Do The Clothes Make the Man?
I just learned that an old family friend feels certain that if a man wears a dress, he’s a pedophile.
I’m not sure if this person believes that a dress has the power to pervert a man, or thinks male perverts are the only men who would ever consider putting on a dress. Either way, this makes for an historical dilemma: In Shakespeare’s time, when women were not allowed on the stage, all the female roles were played by men.
Men wearing dresses on stage was a tradition dating back to ancient Greece and wasn’t seen as scandalous. But today, there’s a swath of the population who think like my old family friend—which is disturbing. There’s no rational basis for this presumption.
When I was very young, girls weren’t allowed to wear pants. Not to school, church, or pretty much any public gathering place. Girls who disregarded this social norm were called “tomboys” and were fussed at for not being ladylike. But these days, most women wear slacks at least some of the time—and some of them wear slacks all of the time. The societal norm has changed. It turns out dresses don’t make girls ladylike and pants don’t make them tomboys.
My father was born left-handed. In his day, left-handedness was considered unnatural. Inferior. In some instances even evil, or unholy. In school, Pop was forced to write with his right hand—which he did until the day he died, (although he never could write in cursive. He printed—all caps—all his life.) Just imagine if society had dictated girls are left-handed and boys are right-handed. Ambidextrous persons are perverts.
Clearly—as we understand today—there was nothing inherently evil about writing with the left hand. Pop was just a victim of a nonsensical social construct. Like dressing appropriately for one’s sex.
The funny thing is, when we’re in public, we all must hide the part of our body that theoretically dictates how we’re supposed to behave. It’s the law! So how can anybody who’s not allowed to see our genitals be absolutely certain we are behaving appropriately according to society’s standards?
Here’s a thought: What if we continued to hide our “private parts” and everybody dressed the same—let’s put them all in togas, for the sake of this exercise. (The Almighty Google tells me there were cultures in history wherein both men and women wore togas.) In my Toga Land there are no societal expectations based on sex. Kids are just kids and can hone skills based on their interests rather than societal prescription. If there were no sex-based expectations in the first place, folks would be disappointed a lot less often.
“What about public restrooms?” you ask. Well, I believe people’s fear about perverts in restrooms demonstrates another irrational social convention. Slapping the labels men and women on restroom doors does not likely prevent pedophilia. But to ease your fears, in Toga Land we’ll have unisex restroom facilities: tiny private rooms with toilets and sinks, each with its own locking door. People waiting for a restroom will wait in the hallway until one of the little rooms is vacated. I already see these facilities in book stores, coffee shops, and even public libraries.
But I suspect people in Toga Land wouldn’t be too worried about all that anyway.
Wouldn’t it be nice if our society concentrated on bona fide problems, like how to feed the hungry and house the homeless, instead of stoking fears about the power or symbolism of clothing? No wonder it’s so difficult to decide what to wear every morning.