Boys can’t wear dresses, they say….but was that always true? This week, Professor Jo Paoletti stops by the pod to let us know why boys stopped wearing dresses.

  • Remoy starts us off with a visual…of none other than himself swagged out in a dress as a baby.
    • You may be thinking to yourself, is that a Texan thing? Is it his worldly background? Nope! Boys used to wear dresses…
    • He taps in Professor Jo Paoletti who gives us the scoop.
  • So all babies used to wear dresses, but what does that mean? Was it always the skirts and lace we see on babies these days? Not exactly….
    • Clothing used to be purely practical and not necessarily a way to announce a kid’s gender through their fashion…
    • In fact, using clothing to distinguish kids’ gender was against the grain for a while…
  • We recently talked about the 1800s as a pivotal era in men’s clothing, but for baby boys and girls, the move was to keep things as gender neutral as possible.
    • There were concerns about boys’ behavior that made dresses the better choice. Listen to find out what behavior society was told to suppress…
    • The clothing choice was not just about suppressing certain behaviors; it was about function. In what sense? Professor Paoletti breaks it down.
    • Color came up in our Fashion Is Resistance episode, but about the babies? Did it start off as blue and pink? Great question - listen to find out….
  • Then the ‘80s happened and a new concern emerged (surprise it’s the ‘80s again)…
    • This time, it’s not Reagan… But what was it that made it suddenly so important to distinguish male and female babies from each other at a glance? Take a guess… It’s not so different from the conundrum we’re facing today…
      • Jo Paoletti charts the evolution from functional to purposely gendered clothing.
      • There was a shift in the family structure that caused a butterfly effect for boys and they were failing to meet expectations… It sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
      • Boys could have been the ones to keep the dresses, but they didn’t; why? Jo paints the picture for us.
  • It wasn’t just young boys’ behavior that was a concern, but young men’s in general.
    • Psychologists got involved in this clothing shift at the turn of the century.
    • The Industrial Revolution strikes again and shifts the currents of fashion for all ages…
    • The distinction between boys and girls in fashion would supposedly help curb “deviant” behavior in men.
    • A familiar refrain starts taking over the conversation on men’s behavior - spending too much time with their mothers… Enter the Boy Scouts, enter sports, anything to keep the MASKulinity in boys.
    • Industries follow the conversation and new choices pop up in stores. Consumerism helps ensure the shift.
  • But when we say boys, it wasn’t all boys… There was a particular ideal that boys and eventually men, would be expected to model.
    • It’s what all roads lead to so far this season…
  • Perhaps the most important point Jo makes in this episode is that we all perform gender in some way… Drag of a sort, if you will.
    • Might come as a surprise, but let us humor you!

Was this episode shocking, surprising, old news? Let us know in the comments!

Referenced on this episode:

COMPANION PIECES:

Rss Apple Podcaster
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör Supported by Next Gen Men. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Supported by Next Gen Men och inte av, eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.