I can count on one hand those that wear speedos, of which I am one. Yet a woman wearing a bikini or a two piece in the pool would not be blinked at, nor would her sexuality be questioned as men in speedos often face.
She might well face having her sexuality questioned if she wears something more modest though, unless of course she is fat when she will be mocked if she does not cover up the flab. It's not a wider choice for women if one's acceptability is still mandated by what one does or does not wear.
The most common analysis I've previously read of current men's fashions for the baggy look is that it functions to make the men wearing those clothes look bulkier, at the same time as tight/skimpy clothes for women make them look tinier, as an exaggeration of the sexual binary. That has a ring of truth to me, especially when in winter you see women freezing in tiny outfits because warmer clothes would make them look "too big", although of course simply my perception doesn't mean it is necessarily true.
I note that the fashions for the leading men on British TV are for sharp suits, in colourful fabrics and modern pinstripes, which fit the form closely and show off a good physique (or make a scrawny one look stronger). We see some of the same here in Oz as well, and even in the US certainly there are hosts like David Letterman who wears a very sharply tailored collection of suits (pity he's not that funny, but he's beautifully dressed).
I just don't see the phenomenon you describe, Cam. Not here in Sydney anyway.
Comments