The cardigan too!

@@vysharra gotta love a good cardie.

This belongs in a museum!

it's ugly

Functional pockets in womenswear should also be a part of gender equality in fashion!

No, pockets are what's happened with previous male-focused design...

Arguably, the older style that this is based on allowed pockets for women in most garments. It wasn't until slimmer lines in women's fashion (think around 1900 +/- 10 years) where they started switching to carrying bags to accommodate the popular fashion. Then bags became its own industry.

Vanity pockets became a thing in WW2 when there was rationing on fabrics. I have some suits with vanity pockets even now, but with menswear most pockets returned. With women’s garments, they did not.

Hey women had gigantic pockets in these robes a l’anglaise.

I love that he even thought of this, I wish more fashion actually was designed to enhance more than ONE type of body in ONE gender.

I tailor bespoke men's historical suits 1890 to 1930. But I also agree with you. The tailoring of the 18th century was crap, but the fabrics were ASTONISHING.

I'd love to see that

Yes, but I think when he says "a male view of fashion" he means opening doors so that men of different classes, different backgrounds, different sexual orientations can openly take an interest in fashion that's more expressive than whatever sports team they support. Yes, the kind of expression he's talking about has been at least *somewhat* possible for wealthy men for the last fifty years. In general though, the further you go down the socioeconomic ladder though, the less you can play with color, with gender, with silhouette, with different materials, because basically anything within the realm of aesthetics is a "feminine" pursuit. The hope is that by proposing something as theatrical and classically feminine as a Robe a l'Anglaise recut for the male body, the idea might trickle down so that by the time it's filtered through levels of retail men on the street might feel a bit more liberated to play with their gender, in likely more subtle ways.

@@Bunny-ch2ul I know what he means. It's just a way to redominate the field by men...

@@b_uppy I read 'male focused view of fashion' as more seeing men as the target audience for the clothes. Most fashion is targeted as very female focused while by comparison a lot of male clothing is quite uninspired

It's all the fans wanna see

I'm a woman in my late 50's, and since my teens, my wardrobe has always included items of men's clothing. Some of my favourite pieces have been a very loud checkered blazer that I wore for a good portion of the 80's, a plain white button up shirt that I found about 100 different ways to wear, various big cozy cardigans, and my favourite pair of jeans EVER. I bought a pair of men's Mexx black jeans about 20 years ago. Never, before or since, has another pair of jeans fit me so perfectly. When they started to get worn out after a few years, I went to buy another pair. And, of course, they didn't make that style anymore, nor did they use that particular fabric anymore. I was wearing holes in them in places that aren't fashionable, like the inside of the legs and on the bum. I tried patching them, but, eventually, the fabric was so thin and worn, it wouldn't even hold the stitches anymore. I wore them as long as I could, and it broke my heart the day I realized that I'd never be able to wear them again. In all the years that I've worn men's clothes, no one has ever commented on it being weird or wrong or "gay", and I always found it so unfair that the couple of male friends I had who did wear female pieces were subject to all those kinds of comments, and much, much worse. Clothes are clothes. When my sons (now in their 30's) were little, and wanted a shirt or pair of pants from the girls section, I bought them. When they wanted trucks and Barbie dolls for Christmas, they got both. And they each had a Cabbage Patch Doll that they spent forever picking out...because getting just the right one was a VERY big decision. I keep hearing "enlightened" people who insist that gender is a social construct, and they refuse to gender their children. But then, they'll go on to assign genders to toys, clothing, and certain activities/sports...getting upset when their son is interested in playing with trucks instead of dolls, or wearing jeans and tee-shirts instead of dresses. If gender is a social construct, then that has to apply to everything, not just people. Like you said, everyone should be allowed to wear all the things...with absolutely no judgment.

@@Terri_MacKay honestly at this point I'm surprised we haven't made more strides toward just letting people be people. I feel like all of the 'gender barriers' have been broken at this point, and people should be less weird about boys embracing 'feminine' things. But we have made progress, and hopefully we will continue to. I'm sure your sons are much less likely to enforce the strict gender binary with their own children. And I see a lot more acceptance and celebration of boys who don't fit the rigid gender role of decades past. Even things like drag are consumed and respected and applauded in a way that just wasn't something I could have imagined before.

Personwear?! Oh lord... 🙄

@@PixelZan big fan of rigid gender roles, are you sweetheart? 🤨

@@Siansonea no dummy, but men and woman are built differently. I couldn't wear a men's blazer as it would be massive in the shoulders and tight in the hips. The same goes for men's trousers as I have hips and an arse. I can't wait to go looking for an outfit in "personwear" though 🤦🏻‍♀️

Did you not see those same fabrics applied to contemporary easy-to-wear garments that he was showing in the later part of the video as well?

I feel that way too. I feel like I've had something stolen from me.

I think you are missing the point by describing them as 'women's clothes'

It almost feels like this whole idea about making "inclusive" fashion was just an excuse for him to look at twinks in corsets and dresses 🤷‍♂️

Because the word 'queer' no longer means just homosexual, but encompasses a multitude of LGBTIA-identities. It's easier and more inclusive to say 'queer' than to go through an entire (and incomplete) acronym.

Please stop getting offended on our behalf.

So you don't think men should be allowed to wear dresses?

@@rsmith6366 no, it's just this dress. This dress is cultural. Historical.

So you're saying women shouldn't wear pants of any kind

@@janebaker4912 The historical culture is 18th century Western Europe. It's 300 years on, and we're still in Western Europe. The only thing that's changed is that a man is in the dress now.

Are you okay?