In print | Published April 9, 2009

Why should men be making women’s clothing? This is a constant question and critique surrounding the fashion industry, particularly in regards to high fashion. Many consider this to be a problem because they believe men to have distorted views about women and women’s bodies, and that the height and weight conditions for models lead to unrealistic expectations for the everyday woman. It does seem to be the case that female designers, such as Betsey Johnson, tend to have curvier models than male designers like Calvin Klein. But given the male dominance of the industry, waifish frames seem to always be in fashion.

But if there is a problem with men designing women’s clothing, then what about men designing for men? Don’t the same unattainable calls for physical perfection apply? Well yes, but perhaps to a lesser degree. Because a typical menswear runway show is comprised mostly of suits, and suits by nature are designed and tailored to compliment the body, men’s fashion appears to be empowering. A good suit can make bodily imperfections unnoticeable, but the assortment of dresses, skirts, etc. that women wear on the catwalk are more prone to variation. Because women’s wear tends to be more conceptual or artistic, the usual considerations for flattering fits may be sacrificed in maintaining the overall “vision” of the collection. Ideally, women should want to wear such clothing, but designers usually do not have the goal of making collections that sell — commodity comes second to art.

Still, there are men designing for menswear who produce collections that bend the traditional gender norms of dress. This does not mean that they send men down the runway in dresses; the effect is a more androgynous, or a feminine take on menswear. European designers seem much more comfortable doing this than do American ones, it is possible that it is a matter of difference in culture. The designers who experiment the most with de-masculinizing menswear, however, also happen to be the ones who have more androgynous women’s wear. For example, Jil Sander’s Fall 2009 women’s collection contained minimalist power suits and dresses that empowered rather than sexualized the female body. Raf Simons, the designer for the collection, also has his own menswear label. His Fall 2009 collection (above) for that label started off with traditional suits, but then became increasingly more ambiguous. Suits with sloped shoulders worn under corset-like tops and cinched waistcoats exaggerated proportions of the body. Jil Sander’s Fall 2009 menswear collection was even closer to the shapes seen in the women’s wear collection. Most of the coats were structured to exaggerate an hourglass figure, and looked like the item could have been part of the women’s wear collection. Viewing the collections side by side, one has to wonder, is it possible to completely blur the line between male and female fashion?

If it is possible, then it seems to only be happening with designers who have the same or similar visions for both collections, and the number of these designers is still very low. For those who critique the idea of men making women’s fashion, it is important to take note that menswear adheres much more strictly to gender norms than does women’s wear. The patterns, materials and colors may change, but the basic structure of any collection still relies on suits. The greater likelihood of masculine or androgynous women’s wear also seems to either be a reflection of or an influence on the fact that women wearing “men’s” clothing is common practice in everyday life. Boyfriend jeans, blazers, button downs and pantsuits are all testament to this socially accepted notion. Obviously this does not mean that the fashion industry does not perpetuate often negative expectations of women’s wear, but maybe we should consider shifting some criticism to how it dresses the other sex.

Ming is a sophomore. You can reach her at mcai1@swarthmore.edu.

« RETURN TO LIVING & ARTS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »