Keep it Classy

Back in the day, there was a saying, ‘undressing you with my eyes’; though nowadays it would be more accurate to state, ‘ not leaving much to the imagination’.  The use of clothing has evolved over the years from the basic needs to being used as outlets of expression and attraction.  Unfortunately, people are obsessed with the need to attract rather than the need to express.  Today’s style is anchored in this need and lacks practicality and expression.  Other styles, like the historic androgynous styles, are anchored in modernizing a practical way of dress and rejecting the traditional gender binaries.  Today’s style is congruent with society’s over stimulated sexuality of the human body, utter disregard of the simple practicality of clothing, and obsession of the rigid gender binary stereotypes that has trained this generation to become oversexed and expressionless.

The historic androgynous style has been described as “dapper”, which is synonymous with  words such as; “well dressed”, “trim”, “groomed” and “classy”.  This dapper style is an umbrella term for looking well groomed ; it’s a shame that this is no longer expected in general style.  Fashion designers throughout the Great Depression and World War 2 time period, regardless of popular belief, were innovative and creative in trying to uplift the hearts and minds of people through their fashion work.  Rooted in the roaring twenties, known for its “showy” styles, the androgynous styles were born from historical events such as; the first female fliers which inspired aviation styled wear, American nautical achievements that inspired androgynous nautical wear, and Roosevelt’s call to a healthy athletic life which inspired androgynous sports wear.  Also well known in this time period was the “Flapper dress” and the “Flappers”, it was a more “masculine” dress and completely broke down the normal viewing of female beauty.  The short cut bob goes against the long flowing depiction of female beauty.  The dress shows of the legs and pronounces the flat chest of the usual wearer, rather than stick the normal exhibition of the feminine body.  

Fashion designers, nowadays, have conformed to the major insecurities of the people the fear that they are never enough.  So, everything is either, “slim fit”, or ,”push up”, and that’s not exclusive to women’s wear: though a slimmer waistline was probably not in the mind of the fashion designers for male clothing.  There are two types of male clothing, too tight or two loose. Skinny jeans to baggy jeans, shirts too long to shirts to tight, while the female wear is designed to promote a daintier feminine figure; the key to male wear is to create an illusion of sex appeal.  Media definitely has a play in this promotion of the perfect female and the perfect male.  Movie goers will constantly see the female love interest as a picturesque female with a dainty waist and a full bust.  Though this portrayal is not only biologically unlikely, but extremely hard to naturally achieve and maintain.  The perfect male, tends to be a conglomerate of many races poured dramatically into one being.  Dark and mysterious, innocent yet mischievous eyes, tall, muscular, with large hands; these media driven cliches have wormed their way into the hearts of women and the insecurities of men.

The types of cloth they used in the 20’s through 40’s time frame was sturdier, though coarser than today’s fabrics.  That meant that clothing was fashionable and practical, worn to ward of the direct sunlight, heavy rains, heavy snow, and brash winds. Hats, for example, were both practical and suave.  These clothes were practical and were often turned into hand-me-downs for several generations.  What hat do you know nowadays that can be worn by your great grand father and still be religiously used by your great grandchildren? Clothing in this time period was made to last.  Expenses, in this time period, were for food and shelter; not for the constant investment in the same pair of pants that have torn repeatedly.  

The fabrics of today are not longer coarse and sturdy, but soft and modified.  Pleasing to the touch as well as the eye, these fabrics usually support festive and convoluted designs.  There is a large amount of boisterous designs in today’s style that does not have the elegance that appeared in the old styles.  Nowadays, the wearers are as boisterous as their clothing.  I have had several encounters with these people proclaiming that they are made better by their clothing, and therefore deserve better with the addition of cloth on their bodies.  Clothing, in this way of expression, expresses a shallow expressionless being that craves superiority.  

The perception of beauty needs to be rewritten to include all body types and all expressions, and the historic androgynous style includes all body types.  It does not exploit every curvature, absent or otherwise.  The term, “androgynous”, Greek in origin, means to have both male and female and male characteristics.  This style offers a certain equality that is severely lacking in others styles of today.  This style makes it easier to break through the rigid gender binary, Andrej Pejic has crossed the gender binary in fashion.  He models both female and male underwear, as well as clothing.  He has baffled many with his androgynous appearance, and is even in the top lists of “sexy ladies”. The androgynous style has really boomed to the point were androgynous males has become very popular in the fashion industry, as well as androgynous females becoming increasingly popular on the streets. Thus breaking down the rigid gender binary to make way for non gender typified expressions such as; genderqueer, gender-fluid, unisex, agendered, neutrosis, and countless others.

In our gender typified mainstream society, masculine styles tend to depict the stereotype of the “stronger” of the sexes.  For feminine clothing, it depicts the stereotypes of a “fairer” sex.  Female dress is vastly typified with with flimsier clothing usually focused on appearance or effectiveness.  It seems that it’s a choice between what is fashionable and what will actually withstand the seasons.  This is rarely a problem for male typified clothing; a thicker cloth, fashionable, and even allowing room to breath. When a female tries to crossover into the male typified clothing; it is assumed that she is trying to be something she isn’t. It’s automatically assumed that she is trying to be a man when clothing shouldn’t really be a point of assumption, based on how clothing is no longer used for direct expression.  On the flip side, when a male tries to wear female typified clothing there are abhorrent assumptions made about him.  He is assumed to have become “lesser” and “weaker”, and while this is awful; it is not that far off from what many peoples and cultures have preached for years.