A week or so ago; as I was loitering around on the internet in the depths of my chronic procrastination, I stumbled upon this pixelated clip presumably from a reality show from around the 2010s:

“Volleyball is a very masculine sport. Modeling is a very feminine thing. And that means sometimes we have to give up things that we love to do”, Yolanda went on, “You eat like a man. I thought you were lesbian.”

Her daughter; Gigi, listened. I didn't think much of it at first; in fact, I let out a weak chuckle. These words echoed in my head by some uncanny fluke. The video came to a resolution yet I was left in thought. How could someone possibly make so many inferences about another's temperament based on a hobby - and to go as far as to assume sexuality? What even makes volleyball masculine? Why is anything even gendered? And no, this isn't the exposition of some downward spiral but (ironically) a product of my lackadaisical ceremony. How did I manage to have a string of coherent thoughts? I was impressed. 

Harry Styles had caused “controversy” (because this is obviously one of the biggest issues of the 21st century this last December over sporting a flowy periwinkle dress on the cover of Vogue). When I say Candace Owens rained on this parade , I'm not suggesting a light drizzle - not even a heavy downpour. I mean a flood. “Bring back manly men”, she said in response to Harry's cover. This was my last straw. This ideology that dominated people - subconsciously - was getting out of hand.

What defines masculinity and femininity? Why are clothes assigned gender? These societal constructs govern our daily lives. Why did I have to wear a skirt to school and the boys a pair of pants? What did the length of my hair have to do with gender? These scrutinies flashed across my conscience in an unexplainable rage and I needed to hold someone accountable. Where did it all go wrong and how  have we reached this state of mind as a society? Who decided to gender clothes?

The sad truth is that men have looked “feminine” for the majority of history. As early as 400 BC, Spartan warriors, who are “manly” and “tough”, wore miniskirts made of leather and embellishment . Shortly after, in Ancient Greece, men wore a Chiton which is that loose flowy garment that is very popularly depicted in Greek statues that today would be considered a dress. There was a strong anti-pant sentiment because of the long standing cultural belief that pants were effeminate. Yes, the Greeks thought pants were feminine. The Greeks were disturbed by the fact that in many of these pant-wearing cultures (like the Persians) both men and women were wearing them which implied that men and women had the same roles in society, which was considered horrific.

Eventually the Roman empire took over the Greeks and they were just another component to the anti-pants movement. Roman Emperors went as far to enforce a trousers ban, where anyone caught wearing pants would be exiled. It's also significant to note how common pederasty was in this era and that it was considered hyper masculine and a rite of passage for young men. Achilles and Hercules himself, the peak of manhood, engaged in this. Obviously, twice the man, more the manliness!

In my opinion, men looked the best between the late 1400s to the early eighteenth century. For instance, in the early 1500s, Henry VIII , who was the monarch of England (certainly a very manly man isn't he?) wore exquisite silk stockings adorned with embroidery under his skirt. He fashioned well crafted jewelry in his royal portraits as well. The 17th century saw the invention of high heels as mens footwear. As a matter of fact, men of that period ostracized women that wore high heels as “stealing their ultimate attribute to manliness.” Men styled their hair in voluminous locks, neat rolls, ponytails and wigs. Men's interest in fashion and their own appearance wasn't considered effeminate but as a sign of wealth of power. As far as western human history goes, manly men wore dresses, makeup, they did ballet, wore corsets, lace, silk frilly nightgowns, tasty pastels and a lot of pink. The general notion of this time was to dress in a way that pertained to an individuals class and not sex or gender (although the bipartite did exist, social class and obligation overruled it), which in contemporary standards is would be considered tragically effiminate. 

Indian maharajas wore such extravagant, colorful clothes in loud patterns lined with gold piping and embedded with pearls. They adorned themselves with many diamonds, rubies, emeralds, and whatnot. In East Asian cultures, nobility and aristocrats were quite elegant and possessed a variety of “feminine” traits.

This brings me to a seminal theme - the racial component of this issue. When Harry Styles wears something society deems feminine, it's viewed as a progressive move; he's dismantling toxic masculinity. It's nice to see Harry Styles incite a conversation within mainstream media. But when Billy Porter wears a dress, there's more negativity and backlash; he is discredited and it gets pushed under the carpet entirely. This is just one such example. There are numerous male (or even male presenting) A-listers that have been wearing dresses to red carpets that just happen to be BIPOC. 

I want to stress that the way we've gendered clothing has shifted throughout history to  reflect current values of the times. For example, pants are essentially free of any binary because we've moved closer to gender equality (there’s still a long way to go). Due to the spike of women who have joined the workforce, I think that dresses and skirts should also be unshackled from the girls-only connotation; because we have simply surpassed that point. People who hide behind tradition are unreasonable because traditions constantly change as I've written. It isn't erroneous to dress “masculine” or “feminine” - the problem arises when people gatekeep it. People may wear dresses to look more “feminine” while others may view them as simply fabric - that is, with no binary confinements.

One day, we are going to look back and be astounded at how in 2021 men were criticised for wearing dresses in the same manner we look back now in the 1930s when women were vilified for wearing pants (obviously, women have always been more oppressed than men, hence, it being socially acceptable for women to wear pants has completely different implications than men being “allowed” to wear skirts and dresses); but what we can today is to not ruin the fun by dictating what people and should and shouldn't wear, according to a construct that literally changes every 50 years. Take notes, Candace Owens.