Men's Fashion - Skirts and Heels

[genebujold]

The reason I'm taking another look at this topic is three-fold. First, it's been appearing with increasing frequency in the news; second, stores catering to men in skirts (and even heels) are popping up with regular frequency; and third, I've a personal interest in the topic and would like to see it get more coverage (no pun intended...).

But first, a link, a quote, then some discussion:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:6t436Pn-jtcJ:www.nwaonline.net/pdfarchive/2003/november/23/11-23-03%2520E12.pdf+%22men+wear+sarongs+in%22&hl=en

Quote from Robin Ghivens, Washington Post Fashion Writer (who wrote the article referenced above, as well):

Men no longer are handing over their fashion decisions to the women in their lives -- at least not as often as they did in the past. In 1998, only 48 percent of American men shopped for themselves. In 2001, 65 percent did their own shopping, and by 2002 that number had risen to 70 percent, according to the NPD Group, a marketing information company.

That's quite a jump, folks, in a short span of time. In just four years, a full 22% of the American male population began shopping for themselves.

I'm not concerned about the why. What interests me are the implications for men's fashion.

Question - could it be one of the reasons we men have so few fashion choices on our own side of Sears is because we allowed our wives and girlfriends to do our shopping for us? According to the NPD group, more than half of us did just that 6 years ago. Now that has dropped to just 30%.

What's behind our limited choices of style? Could it be that while women were pushing the boundaries of their own gender's fashion choices over the years they unknowingly hemmed in (no pun intended... ok, YES, it was intended!) our own?

It's a well established, though not well-known fact that throughout the ages men wore skirts, dresses, hosiery, and other forms of clothing (including heels) that now relegated to the "Women's" department.

What caused the widespread abandonment of our own gender's acceptable styles? Why are we now faced with just five styles (shirt, pants, flats, jacket, swimming trunks) while woman have those and five more (dress, skirt, bikini, one-piece, heels)?

Many factors have been blamed, from the industrialization of the work force requiring safer clothing to the widespread adoption of the military uniform throughout the 1700's and 1800's as the model after which fashion must be made. And as we all know, fighting in heels and a long skirt (or dress) is difficult, although the Scots managed quite well with their shorter skirt, the kilt.

This skirt movement appears to be more widely publicized and written about them the men's heel movement, which leads me to the next question: Are we only advocating men in heels? Or are we also advocating the greater principle that fashion choices for both sexes should be free from public censure, ridicule, and even potential harm?

Earlier in this century, women wen through many of the same challanges, with friends, family, neighbors, churches, communities, newspapers, and political leaders decrying the advance of women wearing pants, tennis shoes, short-sleeved shirts, short skirts, mini skirts, shorts, one-piece bathing suits, bikinis, leather, short hair, and yes - even flats.

Yet women prevailed, for many reasons, not the least of which included powerful Hollywood mavens who were fed up with the restrictions and began wearing what the wanted while their money-hungry producers protected them and their fashion choices by twisting the backlash into typical Hollywood "progress."

And America and many other countries ate it up!

Well, we're now at a point where women are once again "finding their roots," where fashion such as skirts, dresses, heels, blouses, frills, lace, and even bonnets, are returning. After decades of an advance of skin, modesty is among women is becoming more accepted, if not desired, among the women themselves. We now see actresses wearing more conservative skirts and dresses, business women are dropping the drawers for more traditional clothing, and the concept of femininity is being embraced.

Women are returning to more traditional clothing styles.

But so are men!

And by traditional, I'm referring not to what's been accepted over the last 50 years, but what's been accepted over the last 500 years.

For example, I recently attended a Scottish festival. Being of partial Scottish heritage, I wore my kilt, the origens of which are accurately described in this most interesting read:

http://www.doyle.com.au/tartan_traditional.htm

I was quite suprised, however, that the percentage of men in kilt, even those obviously not of Scottish origen, had significantly increased since the last time I went, more than four years ago.

It was almost as if those present wanted to expand the boundaries of what was considered acceptable men's garb, to win back the right to wear whatever the heck they wanted to through a forum where it was socially acceptable to at least wear something on the bottom half of their body that wasn't a pair of pants.

I wear skirts.

Often at home.

Sometimes in public.

Skirts.

Not kilts.

And what, precisely, is wrong with that?

They don't contain frills, and they're not made with lace. Most of them are made of denim, contain the same pockets as found on my pants, and the belt loops to match.

The only difference between them is that instead of sewing the left front quarter to the back rear quarter at the inseam, they instead sewed it to the right front quarter, adding some material for mobility purposes.

In fact, if most guys wanted a skirt, they could quickly create a pair by undoing the inseam of a par of shorts and re-sewing the right and left halves to each other instead of front to back.

Folks, this is insane!

What the heck does the location of where one seam is sewn have to do with masculinity and femininity? There are far more feminine dudes out there parading around in a pair of pants than there are masculine dudes parading around in kilts/skirts/dresses.

Does it really matter?

Who's "insensibilities" are being offended, anyway?

What does it really matter to society when a woman chooses to wear pants and a t-shirt, or when a man decides a skirt is more comfortable in the summer than pants?

As a lay counselor confronted with many of these issues through those whom I counsel, I take strong exception to the DSM-IV, which, although it suffered a massive rewrite, is still far out-moded with respect to wrongly defining psychological gender issues on the basis of what people (men and women) choose to wear.

Fashion simply is, folks. It changes with the times. It is not an indicator of one's worth to society, much less one's psychological profile. If anything, the DSM IV still has strong roots in the days of the FBI's witch-hunt, of which it's progenator, hoover (his name in lower-case for a reason) committed what I would consider as treasonous acts: http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/HOOVER.html

And that's enough dirt - if you want more, it's easily found. Just search on his name.

Ok - WHAT is the point I'm trying to make here???

Well, there is only one, and it is fully in accordance with God's original Biblical provision that a man be recognized as a man and a woman be recognized as a woman:

1. Neither a man nor a woman shall be limited in their chosen fashion attire provided their genetalia are not exposed in concordance with the vast majority of the fashion norms of nations around the world.

2. Any deviant case will be examined on a case-by-case basis only if it violates the stipulation listed in item #1, above.

Please note:

1. This measure gives free reign for both sexes to bare their breasts throughout the world, unless prohibited by their respective country's laws.

2. This measure prohibits both sexes from baring their genitalia, regardless of their respective country's laws.

[Dawn HH]

Genebujold says:- QUOTE:- Stores catering to men in skirts (and even heels) are popping up with regular frequency....... Now Gene, I don't know if you have observed this or not, but since I joined in December, 2003---When the posting seems to get slim, I look for threads with zero posts and I try to revive them if I can post on them myself. Then, it seems that everybody hops on and begins to post on them and they are alive and well again. I call this action, "Stirring the pot". So maybe now that I have done this with your post on men wearing skirts, (and heels), maybe there will be some life in this thread yet and we can get it off of the ground for you. As you know, I also wear skirts and heels too. BTW....Have you been in any of these stores that cater to men wearing skirts and heels personally, and if so ---what was your impression of these stores, do you think they will be successful and where are they located. Thanks. Cheers--- Dawn HH

[ShockQueen]

I think it would be rather nice if this trend did continue, as the choice seems rather nice. In the summertime it would bring tons of more fashion choices to us guys, and you have to admit....it would be MUCH cooler with a skirt than with even shorts - although you do have to watch out for the "Marilyn Monroe syndrome"....WHOOOOOSH! I did some experimenting with skirts when living in Denver, and it was VERY nice indeed!

[genebujold]

Genebujold says:- QUOTE:-

Stores catering to men in skirts (and even heels) are popping up with regular frequency.......

Now Gene, I don't know if you have observed this or not, but since I joined in December, 2003---When the posting seems to get slim, I look for threads with zero posts and I try to revive them if I can post on them myself. Then, it seems that everybody hops on and begins to post on them and they are alive and well again. I call this action, "Stirring the pot". So maybe now that I have done this with your post on men wearing skirts, (and heels), maybe there will be some life in this thread yet and we can get it off of the ground for you. As you know, I also wear skirts and heels too.

BTW....Have you been in any of these stores that cater to men wearing skirts and heels personally, and if so ---what was your impression of these stores, do you think they will be successful and where are they located. Thanks. Cheers---

Dawn HH

To which stores do you refer?

Go ahead and pony up, as it'll only help accelerate your/our professed cause!

[genebujold]

On further review, I would have to say this:

In the last 2 years I've noticed a decided increase in the number of stores offering both skirts and heels in the sizes that fit me.

Then again, I've been writing about one letter per month to my fashion outlet of choice, demanding why they were offering shoe X in size Y, but not Z?

Same with skirts.

As a result, this year's online fashion trove has been abundantly supplied with skirts, tunics, pants, and heels in my size.

But folks - how many have you asked?

And if you havn't asked, how can you possibly expect that the companies will respond???????????????????????????????????????

They're not mind-readers - it takes input, from the likes of you!!!

No input, no change.

So before I read any more winage, I'm going to look for the "I wrote Sears, and guess what???" Letter.

No letter? No read-um.

[Skirted-UK]

This business of who can wear skirts and who can't seems to be taking a new twist. Not so long ago when school governors were mostly men, female pupils and staff were not allowed to wear trousers. Now that a lot of school governors are women, it seems to be going in the opposite direction. See this link below from the BBC News about a school that is banning girls from wearing skirts!

There appears to be a strong anti-skirt movement here in the UK amongst women, who having won the right to wear trousers now want to see skirts banned. Only two years ago a mother challenged her daughter's school rule of skirts only for girls. She claimed her daughter's skirt was a hazard as she would not be able to run in it in an emergency. This was nonsense as the skirt in question was a flared mini.

With women giving all this bad publicity to skirts, I can see a time in the not too distant future when they will outlawed at work and school on health and safety grounds.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3823551.stm

On the other side of the argument are school boys like 15 year old Ed Ellson who wore a skirt a school in protest at the trousers only rule for boys. The surprising thing about this was that he was supported by his mother, who give him one of her straight black skirts to wear. You have to admire the lad, it takes a lot of bottle to go to school wearing one of your mother's straight skirts!. But with his shoulder length hair and his age I don't suppose many people took much notice. See the link below.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/3796163.stm

[new_look]

i agree with what u say. In response to that, it was done with reference to girls arriving in short skirts. How can lads be expected to get onto concentrating on their work when the girls are showing their asses nearly. I dont think its fair that women get choices of different length skirts and trousers, and men can just choose trousers. like our bank uniform

[Skirted-UK]

Hi Daz, Back in the early 90's before women were allowed to wear trousers in banks, my local TSB bank issued it's female staff with long navy straight skirts. They were very 50's style with a small pleat at the back instead of a slit. I thought they looked great, but I heard that the were not popular with the women because of the limited movement they had in these skirts. I think today it would be impossible for an employer to issue such a uniform style, as women could claim that it was hazardous.

[new_look]

believe it or not, they still do. The corporate uniform catalogue has then mens and womens styles, so i can see that women have 3 lengths of skirt. short above the knee, knee length, and a long skirt almost to the ankles, and the larger sized women nearly always go for the longer ones. back to the thread, itd be great to see shops selling skirt choices for men. Its the word that frightend people. If you styles a short skirt into a sports style, ie with a stripe, and a nike logo etc, it would look no different to mens shorts anyway, And it would be much cooler too. Last year i jumped to the chance of 3/4 trousers for it was a change of a difference in choice. We could use something like mele styles skirts in our shops. Women want equal rights, well it should be equal in the clothing dept (and lifting boxes at work ) Pity the beckham serong never influenced that many. daz

[NikkiHH]

There is a shop in Manchester that sells specifically skirts for men - its called midas clothing and on the web too, something like www.midasclothing.com (i think). Some styles look OK but they are a bit pricy. There was also some stuff on BBC News Online about it as well and the reaction to men in skirts. I can't remember offhand when it was but I'll have a look and post the link

Nik

[NikkiHH]

right - found it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/3025798.stm

(sorry don't know how to edit earlier posts!!)

[Dawn HH]

I have been wearing skirts and dresses for several decades now and like the fit, feel, and comfort of them over the more restrictive pants. It is nice to see that some small companies are sticking their necks out to try to further the availability of skirts and dresses made to fit the male form. They show some really nice patterns, designs, and colors. They say that in the future they are contemplating adding other accessories to their skirt line. I wonder if one of the projected accessories will be high heeled shoes made on a male last to fit the male foot. They have already added a line of tops to join the skirt line. Cheers--- Dawn HH

[genebujold]

believe it or not, they still do.

The corporate uniform catalogue has then mens and womens styles, so i can see that women have 3 lengths of skirt. short above the knee, knee length, and a long skirt almost to the ankles, and the larger sized women nearly always go for the longer ones.

back to the thread, itd be great to see shops selling skirt choices for men. Its the word that frightend people. If you styles a short skirt into a sports style, ie with a stripe, and a nike logo etc, it would look no different to mens shorts anyway, And it would be much cooler too.

Last year i jumped to the chance of 3/4 trousers for it was a change of a difference in choice. We could use something like mele styles skirts in our shops. Women want equal rights, well it should be equal in the clothing dept (and lifting boxes at work )

Pity the beckham serong never influenced that many.

daz

There you go - think you can convince the football (er, "soccer") teams to begin wearing skirts? How about skorts? One could always cal the center flap a "handwipe," "handky," or just "flap..."

Let's face it - rugby players (of which I was one in high school) always wore looser shorts, whereas American football players always bound their lower extremities, from the waist down, in the tightest fitting pair of pants possible, beginning with the waist, and relentlessly proceeding untill they reached the ankles.

I know - I played JV football! Then I switched to rugby, in part because it took 5 minutes to get dressed instead of 20 - and who wanted to be hanging around the locker room unstrapping your gear when you could be downtown having a pint or two???

Even so, rugby's a rough game - I could play it easily enough when I was 16, but never now.

[genebujold]

There is a shop in Manchester that sells specifically skirts for men - its called midas clothing and on the web too, something like www.midasclothing.com (i think). Some styles look OK but they are a bit pricy. There was also some stuff on BBC News Online about it as well and the reaction to men in skirts. I can't remember offhand when it was but I'll have a look and post the link

Nik

Here's the crap I can't stand about the fashion industry. They think that just because it's "novel" (it's not) they can jack the prices into oblivion, thereby killing all future sales!

Bah!

Menintime, bless their souls, were naively offering skirts for $250 when I could buy a nearly identical one at Roamans for $25.

Same thing goes for most makers of kilts. True, it is more expensive to get the pleats right, but $60 is all. The idea of paying $180 for a kilt is for the birds!

If kilt prices were commensurate with other forms of fashion, men would be wearing kilts galore!

Sorry, mates, but the manufacturers have priced us right out of the market as well as the fashion industry as a whole.

All you skirt wearers copy and past this post into an e-mail to your favorite (or not so favoriate) male skirt/kilt manufacturer.

Dudes and Dudettes - if you build/make it, they will come. But ONLY if you do so at the right price!!!

And your current prices are WAY overvalued (by at least a factor of 7).

[NikkiHH]

Gene - I entirely agree with your post. 65 quid is a lot to pay for one of those skirt that -lets face it -aren't really all that nice anyway! I can go into any high street store (especially with all the sales on) and get the same for 6.50. (or less). Hmm ... hard decision there to make! If I ever go to Manchester I'll be sure to drop in and tell them to lower the price and then I might buy one. They [Midas Clothing] did have a 'lifestyle' section section on the site with men modeling the skirts but that was ages ago and seems to have gone now.

[shyguy]

After a quick look at the site selling kilts/skirts for men, it looked to me like most were just womens skirts rebadged to say mens kilt. I personally have no desire to wear them, even if it became fashionable to do so. So I may have missed some subtleties anyway.

[genebujold]

If I ever go to Manchester I'll be sure to drop in and tell them to lower the price and then I might buy one.

They [Midas Clothing] did have a 'lifestyle' section section on the site with men modeling the skirts but that was ages ago and seems to have gone now.

There you go! Give them a piece of my mind!

Midas clothing is still around: http://www.midasclothing.com/

And they call the skirts "skirts."

And looks like Divine's sizes are well into the upper ranges, too: http://www.loveisdivine.co.uk/home2.htm

I'll bet they deliver in the UK!

[Priscilla]

I know that this is an old thread, but anyone now wearing skorts?

[r1g0r]

when the weather gets comfortable again (northern wisconsin is hovering around 32f/0c) i'll be wearing mine again. i'm fortunate to work in an environment where my supervisors HAVE to be accepting and supportive of the individual, so it's a good bit easier than for a lot of other folks. r1g0r (not my real name)

[Guy N. Heels]

The reason I'm taking another look at this topic is three-fold. First, it's been appearing with increasing frequency in the news; second, stores catering to men in skirts (and even heels) are popping up with regular frequency; and third, I've a personal interest in the topic and would like to see it get more coverage (no pun intended...).

But first, a link, a quote, then some discussion:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:6t436Pn-jtcJ:www.nwaonline.net/pdfarchive/2003/november/23/11-23-03%2520E12.pdf+%22men+wear+sarongs+in%22&hl=en

Quote from Robin Ghivens, Washington Post Fashion Writer (who wrote the article referenced above, as well):

That's quite a jump, folks, in a short span of time. In just four years, a full 22% of the American male population began shopping for themselves.

I'm not concerned about the why. What interests me are the implications for men's fashion.

Question - could it be one of the reasons we men have so few fashion choices on our own side of Sears is because we allowed our wives and girlfriends to do our shopping for us? According to the NPD group, more than half of us did just that 6 years ago. Now that has dropped to just 30%.

What's behind our limited choices of style? Could it be that while women were pushing the boundaries of their own gender's fashion choices over the years they unknowingly hemmed in (no pun intended... ok, YES, it was intended!) our own?

It's a well established, though not well-known fact that throughout the ages men wore skirts, dresses, hosiery, and other forms of clothing (including heels) that now relegated to the "Women's" department.

What caused the widespread abandonment of our own gender's acceptable styles? Why are we now faced with just five styles (shirt, pants, flats, jacket, swimming trunks) while woman have those and five more (dress, skirt, bikini, one-piece, heels)?

Many factors have been blamed, from the industrialization of the work force requiring safer clothing to the widespread adoption of the military uniform throughout the 1700's and 1800's as the model after which fashion must be made. And as we all know, fighting in heels and a long skirt (or dress) is difficult, although the Scots managed quite well with their shorter skirt, the kilt.

This skirt movement appears to be more widely publicized and written about them the men's heel movement, which leads me to the next question: Are we only advocating men in heels? Or are we also advocating the greater principle that fashion choices for both sexes should be free from public censure, ridicule, and even potential harm?

Earlier in this century, women wen through many of the same challanges, with friends, family, neighbors, churches, communities, newspapers, and political leaders decrying the advance of women wearing pants, tennis shoes, short-sleeved shirts, short skirts, mini skirts, shorts, one-piece bathing suits, bikinis, leather, short hair, and yes - even flats.

Yet women prevailed, for many reasons, not the least of which included powerful Hollywood mavens who were fed up with the restrictions and began wearing what the wanted while their money-hungry producers protected them and their fashion choices by twisting the backlash into typical Hollywood "progress."

And America and many other countries ate it up!

Well, we're now at a point where women are once again "finding their roots," where fashion such as skirts, dresses, heels, blouses, frills, lace, and even bonnets, are returning. After decades of an advance of skin, modesty is among women is becoming more accepted, if not desired, among the women themselves. We now see actresses wearing more conservative skirts and dresses, business women are dropping the drawers for more traditional clothing, and the concept of femininity is being embraced.

Women are returning to more traditional clothing styles.

But so are men!

And by traditional, I'm referring not to what's been accepted over the last 50 years, but what's been accepted over the last 500 years.

I was quite suprised, however, that the percentage of men in kilt, even those obviously not of Scottish origen, had significantly increased since the last time I went, more than four years ago.

It was almost as if those present wanted to expand the boundaries of what was considered acceptable men's garb, to win back the right to wear whatever the heck they wanted to through a forum where it was socially acceptable to at least wear something on the bottom half of their body that wasn't a pair of pants.

I wear skirts.

Often at home.

Sometimes in public.

Skirts.

Not kilts.

And what, precisely, is wrong with that?

They don't contain frills, and they're not made with lace. Most of them are made of denim, contain the same pockets as found on my pants, and the belt loops to match.

The only difference between them is that instead of sewing the left front quarter to the back rear quarter at the inseam, they instead sewed it to the right front quarter, adding some material for mobility purposes.

In fact, if most guys wanted a skirt, they could quickly create a pair by undoing the inseam of a par of shorts and re-sewing the right and left halves to each other instead of front to back.

Folks, this is insane!

What the heck does the location of where one seam is sewn have to do with masculinity and femininity? There are far more feminine dudes out there parading around in a pair of pants than there are masculine dudes parading around in kilts/skirts/dresses.

Does it really matter?

Who's "insensibilities" are being offended, anyway?

What does it really matter to society when a woman chooses to wear pants and a t-shirt, or when a man decides a skirt is more comfortable in the summer than pants?

As a lay counselor confronted with many of these issues through those whom I counsel, I take strong exception to the DSM-IV, which, although it suffered a massive rewrite, is still far out-moded with respect to wrongly defining psychological gender issues on the basis of what people (men and women) choose to wear.

Fashion simply is, folks. It changes with the times. It is not an indicator of one's worth to society, much less one's psychological profile. If anything, the DSM IV still has strong roots in the days of the FBI's witch-hunt, of which it's progenator, hoover (his name in lower-case for a reason) committed what I would consider as treasonous acts: http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/HOOVER.html

And that's enough dirt - if you want more, it's easily found. Just search on his name.

Ok - WHAT is the point I'm trying to make here???

Well, there is only one, and it is fully in accordance with God's original Biblical provision that a man be recognized as a man and a woman be recognized as a woman:

1. Neither a man nor a woman shall be limited in their chosen fashion attire provided their genetalia are not exposed in concordance with the vast majority of the fashion norms of nations around the world.

2. Any deviant case will be examined on a case-by-case basis only if it violates the stipulation listed in item #1, above.

Please note:

1. This measure gives free reign for both sexes to bare their breasts throughout the world, unless prohibited by their respective country's laws.

2. This measure prohibits both sexes from baring their genitalia, regardless of their respective country's laws.

[Guy N. Heels]

For example, I recently attended a Scottish festival. Being of partial Scottish heritage, I wore my kilt, the origens of which are accurately described in this most interesting read:

http://www.doyle.com.au/tartan_traditional.htm

Laddie - There's no such thing as a partial Scott, ye either are a Scottsman or yer not! Now where I come from, ye absolutely must have one precious drop of Highlander blood and/or one precious drink of whiskey in ye to be called a Scott. If ye ha that much, then slip a dagger in yer belt and a blade in yer stockings and wear yer tartan proudly.

Now, I've seen a lot of talk about guys wearing skirts and kilts (and they absolutely are NOT the same), but precious little about heels. Well I have been out in both. The last time I had a full beard, a Blackwatch kilt, and 4" heels. Now I'll admit that there's no history of the Scotts wearing high heels in their colorful history. But I ain't in Scotland, and I've never been there either. After all, why must I dress for others? So why can't I dress for me in the here and now?

As for skirts and kilts being pricey - I quite agree! It'll take about 10 yards of material to make a properly pleated kilt, and at upwards of $45 a yard for whole cloth, you're looking at upwards of $1000 for a proper Scottish kilt, sporan, and jacket. But do we really have to pay the freight? I found a skirt in my clan tartan at a thrift store for less than $10. (It was much too small for me and so I gave it to my daughter) Still, my point is that I believe there are ways for guys to dress up sharp without spending an arm and a leg to do so. Also, I must say that I've never had a pair of pants or trousers that offered me the freedom of a kilt or a skirt. Apart from some minor difficulties at the restroom (loo) they're great and they look sharp too! - Guy N. Heels

[Skirted-UK]

You don't have to spend £300 on a traditional kilt! You can buy a woman's kilt for £30 / £40. Its not got so much material in the pleats and it fastens on the other side. but its looks the same and only an expert would know that its a woman's skirt. I occasional use one for hill walking, I certainly would not wear a £300 traditional kilt for hill walking for fear of ruining it.

[dr1819]

And a couple of years later, the phoenix has risen. Please continue...

[Guy N. Heels]

Here in my area, most of the public schools are now requiring the students to wear uniforms. Wouldn't it be a hoot if they did away with trousers entirely and only allowed the students to wear skirts?

[on heels]

Skirts and heels? May be skirts and low heels? Well what about taking the middle road…a Skort? From the back, they look like a pair of shorts but from the front, a skirt! I know I’m going to get some flack over this. Not all of us a brave enough to venture out in a skirt. The closest I get to wearing a skirt is a sarong.

[Fog]

I know I’m going to get some flack over this. Not all of us a brave enough to venture out in a skirt. The closest I get to wearing a skirt is a sarong.

I don't know why you should get flack because you don't want to wear a skirt. It's up to you, isn't that the essence of freestyling? Despite what is an often stated view on this forum a skirt is regarded widely as a female garment. I'm not saying that in many cultures that men don't wear unbifurcated garments, but, Western society regards a skirt as a female garment. So really it's up to you. If it's something you really, really want to do it's a shame that you're letting your fears stop you. You've also got to take a good long look at yourself in the mirror.

For myself I have fancied it, but I look daft in a skirt.

[Guy N. Heels]

I don't know why you should get flack because you don't want to wear a skirt. It's up to you, isn't that the essence of freestyling? Despite what is an often stated view on this forum a skirt is regarded widely as a female garment. I'm not saying that in many cultures that men don't wear unbifurcated garments, but, Western society regards a skirt as a female garment. So really it's up to you. If it's something you really, really want to do it's a shame that you're letting your fears stop you. You've also got to take a good long look at yourself in the mirror.

For myself I have fancied it, but I look daft in a skirt.

Yup, you've got it! Yul Brenner wearing a beautiful skirt as Pharaoh, Richard Burton wearing a battle skirt as Marc Anthony, and Charlton Heston as Ben Hur; but men in skirts today? Almost everyone starts hollering "gay" and stuff like that. Stop the world, I want off.

[dr1819]

Yup, you've got it! Yule Brenner wearing a beautiful skirt as Pharoah, Richard Burton wearing a battle skirt as Marc Anthony, and Charlton Heston as Ben Hur but men in skirts today? Almost everyone starts hollering "gay" and stuff like that. Stop the world, I want off.

And when one watches those movies, I'll bet not one person thinks, "Oh - he's wearing a skirt."

Then again, these men were more masculine than most in both looks and behavior, so that offset the skirt quite a bit, I'm sure.

And now we have new movies, cartoons, by Disney no less, depicting boys and men wearing MUGs.

Perhaps it will catch on to the point where we start seeing skirts and heels in the men's section.

Something like this would be nice:

Especially when paired with this:

[on heels]

I wear sarongs at home and when I’m in Asian countries where men in sarongs are common place and are accepted. If I were to venture further east to Fiji, I would be able to wear a skirt or SULU all the time. It is the norm. But here in the west with its backward way of thinking and dressing it’s time for change but I fear it will be slow, oh so slow.

You all might be interested in this short video -

Crossdresser

[Thighboots2]

on heels

Very interesting - good find.

TB2