Friday, August 26, 2011


This ensemble strays far from my typically girlish attire, but I sort of like that about it. I feel very relaxed and comfortable in my structured, boyish threads. 

Whenever fashion challenges gender roles, I always get a little excited. I like when traditional culture ideals are pressed and changed in fashion (and in other areas as well). When I discovered that in the 18th century young boys wore dresses up to age 10, I was intrigued. They were not allowed to wear pants during this part of their life because, supposedly, the flowing fabric of dresses allowed for better growth. Nowadays, if a young boy put on a dress, he would be severely, severely ridiculed. Dresses are for ladies. Ties are for men. Those are the rules. But why? Does a woman need a dress in order to be recognized as a woman? Does a man need pants in order to be recognized as a man? If gender does not change the quality of a person, why must it be distinguished at all? 

How do you feel about all this? I'd love to hear other insights. 

Outfit details:

Shirt//Old Navy, thrifted
Shorts//Vintage BONGO

No comments:

Post a Comment

I do my best to respond to all comments, but I'm pretty scatterbrained. So if I skip over you, it's most surely unintentional.
Thank you for your sweet words!