Why don't we just change the majority of, if not all clothes to unisex?

It makes no sense to me why it is "the current year", as the right wing mockingly calls it, while they call for retrograde moral values. And we still gender the vast majority of clothing.

If I go into a clothing store, I end up not liking the majority of clothing, but still finding about %10 of clothing for men, and about %20 of clothing for women that I like. Just by virtue of the fact women's clothing sections are so much larger on average than men's. And it's totally pointless to me.

Firstly, there's the annoying double standard that it is socially acceptable for women to wear men's clothing, far more so than it is socially acceptable for men to wear "women's clothing". Secondly, it is just ever so pointless. Why have it? Clothes are clothes. I can literally even now thankfully, go to men's sections and buy clothing that is themetically traditionally "feminine" in various ways, form fitting, ponies, pink, pastels. All of these things that are unfortunately considered "feminine", in men's sections.

The distinction between "male" and "female" clothing is totally arbitrary. We're human beings, and we all basically use clothing for the same basic purposes. Why not just have human clothing and call it a day?

Common rebuttals and why they are, well, pretty wrong:

1. Men and women have different body types. Justifying different clothing.

Some men have (large)breasts, some women don't. Women aren't defined by their chest size. Saying women should have different clothing because they have boobs, reduces them to their chest size. Some men have wide hips, some women do not. The whole "women have wide, child-bearing hips" is a culturally exaggerated thing. Some women are tall, some men are short. I was assigned male at birth, and am only 5 feet and four inches tall. So it simply isn't true that only women can be "petite".

2. Women need certain clothing because certain clothing is meant to shield them from male sexual desire, like bras. Or, conversely, to enhance sexual appeal. Women need bras to cover their breasts, when even men with large breasts don't, because men get sexually excited by female breasts.

And the normalization of bras as a female only thing, whose purpose is to desexualize and hide the body, instead of being something that simply makes a large chest easier to deal with for people of any gender, only serves to further normalize female breasts exclusively as a sexual object, rather than protect women. It enhances, rather than desexualizes, the female chest, by gendering breasts and calling attention to a chest taboo.

So yeah, simply put, I don't think that gendering clothing accomplishes anything good. Why not go the same route that Target has gone for toys, by removing the "pink girl aisle" and "blue boy aisle" and just removing gender from, well, all products? Clothing included.

I don't think we're anywhere near a point where society as a whole would accept completely gender neutral clothing. This is not even just right wing conservative issue. The vast majority of people on all sides prefer to dress according to gender norms, relatively speaking. I personally have no issue with a man wanting to wear feminine clothing or vice versa, but I have zero interest in doing so myself, and frankly it's hard enough to find clothes that work for me without having to sort through women's clothing as well.

Society would need to undergo some pretty significant changes for that to be something an average department store would even consider doing. Maybe it will happen someday, but we're definitely not there now.

Why not just buy and wear whatever you want? Having different clothing sections is not stopping anyone from doing that. You said it yourself, clothes are clothes.

@harbinlights said:

How exactly is it arbitrary? Men's and women's styles are certainly not 1:1. Not to mention I would be hard-pressed to find anything my size in a women's style as I am not a petite person.

This is no way to discourage you from buying and wearing what you want, but when I think of unisex clothing I think of things that are completely gender neutral. Not a crop top in the men's section.

Expected a stupid post arguing that clothing is ultimately just practical and everyone should dress identically, instead the post is why can't we just change human nature? .... because we are humans and its in our very nature. Humans will inherently group and categorize everything, if not in regards to gender, it will be race, wealth, personal preferences, age, etc. You will never be free of judgement for what you wear.

Also you are more than welcome to dress however you want, but people have every right to judge you for it, which if you want that to change takes you down a very dark road of behavior/thought control.

No thank you. I love wearing clothes made for men. Usually unisex clothes I've worn in the past just don't feel right. It's more a comfort thing anything.

What does unisex underwear look like? Would they still have the hole in the front for your penis? Do I now have to wear some sort of sports bra? I'm all for progression but let's not ignore biology.

Hey man if you want to wear women's clothes be my guest but don't make me wear some crap I don't want to wear. I love suits.

Do we not need to instead think of expanding the options available rather than shift around the people we take choice from?

While I would never bemoan anyone their want to ogle or fornicate with the conscenting adult of their choice...

...no one needs to see a dude in dukes...

On a more serious note, just get shit from the other isle and be happy about it.

I'm all for removing the gendering of most things. For example, I have a Hello Kitty mug and I get weird looks from people all the time. Because apparently pink and Hello Kitty are for women only. Fuck that, I wasn't part of that meeting. I didn't get a vote. Hello Kitty is dope and I grew up watching it on weekend mornings.

Shit like that seems arbitrary to me because there's literally no reason most things should be specifically for one gender or the other other than some marketing department decided it should be that way.

Clothing though? That's an entirely different beast. The reality is simply, on average, men and women are physically built differently and therefore need clothing specifically tailored to those differences. That's it. There's really no grand conspiracy going on here. Like others have said though, an easy solution is just to wear whatever you want. It is not illegal to buy and/or wear clothing made for the opposite sex.

I'm into what you're saying. Culturally, it's so frustrating to me that there is nothing worse for a man to be than woman-like. It feeds into this cultural feeling that feminine = bad, masculine = good.

But, I do have to say, it frustrates me on websites when only male shirt size options are available. Physically, the shoulders are always too big on me, and they don't fit around my hips so they scrunch up on my waist. So tbh we may still need gendered "sized" clothes, but I agree, and would love to see female/male cuts of clothes offered for all styles.

Lol this is a VERY NICHE point of view. Fashion is a very personal choice of expression. This just gives me a very homogenized overly PC vibe thats hard to get past. Im really not clear on the point. You sound like you would just like womens clothes to be socially acceptable to wear for men, and all clothes just be labeled gender neutral? Or do you actually want the clothes changed in some fashion to look gender neutral?

Bras aren't there because of men (although, they can be in more ways than one [as in for men to wear, or for their sexual desires]), they're there to support the breasts and the breast tissue. I'm not sure who said that it's meant to desexualize women (sounds more like a theory to me), aside from the fact that you do have to wear clothes in some form to cover up, which goes for both sexes. When have clothes ever been about that? They either do or they don't depending on the wearer. Clothes are to cover up your privates, keep warm, and to be fashionable. Also, like @ballsleon said, when I think of clothes that are unisex, I am not thinking of a man wearing a dress, which I think is the point you're trying to make, and by extension in which you didn't address on the nose is, why can't society look at a man wearing a dress and not think it looks awkward?

Men and women, at least in the U.S. can wear whatever they want in public and can buy whatever they want, why is that not good enough? If the question is why can't people treat others better without judging, that's not something I can answer other than that's just where we are right now as a society. Maybe I'm a total bigot, but I really don't have an issue with the way clothes are presented in stores or the way people wear clothes. Now, if the issue was a man can buy socks for cheap but a woman's cost twice as much, that would be an issue to me.

I think you'd find a lot of people who'd strongly disagree with this statement.

HOLY MANTITS.

Clothing is unisex, it's up to the wearer to decide what they want to wear in order to portray themselves to the world in a way that makes them feel comfortable. Sometimes, for men, that means wearing a dress, for women it might be a jeans, a t-shirt and a suit vest.

Part of why fashion is fun has to do with playing towards masculinity and femininity, regardless of your sex.

Until burkas are made unisex, it don't matter a damn.

Aside from that; dress however you fucking please. Don't go online seeking acceptance to dress how you please, you're already missing the point at this juncture. Self-expression is just that. You don't need tumblr at your back to be who you want to be.

Also, do you maybe wanna' go ahead and wiki bras and read up on what their intended usage is? It sure as shit ain't to "shield the womanly parts from male eyes", my dear boy, nor to 'emphasize 'em'. I'm assuming your gender, which is normally a big no-no, due the fact that you clearly have no idea why women wear brassieres. Now, I feel a little bad about being this mean, BUT COME ON! What's next, arguing that diapers being mostly a baby-only thing is ageist?

Edit edit: I am grumpy about this.

I don't really see what's the problem, there's more fashion choice nowadays than ever. Even liking 10% of what's on offer seems like plenty already, I'm not looking to wear the whole store.

Having breastfeed three kids, I can tell you that’s not what bras are for.

To me, anyone can wear whatever they like, however, I’d still want male and female clothing so that people could have a choice. I mean, you might as well go the whole hog and put us all in brown jumpsuits if you want to depersonalise clothing, but everyone would look boring and be pissed off.

Everyone should wear Starfleet onesies and call it a day.

How about lets try not looking to fix "problems" that are not really problems?

The only time I’ve ever felt bothered by clothing standards is during the summer where I am required by company policy to dress business casual, meaning a tucked in collared shirt with trousers, while women have a whole range of light and airy summer clothing to choose from which likewise falls under the business casual umbrella. Even on casual fridays men are not allowed to wear shorts, which in the middle of summer can be really uncomfortable.

Other than that, I mean women are women and men are men. I think today people are confusing the act of reaching gender equality with erasing gender lines entirely.

This thread reminds me of the second verse of Tears of a Rapper...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wtBc5ABgYEM

Oh, I do. I just think the distinction is a bit silly. As are gendered products in general. I like what Target has done with their toys section, no longer having a section for "toys for boys" and "toys for girls", just a toy section.

I want society to change. I don't think that having gendered toy or clothing sections is human nature.

And that's a very good thing, I think that clothing should be a reflection of self expression and individuality. Without gendering being tacked onto it.

I want to "erase gender lines entirely". I don't care whether it is "feminist" or "egalitarian" or not.

I want more diversity in clothing, not less. I think that splitting clothing into two binary categories, limits them.

What are clothes, then, grapefruits?

It's supposed to be because of weight distribution and back support. I'm aware of that. And yet, you rarely see men with huge breasts wearing them. And it isn't normalized at all. Despite the fact men with large breasts could surely use the support just as much.

Something is amiss when AA cup bras exist for women, but nothing for men with DD cups.

But maybe I'm wrong and assuming, now. What is the intended usage of AA cup size bras?

@harbinlights: Clothes are an expression of who you are. As far as making first impressions there's almost nothing that comes close to being as important as your clothes. Sure a shirt is a shirt and a jacket is a jacket, but what clothes you choose to wear says a lot about your identity, and gender identity is a part of that.

Yeah, but by gendering clothing and other products, companies are kinda pushing gender roles moreso than self expression and individuality.

@harbinlights: But who says it's bad for men to portray themselves as men and women to portray themselves as women ? Taking away the option to dress like a man or a woman isn't exactly opening room for expression and individuality either. There are plenty of clothes that are fairly gender neutral if that's what you're looking for, but most people like to dress according to their gender identity.

Apparently it's quite hard for ladies to find pants with nice deep pockets in them. That should be more readily available.

Honestly, i think a big part of splitting clothes up between genders is to serve the average customer best . While there are more and more people willing to experiment and cross boundaries with the clothes they purchase, the average customer is looking for clothes that fit their gender. If everything was unisex, the average consumer would have to sift through a bunch of stuff that they were never interested in to find the clothingpieces that they do like. At some point, they rather shop at a place where they can step in an aisle and know that the clothes there at least fit their preference regarding gender.

Online discoveribility would be even more of an issue, where you can't glance through a store within a few seconds but have to painstakingly browse through pages & pages of unisex clothes that may or may not fit the feminine or masculine theme you're looking for. And labeling them such would defeat the purpose. There's a reason so many successful stores out there are pretty much devoted to serving one gender. People want to find their clothes fast. But if you're into crossdressing, it's totally fine to just mix & match stuff from different sections of a store. No one is going to stop you.

But you can't stop people from conforming to their gender with their fashion. Why not give everyone the option to dress like they want, including extremely feminine & masculine clothes. Not everyone wants to get rid of genders in the fashion equation.

PS. current year = right wing? I thought it was a millenial thing.

I'm not interested in taking away the clothes. I'm interested in taking away the labels. All the clothes that exist for men and women today and more should exist. I don't think they need gender labels.

I don't think that, for instance, dresses should be considered "women's clothing". They should just be considered human clothing.

They're not moobs. They're mreasts.

People dress the way they do because of the global associations we have with certain aesthetics in relation to gender and gender roles, and the pressure society places on us to adhere to them stems from the way those clothes are marketed rather than the way they're sold; A unisex clothes store isn't going to change that, it's just going to make it more awkward to find clothes that fit those aesthetics.

@harbinlights: Labels are not inherently evil. By nature they help us sort and categorize things so we can more easily find what we are looking for. Just labeling everything as "clothing" is too broad and does not actually benefit the average consumer, who by and large do want clothing designed for their respective gender. (Or even specifically because it represents the other gender.)

I'm all for breaking down stereotypes and prejudices of what certain genders are allowed to wear within society, but removing those gender categories entirely does not actually benefit society as a whole, and simply removing those labels while ignoring the root cause of why those labels exist would only cause more problems than they would solve.

Get in line for your blue overalls comrade

I think there are so much more interesting and accurate labels for the fashion, design, aesthetics, size, shape, ect. of clothing, than gender ones.

I'm all for clothing having labels, more than we have now currently, even. Just not gender ones.

@harbinlights: Having too many individual labels is not any better than having one overly broad label. Like I said, the vast majority do want clothes designed for their gender, so by categorizing them by gender you cut out a lot of needless clutter when searching through clothes. It's enough of a pain in the ass to find pants that I like and fit me as it is. Adding women's clothing into the mix sounds like hell.

Until society shifts to a point where the majority is willing to go either way with their clothing style there's no actual benefit for the average person by changing it.

Female breasts are also a hell of a lot more sensitive than man boobs. Some women can’t be very active without the support of their bras or else their breasts would hurt. Fat guys don’t give a shit if their chest flops around. ( speaking as an old guy who has been with his wife for many great years )

Personally, I just wanna find ultra-wide JNCO style pants again. Shirts with stars and unicorns. And frilly pastel pink dresses. And Sylveon hats.

Sadly, most places don't sell any of those things in particular. And I usually have to go to online specialty stores and things. I mean maybe a few at Hot Topic and ect., but definitely not the thing you'd find an TJMaxx or something.

I'll wear a pair of men's pants with a My Little Pony belt, but then also wear it with a women's Pokemon shirt and wear an Eevee themed handbag. I wish I could say I have a pair of Princess Peach vans, but I didn't get them in time, and they're too expensive right now. :/

Anyway, I feel like these clothing sections force me to need to shop in both anyway. And that there's probably more overlap in men's and women's clothing by different aesthetic than just gender. I think these seperated sections by gender actually make it harder for me to find things than easier. If I were to find things easier, I would be better off if they had a section just called "cutesy and nerdy". As it is, I have to search through both binary gender categories, to find basically the exact same aesthetic and look.

Sorry if someone else made this point I haven't read through every comment but I think there is a point being missed here that removing the gender tag from clothes does not mean clothes will be randomly thrown together and you have to sift through hundreds of pairs of pants till you find what you like. Styles will be separated still, body types would still be separated from other body types, feminine clothes can still be separate from masculine clothes etc. Literally, the only difference (from a shoppers standpoint) is what is on the tag/signage. The only way I can see this being a problem is not knowing where a certain section is which can easily be fixed.

The more difficult thing to solve is how clothes are marketed but then again if trends move one way advertising would logically follow. Now as far as actually getting there from here? It seems like a stretch to me but not impossible. I'm not against the idea but for others, it would take a lot of convincing and even then it would be tough. Would it benefit society? Sure, maybe I don't see how it could hurt it.

I'm 6ft, 7in. No thanks. Already hard enough to find shit I like in my size. Hell even size 15-16 US shoes are impossible to find in Canada. I order online and it costs too much compared to US. My girlfriend wears my shit and its baggy on her but she's almost 6ft. Nothing wrong with gender specific clothes. The 2 sexes have different body shapes and features. I think clothing can reflect that and add something to attire and fashion and sex appeal. I will never have a great supple bum or full and supported tits but I think clothing that fits that body type should exist so everyone can feel comfortable and sexy in their own shit.

It sounds like your problem here isn't that clothes are gendered, only that there's not enough variety to the dimensions of each garment within that category. You want all clothes to have enough variations that they fit everyone. Which is unrealistic, predominantly because even now not all clothes that have a certain gender tag fit everyone aligned to that gender. This comes down to averages - a shirt manufacturer isn't going to cater to body types which fall outside the statistical average because they have overheads and the chances of those products being sold is dramatically less. Similarly, most men don't want to wear "shirts with stars and unicorns" (to be honest it seems like most women don't either) and fashion labels aren't going to print an excess of product designed to fit a body type which doesn't fit the largest demographic - that's not about gender politics, that's just common sense.

So you can get rid of the "male/female" tags and instead call everything unisex, but you're still going to need subcategories (for example "straight waist" or "slim hips", or whatever) that will essentially be doing the same job, because the people making the clothes are still going to cater to those statistically average genders/sizes. Because that's how they make profit.

To be honest though, having read through your posts it seems like you care less about gender neutrality and more about convenience; the aesthetics you personally want aren't readily available in your body size despite the fact that you're clearly in a very small demographic. Well, as a 6'2 westerner living in Asia I sympathise with your inability to find clothes in your size, but complaining about it here is a waste of time.

What a weirdly specific thing to be hung up on. Honestly the fewer options I have to deal with the better and I don't think women would want to shop for clothes and try them on in the same areas as men so you'd still need women and men sections.

I'm willing to bet you're right, and that society is a long way from anywhere close to what I'd personally find appealing in terms of gender, or anything else, really.

You're just being pedantic. Even if you removed the official labels on clothes they would still be considered male and female clothing. Why ? Because they're made to enhance our physical appearances. I'm a man, I want my clothes to make me look broad-shouldered and bulky. That's not because of some sociological concept I've been fed, it's human nature. I don't want to wear a dress that makes me look tall and slender, or jeans that makes my ass look huge, because those aren't characteristics that favor me. So sure, take away the labels and wear clothes from the other aisle if you want to, but that wouldn't stop 95% of all dresses to be worn by females and for them to be considered women's clothing by society at large. These labels aren't something forced on us by evil companies, they're just a reflection of our own wants and needs.

Good gracious, I sure don't want to look broad and bulky.

Truly, "human nature" in all ways it is described, is an unrelenting dystopian machine. When most describe human nature and biological hardwiring, I can't help but feel a wave of misanthropy coming over me.

Are all of our 'natures' truly garbage, generating systems worthy of disgust and contempt? And here I thought with social engineering we could change. But perhaps on a fundamental level, we are simply monsters of bile.

@harbinlights: Well, I guess you truly made your point.

Mmm, that'd be good for accessories and things that generally will fit well (or at all) no matter what. But if a buff dude goes to buy a dress under the new "everything is labelled unisex" system, whatever one fits the "best" probably still won't fit very well at all, if you know what I mean.

I think there's value in changing all the labels to unisex, even if in essence the division remains, just for the sake of it resulting in people who are open/curious/interested in wearing something outside of their socially defined prospective wardrobe feeling less disinclined to do so.

But outside of that it doesn't really seem that practical or impactful. I'm more interested in the idea of expanding what's socially acceptable through fashion, rather than just changing labels and patting yourself on the back. So you know, make long flowy garbs that are "for men," for instance. Frankly women have a much easier go of it because them wearing men's clothing is already acceptably cool as all hell, but put a man in heels or a blouse and watch people lose their goddamn minds. Changing a label isn't really gonna change that. You need more meaningful efforts.

If those efforts prove successful, then once the availability of styles is generally universal (as in you can find whatever you want for whatever body type you have (or thereabouts), rather than the opposite where everyone's wearing a fuckin commie jumpsuit (which would suggest that you'vee taken a very wrong turn along the way)), the division outside of practical concerns (tailoring considerations; you can say "not every man" all you want and be right about it, but that doesn't change the facts of the bigger picture regarding typified body differences from averages) essentially fades away. So change the labels to unisex, sure, fine, but if you want to actually tackle your society's genderized fashion, you do it by changing what's actually fashionable. Because of course just changing a label doesn't mean the social division between "men's" and "women's" fashions would magically disappear.

The distinction in fashion is socially reinforced in part through the labels, so even if you unify the labels, the actual distinction in fashion would still exist and persist socially, regardless of any shallow attempts to change that. So you turn to your culture's actual fashion, specifically its current boundaries. Obviously you can't force that shit, but women in suits and men in long flowy garbs looks pretty fuckin rad to me. I mean it's not like kurtas and kilts don't already exist. You just gotta rock that shit unapologetically. Maybe it catches on and you get a market for that kind of thing which spins up the whole capitalist grindhouse to your benefit, maybe it doesn't, but either way, it bears repeating that you cannot force this kind of thing, no matter how helpful you feel it'd be in getting closer to an idealized free and open society with hella male floral blouses for your purchasing convenience. Also worth noting that this style business doesn't really address socially idealized body types in fashion... so yeah, know that. It's associated, but kind of a parallel issue, I suppose.

Anyways, that said, theoretically, even if your fashion revolution were to work, it'd only result in creating more options for clothing and opening what minds you could to the idea of letting folks wear whatever the hell they want without being an ass about it. Point being, you're still not gonna stop all people from being an ass about it.

So the inescapable other side to this whole damn coin is that no matter what: you still gotta own your shit.

Yes, please! This is exactly the kind of direction I want things to go!

I did say truly twice, I guess. But I do favor something more akin to social determinism than genetic determinism. And not always for the most logical reasons, admittedly. If I were to give in to believing all of the things evolutionary psychologist say about the hardwiring about human nature, I'd sink into a pretty terrible misanthropy. So advocating change, and belief that it is possible, is the only recourse I have for acting liking people and a biological category.

Also, I have this lingering feeling that such claims don't add up. There's not a lot of peer reviewed studies leading to firm evidence that gendered, racial, or any other demographic behavior or statistical tendency is biologically hardwired. There's a lot of claims, but I don't really see any hard evidence, that is, things like peer reviewed studies, showing that we are any more hardwired to behave a certain way based on gender, than we are do be based on something like race or hair color or skin color or the shape of our noses or something like that. And considering that race doesn't exist, I think there are similar implications for gender and common beliefs about gendered preferences and behavior.

Either that, or I simply have a very different biology than the vast majority of humanity. And that differing biology is seemingly on a collision course with said humanity.

Someone who doesn't like any gender norms is not who I am from some kind of ideological brainwashing or anything like that. It's been a fundamental feeling that has welled up and festered inside of me since before I went through puberty. I'm just following the same path I've been on ever since I can remember, having a burning irritation with any and all gender norms that I always have to get out of my system, so long as I'm forced to live in a world where they exist. I would call this irritated feeling with gender norms a fundamental part of my psychology and a static, predictable part of who I am at this point.

@harbinlights: Let me start with, I think people should be able to do whatever they want to do as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. My initial point was more, if you can already do it, why does everyone need to change too? From the rest of your posts though I see why you think everything should change. We all are products of "ideological brainwashing" You can throw some 5 dollar words into your self descriptions, but like everyone else you seem to want to be different, you just don't want to do it alone.

Gender norms are based on a time when humanity had to play to its strengths to survive and continue on as a species, clothes were designed around function not fashion and have pretty much not changed since. In the modern age humans in the western world live easier lives, less reliant on nature, so we have been given the luxury of asking questions and creating middle ground. I hope your festering agitation with the world around you clears up, life is hard enough without extra things to pile on the heap.

@harbinlights: Why would you want to erase gender lines entirely when men and women are fundamentally different on so many levels? Fitted clothes are always going to look and fit better than unisex clothes meant to encompass a broad range of body shapes and sizes. Different waist lines, different cuts in regards to genital regions, different neck lines.. I mean I just don't see a practical reason why we would want to conform fashion to a single line? You can have diverse clothing tailored for men and vice versa that blur the accepted social norms but are still cut and fit with a specific gender in mind.

I don't really know what genders are anymore except biologically but also due to biology
there needs to be some sort of categorizing. Doesn't have to be gender-specific though.
Could be cute pics of animals to represent various shapes, for instance!

Of course there isn't one clothing store in my city that sells clothing that fits my height
so I have other more personal issues with clothing currently,
and also I'm a dog.