on silk and velvets with gold threads. Each chasuble told a story, depicting mainly a bible story or the cross, in some cases both. This "Opus Anglicanum" (English Work) or "Acu Pictoria" (Painting with a needle) was valued highly as metalwork and jewellery at the time. It was traded and bought mainly by rich nobles and the church (to make these chasuble). This style of embroidery was truly England's finest, but soon competition from Embroidery workshops in Italy, Netherlands and Spain meant the quality of craftsmanship declined although the range of patterns, silks and velvets increased. Hence we moved into a new period in textile history.


I enjoyed very much the tapestries, they were grand, large and overwhelming. All depicting life at the time. What fashions were worn, and what pass times were implored (hunting for game and deer). I was interested to learn that at his death in 1547, Henry VIII owned 27,000 tapestries.

After the textile collections I took myself off to the Islam Collection, namely to look at The Ardabil Carpet. One of the finest and largest Islamic carpets in existance. It also has great historical importance. It was commissioned as one of a pair by the ruler of Iran, Shan Tahmasp for the shrine of his ancestor, Shaykh Safi-al-Din in the town of Ardabil in the province of Azerba jan in North -West Iran.

It was completed in 946 on the Muslim calendar, 1539-1540. It seemed amazing to be stood close to such a rare item, and I felt it was lucky to be preserved in such a rare way by the V and A , and hopefully preserved so future generations can enjoy it too, when it becomes much older and rarer.

The V and A was a fantastic Aladins cave of collectables. I certainly would use it as a place to go and source research for my work, and gain knowledge. A great place to also sketch and photograph objects too. I am aware also though, that collections alone do not tell the whole story about a culture and a time in history, and that further reading and research must be obtained to gain a more true understanding of what the whole story is. A collection is just a small momentum, like a keepsake from a holiday. But, without such collections we are not able to appreciate the true craftsmanship of articles (textiles in this case) over time, and see them for real, not just view them in a book or on the internet. So I applaud the V and A, and certainly shall be visiting it and it's collections time and time and time again.

Tartan-cool or naff? You decide.