Fashion and gender: How do they correlate? - Part 1
Written by Ilman Ramadhanu
The conversation surrounding fashion and gender has recently been pushed back into the mainstream. It is hard to pinpoint exactly who started this phenomenon but one of the most memorable genderless fashion moment in recent history was when Billy Porter wore Christian Siriano’s tuxedo gown to the 2019 Oscar, and has been continuously serving gender bending looks ever since. Harry Styles made headlines after he graced the cover of the American Vogue wearing Gucci’s periwinkle blue gown and tuxedo for Vogue’s December 2020 issue. Before that, actor and singer Jaden Smith is known to blur the gender line for his street wear looks.
The interest toward genderless fashion could not have come in a better time as it coincides with more and more queer people become visible both in the real and the digital world. Before this sudden burst of fascination by mainstream media towards genderless fashion, the style has so far been represented by niche groups of brands and designers created by queer people.
A personal favorite of mine are the romance filled Palomo Spain and Charles Jeffrey Loverboy’s chaotic punk take on fashion. Until recently many fashion publications started calling genderless fashion the wave of the future.
The idea of genderless or unisex clothing excites me because you can express however you want to without the limitation of gender. I left the notion that gender should limit the way we express ourselves through clothing some time ago. I identify myself as a cisgender man and I never really have a problem by being called a “man,” some people would chuckle reading this line as I express my gender flamboyantly in a lot of ways.
Dressing-wise, I never equate my gender with what I am wearing, I used to though, but not anymore. My process of dressing up is pretty simple if it fits me and it looks good on me then I’m wearing it, irrelevant whether it comes from the men or the women section. I even prefer to shop at the women’s section simply because it provides me with more options, as opposed to the men’s section which usually consists of the same stuff just in different colors.
The dreaded uncomfortable feeling of buying something off of the women’s section, however, still haunts me from time to time. Most of the time I can’t even try the clothes because I’m afraid that one of the store employees would stop me from bringing the women’s clothes into the men’s fitting room.
Genderless or unisex fashion, however, is not a new thing. In fact it has been in and out the mainstream face of fashion for a while now and the history of it could be traced as far back to the 60s and 70s. American professor, Jo B Paoletti, wrote a book called Sex and Unisex: Fashion, Feminism, and the Sexual Revolution, focusing on the unisex movement in the western fashion industry during that period. The wave started with the ‘youthquake’ movement, a term coined by editor-in-chief of Vogue at the time, Diana Vreeland, to mark the youth’s influence in art, music and fashion.
This cultural shift coincided with the black liberation movement, women and LGBTQ’s rights as well as sexual freedom. It is safe to say that the 60s was a pretty chaotic time as people were demanding to expand the reality of their individual rights and the fluctuant nature of the 60s was vividly translated into the fashion that people wore back then.
One particular style that stood out from that era was the rise of unisex clothing. The idea of unisex fashion during that period would mean masculinising women, embracing effeminacy on men, or taking all of the gender-specific aspect out of the equation of the clothes all together.
Sadly, the fascination towards genderless or unisex clothing didn’t last for long; Paoletti noted in her book that society’s reproach towards the unisex movement back then as too much too soon. With the emergence of Diane Von Furstenberg’s wrap skirt and the rise of Victoria’s Secret dynasty, the line between masculinity and femininity were starting to take back its form.
Then what about today? Are we ready to welcome genderless clothing now?
Image: Billy Porter in 2019 Oscar via Shutterstock
Genderless fashion: Then and now
Fashion’s landscape of today compared to how it was back in the 60s and 70s showed a glaring similarity. In womenswear, the legacy of the unisex trend in the fashion industry from the 60s and 70s started with the assimilation of menswear, for instance pants. By society standard in the 1950s, it was more ladylike for women to wear skirts rather than to wear pants. As it were, skirts were heavily associated with the idea of femininity as opposed to pants which were associated with erotic nature as they would accentuate the hips, the butt, and the crotch area.
With the rise of women’s right movement in the 60s, the social norms that regulated what is and what is not appropriate for women to wear began to loosen up. Now, women can literally wear anything. As far as what’s available in the fashion market for womenswear today, they sell any type of clothes you can think of. Every color and every silhouette are available at women’s disposal and the possibility to express your fashion self in any way you like that womenswear offers is endless.
However, as women obtain more freedom in how they dress; what society expects of women also exponentially evolves with time. Study finds that the level of attractiveness (grooming; beauty; and wardrobe selection) will have a great impact on how women are being perceived in the workplace. What was haunting them back in the 50s still exists today; it’s just presenting itself with a different face. Back then women were expected to be ladylike and wear ladylike clothes, now, women are pressured to compete with each other to look perfect all the time, and how they look will have a huge impact on the outcome of their career.
For someone like me, who was taught to keep all my desire to express myself hidden, It might sound like a dream to have this limitless option that womenswear offers but with the heavy scrutiny that surrounds how women look, it does not seem like the clothes are created to celebrate women’s personal expression but rather to have more control on women.
If you look at fashion collections aimed for men from different eras, they don’t really change much. Most of the time they look very similar or only with minimal alterations here and there. Men’s classic suit is a testament to men’s ability to freeze the image of masculinity. What was expected of men was different than women, men were expected to be a hollow vessel that society could depend on and in doing so they had to repress any unnecessary intrusion which was personal freedom.
Image: David Bowie on Serious Moonlight tour in 1983. Bowie was one of the few musicians who adopted androgynous style
There was, however, a period of time during the 70s in which fashion was able to thaw the frozen definition of masculinity. Fashion historians called it ‘The Peacock Revolution’, a movement that gave young men in the 70s a chance to rebel against conformity and explore their creativity and individuality. Floral to paisley prints; feminine flared silhouettes and flowy frills and ruffles suddenly became viable options for men to wear. An abrupt change from menswear in the 50s which was a cookie-cutter business men attire in tedious black, white and gray.
The idea was to incorporate feminine things into menswear in order to expand the scope in which men could freely express themselves. Personal expression for men were associated with feminine things, as the trend of genderless or unisex clothing back then coincided with the gay rights movement. Though the movement didn’t last for long, its influence persists to this day.
Casablanca presented a co-ed collection during the 2021 fall season which was heavily inspired by the movement. The geometric print, the saturated colors and the glistening editorial were a clear nod to the free thinking and flamboyant menswear fashion in the 70s. As the harsh and brassy prints and color were equally delivered throughout the collection, a couple of styling choices were made on the male models to emote a sense of softness, by incorporating pearl necklaces, satin scarfs, lace turtlenecks, and cardigans into the looks.
While Casablanca presented masculinity in a softer look, Berlin-based fashion house GmbH maintained a tough masculine look with a twist. The color story of the GmbH Fall 2021 collection is a complete 180 from Casablanca’s, showing one neon yellow top in a room full of black and white. GmbH put more attention in pushing the boundaries of menswear’s silhouette with their criss-cross tailoring that hugs the shoulders, mimicking an off-the-shoulder neckline. This silhouette is then applied onto a men’s suit, a black quilted puffer dress, and a faux fur long coat, giving the whole collection a sleek and dystopian vibe.
Both fashion houses presented the relationship of masculinity and fashion in a new face but one underlying theme is clear. These designers still equate men’s personal expression with feminine aspects. Though the explosion of prints and colors in Casablanca’s collection felt distinctive, generally prints and colors in womenswear could feel ubiquitous as with GmbH’s off-the-shoulder silhouette which could seem groundbreaking when presented on a male body but tons of them could easily be found in the women’s section.
These eccentric trends for men in fashion might look like an exciting new horizon but as history has shown, it was proven to be nothing but a zeitgeist of the 70s. If the objective is to expand in which men could have more freedom in expressing themselves through fashion and we are still using the same formula today, we could see this optimistic new ventureof men dressing based on self-expression, crumble before our very own eyes, again.
There was a period during the 60s and 70s where designers, major retailers, and showbiz imagined a society where gender did not exist. Paoletti cited the brilliant work of the legendary Rudy Gernreich as the visionary master of the unisex fashion. Gernreich’s vision when it comes to unisex fashion was body freeing and gender unifying. He removed the differences between the male and female bodies by creating a unisex line of jumpsuits, turtlenecks, floor lengths smock with loud geometric prints.
The collection was presented with the male and female models photographed side by side wearing similar outfits with all of their hair removed (yes brows included), further devoiding all of the characteristic in each sex’s bodies creating an impression that gender does not really exist. This point of view could be seen in both couture and essential wear today.
Rad Hourani made history by presenting the first ever unisex couture collection during the 2015 Paris fashion week which was presented with long-haired male and female models photographed side by side wearing similar clothes, similar to the shaving of the models’ hair done by Gernreich. Accents of shimmers were seen throughout the clothes giving the collection a futuristic vibe. The boxy structure of the blazers, floor-length coats, and dresses erased all natural shape of the body.
Gernreich and Hourani’s take on genderless fashion share one common thread, their designs felt otherworldly. It feels as though, gendering a piece of clothing is the normal thing to do and if we take gender out of the equation then it must be an idea from a different planet. What translates through to the clothes is that they don’t feel very wearable, granted Gernreich’s designs might now appropriately be considered as a cultural heritage due to its influence but the point still stands, that there is always a sense of theatrics and whimsy when the gender line is blurred in a garment. The other face of this approach, however, showed lack of imagination.
In 2016, Zara released their ‘ungendered’ collection consisting of plain t-shirts; hoodies; and jeans in selections of grey, white, and navy colors which angered a lot of people on twitter. The reason why people were mad with Zara and their ungendered line was because the collection was too bland. Nothing in that collection said ingenuity and this is why I, sometimes, feel deceived by this approach because I could not help but think of this as a marketing attempt to sell essential clothing and, in order to seem ‘woke’ or politically motivated, they slap a “unisex” label all over it.
Image: Ungendered collection from Zara in 2016
Zara is not particularly wrong for calling it ungendered though because the clothes in the collection do not pay any particular attention to any physical attributes, they were selling t-shirts and anybody could wear t-shirts. This approach is also the most profitable according to Edited. Collections advertised as unisex or genderless by major retailers in the western market, muted and dark color t-shirts are the most invested style. Shocking.
Another issue that I have with this approach is that it is built on the rotten notion that gender is determined by our physical appearance instead of self identified. I believe that our gender identity is a part from a journey of self discovery and fashion could definitely lead the way. Some people use fashion to affirm to their gender identity, to physically feel closer to who they are on the inside. By making everyone wear coats that have no shape or simple old t-shirts would not feel appropriate.
As designers and brands of today look back for inspiration we found ourselves using the same formula to define the relationship between fashion and gender and left wondering about the same thing 60-ish years ago. What promise could fashion hold for today’s obsession with genderless clothing to not have the same fate as it was in the 60s and 70s? The difference between then and now lies within the attitude towards the very community who inspired the whole genderless fashion movement, the queer community.
Nowadays, in some parts of the world, society is starting to acknowledge the many faces of gender identities and expressions. The fact that our gender identity goes beyond what is between our legs and how individualistic this matter is. A stark contrast with what the fashion industry counts as ‘genderless fashion trend’ which is a frivolous matter, like padded shoulder for women and pearl necklaces for men, which will forever be a slave to the pendulum of trend and time. One day you are in, the next day you are out.
Gender is, however, a much more substantial topic than that. One’s gender identity is not like a fashion accessory that you can throw on and off whenever you feel like it or whenever it deems to be the ‘trend.’ Reducing the conversation of one’s gender identity to something insignificant, like ‘the color of the season’’, is completely wrong. I wrote about the discomfort I sometimes feel when I have to shop at the women’s section. My shopping struggles are, however, not comparable to the journey that trans or non-binary folks have to endure. In terms of sizing, for instance, I have a pretty average body for a male and I could always wiggle my way into any women’s clothing.
This is not the case with everyone, trans folks who are just coming out into themselves might have a harder time finding clothes that come from the gender section that affirms their gender identity and would also fit their bodies. I also don’t mind having to say that I buy clothes from the women’s section, for other people is a different story. Some people would not feel comfortable having to shop in a section that does not affirm their gender identity.
If we want to prevent the genderless fashion movement in fashion to be just another fad we need to start having discussions that includes issues that queer people face. This is just a glimmer of the many issues when we are talking about the relationship between fashion and gender, with the conversation surrounding the relationship between fashion and gender is at the top of everyone’s lips opens up a huge door of possibilities in which the fashion industry could provide the queer customer more tool and more space to express themselves through fashion.
Disclaimer: The view expressed on opinion article doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinion of The Finery Report. The opinion belongs to the author of the article.
