Geohistorical Bifurcation in the Basic Concept of Female Dress

Factual Questions
1

Query #2 to solve in the new millennium:

Pants versus skirts.

It seems, somewhere in historical times, there evolved a basic distinction, distributed somewhat according to geography, in the appropriate attire for women. Skirtlike garments apparently held sway most of the time in most of the world, in contrast to the more nonsexually practical trouser/pantaloon/breech nature of garment worn by men – in most, but not all parts of the globe, during most eras. From Persia through India,Mongolia and Indo-China to China, however, apparently garments closer to the male type predominated more often. Of course, as one wandered toward the Arctic, warmth and practicality tended to demand essentially always the bifurcated, tight-fitting garment.

One might figure that, whichever sex you were, if you had to work or fight, you’d prefer the form-fitting manner of dress; while if you languished around courtyards or in monasteries/nunneries, you’d prefer togas saris, sarongs or whatever.

Should one assume the nature of the skirt relates fundamentally to its sexual display feature, needed early on, after the days of wearing pelts, to keep the race promulgating? Is it more than coincidence that the skirt, in its way, resembles, to a degree, the funnel?

Well, I dunno, female star-ship commanders seem not to often wear flowing skirts (not that I’ve met any in person), so what is in store for the 21st Century?

Ray (Wear are we going? Hang onto your pants.)

2

I think you’re on to something there. For wealthier women, the illusion of being helpless, unable to flee or to care for one’s self is sexually appealing. The Chineese bound the feet of small girls-- hobbling them, in effect. High heels do the same thing for us today.

It’s also a matter of class distinction. A woman can wear bulky, akward clothing and advertise to the world that she is above such concerns as mobility. She doesn’t have to be mobile because she is the posession of a high-status male. Women in the Civil War South prided themselves on their pale flesh, because it showed that she was of significant status to not have to work in the sun. Where learned female fagility and helplessness are firmly ingrained in the culture, you will see more complicated and cumbersome clothing for women.

The clothing also calls attention to the wearer’s gender, and in male-dominated cultures, generally the men want to look as differently as possible from the “weaker sex.”

3

Don’t forget the influence of the horse.

4

lets face it, given enough time, generationally speaking, whatever women wear would eventiohnally be precieved as sexy. Skirts served to hide features (the old victorian stile) while male closth showed off more of the body’s shape.
At that time in most places women were property either of her father or her husban, both wanted to prevent other people having sex w/ her. Her features were hidden and she rarely went out unescorted.
this was life back then. A womans goal in life was limited to getting married adn having children. They knew it and their mothers knew it. To that end their mothers usally preformed such things as foot binding, neck rings, gentital mutalation, ect.
Note Men didn’t do this, women did this to themselves to make themselfes and their ofspring more desirable to men.
Women still do this, most know the potential long term damage of high heal shoes, and most wear them.
Now I’m not saying that a man never bound a womens foot at gunpoint (or clubpoint), or made her wear high heal shoes, but am saying that most times a women does such a thing it is usally because she thinks she (or her child) would be better off by doing these things.

5

IIRC, Andrea Dworkin (sp?) of radical feminist notoriaty denounced skirts as part of the male-promoted “rape culture”.
Yeh, I know.

6

Ursa Major:

Lady Godiva used one to get rid of clothes, didn’t she? :wink:

And those Scots Highlanders? No horses thereabouts?

So you figure that if men had never started horsing around. . .er, I mean. . .about, we’d all be wearing togas?

Ray

7

A Scotsman on a horse? Maybe, but I’ve never seen one doing it in a kilt.

8

…except on Monty Python!

9

I seem to remember seeing Lursa and B’Etor in skirts on the bridge of their ship in ST:TNG.

10

You know, if people were rational, it would be MEN that rode side saddle, we have a reason not to want to straddle a horse.

11

I think that problem comes about more often on a bicycle.

Ray (on all 4 wheels)

12

I used to ride horses all the time. I can’t imagine doing it in a skirt. Saddles are uncomfortable enough, thank you. And bare-back? Horses may look sleek, but trust me, their fur is very rough, plus the spine goes right up your… never mind. I really doubt any Scotts rode their horses in skirts, especially given they (the Scotts) go with an “unfurnished basement” Ouch!

Dizzy

You people have been holding me back long enough! I’m going to clown college!

13

Of course when I say “skirt”, I mean “kilt”.

Dizzy

You people have been holding me back long enough! I’m going to clown college!

14

Didn’t the Roman footsoldiers wear something approximating a leather miniskirt? Or was that just my adolescent impression when I saw “Ben Hur”?

15

I’ve been on a few coed backpacking trips, and the truth is, it is more difficult for women to urinate outside in pants than in a skirt without getting it on their clothes. Men of course, can aim a little better. (Just because se choose not to doesn’t mean we can’t.)
Since pants are almost always worn on hiking trips the women I’ve seen have adapted, but historically, for day-to-day life in areas without convenient facilities, I can understand the pressure on women to stick with skirts.

16

Long skirted men would also have coverage for bowel movements and for those men who were taught to pee sitting. Weren’t some modern times men (besides scots) used to dressing in skirts? Islanders? Eastern Asia? Hum.

17

Shitting on a latrine that is a hole in the ground is a bitch with pants on…

skirts rule for body functions - except the male peeing. Women can be had by the lord of the manor in an instant in a skirt. Women also did not wear any sort of panties until the 19th C. Bloomers were considered scandalous, like the Parisian dancers who wore them to cover a little on the highkicks…

pants rule for working. Chinese and Persian (B4 Islam) women have worn pants for a long time.

Also wraps for men are still common (and great for the sperm count) in Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Nepal, Africa, Samoa, Hawaii, etc.

They can’t be beat in hot weather, require no tailoring, launder and dry in 1/2 hour, and coupled with about 100 hours of Maori tattoos, are sexier than a tuxedo any day.

18

So you think 50 million Malaysians can’t be sarong.

Ray (If lava is red hot, how hot must a lava-lava be?)