seriously miriam, you read my mind sometimes. I was JUST talking about this yesterday with my GF. my point was that it is SO interesting how gender bending for women in the fashion world is ONLY acceptable via heterosexuality through one's boyfriend. annoying!

and i think that you're right, the line of what is 'acceptable' for women to wear is crossed as soon as there is the hint that maybe...she IS the boyfriend.

The heteronormativity in the article is disturbing. Moreover, I think they're trying to "engineer" a fashion trend to create a story where there is none.

Personally, I've always gone for the "tomboy" type. That and a touch of classic heteronormative femininity always drives me wild. I'd be personally happy in a non-political way if this did become a trend. As would my partner, who would all of a sudden look avant-garde.

Chalk me up as another woman who wears almost exclusively men's clothing. The day they start selling sports bras in the men's section is the day I can finally stop buying women's clothing all together.

Sort of a chicken and egg situation, but I think the better policing for men is related to the numbers of transgressively dressed men being so small. If you include pants on the list of cross-identified attire for women, a Lot of women are gender-deviant.

And, of course, some of us get policed every day anyway, for clothing that wouldn't turn heads at all on sufficiently gender-normative women.

Masculinity is just so fragile. You can be emmasculated, but I can't think of what the female equivalent would be.

Men's stuff is often cheaper and better-made than women's clothing too, I think. Not only is women's stuff more expensive, we're also expected to buy things like make-up and hair accessories and bras that don't have something comparable for men. ... I just get really peeved at how expensive bras are.

Well said, Miriam. Although I'm not queer, I love to cross dress in men's fashions, but I've noticed that it's less accepted for straight men to cross-dress.

Great post. Interesting how it's okay (and in fact, often viewed as stylish) to dress in menswear, as long as you maintain that feminine touch. I've often thought about how cool guys clothes are and how I kinda wish I could wear that stuff (or at least convince my boyfriend to), but the girly voice in the back of my head pulls me back. It's also interesting that girls can go pretty far in the "tomboy" direction - we can wear vests, slacks, suit jackets, ties, sneakers, etc. But men really can't wear anything "girly" - no frills, flowers, skirts, heels - unless they want to be labeled gay or trans. If you look at fashion as a language, when women wear menswear we're appropriating the symbols of the powerful group (but of course, you have to have that "feminine" touch so you don't look too powerful!), but for a man to wear feminine clothes would be to undermine his position of power.

Thank you for this post.

The madness of strictly-policed gendered clothing rankles me.

My family is from a region of the world in which many men and women wear one-piece garments that would be considered unisex if not for variations in cloth pattern and embroidery. Also, some tribes/ethnic groups take it further with one-pieces that literally are unisex--exact color and pattern for both genders.**

Also, some societies prefer buzz cuts or shaven heads for women--that, indeed, is what makes them considered feminine.

SO, I don't have much patience with the b.s. arguments of Westerners intent on propogating the absurd, essentialized myth that skirts are on men are somehow "unnatural" or women's "innate" womanliness (?!) lies in the length or style of their hair.

This has led to some amusing encounters. Euro-Americans and non-immigrant African-Americans at some very radically fundamentalist churches I've visited have tried to make the argument to me that when the Old Testament says women must not wear men's clothing (based on verses that fundies, as per usual, divorce from historical and cultural context), that means men's trousers. Unfortunately, they didn't take kindly to my helpful reminder that neither men nor women in pre-Common Era (heck, 21st century) West Asia commonly wore trousers and that both genders were frequently found in one-piece, dress-like garments.

**Qualified: but almost every society of which I'm aware--and that's not all, mind you---has some sort of code to distinguish between or amongst genders. So, even in those ethnic groups in which both men and women wear, say, toga-like garments, shaven heads will be coded for "women" and long locks coded for "men," or certain necklaces coded for women and certain other necklaces coded for men, etc. Each society has created its own ways to create--and police--gender expression and try to crush it into molds of normativity. My beef is not only with the existing of these norms to begin with, but, as here, with the policing of such, especially based on ethnocentrically essentialized fashion codes.

"but don't even think about wearing a skirt"

Unless it's a kilt.

Or you're in Hawaii/Polynesia.

I've always been perplexed by what stores meant when they're selling "boyfriend cut" women's jeans. Since my boyfriend is a foot taller than i am and nearly twice my weight, the idea of wearing any clothing item of his, other than nabbing a T-shirt to sleep in, is just hilarious to me.

My senior thesis is actually about men in skirts. I defintely agree that "androgyny" in fashion usually means menswear inspired pieces for women, this isn't always the case. You all might be surprised to know that there are quite a few high-end fashion designers who have attempted to make skirts for men. My paper focuses on Jean Paul Gaultier and Marc Jacobs and how they come at the androgyny thing from different angles. Gaultier makes skirts (not always kilts either) specifically for men, while Jacobs makes clothes for women, but his ads show that the person doesn't have to be female bodied. There are tons of other designers who have taken Gaultier's route, but I haven't really seen anyone (in mainstream fashion) challenge the embodiment of gender like Jacobs.

for an example of Gaultier:
http://www.fashionwindows.com/gallery/gaultier/2007f/jpgmf0706.asp

for some examples of Jacobs:
//www.afterellen.com/blog/emilyhartl/styled-out-a-boy-in-girls-clothing

Thanks for the interesting info, Okra.

Yeah, the signifiers for male & female vary across culture and time.

Yeah. The other day I was sitting opposite someone on the bus who I couldn't code as male or female. Jeans, trainers (sneakers), sweater, puffa jacket, cropped hair.
It is March, in the UK - breasts aren't always noticeable under a thick sweater and jacket :-) which was what bugged me! But I did think of it.

Then I thought, WHY did it bug me? I shouldn't have been, really. (By bug I mean I gave a second thought to it, not that it actively upset me or anything).

A woman in exactly the same clothes with long hair (actually, that pretty much described me, it was a casual Saturday) would clearly be a woman.

Hmmm. Guess people should be judged on who they are, not how they look.

Raid my boyfriend's closet? Really? Well, let's see, my shirt's from Target, my vest is from Kohls, and my jacket's from Sears.... and my girlfriend loves it ;-)

I wonder, do the writers of these kinds of articles even *think* about the heteronormativity they're perpetuating, or is it just that deeply engrained?

The other day I was listening to a woman talk about being a female instrumentalist in the traditionally male-dominated world of jazz. She said that, in being required to wear a tuxedo for a gig, she was being required to "dress in drag."

Her perception was thought-provoking. As you pointed out, it is more acceptable for women to wear "elements of men's fashion," and yet for a male to wear a skirt is considered cross dressing. I imagine requiring men to wear skirts for a concert would cause quite the uproar, yet women, in order to conform, are expected to don perceivedly male clothing. Other examples that come to mind include restaurant and retail uniforms (or most job uniforms for that matter), and to a lesser extent, professional wear (i.e. suits).

Of course fashion and its gender signifiers are socially constructed. But in the meantime, when seeking a unifying fashion, why must the default be distinctively masculine?

In terms of fashion and beauty, drawing from both East and West, there are only two things, in my opinion, that women have claim to that doesn't have an equivalent male counterpart: Bras and Skirts.

There is make-up created especially for men.
There are accessories created especially for men.
There are facial/beauty salons especially for men.

The first, the Bra, is self explanatory.

In terms of the Skirt, I don't think of the Skirt as the equivalent of the Pants, mainly because there are pants tailored for both men and women. While women's pants are more fitted, I know plenty of men's pants that are quite snug and fitted as well (I wear them to work). Actually, it is considered neater and more tidy to wear snug pants, than baggy pants at work.

I think the reason the Skirt doesn't carry across well is because that the Skirt itself highlights (whether it's mean to or not) the curves of the hips-thighs. Generally speaking, most men's hih-thighs are not as curved, thus making the wearing of the skirt superfluous....for example, we don't wear clothes that accentuate things we don't have (ie. skinny men should not wear muscle shirts,as dictated by fashion). In some societies men do wear skirts, but that's see as "traditional" more than contemporary.

I think, because of this, if the "Skirt" were to ever find acceptance in the male fashion industry, it would start of as long (ie, reaching the feet) such as a sarong wrapped around the waist (as worn by many men in Southeast Asia), rather than short like a mini-skirt.

I also wanted to note that in regards to underwear...isn't it funny how if a woman wears boxers, it is still considered sexy, but if a man wear panties, it's gross and disgusting (not to mention many people might think it is sick).

I either like to go for really feminine or really masculine in my dress. And I especially like wearing ties. But when I first started wearing ties I encountered a strange reaction. I was a college student at the time and I was wearing a tie with a suit jacket and pencil skirt. At the bus stop a female student said of me (to her friend) that she bets I'm a lesbian because of my tie.

Huh? So now a tie makes you a lesbian?

I can't wear men's clothes (I'm the wrong shape, esp. in this country) but I do generally wear pretty relaxed, "mannish" clothing from the women's department. (Here "mannish" is considered a cute women's style--GO FIGURE, but I guess this is a land where androgyny is popular.) My students think I'm just well-dressed. My coworkers (from western countries) think I'm a frumpy lesbian.

Again with the clothing making me a lesbian ... I guess fashion is more powerful than I once thought.

I think the tomboy style has been so normalized that cross-dressing isn't even an issue for women. Transvestic fetishism is a classified mental disorder, and men make up the vast majority of the sufferers. And they're only suffering because they feel like they can't go public with it without being persecuted.

I think if Americans viewed clothes as fashion and art instead of a way to assert one's gender and sexual preference, there would be a lot less gender and sexuality norms in our clothes. I see the human body as a work of art and clothing as a way to accentuate one's best features. Clothing is also a way to express one's inner qualities, like creativity. I just think we need to see clothing in a totally different way. We're selling ourselves short if the only message we're sending with our clothes is "I'm a guy" or "I'm straight" or whatever the case may or may not even be.

The gender binary with clothing is ridiculous.
My girlfriend and I are thinking about going to our senior prom, but we are grappling with what she will wear. I dress generally pretty feminine and like skirts and dresses, but she certainly does not. She is by no means butch, but she has not worn a dress/skirt since kindergarden and would not be comfortable in one. However, she would also feel ridiculous wearing full on men's attire to the prom (some other lesbians at our school go that route). There is no in between! We're trying to come up with something creative, but it's frustrating that there is no middle ground.

I don't really have to deal with this issue much in day to day life, as my own presentation is relatively femme, but I really noticed when I did drama and used to walk round in costume - I got a lot more weird looks for walking around in a man's suit than I did for wearing a cloak, skirt and plastic sword.

I've always wanted to wear a tie to work (I'm a woman). Unfortunately working for a law firm does not lend itself to any hints of crossdressing. Suits with dresses are more accepted than suits with pants.

Women's clothing is much more size exclusive than men's. Even in the same store. Let's use H&M as an example since we're already talking about them.

In most stores I wear a 14/16 or a L/XL. I have a good male friend who is sort of on the heavy side of average like I am - we're probably the same level of fat compared to the "norms" for our respective heights and genders. For clarification, when we go to concerts together and buy the same t-shirt (happens a lot) I get a M and he gets a L.

We both love H&M. However, I am much more limited in what I can fit into in their women's clothing than he is with their men's. I know that's kind of a wonky comparison, but it makes sense in my head. The biggest women's size is tiny tiny tiny. Their 16s are tiny compared to the myriad size 16 pants I have from an array of other brands. Hell, I have size 14 jeans on right now that are looser than H&M's 16s are on me. And by "looser" I mean I can actually get them past my thighs.

My point is, clothing-wise, men can get away with being heavier than women can and still find clothes in mainstream stores. They can get away with varying heights better too.

I've noticed it in other stores as well. Women are held to a much stricter standard of what clothing sizes are acceptable and available. Men are allowed much more variation in their bodies before they see discrimination in what's available.

Actually, I read somewhere that women start to see discrimination after gaining about 15 pounds and men don't see it until they gain about 70. That's in personal treatment, not necessarily clothes, but it is along the same grain.