For centuries upon centuries, societal expectations of men and women had been set in stone and the gender binary was non-negotiable. Over the past few decades, most of the world has progressed in its ideals; the value of women in the workplace and in politics has been recognized. Women’s fashion has become very interchangeable and new styles were accepted. However, why don’t men or nonbinary people have those same opportunities?
On December 11, 2020, Vogue’s cover of Harry Styles was released, and so was the backlash. Many well-known conservative authors including Candace Owens and Ben Shapiro commented on the cover page, with Owens tweeting,
“There is no society that can survive without strong men. The East knows this. In the West, the steady feminization of our men at the same time that Marxism is being taught to our children is not a coincidence. It is an outright attack. Bring back manly men.”
It is quite ridiculous that she thinks this; if she did less than five minutes of research, she would have found that many countries in the East wear “dresses” (as deemed by the West) on a daily basis. In Japan, some men wear Hakamas, which are tied at the waist and fall to their ankles. Some Chinese men wear Changshan, a traditional robe that was adopted in the Qing Dynasty. The Indian Kurta is a long tunic that is worn daily along with churidar or salwar (pants).
History has shown us that the expression of masculinity/femininity progresses as time does. Male euro-centric styles included wigs, flared sleeves, ruffles, knee-length pants and tights, kilts, etc.
Men who wore those clothes were some of the highest in power and considered the most eligible bachelors. So why can’t that be the same now? If a man is seen wearing a dress or a skirt in America in the 21st century, they are profiled as gay almost immediately. Men who wear makeup? Same situation.
Looking back on history, it is honestly hypocritical that any women judge men for what they wear in this era. Eighty years ago, it would have been unthinkable for a woman to wear anything other than conservative dresses and skirts. People caught wearing any clothing besides what was associated with their sex were known as cross-dressers.
However, women’s’ fashion has evolved so much over the decades that wearing pants has become a daily occurrence for many women in America. Conservatives like Candace Owens judge feminine-presenting men, but to many formal award shows, lectures, photoshoots, etc, she wears button-down shirts, suit jackets, and trousers. She would have been seen as a cross-dresser that not too long ago. Why can’t men have the same respect that she does when wearing the clothes that make them comfortable?
Looking from a different aspect, Candace stated in her infamous Instagram story, “…quite frankly, I do not find men in dresses to be attractive. Women do not find men in dresses to be attractive.”
How incredibly narcissistic and arrogant of her to say. First of all, what exactly makes people like Candace think that men are dressing to impress anybody besides themselves. They dress how they feel comfortable expressing themselves, and not for anybody else’s benefit or comfort. Second, she makes completely inaccurate assumptions about what other women find attractive in men. The only person that she can speak for is herself. I personally know many women that are attracted to men in dresses, therefore her claim is discredited as it is only true to her own preferences.
The main argument used by the right is to “Bring back manly men.” But masculinity is not determined by the level an individual identifies with wearing flannels, work boots, long beards, and chopping wood. Style and presentation are not binary, it is a spectrum that allows us to explore options that would have never been available while adhering to traditional gender expectations.
Harry Styles explained it perfectly: “anytime you’re putting barriers up in your own life, you’re just limiting yourself. There’s so much joy to be had in playing with clothes. I’ve never really thought too much about what it means—it just becomes this extended part of creating something.”
Just because something is not normalized, doesn’t mean that it can’t be. Just because something is normalized doesn’t mean that it should be. Prejudice and bringing people down over things that don’t affect anyone else is completely pointless. They are only wasting time and energy that could be spent supporting others, even if their motives are not understood. Education and an open mind can fix everything.