pants: a right or a privilege?

Susanann. you seemed to have mixed up what is ‘legal’ with what is ‘customary’. Please show us some evidence that it was illegal for women to wear slacks in the 1950s and 1960s- not that was the custom and the style to wear skirts instead. Slacks couldn’t be worn to the office? Well, today, a woman would be fired if she wore a bikini to (most) offices. Bikinis are perfectly legal, but it is the custom not to wear them to the office.

I am surprised that such a women’s libber as yourself would not mention the history of bloomers.

The 1970’s? Eh–That strikes me as highly doubtful.

This page discusses a legal case from the 1970’s, City of Chicago v. Wallace Wilson, in which two transsexuals were arrested and fined for violating a municipal ordinance which provided that “[a]ny person who shall appear in a public place in a state of nudity, or in a dress not belonging to his or her sex, with intent to conceal his or her sex, or in an indecent or lewd dress, or who shall made any indecent exposure of his or her person, shall be fined not less than $20.00 nor more than $500.00 for each offense.”

This page mentions that case and some other cases, cites a Cincinatti municipal ordinance which made it a crime to publicly “appear in a dress or costume not customarily worn by his or her sex, or in a disquise when such dress, apparel, or disquise is worn with the intent of committing any indecent or immoral act …”

I don’t think that any of these laws would have criminalized a women simply wearing pants in public. (One of the pages mentions that these laws were generally enforced against men who wore women’s clothing rather than women who wore men’s clothing.) Earlier–say in the 19th Century–I do think it’s possible that a woman might have been arrested in some places for wearing pants in public.

Pants or no pants…it’s all the same.

Err…unless you’re not wearing underwear.

Then it is a bit different.

I would point out that a law strictly forbidding women from wearing pants would very probably be shot down on constitutional grounds in very short time.

Also, off the top of my head I can remember two instances of photos I have seen of women in the late 19th and early 20th centuries wearing pants: Chinese women in SF Chinatown and black women working in the fields in the South. I also remember photos of Marilyn Monroe or other stars wearing that kind of pants which are held down by a “stirrup” which goes under the foot. They were quite sexy too.

Marilyn Monroe was sentenced to the electric chair for wearing pants?

susanann, you are, once again, invited to the pit.

I have to say I was confused by the expression “Camel Toe” in the OP. Then I made the unfortunate decision to do a Google search, and came across www.cameltoe.org

My eyes are bleeding!

Summer 1943 - Urbana Illinois.

Grandmother & grandfather posed in front of “their cabin”. Grandfather was in his Army uniform.

Can’t tell if her pants are side-zip or not. She was a pretty liberated lady though.

Dietrich had her pants custom (and expensively) made for her at Knize, an upscale men’s suit tailor. (She and her husband would both go, and be fitted for suits the same day.) According to her biography, written by her daughter, Dietrich was amazed at, and disdainful of, the controversy her pants caused. In her hometown of Berlin, women had been dressing in masculine attrire for years, even wearing suits and ties.

Dietrich’s director, Von Sternberg decided to play up this “shocking” pants controversy in the movie Morocco. In one of the first scenes, Dietrich appears in a top hat and tails. She kisses a woman on the mouth, takes the woman’s flower boutineer, deeply inhales from it, and then flicks it to Gary Cooper. It had blatantly (for the times) lesbian overtones, and movie buffs are still amazed that it managed to get by the censors.

Hollywood didn’t know what to make of its new, exciting star. They had fan cards distributed with Dietrich’s pant-wearing picture on them, with the slogan “The woman even women can love.” But worries grew that Dietrich seemed too masculine, so fan cards were also distributed of her and her young daughter, Dietrich wearing a demure black dress with a lace collar.

There was a famous controversy caused by Dietrich’s pants: newspapers reported that city officials in Paris had forbidden Dietrich to wear pants while shopping on Parisian boulevards. (A publicity stunt, according to her daughter.) Later, the Hotel Lancaster supposedly refused to house Katherine Hepburn for wearing pants.

Again, according to Dietrich’s daughter, Marlene was always claimed that Lombard tried to look like her, and deeply resented it.

Later, in her stage career, Dietrich always changed her costume to top hat and tails to sing love songs to women. Most love songs can be changed simply by substituting male pronouns for female ones, but Dietrich insisted that the lyrics written to women were more romantic, and sang them in male attire.

As she has done countless times before, susanann abandons the thread and does not bother to supposrt anything she posted.

Pants:

Right, Privilege, or REQUIREMENT?

TLDR

I firmly believe that sweatpants should be outlawed. They have no place outside of the home.
For Barbarian:
This one is much better.
www.ratemycameltoe.com

Susanann, I have some questions for you.