IsabellaLinton wrote:
lostonearth35 wrote:
Women just get away with doing stereotypical masculine things more so than men do with feminine things. A woman can wear pants without everyone thinking she's a male impersonator or trans, but if a man wears a dress it's completely different.
For years I wondered why it was okay for girls to like girl stuff but not okay for guys to like girl stuff, and then I finally realized it's because society still sees "girl stuff" as weak and inferior. Go figure.

I always wondered the same things. I felt sorry for men because their gender roles were so much more pronounced. Women can wear whatever, and essentially do whatever job they want. They can colour their hair, wear cosmetics, stay home, work, take parental leaves, etc. It's only recently recently that men have had the same social freedom to dress or behave "female", without being ridiculed.
That wasn't always the case.
Your Victorian great great grandmothers would NEVER wear pants.
No way in hell.
They even contrived garments like bloomers (sorta baggy pajama like things that enclosed each leg seperately) that...were pants... but weren't considered to be pants, that ladies could wear in situations like riding those tall Victorian bicycles they had back then.
But yes, after the first world war it became acceptable for ladies to wear pants suits. Emelia Airhardt looked kinda hawt in her pilots jump suits. But I digress.
The first world war also made it acceptable for men to wear ONE type of jewelry: wrist watches. Before that men only carried watches on chains, but that got impractical for the guys in the trenches.