Men vs Women gymnastics-why different clothes/moves?

[Garga]

5 hours ago, umsami said:

Not really relevant to gymnastics...but it is to outdoor sports like beach volleyball.  As somebody who lives in Florida where it is often quite hot, you will notice that the people who work outside all day often wear long sleeve shirts (often a long t-shirt hoodie), long pants, big hats, etc.  Why?  It can actually keep one cooler and also helps protect against sun damage.  That's also why in many desert countries, the traditional dress for men and women is often basically a long sleeve loose dress (thobe, galabaya) with some sort of head covering.  Because it's the coolest clothing to wear in such a climate.   While I can understand why loose clothing might be an impediment to certain sports, actual long sleeves, when outside, should help keep the participants cooler.  I will say that in America (and it does seem to be an American phenomenon/belief), people believe that fewer clothes equals cooler.  Not true.

 

http://blog.coolibar.com/the-secret-advantage-of-long-sleeves/

"A number of years ago, an inquisitive research team led by C Richard Taylor and Virginia Finch of Harvard University and Amiram Shkolnik and Arieh Borut of Tel Aviv University were puzzled by the ability of the Bedouins of the Sinai to minimize solar heat loads in a hot desert. The study, aptly called Why Do Bedouins Wear Black Robes in Hot Deserts?, measured the people’s overall heat gain and loss in the robes, considering their amount of coverage, long sleeves and the color of their robes.

A volunteer wearing different levels of coverage and different colored clothing was faced into the midday sun in the desert for 30 minutes. Withstanding 95F, the volunteer placed in the Negev desert at the bottom of the rift valley between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat wore either: 1) a black Bedouin robe; 2) a similar robe that was white; 3) a tan army uniform; or 4) shorts (that is, he was semi‑nude).

The results were surprising, but not surprising. Long sleeves and more clothing kept the wearer cooler. As the report puts it: “The amount of heat gained by a Bedouin exposed to the hot desert is the same whether he wears a black or a white robe. The additional heat absorbed by the black robe was lost before it reached the skin.”"

 

4 hours ago, maize said:

Yes, when I worked on an archeology dig in Jordan we mimicked the coverage of the Beduoins we lived with--loose fitting, light colored clothing, brimmed hats to shade our faces. Really only our hands were uncovered.

Also, we started work early in the morning and stayed indoors after noon.

 

Does this work in muggy environments?  I prefer to be covered, so I tend to wear cotton capris pants in the summer here (humid.)  On the days when I take off the capris pants and wear a shorter skirt, I am markedly cooler.  Maybe the capris aren't loose enough?  I would love to wear clothes with more coverage in the summer, yet still stay cool.  Love it!

But then I wonder about my muggy environment:  Bedouins are covered in the desert, but people in the jungle are almost entirely naked.  

I really need to test this out this summer. I won't go naked (!), but I need to find something long and loose and see if it's cooler than shorts and a tshirt.  I wore a cotton tshirt and a silk skirt remade from a sari from India out in the desert this past summer when I visited my parents in Arizona.  We went to that church in Sedona that's carved out of the rock and I got very sweaty, even in the dry heat and even wearing a long loose garment.  I wonder if it's because it was silk.  Doesn't silk retain heat?  It was probably a bad choice for desert.  But isn't India very hot?  So why do the women there wear silk?

Yes...this must all be tested this summer.  🙂

Edited February 15, 2019 by Garga

[Garga]

19 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

 

I agree!

And seriously, what’s wrong with wanting to feel attractive? What’s wrong with wanting to look your best? It seems ridiculous that after a certain age, it’s time to pack it in and give up. I don’t buy into the argument that women only want to look good because they are giving in to societal pressure. That concept is so insulting to women, like we aren’t strong enough or smart enough to do anything but do whatever fashion magazines tell us to do... unless we’re over 50, in which case we have no business even looking at a fashion magazine because we are no longer entitled to want to look attractive. 

And what about single or divorced older women? Are they not allowed to want to attract romantic partners once they are beyond their childbearing years? I don’t understand the feeling that older women are no longer sexual. I feel like the only people who believe that must be so young that their parents are in their 50s, and they don’t want to imagine the idea that their parents ever have sex.

I know one of the signs of depression is when a woman stops caring about her appearance, so maybe some of those women who can’t be bothered with trying to look attractive aren’t actually so enlightened... maybe they are just depressed and have given up.

Don't get me wrong — if a woman is unconcerned with her appearance and is happy dressing way out of date, and she is fine with not styling her hair and never wearing makeup or nice shoes or any number of other things, that’s perfectly fine. It’s her choice. But that same woman is not entitled to feel smug and judgmental and morally superior to the women who do care about their appearances and who take steps to look their best, because that’s not helpful or supportive; it’s just mean.

 

It's not about not looking attractive.  The majority of people do want to look attractive.

The problem is how you define "looking attractive".  It usually means women have to look young and like they just had sex five minutes ago (swollen red lips, flushed cheeks.)  Why is *that* what is attractive?  Because it makes people think of sex and therefore, they are attracted to you in some sort of physical way (not panting after you and filled with lust, but they still find you physically desirable on some sort of low level.)

And the problem with that definition of looking attractive, is that it's only applicable to women.  Women are the ones who are expected to look young and like they just had sex.  Men can have pale lips and gray hair and be attractive.  But women must cover their grey and wear lipstick to be attractive, even if they're the same age as the man.  Men can be covered head to toe with only faces and hands showing (a suit) and be considered very, very attractive. And yes, a woman could do that, too, but mostly women are expected to show some skin--exposed arms or chest or legs...something.  It's very rare to see women covered as much as men and be found attractive at the same time.  They can be covered...and they can be grey...and their faces can be makeup free...but they will NOT be considered attractive like the covered, grey, un-made up face of the man next to them.  

So...it's ok to want to be attractive.  The problem is that women are only considered attractive if they look like they're in their childbearing years.  Once they are out of their childbearing years and are grey and wrinkly and get a little more girth...that is NOT attractive, unless they artificially change the way they look.  Men can be gray and wrinkled and have more girth and still be attractive.  And it's really not fair.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Garga

[hshibley]

28 minutes ago, Garga said:

 

It's not about not looking attractive.  The majority of people do want to look attractive.

The problem is how you define "looking attractive".  It usually means women have to look young and like they just had sex five minutes ago (swollen red lips, flushed cheeks.)  Why is *that* what is attractive?  Because it makes people think of sex and therefore, they are attracted to you in some sort of physical way (not panting after you and filled with lust, but they still find you physically desirable on some sort of low level.)

And the problem with that definition of looking attractive, is that it's only applicable to women.  Women are the ones who are expected to look young and like they just had sex.  Men can have pale lips and gray hair and be attractive.  But women must cover their grey and wear lipstick to be attractive, even if they're the same age as the man.  Men can be covered head to toe with only faces and hands showing (a suit) and be considered very, very attractive. And yes, a woman could do that, too, but mostly women are expected to show some skin--exposed arms or chest or legs...something.  It's very rare to see women covered as much as men and be found attractive at the same time.  They can be covered...and they can be grey...and their faces can be makeup free...but they will NOT be considered attractive like the covered, grey, un-made up face of the man next to them.  

So...it's ok to want to be attractive.  The problem is that women are only considered attractive if they look like they're in their childbearing years.  Once they are out of their childbearing years and are grey and wrinkly and get a little more girth...that is NOT attractive, unless they artificially change the way they look.  Men can be gray and wrinkled and have more girth and still be attractive.  And it's really not fair.

I don’t think most people define looking attractive as you do looking younger and as if they just had marital relations. 

I think it has more to do with a woman’s confidence. For me being fit, a good hair cut and good fitting clothes are what make me look and feel attractive. I feel more attractive now at 50 than I did at 30. I have more time and am not as haggard as I was with 3 small children. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

35 minutes ago, Garga said:

 

It's not about not looking attractive.  The majority of people do want to look attractive.

The problem is how you define "looking attractive".  It usually means women have to look young and like they just had sex five minutes ago (swollen red lips, flushed cheeks.)  Why is *that* what is attractive?  Because it makes people think of sex and therefore, they are attracted to you in some sort of physical way (not panting after you and filled with lust, but they still find you physically desirable on some sort of low level.)

 

That's the silliest thing i have ever read.  Honestly.  If you look neat and put together, you are attractive.  You don't have to be a beauty queen  and you certainly don't have to look like you just had sex.  The above description might be some Cosmo standard but it isn't "normal" standard - at least where I live. 

[EmseB]

43 minutes ago, Garga said:

 

It's not about not looking attractive.  The majority of people do want to look attractive.

The problem is how you define "looking attractive".  It usually means women have to look young and like they just had sex five minutes ago (swollen red lips, flushed cheeks.)  Why is *that* what is attractive?  Because it makes people think of sex and therefore, they are attracted to you in some sort of physical way (not panting after you and filled with lust, but they still find you physically desirable on some sort of low level.)

And the problem with that definition of looking attractive, is that it's only applicable to women.  Women are the ones who are expected to look young and like they just had sex.  Men can have pale lips and gray hair and be attractive.  But women must cover their grey and wear lipstick to be attractive, even if they're the same age as the man.  Men can be covered head to toe with only faces and hands showing (a suit) and be considered very, very attractive. And yes, a woman could do that, too, but mostly women are expected to show some skin--exposed arms or chest or legs...something.  It's very rare to see women covered as much as men and be found attractive at the same time.  They can be covered...and they can be grey...and their faces can be makeup free...but they will NOT be considered attractive like the covered, grey, un-made up face of the man next to them.  

So...it's ok to want to be attractive.  The problem is that women are only considered attractive if they look like they're in their childbearing years.  Once they are out of their childbearing years and are grey and wrinkly and get a little more girth...that is NOT attractive, unless they artificially change the way they look.  Men can be gray and wrinkled and have more girth and still be attractive.  And it's really not fair.

I think the disconnect is here. I see this on social media, but among my friends and family I know exactly one person who follows these sorts of beauty trends. Of course she has her circles where this stuff is popular, but it's young, single women with a lot of money. It's a very specific group. I don't see these sorts of things in women's sports...like the women wearing bikinis in beach volleyball always struck me as sort of the opposite of that type of person. So in this discussion I have very little frame of reference for really feeling pressured to look attractive as you and others feel society defines it. I feel other pressures about my appearance, don't get me wrong, but this idea of having to look youthful or like I've just had a roll in the hay...for my whole life...just doesn't enter into things. That's just not going to happen. 

I mean, I see what you're talking about in media a lot...but among the other moms and wives and people I hang out with, it's mostly talked about as ridiculous or silly to try to look like that. Attractive and feminine in the circles I travel in (and it's not regional because we move a lot) is not Kylie Jenner or Bella Hadid, for young women or older women. That level of primping and skin care and whatever else is kind of a caricature. I'm not saying that it's not influential in some way, but I know plenty of guys who think it's ridiculous and over the top and not all that attractive.

And honestly, aging does make people less attractive in some ways. I don't know about the fairness of it, but it's just biology on some level, I think. We get older, things sag, things wrinkle, we get sun spots and gray hair. I can't say honestly that it is as attractive as being 19. I know some women who are lovely older women, but it's not the same standard of beauty as a lovely young woman. And I think one of the points you make above is that we don't want the same standard of beauty for younger women and older women. That would be ridiculous. But it's okay to say that youth is beautiful and aging kind of sucks and is hard on our appearance. That it is normal to look old when you are old. It's okay for the body that had four babies to not be as attractive as the same body before that happened. We need to be okay with stuff like that. But also, a 19yo elite athlete that is by most definitions physically fit is probably attractive, but wearing a leotard isn't necessarily falling into the beauty trap that you describe above either.

Edited February 15, 2019 by EmseB

[maize]

1 hour ago, Garga said:

 

 

Does this work in muggy environments?  I prefer to be covered, so I tend to wear cotton capris pants in the summer here (humid.)  On the days when I take off the capris pants and wear a shorter skirt, I am markedly cooler.  Maybe the capris aren't loose enough?  I would love to wear clothes with more coverage in the summer, yet still stay cool.  Love it!

But then I wonder about my muggy environment:  Bedouins are covered in the desert, but people in the jungle are almost entirely naked.  

I really need to test this out this summer. I won't go naked (!), but I need to find something long and loose and see if it's cooler than shorts and a tshirt.  I wore a cotton tshirt and a silk skirt remade from a sari from India out in the desert this past summer when I visited my parents in Arizona.  We went to that church in Sedona that's carved out of the rock and I got very sweaty, even in the dry heat and even wearing a long loose garment.  I wonder if it's because it was silk.  Doesn't silk retain heat?  It was probably a bad choice for desert.  But isn't India very hot?  So why do the women there wear silk?

Yes...this must all be tested this summer.  🙂

I don't know about humidity, but loose layers of clothing have the most benefit if you are out in the burning sun (the sun can't reach your skin to heat it directly) and when air temperatures are higher than human body temperature (the clothing insulates you from the heat just as layers of clothing insulate you from winter cold).

Jungles are shady places, and water/high humidity may act to keep temperatures from rising too high. I hate muggy heat, but the hottest places on earth all seem to be desert/dry heat sorts of places.

[Corraleno]

I find the assumption that "looking attractive" automatically (and only) refers to reproductive capability and sexual availability to men (with the corollary that the only women with any right to want to look attractive are sexually available females between the ages of 18 and menopause) absolutely bizarre. Unless you live on the Las Vegas strip and read nothing but Cosmo, what percentage of females, from 8 to 80, do you people actually see every day walking around in sexually provocative clothes? 

The standard uniform of my 16 yr old DD and her friends — both male and female – is skinny jeans, a tee shirt or hoody, and Converse or Vans sneakers. Most of the girls (and the occasional guy) wear eyeliner, and both boys and girls often dye their hair bright colors. I don't see any females, of any age, walking around in tiny miniskirts and low-cut shirts and high heels, with bright red lipstick and blush. Do other people see hundreds of girls dressed like this on a daily basis? Do most people live in areas where it's common to see 40, 50, 60 year old women tottering around in high heels, wearing skin-tight clothes and flashing cleavage at the grocery store???

I wear basically the same kind of clothes my daughter does, except I wear yoga pants or straight-leg jeans with my tee shirts and hoodies and sneakers. I am well past 50 — and well past caring what other people think about what I'm wearing — so I wear what's most comfortable. And if I'm lucky, someday I'll be an 80 year old wearing jeans and hoodies and sneakers. The idea that it's "inappropriate" or a sign of some sort of desperate need to "look young again" is absolutely laughable.

Equally ridiculous is the idea that any woman who does want to look fashionable or "on trend" is just too brainwashed to know better and/or is only doing it to look attractive to men. Some women just really enjoy putting together outfits and accessories and makeup that look good together, in the same way that other women enjoy choosing furniture and curtains and paint colors to decorate their homes — and most people don't want their homes to look frumpy and "outdated" either. Wanting to look pretty and pulled-together is no weirder or more sexual than wanting to live in a pretty, well-decorated home. People like pretty things.

[Garga]

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

I find the assumption that "looking attractive" automatically (and only) refers to reproductive capability and sexual availability to men (with the corollary that the only women with any right to want to look attractive are sexually available females between the ages of 18 and menopause) absolutely bizarre. Unless you live on the Las Vegas strip and read nothing but Cosmo, what percentage of females, from 8 to 80, do you people actually see every day walking around in sexually provocative clothes? 

The standard uniform of my 16 yr old DD and her friends — both male and female – is skinny jeans, a tee shirt or hoody, and Converse or Vans sneakers. Most of the girls (and the occasional guy) wear eyeliner, and both boys and girls often dye their hair bright colors. I don't see any females, of any age, walking around in tiny miniskirts and low-cut shirts and high heels, with bright red lipstick and blush. Do other people see hundreds of girls dressed like this on a daily basis? Do most people live in areas where it's common to see 40, 50, 60 year old women tottering around in high heels, wearing skin-tight clothes and flashing cleavage at the grocery store???

I wear basically the same kind of clothes my daughter does, except I wear yoga pants or straight-leg jeans with my tee shirts and hoodies and sneakers. I am well past 50 — and well past caring what other people think about what I'm wearing — so I wear what's most comfortable. And if I'm lucky, someday I'll be an 80 year old wearing jeans and hoodies and sneakers. The idea that it's "inappropriate" or a sign of some sort of desperate need to "look young again" is absolutely laughable.

Equally ridiculous is the idea that any woman who does want to look fashionable or "on trend" is just too brainwashed to know better and/or is only doing it to look attractive to men. Some women just really enjoy putting together outfits and accessories and makeup that look good together, in the same way that other women enjoy choosing furniture and curtains and paint colors to decorate their homes — and most people don't want their homes to look frumpy and "outdated" either. Wanting to look pretty and pulled-together is no weirder or more sexual than wanting to live in a pretty, well-decorated home. People like pretty things.

 

I’ll try answering because it feels like I must have misrepresented something somewhere along the line.  And I’m not answering just you but a few posters who took what I said to a degree I didn’t intend it to be taken. I’m not talking about all the women teetering around on heels in full makeup.  

My boys look for t-shirts.  They have either a crew cut neck or a very high v neck.  I look for t-shirts.  I can find some crew cut or very high v necks, but the majority of tshirts for women have a much lower rounded or v neck.  My neck/upper chest gets cold very easily, so I often have to reject shirt after shirt when I’m trying to find a new shirt.  Some button down shirts don’t have buttons that start high enough.  I’ve never seen a man’s button down shirt that doesn’t start high (the second one down.)  But some women’s button down shirts don’t have a first button until right around where the breast start and not on the upper chest.

I don’t know a single man who dyes his hair, but over half of the women I know do.  Not usually to change the color or show creativity, but just to cover the gray.  

Nice Christmas party at work.  The men wear suits, covered from head to toe with comfy shoes with socks.  Some women wear something close to what the men are wearing insofar as they have on flats and pants and a blouse/jacket combo.  But many of the women are in dresses with short sleeves or with skirts and are wearing uncomfortable high-heeled shoes.  Those women are often a bit chilly and their feet hurt by the end of the night.

I wear a tiny bit of eyeliner and sometimes mascara.  Once in a while, I put on blush.  I usually use chapstick, but sometimes (about twice a year) I wear a very neutral lipstick.  On the day where I wear nothing, I look washed out and I look my age.  On the days I wear the tiny bit of liner, mascara, and blush, I look markedly younger.  People will comment, “you look so nice today” when I have the makeup.  People will comment, “Are you ill?” when I don’t. That has happened many times. My husband has never worn any makeup ever.  And I don’t personally know any man who has ever worn makeup.  Over half of the women I know wear makeup of some sort every single day, even if it’s just mascara or eye liner or a neutralish lip.

It is very hard for me to find shirts in the summer that aren’t sleeveless.  I hate sleeveless shirts.  And I suppose some men wish all their shirts were sleeveless, but men’s shirts all have sleeves, barring sports shirts. It’s popular now for women to have cold shoulder shirts, so even if the shirt does have sleeves, still the shoulder is exposed.  Men don’t have cold shoulder shirts at all. 

Women’s shorts are usually shorter than men’s shorts.  Women’s pants fit tighter in general.  Men’s pants fit looser in general.  Not so for skinny pants—those are skinny on men as well.  Around here men wear jeans that sag or are loose in the leg.  The women mostly wear jeans that are more fitting.  Again, this might not be the case for teenagers.  Teen boys wear skinny jeans.  I’m talking about my husband’s saggy jeans at age 51 and my skinny jeans at age 46.  The middle aged men in my social circle wear saggy jeans and the women wear fitted ones.  Not skin tight, just fitted.

 Women’s swimwear is traditionally like underwear, even one-pieces.  Men’s swimwear is roomy with pockets—going to the knee, though they do go shirtless, which can be embarrassing for them.  

Women wear shapewear.  Men don’t.

The point is that men wear clothes that cover their bodies and are comfortable.  Women’s clothes are skimpier than men’s, even if it means being self-consious (are my pits shaved?  Is everything shaved while I’m in this bikini?) or uncomfortable (I’m so cold at this party!  Maybe I can borrow my husband’s suit coat.  My shapewear is rolling down and digging into my thighs.)

The overwhelming majority of men do not dye their hair or wear any makeup at all, yet the majority of women do.  

So, why do men not do any of those things and not wear any of those clothes?  They are not all ugly.  We find them attractive without any makeup, any dye, and covered head to toe and not sausaged into shapewear.  And there are plenty of women who look attractive who can dress relatively similar to men.  And yet, more than half of the women I know wear a touch of makeup or cover the gray or wear skimpier clothes than the men, etc.

Don’t take what I’m saying to an extreme that men are all walking around in fluffy pjs all day while women are dressed to the nines as if they were models.  But in general, women have a lot of tools at their disposal that make them look younger.  Men have no such tools, because they do not feel the need to look younger.  Why do women feel the need/desire to look younger and men don’t? 

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Garga

[Corraleno]

@Garga But all the things you mentioned are choices that women can make if they want to, and there are plenty of other options if they don't want to. I have never ever had trouble finding summer shirts with sleeves — I don't even own any sleeveless shirts. I prefer v-necks because I don't like a lot of fabric up against my neck, but again I have no trouble finding shirts with reasonable v-necks that don't show cleavage. I generally wear tee shirts with capris or bermuda-length shorts in the summer, and I wear a rash guard and board shorts when I swim because I burn to a crisp in about 10 minutes. If other women prefer to wear tank tops and short shorts and bikinis, more power to them. If some women want to wear sleeveless, low-cut evening dresses, even if they feel chilly, or wear high heels even if their feet hurt at the end of the evening, that's their prerogative. It's not as if those are the only possible options; they could choose a more covered-up dress and flats or low heels if they preferred. 

I think the normal level of make-up that most women wear is more about looking healthy and vibrant, not like they just had sex. (In fact, I think the idea that it's supposed to make women look like they just had sex is pretty crazy.) Personally I don't wear makeup, just because I can't be bothered, but I understand why a lot of women like it. So again, that's an area where women have more choices than men, not fewer. Rather than constraining or negatively judging women's choices, I'd rather see men have more options. One thing I noticed when I visited DS's campus is that a lot of guys have started wearing runner's leggings, usually covered with shorts, as everyday attire. It seems to be the male equivalent of women's leggings in terms of comfort (with shorts added to cover what would otherwise be an obvious bulge). I wonder if the guys who are young now and have no problem with dying their hair various colors will also have no issue with dying their hair when they're older? And even though men may not dye their hair as often as women, Rogain and similar hair-loss products (plus hair transplants) are a billion dollar industry. 

I don't disagree that mass media sexualizes women, but I think there's actually a vastly wider gap between what Cosmo and the Kardashians promote and how women actually dress in real life. If I look around the women's department at Macy's or Nordstrom or even Target, there are far far more plain, normal, comfortable clothes than skin tight, low-cut, body-revealing clothes. There are far more options for comfortable shoes than spike heels, and 99.99% of the people I see walking around are dressed in perfectly normal, comfortable clothes, either with no makeup or minimal/natural makeup. 

[hshibley]

53 minutes ago, Garga said:

 

I’ll try answering because it feels like I must have misrepresented something somewhere along the line.  And I’m not answering just you but a few posters who took what I said to a degree I didn’t intend it to be taken. I’m not talking about all the women teetering around on heels in full makeup.  

My boys look for t-shirts.  They have either a crew cut neck or a very high v neck.  I look for t-shirts.  I can find some crew cut or very high v necks, but the majority of tshirts for women have a much lower rounded or v neck.  My neck/upper chest gets cold very easily, so I often have to reject shirt after shirt when I’m trying to find a new shirt.  Some button down shirts don’t have buttons that start high enough.  I’ve never seen a man’s button down shirt that doesn’t start high (the second one down.)  But some women’s button down shirts don’t have a first button until right around where the breast start and not on the upper chest.

I don’t know a single man who dyes his hair, but over half of the women I know do.  Not usually to change the color or show creativity, but just to cover the gray.  

Nice Christmas party at work.  The men wear suits, covered from head to toe with comfy shoes with socks.  Some women wear something close to what the men are wearing insofar as they have on flats and pants and a blouse/jacket combo.  But many of the women are in dresses with short sleeves or with skirts and are wearing uncomfortable high-heeled shoes.  Those women are often a bit chilly and their feet hurt by the end of the night.

I wear a tiny bit of eyeliner and sometimes mascara.  Once in a while, I put on blush.  I usually use chapstick, but sometimes (about twice a year) I wear a very neutral lipstick.  On the day where I wear nothing, I look washed out and I look my age.  On the days I wear the tiny bit of liner, mascara, and blush, I look markedly younger.  People will comment, “you look so nice today” when I have the makeup.  People will comment, “Are you ill?” when I don’t. That has happened many times. My husband has never worn any makeup ever.  And I don’t personally know any man who has ever worn makeup.  Over half of the women I know wear makeup of some sort every single day, even if it’s just mascara or eye liner or a neutralish lip.

It is very hard for me to find shirts in the summer that aren’t sleeveless.  I hate sleeveless shirts.  And I suppose some men wish all their shirts were sleeveless, but men’s shirts all have sleeves, barring sports shirts. It’s popular now for women to have cold shoulder shirts, so even if the shirt does have sleeves, still the shoulder is exposed.  Men don’t have cold shoulder shirts at all. 

Women’s shorts are usually shorter than men’s shorts.  Women’s pants fit tighter in general.  Men’s pants fit looser in general.  Not so for skinny pants—those are skinny on men as well.  Around here men wear jeans that sag or are loose in the leg.  The women mostly wear jeans that are more fitting.  Again, this might not be the case for teenagers.  Teen boys wear skinny jeans.  I’m talking about my husband’s saggy jeans at age 51 and my skinny jeans at age 46.  The middle aged men in my social circle wear saggy jeans and the women wear fitted ones.  Not skin tight, just fitted.

 Women’s swimwear is traditionally like underwear, even one-pieces.  Men’s swimwear is roomy with pockets—going to the knee, though they do go shirtless, which can be embarrassing for them.  

Women wear shapewear.  Men don’t.

The point is that men wear clothes that cover their bodies and are comfortable.  Women’s clothes are skimpier than men’s, even if it means being self-consious (are my pits shaved?  Is everything shaved while I’m in this bikini?) or uncomfortable (I’m so cold at this party!  Maybe I can borrow my husband’s suit coat.  My shapewear is rolling down and digging into my thighs.)

The overwhelming majority of men do not dye their hair or wear any makeup at all, yet the majority of women do.  

So, why do men not do any of those things and not wear any of those clothes?  They are not all ugly.  We find them attractive without any makeup, any dye, and covered head to toe and not sausaged into shapewear.  And there are plenty of women who look attractive who can dress relatively similar to men.  And yet, more than half of the women I know wear a touch of makeup or cover the gray or wear skimpier clothes than the men, etc.

Don’t take what I’m saying to an extreme that men are all walking around in fluffy pjs all day while women are dressed to the nines as if they were models.  But in general, women have a lot of tools at their disposal that make them look younger.  Men have no such tools, because they do not feel the need to look younger.  Why do women feel the need/desire to look younger and men don’t? 

 

I don’t have a problem finding v necks that work for me but that obviously depends on your size and clevage. Llbean has plenty of button downs that have a top button.

As far as sleeveless shirts, I live in the south so I want sleeveless shirts. It’s hot. Good shoes don’t hurt your feet.

I don’t dye my hair and I doubt that the majority of the women I know do. (Men do dye their hair to appear younger for jobs)

shorts - I wear Bermuda shorts that go to my knees. They are available at every major department store.

If men are wearing pants and a jacket at a Christmas party why can’t women wear a dress and jacket or wrap? 

Make-up is a choice. Shapewear is a choice. You can exercise or not worry about it. Most women are not wearing shapewear 

Your clothing issues are issues are yours but not everyone’s . Don’t put your issues and preconceptions on others. Plenty of older women dress for themselves.  

 

 

[Garga]

Well, this is one of those conversations where we will just slightly disagree.  I keep thinking, “Am I not explaining myself?” Because it feels like the responses are focusing on points that are ancillary to my point rather than responding to my main point, but I don’t know how better to explain myself to express my main point.  I keep thinking, “If I just say the right words, they’ll see what I mean and agree!”  And so, I have to step back and consider that you do understand exactly what I’m saying, but just don’t agree and it’s not a matter of “the right words.” 

My main point isn’t about the fact that women have choices to dress in so many ways or change their looks in so many ways.  It’s about the fact that men don’t, and the implication of that.

I’ll just stop here and figure we see this through a slightly different lens and we just don’t see eye to eye, and that I’ve made my point and it’s ok if others disagree with it.

Aside:  For context in response to my “clothing issues”, I do not dye my hair and am pleased with the white stripe in the front of my hair, I wear that tiny bit of makeup only about 2 or 3 times a week and only to avoid the frowny, “are you sick” questions, I dress with high necklines, mid-arm-length sleeves, and long pants or skirts even in the summer, and I haven’t worn shoes that aren’t wonderfully comfortable in at least a decade, I haven’t worn shapewear in about 5 years, even though I’ve gained weight in those years, and I’m covered from neck to wrists to mid-thigh when I swim.  I absolutely dress for myself and for comfort and not to conform to Cosmo or some other mass media source.  And I feel atractive with my grey, my no-makeup, and my long clothes.  

 

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Garga

[moonflower]

I feel like this thread is responding to a lot of discussion of social trends and generalizations with anecdotes or "but I and other women I know don't do that, and some men do!", etc.

I'm not talking about what you personally do, necessarily, or the moral or social implications of what you personally do (or what Simone Biles does, or Nancy Pelosi, or some 4 year old at a dance performance).  I'm talking about what classes of women in this society do on average, as a whole, and how it differs from what men do on average, as a whole.

On average, more women wear makeup than men.  Many aspects of that makeup are designed to make old skin look younger, lips and cheeks look flushed, etc.  On average, women wear skimpier and tighter clothing than men.  The average pair of women's pants at any age except maybe 80+ is tighter than the average pair of men's pants.  Not all women wear heels during the day and some never do, but many more women wear heels in more situations and at more times than men.  Not all women wear shapewear, maybe not even most women do, but if you go to Wal-Mart there's not 2 shelves of men's shapewear next to the 2 shelves of women's shapewear.

[Catwoman]

43 minutes ago, moonflower said:

I feel like this thread is responding to a lot of discussion of social trends and generalizations with anecdotes or "but I and other women I know don't do that, and some men do!", etc.

I'm not talking about what you personally do, necessarily, or the moral or social implications of what you personally do (or what Simone Biles does, or Nancy Pelosi, or some 4 year old at a dance performance).  I'm talking about what classes of women in this society do on average, as a whole, and how it differs from what men do on average, as a whole.

On average, more women wear makeup than men.  Many aspects of that makeup are designed to make old skin look younger, lips and cheeks look flushed, etc.  On average, women wear skimpier and tighter clothing than men.  The average pair of women's pants at any age except maybe 80+ is tighter than the average pair of men's pants.  Not all women wear heels during the day and some never do, but many more women wear heels in more situations and at more times than men.  Not all women wear shapewear, maybe not even most women do, but if you go to Wal-Mart there's not 2 shelves of men's shapewear next to the 2 shelves of women's shapewear.

 

Okay, but even if we assume that’s the case, so what? 

I’m not being snarky — I’m trying to figure out where you’re going with this. 

Has it occurred to you that many women like wearing fitted clothing and high heels and makeup, and that they are doing it for themselves, not to attract men? The last thing I want to do is walk out of the house looking like I have just had sex. Yuck! How many women, young or older, do you see on the street that look even remotely like that, even when they’re wearing quite a bit of makeup? 

Also, why do you feel the need to compare what women are wearing to what men are wearing? Why does it matter whose clothes are tighter or who dyes their hair? And why are you so sure that men aren’t concerned with their appearance? Many men are well-groomed and well dressed and they care about staying in shape and looking youthful and attractive. Is that a problem, too? At what point should men stop trying to look attractive? Should they stop going to the gym, getting their hair styled and/or colored, getting hair weaves and hair transplants, trimming and filing their fingernails, shaving or trimming the hair on their faces, and any number of other things they do to feel more attractive? Is it wrong for men to want to look and feel youthful and sexy?

It seems almost like you view this as a competition and that you think it’s terribly unfair that men don’t have to do much of anything in order to be considered attractive, but I have to disagree with you. It’s not like women everywhere are falling all over themselves to date unattractive, poorly dressed, out of shape guys with bad skin and body odor. 

And it also feels like you are shaming women who try to keep looking as attractive as they can, and who dress well and style their hair and wear high heels and makeup. Maybe I’m reading your posts the wrong way and I apologize if I’m wrong, but you are coming across as though you feel morally superior to those women and that you think they are so shallow and weak-minded that they are unable to resist conforming to societal pressures to try to look young and sexy, instead of just assuming that they are every bit as strong and confident as you are, but they simply have different priorities than you do when it comes to things like makeup and fashion.

I don’t mean to be so hard on you, but I feel like you’re reading way too much into women’s choices of fashion and makeup, and that you are making a lot of negative judgments about women who want to look and feel attractive throughout their lives, no matter what their age.

[Corraleno]

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

I feel like this thread is responding to a lot of discussion of social trends and generalizations with anecdotes or "but I and other women I know don't do that, and some men do!", etc.

I'm not talking about what you personally do, necessarily, or the moral or social implications of what you personally do (or what Simone Biles does, or Nancy Pelosi, or some 4 year old at a dance performance).  I'm talking about what classes of women in this society do on average, as a whole, and how it differs from what men do on average, as a whole.

On average, more women wear makeup than men.  Many aspects of that makeup are designed to make old skin look younger, lips and cheeks look flushed, etc.  On average, women wear skimpier and tighter clothing than men.  The average pair of women's pants at any age except maybe 80+ is tighter than the average pair of men's pants.  Not all women wear heels during the day and some never do, but many more women wear heels in more situations and at more times than men.  Not all women wear shapewear, maybe not even most women do, but if you go to Wal-Mart there's not 2 shelves of men's shapewear next to the 2 shelves of women's shapewear.

Why is it a problem that women can choose whether to wear makeup or not, whether to wear form-fitting clothes or not, whether to dye their hair or not, whether to wear high heels or not, etc.? And if you consider this to be a problem, what do you see as the solution? Should all clothes be unisex, with women wearing the same baggy pants, unfitted shirts, flat shoes, no makeup, and a utilitarian wash-&-go hairstyle like men? Or should we be trying to look "feminine" but not remotely sexy, maybe with loose, calf-length floral dresses and sensible shoes and our hair up in braids? How does taking choices away from women empower them? How is it less offensive for women who think other women should not dress in revealing or sexy ways to impose those standards than it is for men who wish women would dress in revealing, sexy ways? Why should individual women not get to make their own choices about how to dress?

My personal vote is that women get to keep all their choices and men get to expand theirs.

Edited February 16, 2019 by Corraleno

[moonflower]

I'm not judging the women themselves, I've said this like 5 separate times.  I myself wear a bra when out of the house and shave my legs.  

I'm saying that there are implications to societal expectations and norms.  They don't just come from nowhere and mean nothing.  Did you read my hypothetical about black women and bleaching/caucasian wigs?  Would you say in that situation that there was nothing concerning about society's values if only whiter skin were considered beautiful?

I'm sure men are concerned with their appearance but it is pretty obvious to me that women spend more money and more time on some specific ways of changing/enhancing their appearance, and that most of these ways are focused on maintaining and creating an appearance of either youth, sexual arousal/availability, or both.  The fact that our society encourages these displays primarily in women, and not just women who are both young and sexually available but an ever-widening swath of women, says to me that we don't value what old women represent or what young women represent or what married women represent as much as what sexually available women represent, and we suggest (and often insist) that women display themselves in this way in places where I think it is either destabilizing or just inappropriate.

 

Again, I don't think an individual woman of almost any age says to herself, I'm going to put on lipstick and blush and high heels and a lower-cut blouse (than men) and tighter pants or skirt (than men) in order to attract a man at work or at  the grocery store today.  Of course she doesn't say that, because that is not what the advertising says to her.  She says what the advertising and social messaging says to her, which is either "this makes me feel confident and beautiful" or "this is socially required and I don't want to stand out as weird at work" or "this is a reflection of my inner self" or whatever.  

But that is not where the societal pressure to behave that way comes from.  Why does sexualizing herself or making herself look more youthful make an older woman feel confident and beautiful? Because society says that beauty = sex appeal and youth, even in people who are not sexually available or not youthful.  It says that what is acceptable for a woman in the boardroom, or in Congress, or as a public facing HR rep, or as a news anchor on TV, is to sexualize herself (that is to say, to wear makeup and heels and tighter clothing and have less or no gray hair).  Do you think that the fact that there are different expectations and thus difference behaviors between men and women in this regard is meaningless?

[Catwoman]

6 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Why is it a problem that women can choose whether to wear makeup or not, whether to wear form-fitting clothes or not, whether to dye their hair or not, whether to wear high heels or not, etc.? And if you consider this to be a problem, what do you see as the solution? Should all clothes be unisex, with women wearing the same baggy pants, unfitted shirts, flat shoes, no makeup, and a utilitarian wash-&-go hairstyle like men? Or should we be trying to look "feminine" but not remotely sexy, maybe with loose, calf-length floral dresses and sensible shoes and our hair up in braids? How does taking choices away from women empower them? How is it less offensive for women who think other women should not dress in revealing or sexy ways to impose those standards than it is for men who wish women would dress in revealing, sexy ways? Why should individual women not get to make their own choices about how to dress?

My personal vote is that women get to keep all their choices and men get to expand theirs.

 

I agree!

And I was just thinking of something else. Earlier in the thread, there was the assertion that once women are past their childbearing years, they shouldn’t be trying to look youthful or sexy any more, and I had been thinking of older, single or divorced women and how they might still want to have some romance in their lives... but I just realized something...  I’m one of those “older” women, and doesn’t my husband deserve a wife who still wants to be sexy and attractive? Is it wrong for me to want to look my best for my husband?

[Catwoman]

29 minutes ago, moonflower said:

I'm not judging the women themselves, I've said this like 5 separate times.  I myself wear a bra when out of the house and shave my legs.  

I'm saying that there are implications to societal expectations and norms.  They don't just come from nowhere and mean nothing.  Did you read my hypothetical about black women and bleaching/caucasian wigs?  Would you say in that situation that there was nothing concerning about society's values if only whiter skin were considered beautiful?

I'm sure men are concerned with their appearance but it is pretty obvious to me that women spend more money and more time on some specific ways of changing/enhancing their appearance, and that most of these ways are focused on maintaining and creating an appearance of either youth, sexual arousal/availability, or both.  The fact that our society encourages these displays primarily in women, and not just women who are both young and sexually available but an ever-widening swath of women, says to me that we don't value what old women represent or what young women represent or what married women represent as much as what sexually available women represent, and we suggest (and often insist) that women display themselves in this way in places where I think it is either destabilizing or just inappropriate.

 

Again, I don't think an individual woman of almost any age says to herself, I'm going to put on lipstick and blush and high heels and a lower-cut blouse (than men) and tighter pants or skirt (than men) in order to attract a man at work or at  the grocery store today.  Of course she doesn't say that, because that is not what the advertising says to her.  She says what the advertising and social messaging says to her, which is either "this makes me feel confident and beautiful" or "this is socially required and I don't want to stand out as weird at work" or "this is a reflection of my inner self" or whatever.  

But that is not where the societal pressure to behave that way comes from.  Why does sexualizing herself or making herself look more youthful make an older woman feel confident and beautiful? Because society says that beauty = sex appeal and youth, even in people who are not sexually available or not youthful.  It says that what is acceptable for a woman in the boardroom, or in Congress, or as a public facing HR rep, or as a news anchor on TV, is to sexualize herself (that is to say, to wear makeup and heels and tighter clothing and have less or no gray hair).  Do you think that the fact that there are different expectations and thus difference behaviors between men and women in this regard is meaningless?

 

But you are judging the women. You have used terms like destabilizing, inappropriate, and even degenerate to describe women who wear clothing and makeup that you disapprove of, and you clearly believe older women shouldn’t want to look sexually attractive to men because apparently, once women are past their childbearing years, they have no business being sexy.

I also got the impression that you thought it was wrong for married women to dye their hair or wear makeup or fitted clothing because men at work or elsewhere might have impure thoughts about them... but why shouldn’t women wear whatever they want to wear and look as attractive as they want to look? And why shouldn’t they want to look youthful and sexy for their own husbands, whether they are at home or out in public?

I feel like so much of what you’re saying is insulting to women, because you keep insinuating that women (at least the women who value different things than you do) don’t have minds of their own, and they only wear makeup and high heels and tight dresses because they are subconsciously succumbing to societal pressure, instead of simply giving them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they are smart, free-thinking, strong, confident, competent women who just happen to enjoy living differently from the way you like to live. Why read so much negativity into all of this? And why worry so much about comparing women to men?

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Catwoman
Some day I will learn to type accurately.

[Corraleno]

37 minutes ago, moonflower said:

I'm not judging the women themselves, I've said this like 5 separate times.  I myself wear a bra when out of the house and shave my legs.  

I'm saying that there are implications to societal expectations and norms.  They don't just come from nowhere and mean nothing.  Did you read my hypothetical about black women and bleaching/caucasian wigs?  Would you say in that situation that there was nothing concerning about society's values if only whiter skin were considered beautiful?

I'm sure men are concerned with their appearance but it is pretty obvious to me that women spend more money and more time on some specific ways of changing/enhancing their appearance, and that most of these ways are focused on maintaining and creating an appearance of either youth, sexual arousal/availability, or both.  The fact that our society encourages these displays primarily in women, and not just women who are both young and sexually available but an ever-widening swath of women, says to me that we don't value what old women represent or what young women represent or what married women represent as much as what sexually available women represent, and we suggest (and often insist) that women display themselves in this way in places where I think it is either destabilizing or just inappropriate.

 

Again, I don't think an individual woman of almost any age says to herself, I'm going to put on lipstick and blush and high heels and a lower-cut blouse (than men) and tighter pants or skirt (than men) in order to attract a man at work or at  the grocery store today.  Of course she doesn't say that, because that is not what the advertising says to her.  She says what the advertising and social messaging says to her, which is either "this makes me feel confident and beautiful" or "this is socially required and I don't want to stand out as weird at work" or "this is a reflection of my inner self" or whatever.  

But that is not where the societal pressure to behave that way comes from.  Why does sexualizing herself or making herself look more youthful make an older woman feel confident and beautiful? Because society says that beauty = sex appeal and youth, even in people who are not sexually available or not youthful.  It says that what is acceptable for a woman in the boardroom, or in Congress, or as a public facing HR rep, or as a news anchor on TV, is to sexualize herself (that is to say, to wear makeup and heels and tighter clothing and have less or no gray hair).  Do you think that the fact that there are different expectations and thus difference behaviors between men and women in this regard is meaningless?

 

You keep asserting that attractiveness and youthfulness are only valued because they signal sexual availability — and if women don't realize that it's only because they've been brainwashed by a male-dominated society. I totally disagree with that. A fit, youthful, and healthy appearance can be valued for it's own sake, not because it makes men want to have sex with you. Fitness, youth, and health are valued because being old, tired, unhealthy, and unfit are demonstrably less enjoyable. Who doesn't want to be fit and healthy and youthful as long as possible? In no way does that mean any woman who wants to look and feel that way is "really" just trying to get men to look at her in a sexualized way.

Edited February 16, 2019 by Corraleno

[Jean in Newcastle]

Prairie dresses are in style. I have a feeling that some should run out and buy a bunch. Or some burlap sacks. 

[Skippy]

There is a huge difference in clothing for male and female college cheer leaders.

One thing that stands out to me is shoes. Male and female feet are shaped the same, but our shoes are often shaped very differently. Shoes for males tend to always be shaped to accommodate feet, but often shoes for females are not. We are (appropriately) aghast when female feet are bound. But don't we do something similar when we wear shoes that do not accommodate the shape of our feet and destroy our feet and backs in the process? I don't really see any justification for the vast difference in the shape of shoes for males vs. females when our feet are shaped the same.

[hshibley]

3 hours ago, StellaM said:

The idea that humans value 'youth' for totally non biological reasons, that their youthful preferences are utterly disconnected from anything at all - it's just nice ? well, think about it, why is it nice ? - is just mind boggling to me. Humans are mammals - our role is reproduction. Many, many aspects of our culture(s) have revolved around maximising reproductive potential, and looking for signals of youth in a mate (or advertising such signals) is a sensible evolutionary strategy. 

I don't know how anyone can look at media or social media, and think there is an acceptance and celebration of mature women who are no longer fertile AND WHO SHOW IT. 

 

 

I think the difference in thinking how you define ‘youth’ and relying on social media for your definition of attractiveness. 

If you limit your life to biological function then your definition of attractiveness makes sense. For those of us who don’t limit our choices based on biological function there’s no reason to not dress as we please after menopause. I don’t have to quit engaging with society just because I’m 50. 

I don’t look to social media for my definition of attractiveness. My media consumption is basically npr for news, Facebook is friends and family with running motivation, books, Girl Scouts pages thrown in. I don’t watch tv and can’t think of the last time I saw a fashion magazine. I spend my weekends busy with friends and family. Most of the women I see look nicely put together regardless of age. 

[unsinkable]

3 hours ago, StellaM said:

Gotta say, moonflower and Garga are bang on the money - there is clearly more social pressure for girls and women to present in more sexualised ways than men, and for a far longer portion of their lifetime. To me it seems to have gotten worse over the last couple of decades, and I wonder to what extent porn is norming presentations. 

It's extremely likely the genesis of sexualised presentation is mating ritual. It's literally advertising fertility. Yes, we are at some cognitive distance from our evolutionary roots today, and our understanding of ourselves as sexually reproducing mammals, but honestly, read up about lippie 🙂

The idea that humans value 'youth' for totally non biological reasons, that their youthful preferences are utterly disconnected from anything at all - it's just nice ? well, think about it, why is it nice ? - is just mind boggling to me. Humans are mammals - our role is reproduction. Many, many aspects of our culture(s) have revolved around maximising reproductive potential, and looking for signals of youth in a mate (or advertising such signals) is a sensible evolutionary strategy. 

I don't know how anyone can look at media or social media, and think there is an acceptance and celebration of mature women who are no longer fertile AND WHO SHOW IT. 

None of the above means I think women athletes should be competing in woolen neck to ankle suits. Female athletes, however, do not inherently require skimpier, sexier costumes than male athletes. They do not need to do sexier dancing. They may be able to perform different moves, and they may need clothes shaped for their female bodies - these are not the same. 

If I see anyone out running in a bra or topless, I think they are idiots who obviously don't mind risking skin cancer. Hot places = more skin coverage, if you don't fancy melanoma. 

 

 

I hadn't heard the term "lippie" before and in the context of this paragraph I thought it might have something to do with concealed/cryptic ovulation and signals of fertility or something along those lines.

After googling for a while, I guess it is just Australian slang for lipstick. LOL

[maize]

There are a few people on this board who look at and analyze social/cultural trends as what they are--elements of society and culture that can be analyzed mostly independently of the actions of individuals.

Then there are a bunch of folks who want everything to always be about individuals so talking about potential negative aspects of socio-cultural trends is taken to be criticism of individuals.

Humans simply do not exist primarily as individuals. We are highly social mammals, and the expectations and pressures and assumptions of the groups to which we belong profoundly influence all of us.

Analyzing factors that influence us as a group is not an attack on any individual. 

An unwillingness to look at societal factors in human behavior feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing more than one individual at a time.

The societal trend here is women commonly dressing in more physically revealing clothing than men. Talking about reasons why our culture encourages females to dress this way more than males is not a judgment against any given female or any group of females. It is an attempt to analyze social and cultural trends.

Edited February 16, 2019 by maize

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, maize said:

There are a few people on this board who look at and analyze social/cultural trends as what they are--elements of society and culture that can be analyzed mostly independently of the actions of individuals.

Then there are a bunch of folks who want everything to always be about individuals so talking about potential negative aspects of socio-cultural trends is taken to be criticism of individuals.

Humans simply do not exist primarily as individuals. We are highly social mammals, and the expectations and pressures and assumptions of the groups to which we belong profoundly influence all of us.

Analyzing factors that influence us as a group is not an attack on any individual. 

An unwillingness to look at societal factors in human behavior feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing more than one individual at a time.

The societal trend here is women commonly dressing in more physically revealing clothing than men. Talking about reasons why our culture encourages females to dress this way more than males is not a judgment against any given female or any group of females. It is an attempt to analyze social and cultural trends.

 

Except that if Moonflower was analyzing the social and cultural trends for research purposes, she probably wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) be casting moral judgment against women who make different choices than she does by using terms like “inappropriate” and  ”degenerate.”

The kinds of terms and phrases she used in her posts seems to most definitely be a judgment against not just “any given female” or “any group of females,” but a huge portion of the entire female population who happens to be beyond their childbearing years. 

Women are more than just sex objects. Women wear clothing and makeup for reasons other than wanting to look like they just had sex, so men will be sexually attracted to them. And it is most certainly not “inappropriate” or “degenerate” for older women to want to be fashionable and attractive. 

Sorry, but those posts weren’t “analyzing social and cultural trends;” they were shaming.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Skippy said:

There is a huge difference in clothing for male and female college cheer leaders.

One thing that stands out to me is shoes. Male and female feet are shaped the same, but our shoes are often shaped very differently. Shoes for males tend to always be shaped to accommodate feet, but often shoes for females are not. We are (appropriately) aghast when female feet are bound. But don't we do something similar when we wear shoes that do not accommodate the shape of our feet and destroy our feet and backs in the process? I don't really see any justification for the vast difference in the shape of shoes for males vs. females when our feet are shaped the same.

Make cheerleaders aren’t being lifted. They’re lifting, and in some cases, tumbling. Women are being lifted, thrown, caught, and tumbling, a lot. You generally cannot make a good college team as a woman without elite level tumbling skills. Loose clothing is harder to get a firm grip on the body through. And males DO need protection from being scratched inadvertently (which is why all cheer uniforms are long sleeved, even those where the skirt barely covers the bottom-which, as DD comments, means your top is always hot and your legs always cold).

Part of it is absolutely tradition and unnecessary-and, as I’ve said, the push towards internationalizing the sport and the olympics (and you see this in NCATA, which is basically the NCAA version of competition cheer) has led to uniforms losing the skirts and less difference between male and female (although most NCATA teams are women only). But if anything, the change has been making the men’s uniform more like the women’s-tighter and more form fitting to better allow for tumbling. 

And, FWIW, in cheer, the standard shoe is the women’s one-men have to adjust sizes accordingly :). 

[Garga]

2 hours ago, maize said:

There are a few people on this board who look at and analyze social/cultural trends as what they are--elements of society and culture that can be analyzed mostly independently of the actions of individuals.

Then there are a bunch of folks who want everything to always be about individuals so talking about potential negative aspects of socio-cultural trends is taken to be criticism of individuals.

Humans simply do not exist primarily as individuals. We are highly social mammals, and the expectations and pressures and assumptions of the groups to which we belong profoundly influence all of us.

Analyzing factors that influence us as a group is not an attack on any individual. 

An unwillingness to look at societal factors in human behavior feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing more than one individual at a time.

The societal trend here is women commonly dressing in more physically revealing clothing than men. Talking about reasons why our culture encourages females to dress this way more than males is not a judgment against any given female or any group of females. It is an attempt to analyze social and cultural trends.

 

This.

I fell asleep last night wondering why when I was talking about sweeping generalizations in society that I got responses about how “I know people who don’t do that!”  As I drifted off I realized that I was looking at this from a sociological point of view of humans as a group and was looking at it from a purely academic mindset and I was not talking about specific examples: just society as a whole.  And I realized that people thought I was taking shots at individual women who wear makeup or sleeveless shirts when I really wasn’t at all.

So, what you wrote is exactly spot on, so thanks for writing it for me.  🙂

 

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Garga

[Skippy]

If we look at something else, like news anchors on some channels, the difference in clothing is very apparent. I think the worst offender could be Fox News. (This post has nothing to do with politics.) Both news anchors will be young and attractive, but the man is completely covered, and the woman is most definitely showing much more skin. No one is tumbling, and he is not lifting her up. If he were dressed showing as much skin as she was, we would think he looked ridiculous and unprofessional. 

[EmseB]

I am only one individual, true. But I am completely, totally average. I have no trouble whatsoever, as an average woman in this society, finding conservative clothing, shoes, formal wear, etc. I can dress as covered up as a man with no trouble and no social consequences (but I hate making men's the standard in any case).  The idea of basing what I wear, even lipstick, on trying to look sexed up is just silly to me, regardless of historical origins or uses. And I think telling women that they must be wearing makeup because they are trying for that look is insulting and degrading in itself.

Again, I am totally average in the communties I've lived in. I am buying clothes in major retailers and online, not some specialty modesty shop. I wear crew necks, boat necks, shirts that button modestly. I also might wear a vneck, or even short shorts when I work out. I am guessing, based on this thread, that women are far more judgemental about what I'm wearing than any man.

I think there is a very specific, unreasonable beauty standard out there that some in media do promote. I think it is damaging. I think, though, it is mostly easily avoidable and even easy to mock these days because there are so many fashion choices and ways of dressing.

 

[moonflower]

50 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

Except that if Moonflower was analyzing the social and cultural trends for research purposes, she probably wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) be casting moral judgment against women who make different choices than she does by using terms like “inappropriate” and  ”degenerate.”

The kinds of terms and phrases she used in her posts seems to most definitely be a judgment against not just “any given female” or “any group of females,” but a huge portion of the entire female population who happens to be beyond their childbearing years. 

Women are more than just sex objects. Women wear clothing and makeup for reasons other than wanting to look like they just had sex, so men will be sexually attracted to them. And it is most certainly not “inappropriate” or “degenerate” for older women to want to be fashionable and attractive. 

Sorry, but those posts weren’t “analyzing social and cultural trends;” they were shaming.

 

I do judge the societal trend that has women dressing this way, especially groups of women for whom it doesn't even make biological sense, like young women (girls), sexually unavailable women, and old women.  It is inappropriate in biological terms for there to be a trend where 6 year old girls dress in costumes or even some everyday clothing that are designed to suggest their eventual sexuality; it's (imo) bad for society.  That doesn't mean the girls themselves are degenerate; they're 6!  It means they are subject to and participating in something that is not a good idea.

It is inappropriate and degenerate for the way that older women see themselves as fashionable and attractive to be representing themselves as youthful and sexually available (because that is what youth means in biological terms for female humans).  That doesn't mean individual older women who do this are bad or degenerate; it means that they are subject to and participating in something that is not a good idea.

Again, and I've said this now at least 6 times, it's not an individual criticism of individuals.  In a previous post I pretty directly said, on the literal topic of the OP, that thinking the difference between men's and women's gymnastics uniforms is problematic and sexist doesn't mean we're saying OMG what whores! about the gymnasts.  

[moonflower]

5 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I am only one individual, true. But I am completely, totally average. I have no trouble whatsoever, as an average woman in this society, finding conservative clothing, shoes, formal wear, etc. I can dress as covered up as a man with no trouble and no social consequences (but I hate making men's the standard in any case).  The idea of basing what I wear, even lipstick, on trying to look sexed up is just silly to me, regardless of historical origins or uses. And I think telling women that they must be wearing makeup because they are trying for that look is insulting and degrading in itself.

Again, I am totally average in the communties I've lived in. I am buying clothes in major retailers and online, not some specialty modesty shop. I wear crew necks, boat necks, shirts that button modestly. I also might wear a vneck, or even short shorts when I work out. I am guessing, based on this thread, that women are far more judgemental about what I'm wearing than any man.

I think there is a very specific, unreasonable beauty standard out there that some in media do promote. I think it is damaging. I think, though, it is mostly easily avoidable and even easy to mock these days because there are so many fashion choices and ways of dressing.

 

 

Of course you can avoid doing this (at least in many professions or as a SAHM).  But 

A. there are some situations where you can't.  female gymnasts can't just say sorry, not gonna wear the leo that rides up my butt at competitions while men wear shorts and shirts.  Professional women largely can't say sorry, not gonna wear makeup and heels; especially in a formal wear situation, women largely can't say sorry, not gonna go without makeup and a dress and heels and etc.

B. It is not about choice.  That focuses on the individual.  It is about what most people seem to feel compelled or encouraged or inclined to do.  Again, if 70% of black women were bleaching their skin, we'd be concerned about what implications that has for societal views of beauty and value.  Of course they could choose not to, but that's not the point.

[Skippy]

Looking at (let's say so-called Western) society (for a frame of reference), this disparity is relatively new. Before the 20th century, men and women were similarly covered although styles were much different between men and women. I am also looking at these things from an academic perspective as opposed to an individual level.

[EmseB]

16 minutes ago, moonflower said:

Of course you can avoid doing this (at least in many professions or as a SAHM).  But 

A. there are some situations where you can't.  female gymnasts can't just say sorry, not gonna wear the leo that rides up my butt at competitions while men wear shorts and shirts.  Professional women largely can't say sorry, not gonna wear makeup and heels; especially in a formal wear situation, women largely can't say sorry, not gonna go without makeup and a dress and heels and etc.

B. It is not about choice.  That focuses on the individual.  It is about what most people seem to feel compelled or encouraged or inclined to do.  Again, if 70% of black women were bleaching their skin, we'd be concerned about what implications that has for societal views of beauty and value.  Of course they could choose not to, but that's not the point.

A. If we're still talking about leos and butts I don't know where to go with this. If the leotards that elite gymnasts wore were truly non-functional (as in rode up their butts while competing) in order to make them have more sex appeal, then I would agree with you. If there were no reasons for men and women to have different outfits, then I'd agree with you. But several people have commented as to why men wear pants or shorts and women don't, and why women wear leotards that would be impractical for men (anatomy and the fact that they essentially do different apparatus plays a big part). The men do wear short shorts and revealing tanks. If the women wore what men wear, their BooKs, for one thing would make competition very difficult. If they were wearing the short shorts or the stirrup pants, what real different would be made as to what's exposed? Add in the fact that leotards are designed and tested for performance at an elite level...it just doesn't bear out that the reason female gymnasts are wearing them is in order to conform to a butt-showing standard imposed on them by society. A leotard that rides up the butt at competitions isn't going to be worn by a gymnast for more than one practice because...it's not functional for competition.

For formal wear or office wear I think it depends on where you are and the culture of the events or workplaces. I have been to military balls for the better part of a decade where formal is what people want to wear, with, yes, a certain aspect of dressiness. Women in dress pants and tops, women in flats, women wearing gowns that cover and conceal...and women that go the other way and show a lot of a skin with 3-inch heels. I was at a formal event last year that was not a military ball that was full of conservative Christians where not one woman was scantily clad, but all were dressed up and looked appropriate for black tie.

 To the same point, professional men largely can't say, "Sorry, not going to wear a tie; not going to wear a tux; not going to wear a suit; not going to wear a collared shirt; not going to wear a cumberbund; not going to wear shirt stays" IME, the fashion standard for men both in the office and in formal situations is much more limiting than it is for women. My mom works in an office where she wears long flowy skirts and bohemian style tops, or a suit, or nice pants...flats, wedges, pumps depending on the outfit and what she wants to wear that day. Her male counterparts don't have nearly the range of options that they can wear and still be considered professional. 

And some of the constraints are just by the nature of a formal event being an occasion where people, all sexes, get dressed up. And so that means wearing fancier stuff than one otherwise would. So what is fancier, of course, is different between the sexes, but how do you differentiate a formal event from a non-formal event? In large part, by the clothing people wear and the way they do their hair and if they wear makeup or not. It's a kind of event based on appearance, not every day life. So of course some of it is probably a little ridiculous.

B. But what it comes down to is what individuals feel compelled to choose and have available. Like you say, if a lot of individuals were compelled to make one choice out of two, dark skin or light skin, in order to conform to a standard in order to fit in or whatever, it would be problematic (and a lot of what your metaphor depends on there is the history of race in western culture so it's a bit loaded in the first place). But that is decidedly not what we have in the western world as far as fashion or makeup goes. There is a huge range of makeup going on (from sooo much to none and everything in between) that it is not like trying to look like B if you're actually A because B is treated better because of one physical attribute.

[Catwoman]

54 minutes ago, moonflower said:

 

I do judge the societal trend that has women dressing this way, especially groups of women for whom it doesn't even make biological sense, like young women (girls), sexually unavailable women, and old women.  It is inappropriate in biological terms for there to be a trend where 6 year old girls dress in costumes or even some everyday clothing that are designed to suggest their eventual sexuality; it's (imo) bad for society.  That doesn't mean the girls themselves are degenerate; they're 6!  It means they are subject to and participating in something that is not a good idea.

It is inappropriate and degenerate for the way that older women see themselves as fashionable and attractive to be representing themselves as youthful and sexually available (because that is what youth means in biological terms for female humans).  That doesn't mean individual older women who do this are bad or degenerate; it means that they are subject to and participating in something that is not a good idea.

Again, and I've said this now at least 6 times, it's not an individual criticism of individuals.  In a previous post I pretty directly said, on the literal topic of the OP, that thinking the difference between men's and women's gymnastics uniforms is problematic and sexist doesn't mean we're saying OMG what whores! about the gymnasts.  

 

I know this is none of my business, but I keep wondering how old you are. 

You say this isn’t criticism of individuals, but the group of women you’re judging and painting with such a broad brush ARE individuals. And you ARE judging each and every one of them when you use terms like “inappropriate” and “degenerate” for an entire segment of the female population.

Who are you to decide for all older women what is or is not a good idea? Who are you to decide whether or not women should be presenting themselves as “youthful and available?” Why shouldn’t they present themselves in any way that they like? Why should their age place a limit on what they can wear, and whether or not they can dye their hair or wear makeup? Why are you even thinking in those terms? It’s like you assume all older women who like looking their best must have very dirty minds and get up every morning thinking about how they’ll use their flushed lips and flushed cheeks and high heels and fashionable clothing to lure poor, unsuspecting men into wanting to have sex with them. And that simply isn’t true. 

Seriously, I am wondering how you believe older women should dress and how they should present themselves, because it sounds like they should reach some predetermined age and just give up on the idea of being physically attractive, and I must admit that I find that entire concept to be incredibly bizarre, restrictive, and judgmental. Why can’t older women be sexy? Life isn’t all about bearing children.

 

[moonflower]

33 minutes ago, EmseB said:

A. If we're still talking about leos and butts I don't know where to go with this. If the leotards that elite gymnasts wore were truly non-functional (as in rode up their butts while competing) in order to make them have more sex appeal, then I would agree with you. If there were no reasons for men and women to have different outfits, then I'd agree with you. But several people have commented as to why men wear pants or shorts and women don't, and why women wear leotards that would be impractical for men (anatomy and the fact that they essentially do different apparatus plays a big part). The men do wear short shorts and revealing tanks. If the women wore what men wear, their BooKs, for one thing would make competition very difficult. If they were wearing the short shorts or the stirrup pants, what real different would be made as to what's exposed? Add in the fact that leotards are designed and tested for performance at an elite level...it just doesn't bear out that the reason female gymnasts are wearing them is in order to conform to a butt-showing standard imposed on them by society. A leotard that rides up the butt at competitions isn't going to be worn by a gymnast for more than one practice because...it's not functional for competition.

For formal wear or office wear I think it depends on where you are and the culture of the events or workplaces. I have been to military balls for the better part of a decade where formal is what people want to wear, with, yes, a certain aspect of dressiness. Women in dress pants and tops, women in flats, women wearing gowns that cover and conceal...and women that go the other way and show a lot of a skin with 3-inch heels. I was at a formal event last year that was not a military ball that was full of conservative Christians where not one woman was scantily clad, but all were dressed up and looked appropriate for black tie.

 To the same point, professional men largely can't say, "Sorry, not going to wear a tie; not going to wear a tux; not going to wear a suit; not going to wear a collared shirt; not going to wear a cumberbund; not going to wear shirt stays" IME, the fashion standard for men both in the office and in formal situations is much more limiting than it is for women. My mom works in an office where she wears long flowy skirts and bohemian style tops, or a suit, or nice pants...flats, wedges, pumps depending on the outfit and what she wants to wear that day. Her male counterparts don't have nearly the range of options that they can wear and still be considered professional. 

And some of the constraints are just by the nature of a formal event being an occasion where people, all sexes, get dressed up. And so that means wearing fancier stuff than one otherwise would. So what is fancier, of course, is different between the sexes, but how do you differentiate a formal event from a non-formal event? In large part, by the clothing people wear and the way they do their hair and if they wear makeup or not. It's a kind of event based on appearance, not every day life. So of course some of it is probably a little ridiculous.

B. But what it comes down to is what individuals feel compelled to choose and have available. Like you say, if a lot of individuals were compelled to make one choice out of two, dark skin or light skin, in order to conform to a standard in order to fit in or whatever, it would be problematic (and a lot of what your metaphor depends on there is the history of race in western culture so it's a bit loaded in the first place). But that is decidedly not what we have in the western world as far as fashion or makeup goes. There is a huge range of makeup going on (from sooo much to none and everything in between) that it is not like trying to look like B if you're actually A because B is treated better because of one physical attribute.

 

A. I totally agree that the formal wear and office wear standard for men is more limiting than for women, of course.  What I'm not saying is that the limit is the issue; I don't think having social structures around what is appropriate to wear for different occasions is a problem and I don't think having different standards for different sexes is a problem.  What I think is problematic is that for women, the standards are more sexualized than they are for men, and more importantly, they are sexualized for a large number of women who are not sexually available, either because of marital status or age.

B. What percentage of women wear makeup vs the percentage of men?  what do you think the ratio is?  10x more women? 20x more women?  How is that not evidence of a different standard between the two sexes, and one which sexualizes men vs sexualizing women, including classes of women for whom this makes no biological sense?

[moonflower]

21 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

I know this is none of my business, but I keep wondering how old you are. 

You say this isn’t criticism of individuals, but the group of women you’re judging and painting with such a broad brush ARE individuals. And you ARE judging each and every one of them when you use terms like “inappropriate” and “degenerate” for an entire segment of the female population.

Who are you to decide for all older women what is or is not a good idea? Who are you to decide whether or not women should be presenting themselves as “youthful and available?” Why shouldn’t they present themselves in any way that they like? Why should their age place a limit on what they can wear, and whether or not they can dye their hair or wear makeup? Why are you even thinking in those terms? It’s like you assume all older women who like looking their best must have very dirty minds and get up every morning thinking about how they’ll use their flushed lips and flushed cheeks and high heels and fashionable clothing to lure poor, unsuspecting men into wanting to have sex with them. And that simply isn’t true. 

Seriously, I am wondering how you believe older women should dress and how they should present themselves, because it sounds like they should reach some predetermined age and just give up on the idea of being physically attractive, and I must admit that I find that entire concept to be incredibly bizarre, restrictive, and judgmental. Why can’t older women be sexy? Life isn’t all about bearing children.

 

 

I'm 34, and married; I'm not sexually available (that is to say, I'm married) but I am still reproductively viable.  

I have said this a number of times but I will say it one more time: I don't think women of almost any description are consciously applying makeup or wearing high heels or tighter clothing in order to enhance their sex appeal.  Certainly gymnasts aren't doing this, or Nancy Pelosi, or 7 year olds in dance competitions, or I'd say most women in professions where such clothing is required.  I don't think older women are doing it; I don't think married women are doing it; I don't think preteens are doing it.  

Where did I ever say I thought they were doing this?  

I do think the pattern of behavior, the social tendency, is at its root biologically driven.  I mean, it doesn't come from nowhere.  Where do you think the trend comes from?  

That is not the same thing as saying that I think an individual is consciously deciding to do any of these things for those reasons.  I am not talking about nor am I concerned about what Mary Sue is thinking when she wakes up in the morning; I'm talking about what 20 million Mary Sues do, why they do that (not why they think they do it but why they actually do it),  what effect the behavior (as a whole, as 20 million of them doing it) has for our social structures, and what implications the behavior (as a whole, as 20 million of them doing it) has re: our social values.

Again, to be very clear, I don't care what women think about in the morning, old women or young women.  I don't care why they wear makeup or high heels or gymnastics leotards.  I just care that many of them do while many men don't, and that recently (say the last few decades, anyway, maybe somewhat longer) more of them do it for whom the original purpose (biological attraction for reproductive success) makes zero sense, because they're 7 years old or 55 years old or married and 34 🙂

[maize]

30 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

It’s like you assume all older women who like looking their best must have very dirty minds and get up every morning thinking about how they’ll use their flushed lips and flushed cheeks and high heels and fashionable clothing to lure poor, unsuspecting men into wanting to have sex with them. And that simply isn’t true. 

And we are back to the impasse of some looking at the forest and some looking at the trees. Moonflower's posts in no way imply that she assumes women think this way explicitly. They speak to a cultural trend that pushes women to dress (and sometimes engage surgeons) in ways that present as young and fertile and dripping with sex appeal.

They neither state nor imply anything about the explicit intent of any woman or group of women.

Edited February 16, 2019 by maize

[moonflower]

titled: "what if male avengers were styled to look like female ones"

Edited February 16, 2019 by moonflower
title

[moonflower]

34 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

[...] It’s like you assume all older women who like looking their best[...]

 

 

This I think is the point of contention, maybe I can clarify by narrowing in here.

I don't have any issue with anyone wanting to look their best.  I want to look my best, my 7 year old likes to look her best, my 10 year old son likes to look his best.  My husband likes to wear colors he finds pleasing.  That is so completely normal and I would never criticize it, either in an individual or a population.  That is a human trait, to self-decorate and groom and etc.

The issue I have is that in this society, increasingly, "looking your best" for older women, married women, and young girls, to a much higher degree than for any class of men, involves looking like you are of childbearing age.  Why?  Why doesn't looking your best for older women mean having natural gray hair, wrinkles, and some flabbiness of cheek?  Is it just some random coincidence that these changes (hair dye, botox, wrinkle-free cream, makeup to cover age spots and simulate youthful blushing, demi bras) all suggest youthfulness?  Why are older women in this society led to think that "looking their best" requires looking younger?

Why don't we value old age in the same way we value youth, in women, while we do value old age in men?

[Skippy]

I think maybe it is convenient to dumb down this conversation to, "Don't ya just hate female gymnasts, old ladies trying to look young, and women who wear high heels." Then we can focus on that discussion and pretend that this is not a thing - that no double standard exists, that society doesn't really expect women to ever wear less clothing than men, that women are never expected to sacrifice their comfort in exchange for looks, and that it is not more permissible for men to "grow old gracefully."

[maize]

It is very difficult to discuss ideas when "you are prejudiced against..." or "you are being judgmental towards..."  is the response of choice.

Anyway, back to the discussion of culture vs. discussion of individual choices:

To my mind, culture is more than just the sum total of individual choices. Human culture is something like a group consciousness, a collective mind that functions on a different level from individual human minds. One aspect of this group consciousness in many modern societies is an idea that women--more than men--in order to look good and be socially presentable should appear young and fertile and should dress in a way that highlights their sex appeal. It is an idea that is rarely expressed explicitly but which is a clearly visible current in almost every aspect of society if we stop and look for it.

Edited February 16, 2019 by maize

[Corraleno]

4 hours ago, maize said:

There are a few people on this board who look at and analyze social/cultural trends as what they are--elements of society and culture that can be analyzed mostly independently of the actions of individuals.

Then there are a bunch of folks who want everything to always be about individuals so talking about potential negative aspects of socio-cultural trends is taken to be criticism of individuals.

Humans simply do not exist primarily as individuals. We are highly social mammals, and the expectations and pressures and assumptions of the groups to which we belong profoundly influence all of us.

Analyzing factors that influence us as a group is not an attack on any individual. 

An unwillingness to look at societal factors in human behavior feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing more than one individual at a time.

The societal trend here is women commonly dressing in more physically revealing clothing than men. Talking about reasons why our culture encourages females to dress this way more than males is not a judgment against any given female or any group of females. It is an attempt to analyze social and cultural trends.

And an unwillingness to look at societal factors through any lens other than reproductive capability and sexual availability feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing these issues as being about anything other than sex.

The repeated statements that youth is ONLY valued because it represents sexual availability and that therefore anything women do that results in looking younger or more vibrant is, by definition, an unconscious signal of reproductive capacity and sexual availability are, IMO, total BS. Reproductive capability is NOT the only reason our culture values youth and health, and women do not wear makeup or dye their hair in order to pretend they can still give birth. That's absurd.

The other problem with these sweeping generalizations about "what society demands" is that the vast majority of American women do not in fact dress like Kardashians. Claiming that "society demands" that women wear sexed-up revealing clothing ignores the fact that most women don't wear sexed-up revealing clothing. And when women do choose to wear sexy clothing, with the explicit purpose of wanting to look sexually desirable — what exactly is wrong with that??? 

No one has yet answered the question of what they think women should be wearing, if they should not wear anything that reveals the shape of their bodies. Should we be shopping in the men's department? Are we supposed to start wearing shapeless clothing and sneakers and no makeup and not style our hair? And that is supposed to be empowering to women?

 

[maize]

6 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

And an unwillingness to look at societal factors through any lens other than reproductive capability and sexual availability feels to me like insisting on wearing blinders that prevent us from ever viewing these issues as being about anything other than sex.

The repeated statements that youth is ONLY valued because it represents sexual availability and that therefore anything women do that results in looking younger or more vibrant is, by definition, an unconscious signal of reproductive capacity and sexual availability are, IMO, total BS. Reproductive capability is NOT the only reason our culture values youth and health, and women do not wear makeup or dye their hair in order to pretend they can still give birth. That's absurd.

The other problem with these sweeping generalizations about "what society demands" is that the vast majority of American women do not in fact dress like Kardashians. Claiming that "society demands" that women wear sexed-up revealing clothing ignores the fact that most women don't wear sexed-up revealing clothing. And when women do choose to wear sexy clothing, with the explicit purpose of wanting to look sexually desirable — what exactly is wrong with that??? 

No one has yet answered the question of what they think women should be wearing, if they should not wear anything that reveals the shape of their bodies. Should we be shopping in the men's department? Are we supposed to start wearing shapeless clothing and sneakers and no makeup and not style our hair? And that is supposed to be empowering to women?

 

I don't actually care much what men or women wear, I am concerned about objectification of women when dress standards for women involve either significantly more or significantly less coverage than dress standards for men. If men and women in a given society both go around mostly naked then no objectification of women is apparent in dress standards. If men and women both cover every inch of skin then again objectification of women is not apparent in dress standards. If the boys at high school prom have everything covered except their faces and hands and the girls are all wearing sleeveless or low-cut and backless gowns...I perceive objectification of women. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

Both men and women buy clothing that fits their tastes and preferences.  Designers can try to start trends and some will follow them, but there is a reason why some designer trends (male rompers anyone?) have had very little following.  I said this before, but I think that we are in a time when we have so much choice out there.  I haven't worn heels in probably 20 years.  My 17 year old daughter has no heels and I would be very surprised whether she ever buys them because of her emphasis on practicality.  But if someone wants to buy heels because they like how they make them feel?  Go for it.  It's their choice. 

Both my t-shirts and my husbands actually fit our bodies (as in they are not super loose).  But our bodies are (obviously) different.  I am not ashamed of the fact that I have breasts - even if they are middle-aged ones. 

[moonflower]

Jean, what do you think is the reason that women are more likely to wear heels, makeup, and tighter clothing than men? 

Not why do you do it or not, or why someone you know does it or not, but why is the societal trend in the West for women to do this and men to not do it (on the whole, again, not individually)?

Surely you don't think that women are just as likely to wear heels and makeup and tight clothing and dye their hair/have botox/ have plastic surgery/ wear shapewear as men?

[EmseB]

58 minutes ago, moonflower said:

 

A. I totally agree that the formal wear and office wear standard for men is more limiting than for women, of course.  What I'm not saying is that the limit is the issue; I don't think having social structures around what is appropriate to wear for different occasions is a problem and I don't think having different standards for different sexes is a problem.  What I think is problematic is that for women, the standards are more sexualized than they are for men, and more importantly, they are sexualized for a large number of women who are not sexually available, either because of marital status or age.

B. What percentage of women wear makeup vs the percentage of men?  what do you think the ratio is?  10x more women? 20x more women?  How is that not evidence of a different standard between the two sexes, and one which sexualizes men vs sexualizing women, including classes of women for whom this makes no biological sense?

I don't think I've ever denied that there is a different standard for men and women. Just that I don't think it's necessarily worse for women and better for men or more sexual for women across the board. I think there is a certain subset or demographic that is into a more sexualized standard. I don't think that is the case across the board for women in society. I think many (maybe even most) women find the giant lips and huge booty accentuated by a midriff-baring latex outfit with 5-inch heels to be laughable. I really do. I do not think the sexy-sex image in the media is the standard that most of society is operating on. If it were, our choices that we were talking about earlier, would be far more limited to only clothing that attempts to be that image. And clearly our options are not limited in that respect. I think in different demographics, more of society, the mid-rise jeans with a sweater is far, far more popular than the other thing.

I think that sexualizing children in any capacity is wrong and you won't get any disagreement from me on that front. Aside from children, though, I'm not going to tell women that their fashion or makeup choices have to make "biological sense". I personally might think it unwise or tacky to wear certain things at a certain age, but a)it's not my business to say so; b)I don't see an epidemic of older ladies outside of the Real Housewives trying to look and act 30 years younger than they are and that show is literally fun to watch because those women are caricatures of a stereotype; and c) since I don't see it as an epidemic or really a huge thing in society I have a hard time caring about it.

But I feel like we're talking about two different things and moving the goalposts depending. One is, are makeup and high heels and dresses inherently problematic because they are sexier than mens clothing and women feel compelled to wear them without any other choices and men get to cover up in suits? or b) it's the age that's problematic and older women shouldn't be dressing younger because they are no longer biologically available.

As for women being more sexualized than men, actually, I think culturally speaking it is generally more acceptable for women to ogle and holler and maybe even get physical with "attractive" men and the men are supposed to enjoy it or at least just take it without acting bothered by it. Watch someone like Jake Gyllenhal or David Beckham step out in a nicely cut suit and you can see this in action. Men do aim to look sexy, I think, but the traits emphasized are different for men because they are biologically different and different traits in men portray sexiness than in women. But I don't think the men in media are not concerned about this aspect of their looks, perhaps in the same way the women are. Calvin Klein ads with shirtless dudes in undies? Who are those appealing to?

The interesting thing is that I would argue against biology being determinate of what we wear precisely because I don't prefer that young women go out dressed like Kylie Jenner because it happens to make "biological sense" at their age when they are single. I'm not going to say boo either way unless it's one of my own kids that I'm responsible for, but if reproductive availability is what we're basing fashion on in any sense, no thank you. You're having this conversation with someone who thinks that look is inappropriate for almost any age group. It's just that I don't see it being as pervasive as others, it seems.

[hshibley]

31 minutes ago, maize said:

I don't actually care much what men or women wear, I am concerned about objectification of women when dress standards for women involve either significantly more or significantly less coverage than dress standards for men. If men and women in a given society both go around mostly naked then no objectification of women is apparent in dress standards. If men and women both cover every inch of skin then again objectification of women is not apparent in dress standards. If the boys at high school prom have everything covered except their faces and hands and the girls are all wearing sleeveless or low-cut and backless gowns...I perceive objectification of women. 

Basically we have to dress like men. We’re going to throw off the shackles of patriarchy by aligning our personal dress decisions to those of men. 

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

 

A. I totally agree that the formal wear and office wear standard for men is more limiting than for women, of course.  What I'm not saying is that the limit is the issue; I don't think having social structures around what is appropriate to wear for different occasions is a problem and I don't think having different standards for different sexes is a problem.  What I think is problematic is that for women, the standards are more sexualized than they are for men, and more importantly, they are sexualized for a large number of women who are not sexually available, either because of marital status or age.

B. What percentage of women wear makeup vs the percentage of men?  what do you think the ratio is?  10x more women? 20x more women?  How is that not evidence of a different standard between the two sexes, and one which sexualizes men vs sexualizing women, including classes of women for whom this makes no biological sense?

 

Why do you keep assuming that women are “not sexually available” once they reach a certain age? That is absurd.

Plenty of older women want to have sex, and not all single, divorced, or widowed women believe that it’s wrong for an unmarried woman to have sex. Do you really believe that once a woman is no longer able to bear children, that she suddenly loses all interest in sex, and loses all interest in being attractive to the opposite sex? And you also assume that married women no longer care (or shouldn’t care) about presenting themselves in a sexually attractive way, and I don’t buy into that argument, either. Why wouldn’t women want to primp a little so they look attractive for their husbands? What’s wrong with a woman enjoying some positive attention for her appearance from anyone, for that matter? Just because any woman, married or single, is noticed by men and they find her sexually attractive doesn’t mean she is going to hop into bed with any of them. 

You keep coming back to the idea that it makes “no biological sense” for an older woman to be sexualized in any way, and that it’s wrong for women to want to look sexy once they reach a certain age. Why not??? Why shouldn’t older women be allowed the same options as younger women? What does biology have to do with any of this? 

Your point of view seems so discriminatory and limiting toward older women. You say society doesn’t treat older women appropriately, but from where I’m sitting, you seem to be placing more restrictions on older women than society does. 

If you were talking about ALL women, that would be different. I might agree with you or I might disagree with you, but at least you would be speaking about women in general. But you are singling out all women who are past their childbearing years and making sweeping generalizations about them and how they should present themselves. Also, what about younger women who are unable to bear children, or who don’t want to have children? Are they not allowed to present themselves in a sexually attractive way, either? Based on what you have posted, no matter what her age, a woman who can’t give birth to a baby has no business presenting herself in a sexually attractive manner, because it makes no “biological sense” for her to do so. 

Do you believe that a woman should only want to attract a romantic partner if she is planning to have children with that person? Do you think a woman should only have sex with a man if she is both married to him and wants to get pregnant?

I truly am trying to understand your logic, but it’s not making sense to me. I can’t understand why you keep bringing age into the discussion.

[Wheres Toto]

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

I"m another one (probably inching awfully close to that "older woman" age) that either doesn't understand what you are really getting at or am just seeing something completely different.

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

A. I totally agree that the formal wear and office wear standard for men is more limiting than for women, of course.  What I'm not saying is that the limit is the issue; I don't think having social structures around what is appropriate to wear for different occasions is a problem and I don't think having different standards for different sexes is a problem.  What I think is problematic is that for women, the standards are more sexualized than they are for men, and more importantly, they are sexualized for a large number of women who are not sexually available, either because of marital status or age.

B. What percentage of women wear makeup vs the percentage of men?  what do you think the ratio is?  10x more women? 20x more women?  How is that not evidence of a different standard between the two sexes, and one which sexualizes men vs sexualizing women, including classes of women for whom this makes no biological sense?

But the standards are only more sexualized for women who WANT to be more sexualized.   Many have pointed out that women have a lot of options for how they want to dress and only some of them would be considered sexualized.    

I do also take issues with the idea that a woman past child-bearing age should be not sexually available.  Dh would REALLY hate to hear that.

I wear make-up to even out my skin tones and make my eyes look bigger.  On the once or twice a year occasions I wear make-up.  Not a sexual look at all, just cleaner/clearer.  You seem to feel make-up is ALWAYS about sexualization.  What about if it's to cover up scars or acne or whatever?  Does that still count as sexualizing?  I do know men who where cover-up make-up.  I also know quite a few younger men who wear eye-liner.  It's becoming quite the trend around here.

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

 

I'm 34, and married; I'm not sexually available (that is to say, I'm married) but I am still reproductively viable.  

I have said this a number of times but I will say it one more time: I don't think women of almost any description are consciously applying makeup or wearing high heels or tighter clothing in order to enhance their sex appeal.  Certainly gymnasts aren't doing this, or Nancy Pelosi, or 7 year olds in dance competitions, or I'd say most women in professions where such clothing is required.  I don't think older women are doing it; I don't think married women are doing it; I don't think preteens are doing it.  

Where did I ever say I thought they were doing this?  

I do think the pattern of behavior, the social tendency, is at its root biologically driven.  I mean, it doesn't come from nowhere.  Where do you think the trend comes from?  

That is not the same thing as saying that I think an individual is consciously deciding to do any of these things for those reasons.  I am not talking about nor am I concerned about what Mary Sue is thinking when she wakes up in the morning; I'm talking about what 20 million Mary Sues do, why they do that (not why they think they do it but why they actually do it),  what effect the behavior (as a whole, as 20 million of them doing it) has for our social structures, and what implications the behavior (as a whole, as 20 million of them doing it) has re: our social values.

Again, to be very clear, I don't care what women think about in the morning, old women or young women.  I don't care why they wear makeup or high heels or gymnastics leotards.  I just care that many of them do while many men don't, and that recently (say the last few decades, anyway, maybe somewhat longer) more of them do it for whom the original purpose (biological attraction for reproductive success) makes zero sense, because they're 7 years old or 55 years old or married and 34 🙂

 

Okay, so I'm taking it you don't wear heels, make-up, dye your hair, dress showing cleavage or leg or shoulders or whatever would be considered sexual if it shows more than a men's suit because as a married woman you are not sexually available? 

So, you have a problem with the original purpose of looking attractive changing?  With women having more options for how they look at whatever age?  

And honestly, I think it the last few decades LESS women are worrying about dyeing hair, makeup, heels, etc.  I'm seeing much more of a trend toward women dressing for comfort.  It seems to be all yoga pants, hoodies, and flannel shirts around here.   Or is your issue just the old ladies continuing to do these things, it's fine for the young'uns?

5 minutes ago, moonflower said:

Jean, what do you think is the reason that women are more likely to wear heels, makeup, and tighter clothing than men? 

Not why do you do it or not, or why someone you know does it or not, but why is the societal trend in the West for women to do this and men to not do it (on the whole, again, not individually)?

Surely you don't think that women are just as likely to wear heels and makeup and tight clothing and dye their hair/have botox/ have plastic surgery/ wear shapewear as men?

Why did men wear the heels in earlier times?  Why did they wear wigs and makeup?    We're they trying to look sexy?  

I think more women do it at this point because most men feel they can't.    I think many of them might want to but don't feel able to.    

I think you must live in a very different world than I do.  I'm just not seeing all this forcing women to dye their hair, wear heels, dress sexy, wear make-up that you seem to be seeing.   

[Garga]

 

16 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I don't think I've ever denied that there is a different standard for men and women. Just that I don't think it's necessarily worse for women and better for men or more sexual for women across the board. I think there is a certain subset or demographic that is into a more sexualized standard. I don't think that is the case across the board for women in society. I think many (maybe even most) women find the giant lips and huge booty accentuated by a midriff-baring latex outfit with 5-inch heels to be laughable. I really do. I do not think the sexy-sex image in the media is the standard that most of society is operating on. If it were, our choices that we were talking about earlier, would be far more limited to only clothing that attempts to be that image. And clearly our options are not limited in that respect. I think in different demographics, more of society, the mid-rise jeans with a sweater is far, far more popular than the other thing.

I think that sexualizing children in any capacity is wrong and you won't get any disagreement from me on that front. Aside from children, though, I'm not going to tell women that their fashion or makeup choices have to make "biological sense". I personally might think it unwise or tacky to wear certain things at a certain age, but a)it's not my business to say so; b)I don't see an epidemic of older ladies outside of the Real Housewives trying to look and act 30 years younger than they are and that show is literally fun to watch because those women are caricatures of a stereotype; and c) since I don't see it as an epidemic or really a huge thing in society I have a hard time caring about it.

But I feel like we're talking about two different things and moving the goalposts depending. One is, are makeup and high heels and dresses inherently problematic because they are sexier than mens clothing and women feel compelled to wear them without any other choices and men get to cover up in suits? or b) it's the age that's problematic and older women shouldn't be dressing younger because they are no longer biologically available.

As for women being more sexualized than men, actually, I think culturally speaking it is generally more acceptable for women to ogle and holler and maybe even get physical with "attractive" men and the men are supposed to enjoy it or at least just take it without acting bothered by it. Watch someone like Jake Gyllenhal or David Beckham step out in a nicely cut suit and you can see this in action. Men do aim to look sexy, I think, but the traits emphasized are different for men because they are biologically different and different traits in men portray sexiness than in women. But I don't think the men in media are not concerned about this aspect of their looks, perhaps in the same way the women are. Calvin Klein ads with shirtless dudes in undies? Who are those appealing to?

The interesting thing is that I would argue against biology being determinate of what we wear precisely because I don't prefer that young women go out dressed like Kylie Jenner because it happens to make "biological sense" at their age when they are single. I'm not going to say boo either way unless it's one of my own kids that I'm responsible for, but if reproductive availability is what we're basing fashion on in any sense, no thank you. You're having this conversation with someone who thinks that look is inappropriate for almost any age group. It's just that I don't see it being as pervasive as others, it seems.

 

This is a great response!  You make points that are opposite to some of the points I made and yet I feel like we’re finally on the same page.  We’re not talking about individuals here, but we’re talking about the sweeping generalities of male/female clothing options and what they mean.  

This answer is wonderful and gives me lots to think about and is the sort of dialog I was hoping for a couple of pages ago when the thread turned in this direction.  It presents other points of view of why we dress as we do on a societal level.

[Wheres Toto]

I understand that some of you feel you are only talking about trends, not individuals but the world is made up of individuals.  It's individuals that decide what to buy, what to wear, how to put on make-up, etc.    And the trends of what is sold in ordinary stores where ordinary people shop is for more options so it's very easy to find whatever style you feel comfortable in.  

Plus, as others have said you seem to be getting your idea of trends from beer commercials and Cosmo, and I'm really not seeing that in the real world, which is made up of individuals who are mostly not models getting paid to dress ridiculously.