kyjo72682 No, it's not understandable. It's nobody else's business how you dress. People need to learn how to mind their own business and let other people live their own lives.
Don't forget Shakespearean times, when women weren't allowed to be actors, so that every troupe had young men who played women. I believe the same was true for many other cultures as well.
I read somewhere that for some time women weren’t even allowed to attend the theater where the piece was being performed. That sounds like an exaggeration but who knows…
Don't get me started about high heels. UK especially allows employers to dictate dress codes for their employees even when those employees are not in contact with the general public. And if employees are in contact with the general public, these dress codes go as far as dictating the details of the make-up a woman should wear. This is all bullsh*t and nonsense. As far as I am concerned, I still remember the comments about me wearing a colourful, if plain, t-shirt. This world needs to grow up.
I have had 2 jobs where I all the female employees where given a set of approved make-up as part of the uniform and had to go to a make-up and hair lesson (only certain hairstyles arroved of course) as part of our training. On both occasions the guys just had to turn up neat and clean for the shift following what i would consider 'normal' appearnce rules for work, it was stupid.
idraote I relate to this. I used to work for a burger chain that started in the 40’s. And the founding family was conservative and Christian, so the dress code regulations were insanely strict (I’d constantly get in trouble for things like colored makeup, only nude was really allowed. I wore red lipstick one time and even though it matched the uniform, my manager complimented the color immediately before telling me to remove it. The male employees would have to shave in the locker room, even if it was just a 5 o’clock shadow. Your white pants had to be pristine, white crew cut socks only, women had to wear their hair secured entirely under a hat, held by a myriad of body pins and a headband. This was literally required. Also girls would have to clip their nails and remove nail polish in the break room if they weren’t bare and short. My nails were shiny from a nail growth treatment, not even polish, and I almost got in trouble for it ‘cause it “didn’t look natural”. Also no tattoos, piercings, or unnatural hair. I mean if you weren’t caucasian and had blonde or red hair you ran the risk of getting in trouble. Also for anyone if the red was too bright or the blonde was too white. And forget rainbow hair and interesting ombrés for sure. Extreme dress codes are ridiculous..
@@dianac.9648 I can't control if I'm attracted to someone, but I sure as hell can control my actions based on that attraction. "They were hot" is NEVER a valid excuse for sexual harassment/assault.
At 4:39 on the left hand side of the screen you show Dr. Mary Edwards Walker. She was the only woman to have won the Congressional Medal of Honor. She served the Union army as a surgeon during the Civil War. She famously said, "I don't wear men's clothes, I wear my own clothes."
Melanie Clark Thank you for pointing that out. Indeed you are right and I stand corrected. It was most certainly not my intent to trivialize the nature and gravity of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Mea culpa! I'll do better in the future. Another interesting fact: the government rescinded her Medal not too long after the end of the Civil War. However, she refused to return it and wore it until she died. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter reinstated her Medal of Honor. She remains the only woman to have ever been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Thank you I admire you and you are correct about Dr Walker. But it is Medal of Honor. Congressional is found nowhere in the title. Common misconception.
birdsdaword I remember it was below zero outside and us girls were forced to go out and play during recess. One girl wore a pair of pants to school and was told to take them off or go home. She went home. She came to school the next day and said her mother told her to tell all the girls to come to school in pants. Most of us did, then all of us did. The following year none of us wore dresses. It was lovely.😁
I want to know exactly how an article of clothing can be assigned gender. Almost any item you name had a different assignment in the past, and/or has a different assignment currently in some other culture. All my life I've run up against this idea that guys aren't allowed to be cute. My wardrobe would be vastly different of society wasn't dictating it to me.
Then change your wardrobe, and by doing so change your society. Inspire future generations by being something greater than what was expected of you. Be so cute it melts their hatred and dissolves their ignorance, and through your courage make others feel safer to be themselves as well.
Cultural norms, tradition, law. Yes, almost every piece of clothing has at one time or another or in one place or another been used by male or female, but not in the same time, space, and people. U.S. American men do not wear thawbs, in the past, and conceivably, not anytime soon in a general sense. Make it a bit "masculine" in an American male's eyes and I would argue you have a duster (coat) or possibly capes You could almost say all clothing is variations on a lion cloth and/or a simply tunic and a girdle/belt
I was forced to wear heels as a part of a uniform for years. I nearly lost toenails and it took many years later for me to even be able to touch my big toenails without pain. It was crazy!
I hate to break your dreams, but, that would only be possible if one obtained another’s lightsaber. “Bleeding” a Crystal to make it red in Star Wars can only be done by focusing on pure hatred and other negative emotions. And “grey Jedi” (as far as I know) are mostly know to wield white/grey lightsabers. Though Darth Revan was know to wield a purple lightsaber and he was a “grey Jedi” at one point. Though your comment might have been a joke seeing as the rules are (mostly) well know.
@@Nicholas32906 Heyyy a lore-based response! I think the original comment was referring more to the idea that color does not necessarily denote intention, some good people like red and some “bad” people like blue/green. But yes, according to the original cannon, that’s not really how lightsabers work,... I once saw a kid’s show, and they had two princesses, one was good, and the other was an evil imposter, and in order to differentiate them visually to the viewers, the original one had brown eyes, and the evil one had green eyes.,, I have green eyes,,. I was so triggered... 😂
It seems like throughout history people wanted to be able to tell at once, by looking at someone what their "place" was in Society, so they would know at once how to treat them. To some degree, a loosening of the rules of dress seems to go along with the idea of treating people equally regardless of their "place".
This- also I really wish they'd brought up a bit more about how these laws specifically effected and continue to effect transgender people by grouping our existence in with sex crimes and "indecency" in law though that's probably a whole other video by itself I just think there's a parallel to be drawn with how lot of anti-trans/ transphobic people want to be able to tell what genitals someone has by looking at them and see that as being their right in a similar way as the upper class saw it as their right to "be able to tell with one look who is below me" . Controlling what people wear has always been about oppressing marginalised groups- Terfs today will attack gay and gender non conforming cis women or women of colour who they deem as "not feminine enough" and claim that they are trans women using dehumanising and objectifying language.
I remember when I was working in retail when I woukd be constantly asked "what I was" because people couldn't tell what my ethnicity was just by looking at me. If I gave the "wrong" answer then they might have treated me like garbage. I always answered a martian from Mars just to give them an idea of how stupid that question is. Though I was always treated like garbage if I said no to any of the demands.
Just a small semantical note: Dr James Barry lived his life as a man and requested his body to be buried, rolled up in his bedsheets without having the "proper" funeral preparations done. Against his wishes, they chose to prepare his body anyways and it was only after death that his sex was revealed. As such, I prefer to abide by his last wishes and still do see him as a man in death (regardless of if he identified as one or not).
The school dress code thing annoys me to the core. When I was in middle and high school, I was always dress coded and I HATED IT. I'd be coded for showing too much shoulder, back, and/or leg. And the school made me put an ugly shirt or gym shirts over what I was wearing. I hated it. If I have a daughter and they try to pull that mess on her, I'm cussing the school out.
And a second and important question why are they the norm. And I once heart about a matrialchat society (in China) were in theory the female could steel with every man but they usualy stay whith one (But maybe i have the mandela effect or something and i am wrong about it).
@@alexandrub8786 Patriarchal societies are the norm because they're better If a patriarchal nation goes to war with a matriarchal one,they all ways win
@Constantine V Agreed, that's why the Amazons were so weak and helpless against male centered warfare that they achieved mythical status for being incapable of military combat.
Who will win as a commander? Which will get stuff done? Matriarchs never did control much except cultural honorary titles. Commanders and leaders in direct control of projects were always men
School uniforms don't bother me in the long run. Yes, dress codes can be a little unfair, but they at least have a clear purpose. It's the heels as part of a work uniform. That bothers me. Heels put the foot and ankle in a slightly unnatural position, so wearing them over-frequently or for long periods of time can damage the bones in your feet and ankles. Asking women wear them for work, nearly everyday for many hours at a time, could be hurting those women.
@@ayanna6327 The dress code for my work basically punishes mostly women and I work in a factory that can get over 100 degrees, but we're not aloud tank tops. Let's say I was sweating all day then my shirt sags funny then you see my bra strap just peeking out near my neck (I wear it cross back for better support). Doesn't matter if I'm dying from heat stroke, just as long as I'm covered up. It mostly effects the women who are very busty.
dr. james barry was a trans man... he lived his life as a man and didn’t want anyone inspecting his body even after his death. people need to stop claiming he was a woman who just wanted to practice medicine and be a soldier. otherwise very informative video though.
You say this mostly affects women yet men wearing dresses or skirts is still completely out of the question basically everywhere whereas women wearing pants or suits are completely accepted in the developed world. It feels difficult to think of any masculine clothing item that would be unacceptable for a woman to wear nowadays or even one that you couldn’t get a variation of in the women’s section, whereas vice versa there are many that would get a man ridiculed if not worse (not just skirts but also blouses, crop tops, bralettes, bikinis, hotpants, tights, leggings, rompers, high heels, tube tops, etcetera, etcetera)
Ahh, the church of women worsting. "Men are shamed if they wear women's clothing because men see women's clothing as inferior" Aka, men hurt men because they hate women, and that hurts women most! Such idiocy.
@@rainynight02 eh, I've actually heard someone use that argument. "do you really want to look like a weak little girl?" sooo... It's not always the case but it is used as reasoning. My church believes that both women wearing pants and men wearing dresses is equally as shameful though so I wasn't raised with that mindset. I really don't care what other people wear.
Yeah well, in society only girls and women can get gender equality, rights, liberation, individuality. And, the biggest obstacle to men's would be ironically other men.
Y W The channel is relatively new… TH-cam's algorithm is stupid and slow so one has to give it time. 😀 I might not have known about it if it weren't for some recommendation on a sister channel or some other sort of organic process. 🤔
Yeah...I think I only heard about it the same way pixelized did--from a reccommendation off to the side of a sister-channel's video. In my case I think it was It's Okay To Be Smart? or possibly Eons. One of those.(Of course, I'd also say that people should be watching ALL of those three! :))
Robin Chesterfield In my case it might have been through a recommendation from The Art Assignment.🤔 Until TH-cam gets with the program so to say, I guess it's up to us "squishy things" to promote good content…
It's important to remember that some of these people afab (assigned female at birth) may not have identified as women. At the same time we also can't really apply modern terms like "transgender" to them with any certainty or authority because we just don't know how they would feel about these terms. I bring this up because in some of these cases- like Dr. James Barry- their gender presentation could've been about their personal identity just as much as (if not more than) it was about social status. Like I said, we can't say for certain that Dr. Barry would've identified as trans. But there is a strong case for it as Dr. Barry's final wishes were to not be undressed before burial, however these wishes were not honored and thus they were outed. It seems contradictory to say that we probably shouldn't refer to them as women but also shouldn't label them as trans either. But there are ways around it. Sometimes gender neutral pronouns like "they" and other terms like "afab"/"amab" come in handy in these situations. But an even simpler way to handle these things is to just put a disclaimer or footnote out there that says "We're going to refer to them in this way but we don't really know how they would have identified".
Or... we can just call them women or men until we know for sure that they identified as something else. I am a butch lesbian. I dress in mostly men's clothes. I am a woman for all intents and purposes, address me as such because I have not made it clear that I am trans. Stop trying to force society to change the way it views sex and gender. If it changes, it will only do so naturally and over time with wide spread consensus.
@T Mystery Do you also want other people to assume you're straight? Clothing is definitively no proof for your sexuality either. I mean, as a butch lesbian you don't experience the same invisibility as a femme lesbian or a bisexual person... but maybe you remember being invisible from the time before you came out. Asking can get annoying but it is always better than putting all the burden of coming out again and again on the person themself. No offense (I love butches) but I don't want to turn into a walking stereotype to show people how gay I am. I love skirts, makeup and girly things - and I should not be required to wear rainbow wristbands or gay-themed t-shirts to remind people that not everyone's cishet.
When I was 2-4 my babysitter was a drag queen but because we lived in the middle of Idaho we got the cops called on us every time we went to the park even though it was a small town and everyone knew everyone so we eventually had to restrict our tutu parades to home but that gos to show that even if there aren't still technically laws in the US people sometimes act like it :(
I'm happy I was born in a time period where I can actually dress however I want, I do not look good in dresses and high heels hurt my feet badly and I fall on my ass a lot when wearing them. I wear mens clothing because I love them, it's better than woman's clothes and they look nice and they are comfortable in my opinion. XD
@@ChrisDragon531 Agreed! I was poking around a thrift store last month and tried on women’s pants for the first time in years. While I found several pairs that fit, they ALL flunked the “pocket test” when the pockets wouldn’t even hold my wallet! I don’t carry a purse (it’s just one more thing I need to worry about getting lost, stolen, forgotten, or robbed), so having pockets that actually hold things is Of Vital Importance. And WTF is up with that stupid denim/spandex fabric mix? One PMS “fat day,” and you’re popping seams! I’ve been wearing men’s jeans in winter and military summer pants in summer for precisely those reasons. First off, it’s easier to find pants that fit when you only need the waist and inseam to go by. Women’s pants designers keep changing the sizes so that what’s a size 8 one year is a size 12 the next, and for some idiot reason they’re under the delusion that if you’re a double-digit size then you must also have legs up to your ears. I’m a woman with a “mom body” combined with a height on the shirt side of average-you just TRY finding women’s pants (or even formal dresses, for that matter!) that fit that combo without shelling out more money on major alterations! Second, the aforementioned denim/spandex combination fabric in women’s jeans. You’re lucky if that stuff lasts six months! Don’t these idiots realize that the second part of the compound word “housework” is WORK? Sheesh, we work harder than men because we do paid work for a living, then we have a crap ton of work to do once we get home too! Men’s pants last me for YEARS because they’re 100% denim! That fabric was built to take abuse! Third, the cost. I can find men’s jeans and slacks in my size, and I’m only out $11 a pair. Women’s pants prices? Try $20 a pair at the MINIMUM. Okay, maybe closer to $15 at Walmart, but that’s still $4 more bucks that I shouldn’t have to shell out for pants that don’t have decent pockets, last a fraction of the time that men’s pants do, and they keep changing the sizes on. Screw that! And for the record, the last time I wore a dress was on my wedding day over 22 years ago. I hate dresses. They’re way more confining than pants because you have to watch how you walk, stand, or even sit in one, you gotta worry about up skirting a$$holes getting all pervy around you, it’s easier to be raped in a dress or a skirt, and nine times out of ten they don’t have pockets! The fact that I’m shaped like a feed sack doesn’t help either. You can put whatever decorations on it you want and make it whatever color you want-a feed sack is still a feed sack. In other words, it makes me look like Mama Duggar. YUCK!
I was a cross dresser in secret much of my life, even in the Army. I could pass Rona degree. I am a former combat soldier, father, husband and teacher. There was nothing immoral about what I did. I love the feel of petticoats and full skirts. High heels felt right, but hurt. It all came to an end in my 60's. Passing became more difficult. I did give it up freely. Now and then I might dream about wearing a full swirly skirt. Occasionally when I am alone at night and home I will slip on a cute pleated skirt and sit out on the patio by firelight. I'm happy being a man, but just love the feeling of some femme attire. I'm glad I did it. I was know as Erin of Donegal. In all my 50 years I was never putted or harmed. Loved singing at Karaoke, but not in a female voice. I sang as Elvis, blew the crowds minds. It was a crazy ride, I would never have missed for the world.
I feel like nowadays (in the west) women have more freedom in what they wear than men do. Not only is female-coded fashion more diverse, it is also more accepted for women to wear male-coded fashion and there are more variants of male fashion cut to the female body available as well. For men even to wear bright colors (especcially pink) is frowned upon while it is completely acceptable for women to wear dark colors or blue.
that confused me as well, because my brain skipped to the roman senate. then when she said it roughly translates to "controlling women" i was like... no. it roughly translates to council of old men.
You can still see rules regarding clothing and class in the workplace. One of the small things that pushed me to finish school was not having to wear khaki pants and uniform shirts in whatever work I wound up in.
One of the dumber footnotes to this prohibition.. the abrahamic religions (so christianity, judaism, islam), all go back to the same early 'this is evil' references, which unfortunately were actually a swipe at a nearby tribe where crossdressing was part of a particular religious ceremony and THAT was the target of the ban... 'don't partake in this type of outsider magic', but over the centuries only the aesthetic element remained and made it into general culture.
What tribe was that, Neen? Yes, God told the Israelites not to partake of the practices of the nations He would drive out before His people, but He also made it clear that certain practices IN THEMSELVES were abominations to Him. That other tribes did it is irrelevant. God gave His people the Mosaic Law for them to follow. He did not give it to the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Babylonians, Persians, Arabs, Chinese, Indians, et al. Go back & read Exodus through Deuteronomy. And think: What difference would it make that other tribes were committing evil acts? To God, they were evil acts & worthy of destruction, period. God is not influenced by man. Other way around, Neen.
There's more than just an aesthetic to it though: when we compare the Command for a man to not wear a woman's garment (and vice versa: a woman not to wear a man's garment), and we see it's being called abomination in the same way a lying mouth is considered an abomination, one realizes it's a deeply moral issue: to not deceive (lie) about what He, as our Creator, made us to be and function as, as His human creation, and to not lie about it by the way we dress (express and identify ourselves to others), lying about what He created us to be. The verses to compare: • _Deuteronomy 22:5 (KJV)_ 5 _The_ *woman* _shall not_ *wear that which pertaineth unto a man,* _neither shall_ *a man put on a woman's garment:* _for all that do so are_ *abomination* _unto the Lord thy God._ • _Proverbs __6:16__-17 (KJV)_ 16 _These six things doth the Lord hate:_ _yea,_ _seven are_ *an abomination* _unto him:_ 17 _A proud look,_ *a lying tongue,* _and hands that shed innocent blood,_ In Jesus' day, both men and women wore robes, but there was still a difference in the way they wore it; so, it's up to the society to decide how they preserve this biological difference by their style of dress (whether everyone wears robes or everyone wears pants). Interesting tid bit: clothing wasn't mere fashion: it would tell a lot about a person (e.g. are they widowed? are they single? are they married? and yes including, are they a man or a woman?) and helped prevent inappropriate sexual advances to other people. And knowing He is a God of order, this does help facilitate smooth, orderly interaction in society (as opposed to chaos/confusion). • _1 Corinthians __14:33__ (NIV)_ 33 _For God is not a God of disorder but of peace-as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people._ Peace be with you. ♡
This video needs to be updated given recent legislation. There's a lot of conservatives trying to bring these kinds of laws back on the books at the moment.
When I came out in San Francisco in the late 60s, some (working) drags wore (1) a man's shorts and (2 & 3) a sock in each bra half to qualify as the required three items of men's clothing. I expect this was more pro forma, though, as the law may still have been on the books.
Crossdressing laws would be stopped if pants were declared a women's privilege granting almost total economic and political power. Conservatives would be stopping such a law fast just to hold power hopefully they would stop scap goating cross dressers. As for me I'm a self taught crossdresser I'd jump at the chance to live in a community were men wore dresses and skirts. Or being employed by a women who had a dress code were men wore dresses while women wore the pants.
some women like to wear pants and some like dresses and skirts just stop annoying people about it. its bad because some people say that it is bad to wear pants because its "men's clothes" or telling women that they cant wear a dresses because they are "conforming to society" stop just stop let people wear what they want
When I started school in the 1990s my mum got called in to see the teacher because I had worn (the school uniform) trousers to school instead of the skirt. She was warned to never do it again or I would be punished! So even in the UK this went on for far too long!
Great and informative video! I want to acknowledge that the host is a female POC, and how great it is to find channels on TH-cam (especially educational channels) hosted by a woman and a POC. We need more of these (in the US, at least).
Oh I know an interesting thing about this! There was this really popular serial novel in the 19th century called The Hidden Hand. It was about this poor city girl who winds up with a fortune with some mysteries and hijinks in the middle, think kind of an American version of Dickens. But at the beginning of the book the girl, Cap, is in New York disguised as a boy and working odd jobs on the street. Her real gender is revealed and she gets arrested for cross-dressing. Her defense is basically 1. She was literally dying of starvation and no one would hire her because she's a girl 2. She didn't know any better because she's a 13 year old orphan 3. Bad things can happen to a girl on the street- they obviously didn't say rape explicitly cause its an old family novel but, of course. Its really interesting to see laws like this argued against in a really popular piece of media at the time, there are a lot of gems like that in the novel about the shit women went through back in the day, all without losing its light tone overall. and its worth noting that on top of the reasons you mentioned that women and girls often had to crossdress for their own safety (12th night, anyone?).
In my school, guys aren't allowed to wear earrings, skirts, and a few different types of shoes. It's pretty much the same dress code as they had when the school was founded (in the 1950s), except for long hair on guys, which they started to allow.
Cross dressing was associated with homosexuality for thousands of years. However the sumpturay laws in Europe was enforced make sure women were not feminists and to make sure they are not impersonating a man or are transgender. Alot of transgenders cross dress which can lead to them getting sexually harrased.
Great commentary. I remember watching a program on TV about this, many years ago. One of the things that was pointed out was that during the raids, police would actually strip search people to see if they were wearing the proper underwear and would charge them with crossdressing under their anti decency laws if they didn't. It is interesting to note that even though we're in the first fifth of the 21st century, there is still a lot of violence directed towards gay men than women. Why is it still more acceptable for women to wear pants or wear their hair short than it is for men to wear anything that is remotely feminine or grow their hair out? I used to get harassed a lot at my job, from my store manager to my co workers, because of my long hair and my androgynous appearance. I was treated like a leper. I even had one male co worker say to me, "why don't you get a haircut and look like a real fucking guy?" However, I stayed true to myself and always have. Many years have passed since those times and I still have long hair, although it has gotten a lot thinner and is starting to show more grey than I like. About a year ago, I had this very large umbrella that was purple, I was teased about that too. Seriously, don't people have more important things to worry about than the choices I make to keep me dry when it rains? How do people associate the colour purple with sexual orientation? We still have a very long way to go when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of anyone who does not follow "societal norms" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
She mentions restrictive dressing laws seem to mostly fall on women. Well, in western society men's clothing is dull, uniformed compared to women's clothing. And, can include men's. So, there's actually no such thing as men's clothing, only unisex and women's. It should be as acceptable in society for men to wear skirts, as it is for women to wear pants. And, that part of the man's anatomy needs to be kept cool. At many office workplaces the men must always wear suits, or at least long pants, shoes and socks. Whereas, the women can e.g. in summer wear a tank top, shorts and open toed shoes. Gee, if a man wore that there, he more than likely wouldn't still be there. One can say that the suit is the western equivalent of the burkha. Yeah well, in society only girls and women can get gender equality, rights, liberation, individuality. And, the biggest obstacle to men's being ironically other men. Invariably if a woman brings up women's issues, she'll be praised and liked. Invariably if a man brings up men's issues, he'll get contempt. Double standards.
I just want to point out that crossdressing was a major problem for Joan of Arc too and a large part of the excuse the English used to put her to death.
I love to watch your show. Youre an excellent communicator. Hint: no need to rush. If your info is excellent people will enjoy taking it in at a more user-friendly place.
"It should be what's inside that count, but people seem to have a lot of ideas about what's outside" : indeed, people are so keen at pointing out superficial details and not even try to understand what's inside 🙄
Can we start normalizing masc presenting people wearing femme clothing please I'm getting tired of the discrimination held against them for no good or rational reason.
During the past 100 years skirt length changed with the economy: strong economy - short skirts, weak economy - long(er) skirts. Unless it’s in a religious extremist environment where women are always blamed for men who can’t control their sexual urges.
The evidence suggests that James Barry was probably what we would now consider a trans man-after he had completed his training, his friends offered to arrange for him to travel to South America, where he could have practised medicine openly as a woman, but he declined. He also took very great pains to make sure his anatomical sex wouldn’t be discovered after his death, requesting that his body be buried in his bedsheets “without further inspection”.
I don't really know how I feel about the school uniform thing. It was always annoying for me, personally, but I also know wrangling kids on a tight budget and trying to teach them isn't easy either. I feel like a child psychologist would be the best person to ask these questions. But if we asked a psychologist for anything in America... well...
I like the idea of uniforms bc it's allot cheaper to dress a kid in a uniform. You don't have to worry about what the other kids are wearing and if your clothing will help you fit in. When I was in school, my father bought our school clothes from the dollar stores. I was embarrassed that I didn't have fashionable clothing so I got a job and got my clothing from thrift stores. I did not and do not appreciate that lesson. BTW he had the money, he just did not want to spend it on my mothers' children she had with him.
I don't mind uniforms in general, I do mind that dress codes are used to punish girls for having shoulders (yes, really, google it) and wearing shorts. Because those sexy, sexy shoulders on the 13 year old girl are soooo sexy that they will distract the boys from learning. So girls get pulled out of classrooms, which does not distract the girls from learning of course, to check their clothing and make them wear something else. Boys meanwhile have like one rule to follow. Make uniforms simpler and unisex, problem solved. Workplace dress codes sometimes require women to wear heels, which are cause long term and sometimes permanent damage to the feet, legs and back. I don't think many workplaces would require men to wear an item of clothing that would cause damage just by wearing it.
James lived his life as a man. He was perceived as a man, he wanted to be perceived as a man, so I suspect he identified as one. He could have been a trans man, because trust me, living your life as a gender you don't identify with is hell. A cis woman would eventually crack, haha.
These kinds of laws actually created huge problems for girls in Norway back in the day... From stories I've heard from my grandparents and other adults girls often couldn't go to school during winter, because have you tried walking around with no pants on during a Nordic winter? It can get dangerously cold... So many girls stayed home, or secretly wore pants just to get to school even though they weren't allowed to.
Thank you so much for this video ❤❤❤ It helps me feel empowered to rock both, dress and suits as a trans man and not to care about what anybody says!!! So much love to you and your channel ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ Sunday
Cross dressing in the theatre has actually been normal for centuries. In Shakespeare's day women weren't allowed on stage so all female characters were played by men and boys. In the 19th century music halls of England, cross dressing acts were common with both male and female performers. And even today, the pantomime still makes use of cross-dressing.
It is considered one piece. I am thinking the reason the came to three pieces of clothing is that the people of Buffalo that came up with that rule were too prudish to name the three pieces of clothing. Looking it up just now, it seems the general idea was that butch women typically wore a T-shirt, no bra, jeans, and tennis shoes - three pieces of clothing considered masculine. It would then depend on how picky a police person (man) was on whether to harass such a woman or not. I note that the typical female teenager of this time (50s) stereotypically wore a sweater, bra, skirt, sneakers, and bobby socks - not so unlike, but note the bra, the thing females would later remove in the 60s to represent women's liberation
Lesbian Amazon Sister found the terf. Anyway please stop ciswashing history. He lived as a man in both his public and private life and requested to be buried as one after he died.
Misha Toor Most historians don't like attributing modern terminology onto historical figures. Sometimes they will say things like, same sex attraction or gender nonconforming, because we often can't know for sure how these people felt.
While I agree that there is a significant chance Dr Barry was trans, there is also a big chance they weren't. We simply don't know for sure, and I would agree that just pretending trans people didn't exist before 1960 is nonsense and exclusionary and assuming everyone was cis unless proven otherwise is BS. However, we do not know Dr Barry's stance on the matter. I can understand why most historians would be careful with placing a label on someone that they might or might not have chosen for themselves. The solution would be to word very carefully what the actions of a certain person were, to try to not interpret their identity for them and emphasise that while they did not call themselves trans (afaik) they well could have been.
Oddly, I first began to notice this sort of thing when I realized my workplace dress code was more permissive for women than men. They allowed women to wear sleeveless shirts and head scarves, whereas men weren't allowed to wear anything on their heads, and a similar exception was made for dresses. They didn't so much say that been couldn't wear dresses as they defined the acceptable criteria for dresses in terms of how women could choose to dress.
Why did you jump from the historical laws across the world restricting dress due to status, to the earliest gendered crossdressing laws specifically in the USA? If your tracking the history of the subect in general then shouldn't you mention where and when the first law came about and how it spread, rather than just when it happened in USA? I notice it a lot with USA based videos, often when talking about the first time an ideolagy, trend or law becomes popular they only talk about the USA's history with it not the wider world. It's fine to present a show following the USA's history with things like this but can't really call it the origin of everything if you're only concerned with when and where the subject matter started in the USA.
To be fair, it is a US channel and aimed at the US population so it would naturally zero in on US based issues. Otherwise, where would you draw the line? At strictly Western History? That would also make it less than global. In the interest of time, you have to make choices about what you do and don't cover.
By the title of the channel, the video intro and the paragraph below the video it advertises its self as a general fact/history channel, not a USA one. Why draw a line, it's supposed to be the history of laws against cross-dressing so mention the pertinent facts relating to that subject. They should have at least linked the ancient history to the modern day by mentioning which country first made it a law, which had the most laws or which punished those prosecuted hardest before focusing on America. They cut out a large part of "the origin" of the history of the laws to jump to the USA, I find its something unique to American documentaries, often they only mention what year something was invented but often not who, where, why or how something was invented if it wasn't in the USA. For example, I was watching a US program supposedly on how the steam train changed "the world", they only stated that the steam train was invented in 1804 then with no other information offered they jumped to an in-depth look at when the railways arrived in American and how they grew and changed the landscape of the USA. This would have been a good documentary if it was the history of the American railway but it was supposed to be about the effect of the steam train on the world.
Lady Lockett, I hear you. But the honest answer is that most Americans don't care about the rest of the world in any detail. Not me, of course. I am a geographer so it matters greatly to me and I try every day to remedy that situation. There is a great quote I like to give my fellow countrymen "War is the gods way of teaching Americans geography." That being said, NPR is an American channel. It is basically the American version of the BBC. And as the largest English speaking economy in the world, you might be able to forgive the average American their myopic view of the world, as well as the products made to cater to them. The short answer is that if the channel went into greater detail and covered the entire global history of any one of the subjects they cover, the average consumer would tune out. It would simply be too long. I guess you could say tha the title should be "How the Steam Train Changed OUR world." Unfortunate, but it is a reality. Peace.
Lady Lockett The problem with doing a global perspective is that history tends to be written in the language of the people who care about it... and that's usually the people that live in region where the history happened. So, Spanish people care about Spanish history, Canadians about Canadian history, and so on and so forth. So, these videos would end up still being English centric, because they probably wouldn't have the budget to scour through non-English speaking histories.
I don't agree, I watch a lot of documentories and more often than not those made outside of the US will always mention the general origin, history and facts of the subject in question and will only focus on one countries history with it only if it's of perticular note. Whereas i've noticed a trend in US based ones to only mention when or how whatever the subject is, arrived or affected America (unless of course it was invented there, then they are quite detailed on it's history). The video focuses on one small subject not a whole country's history they could have easily mentioned the examples linking ancient and modern day I gave earlier with out it being a long video. They simply didnt want to and presented only information in regards to the USA while advertising the fact it was the general origin of the subject. It just seems to be a trend or habit i've noticed when watching US made documentories.
Great video...very educational. On a personal note, I hate wearing clothes and only use them for skin protection and temperature regulations . Non- binary folks, like myself have always had trouble witk gender- based laws.
Damn! How much coffee do you drink? You talk really fast. You have such interesting information but I always feel like I miss too much. I'm also a little worried about you not getting sufficient oxygen. Maybe record these before that 3rd cup or after lunch when your more relaxed. . . Unless. . . . . . . . Holy crap!. . . . . . . Your not that energetic all the time are you?! If so, I want your secret! Please!
From 2008 to 2014 there have been a series of laws against saggy pants in Michigan, Tennesee, Georgia, Louisiana, and Florida. So such clothing related laws are still getting published in the US.
“Should women be forced to wear high heels as part of a uniform”? I wouldn’t even have thought to word it that way. And I’m a guy! Instead, I would’ve said “Should men be allowed to wear high heels as part of their uniform if their female colleagues get to do it?” Lots of men would love to, I’m sure. Short men, for example, may wish to get taller especially if in the service sector helping customers over the counter and whatnot. What about transgender women and men? Surely they deserve a chance to put their best foot forward just like everyone else. Gender equality (or lack thereof) affects everyone. 🧐🤔🤨
@Lesbian Amazon Sister it wasn't high heels made originali for man but after the woman tried to copy them (men),the mens stop wearing them? P.S.: happy to see you again.
I think it had to do with the fall of French monarchy. Suddenly, everyone did the impossible to avoid dressing as before, as they could be signaled as royalist. So a new fashion prevailed (the empire fashion) which was considered more "sensible" and "natural" than the previous one, and was completelly different: lack of heels for men, lack of huge skirts for women, lack of make up for both, etc... (fun note, once Napoleon lost his favour, fashion changed again, to a completelly different style)
I am in favour of everyone wearing whatever the hell they want, however, enforcing only women to wear footwear that is painful and causes longterm and sometimes permanent damage to the feet, legs and back is bullshit. Go wear high heels then and change the culture in your office or workplace. Women have been trying to get rid of nonsense rules in the workplace about heels for a while. Having options is the point.
I've read every book of the bible. There are no verses which specifically prohibit cross-dressing. I would not expect there to be because women and men wore basically the same clothing in ancient Israel. The basis for the laws was the connection, however tenuous, between cross-dressing and homosexuality: and/or witchcraft as in the case of Joan of Arc. The video maker kept mentioning Joan, but actually she was burnt at the stake for dressing as a man which was considered evidence of her being a witch. Although granted her real offense was serving the French King. Additionally, at least in the English-speaking world, cross-dressing was associated with the decadent Tudor establishment in the 16th century. Thus the Puritans railed against it, because they were seeking to destroy the Tudor establishment. Undoubtably they tortured some poor Bible verse to that end, but you are living in the 21st century and perfectly capable of interpreting Bible verses for yourself. Angels are usually depicted as being both male and female, i.e. as perfected humans. God is also deemed to be both male and female. St. Paul said: "in Christ there is neither male nor female". The Bible's stance on the issue of gender-bending and cross-dressing is fairly clear: it's perfectly fine. After all, an obsession with physicality and the flesh is evil and the work of the devil. A true Christian concerns themselves only with the person beneath the flesh.
Deuteronomy 22:5 “A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God."
@@rperlberg Technically that verse could be referring to clothes for religious services or telling women not to steal men's clothes. Remember everyone wore robes back then, and robes are basically dresses for men.
+rperlberg, alright I stand corrected. There's one, in the book of rules that hardly anyone follows. The reasons why rules against things are made is never really to do with religion unless the state in question is a theocracy. It's to do with politics. The rules against cross-dressing in America were made because the people who founded the original colonies were all rebelling against the Tudor establishment, which tolerated cross-dressing.
"High heels" were originally designed for royal men and soldiers. For the former, it was to boost height (since men were much shorter from 1400-1800), for the latter it was to keep your footing in deep mud and for easy mounting of horses (a heel, small or large, allows your foot to stay in a stirrup without much difficulty). Also, pink was originally developed as a color for young boys or for women in England. It was supposed to represent a lighter version to bright/deep reds, crimsons--which were for men. Its possible that the pink's "fleshy" tone (depending on race/skin color) seemed to bring out a softer, thus diminutive aesthetic in women ?? I think its hilarious that some suggest that pink is only for women because a vagina is that color...aha... and aren't there multiple skin colors (for vaginas as well)?? and don't some men also have pink penises?? Just because a sex may have that color somewhere on their body doesn't mean that they alone are assigned to wear that color... what a weird world.
I always thought it was strange my mom "had to" wear dresses when she was growing up....didn't realize it was a case of "it's against the law" and not a case of "strict parents and teachers"!
Hello. I have a suggestion. I'm curious to know about time. Who invented the 24 hour cycle? Why 24 hours? Why didn't we divide the day in 20 hours, for example? Or 50? And why 60 minutes per hour? Why not divide an hour in 100 parts and call each one a minute? Wouldn't that fit our decimal math model better? I mean, we divide each second in 1000 milliseconds. And what came first? The second, the minute or the hour? Thank you so much for considering my suggestion. Love your show. I think it is very original and I learn a lot from it. Thank you (and your team) for all your hard work.
Nothing like fabric to freak people out
It's not the fabric, it's the symbolism attached to it. And it's understandable.
no Kyjo...its just fabric
Not like anyone every used it for something like germ warfare or anything .... specifically smallpox in blankets~ -_-
my opinions are facts It doesn't take much to challenge some people's world views, and they really hate that.
kyjo72682 No, it's not understandable. It's nobody else's business how you dress. People need to learn how to mind their own business and let other people live their own lives.
Don't forget Shakespearean times, when women weren't allowed to be actors, so that every troupe had young men who played women. I believe the same was true for many other cultures as well.
In India too.
but they are then crossdressing? hmm..
Exactly, that's the origin of the word drag=dressed as a girl.
@@victoriaalbastra6325 Oh wow, never made that connection, thanks! 🙂👍
I read somewhere that for some time women weren’t even allowed to attend the theater where the piece was being performed. That sounds like an exaggeration but who knows…
Don't get me started about high heels. UK especially allows employers to dictate dress codes for their employees even when those employees are not in contact with the general public. And if employees are in contact with the general public, these dress codes go as far as dictating the details of the make-up a woman should wear. This is all bullsh*t and nonsense.
As far as I am concerned, I still remember the comments about me wearing a colourful, if plain, t-shirt.
This world needs to grow up.
idraote well said sir
I have had 2 jobs where I all the female employees where given a set of approved make-up as part of the uniform and had to go to a make-up and hair lesson (only certain hairstyles arroved of course) as part of our training. On both occasions the guys just had to turn up neat and clean for the shift following what i would consider 'normal' appearnce rules for work, it was stupid.
idraote I relate to this. I used to work for a burger chain that started in the 40’s. And the founding family was conservative and Christian, so the dress code regulations were insanely strict (I’d constantly get in trouble for things like colored makeup, only nude was really allowed. I wore red lipstick one time and even though it matched the uniform, my manager complimented the color immediately before telling me to remove it. The male employees would have to shave in the locker room, even if it was just a 5 o’clock shadow. Your white pants had to be pristine, white crew cut socks only, women had to wear their hair secured entirely under a hat, held by a myriad of body pins and a headband. This was literally required. Also girls would have to clip their nails and remove nail polish in the break room if they weren’t bare and short. My nails were shiny from a nail growth treatment, not even polish, and I almost got in trouble for it ‘cause it “didn’t look natural”. Also no tattoos, piercings, or unnatural hair. I mean if you weren’t caucasian and had blonde or red hair you ran the risk of getting in trouble. Also for anyone if the red was too bright or the blonde was too white. And forget rainbow hair and interesting ombrés for sure. Extreme dress codes are ridiculous..
@@zombelladonna That sounds like my high school
I love "equal minded" guys!
I don't see why girls should be held responsible for the actions of the male students...
I agree
Although I dont think guys can control weather they're attracted or not
Guys can't control what they are attracted to, but they can however, control themselves in treating a girl properly.
@@dianac.9648 I can't control if I'm attracted to someone, but I sure as hell can control my actions based on that attraction. "They were hot" is NEVER a valid excuse for sexual harassment/assault.
@@screamingweevil3410 I know, I'm against the dress code, I'm just saying this shouldn't be blamed on guys but the school or district.
At 4:39 on the left hand side of the screen you show Dr. Mary Edwards Walker. She was the only woman to have won the Congressional Medal of Honor. She served the Union army as a surgeon during the Civil War. She famously said, "I don't wear men's clothes, I wear my own clothes."
She was awarded the Medal of Honor, it is not something you win, like a prize at the carnival.
Melanie Clark Thank you for pointing that out. Indeed you are right and I stand corrected. It was most certainly not my intent to trivialize the nature and gravity of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Mea culpa! I'll do better in the future. Another interesting fact: the government rescinded her Medal not too long after the end of the Civil War. However, she refused to return it and wore it until she died. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter reinstated her Medal of Honor. She remains the only woman to have ever been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Thank you I admire you and you are correct about Dr Walker. But it is Medal of Honor. Congressional is found nowhere in the title. Common misconception.
It's awarded by congress, therefore Congressional Medal of Honor is correct.
isoldam: No, it isn't. Look it up.
www.army.mil/medalofhonor/
"If you're a woman and you're wearing pants right now"
bold of you to assume I'm wearing anything
A person of culture who also sleeps naked
In today's society, true.
@@FernandoTorrera Digital High-Five ヽ(○｀･v･)人(･v･´●)ﾉ
I am wearing panties, a guy
I'm wearing a shirt and thats it
1970 the girls were finally allowed to wear pants to school.
WOAH omg women freedom!
About then in my school too, except we had to wait for the bus at -40 F!
birdsdaword I remember it was below zero outside and us girls were forced to go out and play during recess. One girl wore a pair of pants to school and was told to take them off or go home. She went home. She came to school the next day and said her mother told her to tell all the girls to come to school in pants. Most of us did, then all of us did. The following year none of us wore dresses. It was lovely.😁
birdsdaword most schools in my country require uniforms so it not having the greatest time
In the 60's too i guess, and mini skirts too. The 50's were still very conservative tho omg
The enthusiasm in your delivery is awesome to behold.
Ikr
I agree. You can hear the energy in her voice.
I like it
I want to know exactly how an article of clothing can be assigned gender. Almost any item you name had a different assignment in the past, and/or has a different assignment currently in some other culture. All my life I've run up against this idea that guys aren't allowed to be cute. My wardrobe would be vastly different of society wasn't dictating it to me.
Then change your wardrobe, and by doing so change your society. Inspire future generations by being something greater than what was expected of you. Be so cute it melts their hatred and dissolves their ignorance, and through your courage make others feel safer to be themselves as well.
Cultural norms, tradition, law.
Yes, almost every piece of clothing has at one time or another or in one place or another been used by male or female, but not in the same time, space, and people.
U.S. American men do not wear thawbs, in the past, and conceivably, not anytime soon in a general sense. Make it a bit "masculine" in an American male's eyes and I would argue you have a duster (coat) or possibly capes
You could almost say all clothing is variations on a lion cloth and/or a simply tunic and a girdle/belt
A language where everything has a gender is the only appropriate answer.
By practicality (it fits a body type), and by customs and traditions which evolved based on it.
dudes 100% use to wear tights with bows. Please just be cute.
I was forced to wear heels as a part of a uniform for years. I nearly lost toenails and it took many years later for me to even be able to touch my big toenails without pain. It was crazy!
I dream of a day when the light side can wield red sabers, and the dark can wield blue or green without prejudice.
Some day my friend, some day
It is possible.
@@fuzzytheduck where can we learn such secrets ? ( Not from a jedi ).
I hate to break your dreams, but, that would only be possible if one obtained another’s lightsaber. “Bleeding” a Crystal to make it red in Star Wars can only be done by focusing on pure hatred and other negative emotions. And “grey Jedi” (as far as I know) are mostly know to wield white/grey lightsabers. Though Darth Revan was know to wield a purple lightsaber and he was a “grey Jedi” at one point. Though your comment might have been a joke seeing as the rules are (mostly) well know.
@@Nicholas32906 Heyyy a lore-based response! I think the original comment was referring more to the idea that color does not necessarily denote intention, some good people like red and some “bad” people like blue/green.
But yes, according to the original cannon, that’s not really how lightsabers work,...
I once saw a kid’s show, and they had two princesses, one was good, and the other was an evil imposter, and in order to differentiate them visually to the viewers, the original one had brown eyes, and the evil one had green eyes.,,
I have green eyes,,.
I was so triggered... 😂
It seems like throughout history people wanted to be able to tell at once, by looking at someone what their "place" was in Society, so they would know at once how to treat them. To some degree, a loosening of the rules of dress seems to go along with the idea of treating people equally regardless of their "place".
This- also I really wish they'd brought up a bit more about how these laws specifically effected and continue to effect transgender people by grouping our existence in with sex crimes and "indecency" in law though that's probably a whole other video by itself
I just think there's a parallel to be drawn with how lot of anti-trans/ transphobic people want to be able to tell what genitals someone has by looking at them and see that as being their right in a similar way as the upper class saw it as their right to "be able to tell with one look who is below me" . Controlling what people wear has always been about oppressing marginalised groups- Terfs today will attack gay and gender non conforming cis women or women of colour who they deem as "not feminine enough" and claim that they are trans women using dehumanising and objectifying language.
I remember when I was working in retail when I woukd be constantly asked "what I was" because people couldn't tell what my ethnicity was just by looking at me. If I gave the "wrong" answer then they might have treated me like garbage.
I always answered a martian from Mars just to give them an idea of how stupid that question is. Though I was always treated like garbage if I said no to any of the demands.
so,,, kind of like middle and high school,, kids can be mean~
psychopaths could completely take advantage of this system...
Look into old Ireland. Everyone had to wear a different color based on their class/job.
Just a small semantical note: Dr James Barry lived his life as a man and requested his body to be buried, rolled up in his bedsheets without having the "proper" funeral preparations done. Against his wishes, they chose to prepare his body anyways and it was only after death that his sex was revealed. As such, I prefer to abide by his last wishes and still do see him as a man in death (regardless of if he identified as one or not).
The school dress code thing annoys me to the core.
When I was in middle and high school, I was always dress coded and I HATED IT. I'd be coded for showing too much shoulder, back, and/or leg. And the school made me put an ugly shirt or gym shirts over what I was wearing. I hated it.
If I have a daughter and they try to pull that mess on her, I'm cussing the school out.
Can you do an episode on matriarchal societies, how they come about and how they operate? (Since patriarchal ones seem to be the norm)
And a second and important question why are they the norm. And I once heart about a matrialchat society (in China) were in theory the female could steel with every man but they usualy stay whith one (But maybe i have the mandela effect or something and i am wrong about it).
@@alexandrub8786 Patriarchal societies are the norm because they're better
If a patriarchal nation goes to war with a matriarchal one,they all ways win
Hodensaunee & Tibetan for two.
@Constantine V Agreed, that's why the Amazons were so weak and helpless against male centered warfare that they achieved mythical status for being incapable of military combat.
Who will win as a commander? Which will get stuff done? Matriarchs never did control much except cultural honorary titles. Commanders and leaders in direct control of projects were always men
School uniforms don't bother me in the long run. Yes, dress codes can be a little unfair, but they at least have a clear purpose. It's the heels as part of a work uniform. That bothers me. Heels put the foot and ankle in a slightly unnatural position, so wearing them over-frequently or for long periods of time can damage the bones in your feet and ankles. Asking women wear them for work, nearly everyday for many hours at a time, could be hurting those women.
I'm against both. All school dress codes ever did, was make me feel punished for being born a girl. They need to be re-evaluated.
@@ayanna6327 The dress code for my work basically punishes mostly women and I work in a factory that can get over 100 degrees, but we're not aloud tank tops. Let's say I was sweating all day then my shirt sags funny then you see my bra strap just peeking out near my neck (I wear it cross back for better support). Doesn't matter if I'm dying from heat stroke, just as long as I'm covered up. It mostly effects the women who are very busty.
It makes no sense
Remember when men had to cross-dress for theater productions? Weird how things change, and then change again for different reasons.
because society.
Well things change 🤷 that's how time works
dr. james barry was a trans man... he lived his life as a man and didn’t want anyone inspecting his body even after his death. people need to stop claiming he was a woman who just wanted to practice medicine and be a soldier. otherwise very informative video though.
But it's not known for sure, it could be both
Humans: misunderstanding things they don’t personally like as ‘some weird sex thing’ for literally forever
You say this mostly affects women yet men wearing dresses or skirts is still completely out of the question basically everywhere whereas women wearing pants or suits are completely accepted in the developed world. It feels difficult to think of any masculine clothing item that would be unacceptable for a woman to wear nowadays or even one that you couldn’t get a variation of in the women’s section, whereas vice versa there are many that would get a man ridiculed if not worse (not just skirts but also blouses, crop tops, bralettes, bikinis, hotpants, tights, leggings, rompers, high heels, tube tops, etcetera, etcetera)
That is true men cant wear the opiset since clothing still holds a status and womens clothing is seen inferior in some way.
Ahh, the church of women worsting.
"Men are shamed if they wear women's clothing because men see women's clothing as inferior"
Aka, men hurt men because they hate women, and that hurts women most!
Such idiocy.
@@rainynight02 eh, I've actually heard someone use that argument. "do you really want to look like a weak little girl?" sooo... It's not always the case but it is used as reasoning. My church believes that both women wearing pants and men wearing dresses is equally as shameful though so I wasn't raised with that mindset. I really don't care what other people wear.
Yeah well, in society only girls and women can get gender equality, rights, liberation, individuality. And, the biggest obstacle to men's would be ironically other men.
Boys get raised to suppress their girly, and feminine, sides. For instance girls can usually have long or short hair, but boys only short.
Why does this channel not have more subscribers its really good
Y W The channel is relatively new… TH-cam's algorithm is stupid and slow so one has to give it time. 😀 I might not have known about it if it weren't for some recommendation on a sister channel or some other sort of organic process. 🤔
Yeah...I think I only heard about it the same way pixelized did--from a reccommendation off to the side of a sister-channel's video. In my case I think it was It's Okay To Be Smart? or possibly Eons. One of those.(Of course, I'd also say that people should be watching ALL of those three! :))
Robin Chesterfield In my case it might have been through a recommendation from The Art Assignment.🤔 Until TH-cam gets with the program so to say, I guess it's up to us "squishy things" to promote good content…
Y W It's growing quite fast. I think it will continue to grow. we just have to continue to support!
Eric Barnes It sure deserves that growth and, yeah, we can keep sharing, liking and interacting… the kind of stuff TH-cam's algorithm likes. 😉
It's important to remember that some of these people afab (assigned female at birth) may not have identified as women. At the same time we also can't really apply modern terms like "transgender" to them with any certainty or authority because we just don't know how they would feel about these terms.
I bring this up because in some of these cases- like Dr. James Barry- their gender presentation could've been about their personal identity just as much as (if not more than) it was about social status. Like I said, we can't say for certain that Dr. Barry would've identified as trans. But there is a strong case for it as Dr. Barry's final wishes were to not be undressed before burial, however these wishes were not honored and thus they were outed.
It seems contradictory to say that we probably shouldn't refer to them as women but also shouldn't label them as trans either. But there are ways around it. Sometimes gender neutral pronouns like "they" and other terms like "afab"/"amab" come in handy in these situations. But an even simpler way to handle these things is to just put a disclaimer or footnote out there that says "We're going to refer to them in this way but we don't really know how they would have identified".
Great video, btw! I was always curious as to how these laws came about.
Excelent point, agree with each word. Hope Danielle would add this point in the end of her next video.
I think the thing with Dr. Barry was it was a woman who wanted to be a doctor, but had to pretend to be a man in order to practice.
Or... we can just call them women or men until we know for sure that they identified as something else. I am a butch lesbian. I dress in mostly men's clothes. I am a woman for all intents and purposes, address me as such because I have not made it clear that I am trans. Stop trying to force society to change the way it views sex and gender. If it changes, it will only do so naturally and over time with wide spread consensus.
@T Mystery
Do you also want other people to assume you're straight? Clothing is definitively no proof for your sexuality either.
I mean, as a butch lesbian you don't experience the same invisibility as a femme lesbian or a bisexual person... but maybe you remember being invisible from the time before you came out. Asking can get annoying but it is always better than putting all the burden of coming out again and again on the person themself. No offense (I love butches) but I don't want to turn into a walking stereotype to show people how gay I am. I love skirts, makeup and girly things - and I should not be required to wear rainbow wristbands or gay-themed t-shirts to remind people that not everyone's cishet.
I love that the viewers of this channel help by commenting to make this videos more accurate together and not in a shameful or rude way. :D
When I was 2-4 my babysitter was a drag queen but because we lived in the middle of Idaho we got the cops called on us every time we went to the park even though it was a small town and everyone knew everyone so we eventually had to restrict our tutu parades to home but that gos to show that even if there aren't still technically laws in the US people sometimes act like it :(
I'm happy I was born in a time period where I can actually dress however I want, I do not look good in dresses and high heels hurt my feet badly and I fall on my ass a lot when wearing them. I wear mens clothing because I love them, it's better than woman's clothes and they look nice and they are comfortable in my opinion. XD
Totally agree. I love dressing in more masculine sporty baggy clothes. I hate wearing dresses and high heels.
Men's clothing also has bigger pockets!
@@ChrisDragon531 Agreed! I was poking around a thrift store last month and tried on women’s pants for the first time in years. While I found several pairs that fit, they ALL flunked the “pocket test” when the pockets wouldn’t even hold my wallet! I don’t carry a purse (it’s just one more thing I need to worry about getting lost, stolen, forgotten, or robbed), so having pockets that actually hold things is Of Vital Importance. And WTF is up with that stupid denim/spandex fabric mix? One PMS “fat day,” and you’re popping seams!
I’ve been wearing men’s jeans in winter and military summer pants in summer for precisely those reasons. First off, it’s easier to find pants that fit when you only need the waist and inseam to go by. Women’s pants designers keep changing the sizes so that what’s a size 8 one year is a size 12 the next, and for some idiot reason they’re under the delusion that if you’re a double-digit size then you must also have legs up to your ears. I’m a woman with a “mom body” combined with a height on the shirt side of average-you just TRY finding women’s pants (or even formal dresses, for that matter!) that fit that combo without shelling out more money on major alterations!
Second, the aforementioned denim/spandex combination fabric in women’s jeans. You’re lucky if that stuff lasts six months! Don’t these idiots realize that the second part of the compound word “housework” is WORK? Sheesh, we work harder than men because we do paid work for a living, then we have a crap ton of work to do once we get home too! Men’s pants last me for YEARS because they’re 100% denim! That fabric was built to take abuse!
Third, the cost. I can find men’s jeans and slacks in my size, and I’m only out $11 a pair. Women’s pants prices? Try $20 a pair at the MINIMUM. Okay, maybe closer to $15 at Walmart, but that’s still $4 more bucks that I shouldn’t have to shell out for pants that don’t have decent pockets, last a fraction of the time that men’s pants do, and they keep changing the sizes on. Screw that!
And for the record, the last time I wore a dress was on my wedding day over 22 years ago. I hate dresses. They’re way more confining than pants because you have to watch how you walk, stand, or even sit in one, you gotta worry about up skirting a$$holes getting all pervy around you, it’s easier to be raped in a dress or a skirt, and nine times out of ten they don’t have pockets! The fact that I’m shaped like a feed sack doesn’t help either. You can put whatever decorations on it you want and make it whatever color you want-a feed sack is still a feed sack. In other words, it makes me look like Mama Duggar. YUCK!
I love how casual that reference to Sister Act was. Well-played.
The Tignon Laws deserve a mention here. As far as I know, the laws didn't claim to be anything other than discrimination against black women.
Only way to count number of "female (or male) clothing items": is a female wearing? Yes? Then it's a female clothing article! 😆
I was a cross dresser in secret much of my life, even in the Army. I could pass Rona degree. I am a former combat soldier, father, husband and teacher. There was nothing immoral about what I did. I love the feel of petticoats and full skirts. High heels felt right, but hurt. It all came to an end in my 60's. Passing became more difficult. I did give it up freely. Now and then I might dream about wearing a full swirly skirt. Occasionally when I am alone at night and home I will slip on a cute pleated skirt and sit out on the patio by firelight. I'm happy being a man, but just love the feeling of some femme attire. I'm glad I did it. I was know as Erin of Donegal. In all my 50 years I was never putted or harmed. Loved singing at Karaoke, but not in a female voice. I sang as Elvis, blew the crowds minds. It was a crazy ride, I would never have missed for the world.
I feel like nowadays (in the west) women have more freedom in what they wear than men do. Not only is female-coded fashion more diverse, it is also more accepted for women to wear male-coded fashion and there are more variants of male fashion cut to the female body available as well. For men even to wear bright colors (especcially pink) is frowned upon while it is completely acceptable for women to wear dark colors or blue.
Me being a tomboy, they would've killed or jail me! 😩
Same but in femboy
Same😔
Same here!
Nah you wouldn’t have broken the rules during that time
I love the structure of these videos!!! PBS is winning with these TH-cam channels.
when these laws still exist in kuwait but they arent a remnant of old ass laws but were implemented a lil more than a decade ago...
More like Re-implemented?
At 1:49 you talk about Athens and Sparta while showing a painting of the Roman Senate.(Cicero Denounces Catiline)
Thank you for bringing this up.
that confused me as well, because my brain skipped to the roman senate. then when she said it roughly translates to "controlling women" i was like... no. it roughly translates to council of old men.
Can you do an episode on the radium girls?
This topic is so intresting there is a book by Kate Moor I suggest you read
theres a show on them now! its really good.
You can still see rules regarding clothing and class in the workplace. One of the small things that pushed me to finish school was not having to wear khaki pants and uniform shirts in whatever work I wound up in.
One of the dumber footnotes to this prohibition.. the abrahamic religions (so christianity, judaism, islam), all go back to the same early 'this is evil' references, which unfortunately were actually a swipe at a nearby tribe where crossdressing was part of a particular religious ceremony and THAT was the target of the ban... 'don't partake in this type of outsider magic', but over the centuries only the aesthetic element remained and made it into general culture.
Last time I checked the Romans didn't take much influence from the Hebrews.
What tribe was that, Neen?
Yes, God told the Israelites not to partake of the practices of the nations He would drive out before His people, but He also made it clear that certain practices IN THEMSELVES were abominations to Him. That other tribes did it is irrelevant. God gave His people the Mosaic Law for them to follow. He did not give it to the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Babylonians, Persians, Arabs, Chinese, Indians, et al.
Go back & read Exodus through Deuteronomy. And think: What difference would it make that other tribes were committing evil acts? To God, they were evil acts & worthy of destruction, period. God is not influenced by man. Other way around, Neen.
There's more than just an aesthetic to it though: when we compare the Command for a man to not wear a woman's garment (and vice versa: a woman not to wear a man's garment), and we see it's being called abomination in the same way a lying mouth is considered an abomination, one realizes it's a deeply moral issue: to not deceive (lie) about what He, as our Creator, made us to be and function as, as His human creation, and to not lie about it by the way we dress (express and identify ourselves to others), lying about what He created us to be.
The verses to compare:
• _Deuteronomy 22:5 (KJV)_
5 _The_ *woman* _shall not_ *wear that which pertaineth unto a man,* _neither shall_ *a man put on a woman's garment:* _for all that do so are_ *abomination* _unto the Lord thy God._
• _Proverbs __6:16__-17 (KJV)_
16 _These six things doth the Lord hate:_ _yea,_ _seven are_ *an abomination* _unto him:_ 17 _A proud look,_ *a lying tongue,* _and hands that shed innocent blood,_
In Jesus' day, both men and women wore robes, but there was still a difference in the way they wore it; so, it's up to the society to decide how they preserve this biological difference by their style of dress (whether everyone wears robes or everyone wears pants). Interesting tid bit: clothing wasn't mere fashion: it would tell a lot about a person (e.g. are they widowed? are they single? are they married? and yes including, are they a man or a woman?) and helped prevent inappropriate sexual advances to other people. And knowing He is a God of order, this does help facilitate smooth, orderly interaction in society (as opposed to chaos/confusion).
• _1 Corinthians __14:33__ (NIV)_
33 _For God is not a God of disorder but of peace-as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people._
Peace be with you. ♡
This video needs to be updated given recent legislation. There's a lot of conservatives trying to bring these kinds of laws back on the books at the moment.
As they should
When I came out in San Francisco in the late 60s, some (working) drags wore (1) a man's shorts and (2 & 3) a sock in each bra half to qualify as the required three items of men's clothing. I expect this was more pro forma, though, as the law may still have been on the books.
I feel the need to say that when I was only allowed to wear pants to school for the first time in 2002.
Crossdressing laws would be stopped if pants were declared a women's privilege granting almost total economic and political power. Conservatives would be stopping such a law fast just to hold power hopefully they would stop scap goating cross dressers. As for me I'm a self taught crossdresser I'd jump at the chance to live in a community were men wore dresses and skirts. Or being employed by a women who had a dress code were men wore dresses while women wore the pants.
some women like to wear pants and some like dresses and skirts just stop annoying people about it. its bad because some people say that it is bad to wear pants because its "men's clothes" or telling women that they cant wear a dresses because they are "conforming to society" stop just stop let people wear what they want
As long as it proper. You just can't let people roaming around in their underwear.
I enjoy crossdressing and can’t imagine being arrested for it!
I love to crossdressing n can't imagine being arrested for ti to.
I look forward to the day when violence & war are declared illegal. Ya think? Nawwww........too much money to be made.
When I started school in the 1990s my mum got called in to see the teacher because I had worn (the school uniform) trousers to school instead of the skirt. She was warned to never do it again or I would be punished! So even in the UK this went on for far too long!
Great and informative video! I want to acknowledge that the host is a female POC, and how great it is to find channels on TH-cam (especially educational channels) hosted by a woman and a POC. We need more of these (in the US, at least).
Question - why is prostitution illegal in the U S yet it is still legal , in many states, to have sex with an animal?
It is a piece of fabric should not be fucking regulated.
Oh I know an interesting thing about this! There was this really popular serial novel in the 19th century called The Hidden Hand. It was about this poor city girl who winds up with a fortune with some mysteries and hijinks in the middle, think kind of an American version of Dickens. But at the beginning of the book the girl, Cap, is in New York disguised as a boy and working odd jobs on the street. Her real gender is revealed and she gets arrested for cross-dressing. Her defense is basically 1. She was literally dying of starvation and no one would hire her because she's a girl 2. She didn't know any better because she's a 13 year old orphan 3. Bad things can happen to a girl on the street- they obviously didn't say rape explicitly cause its an old family novel but, of course. Its really interesting to see laws like this argued against in a really popular piece of media at the time, there are a lot of gems like that in the novel about the shit women went through back in the day, all without losing its light tone overall. and its worth noting that on top of the reasons you mentioned that women and girls often had to crossdress for their own safety (12th night, anyone?).
Boy girl, you belong where you are - no doubt ! Your
energy and delivery are tot-
ally infectous.
In my school, guys aren't allowed to wear earrings, skirts, and a few different types of shoes. It's pretty much the same dress code as they had when the school was founded (in the 1950s), except for long hair on guys, which they started to allow.
Ms. Bainbridge is a terrific host for PBS. Her energy is infectious and her narrative packed with facts and a sprinkling of sardonic wit.
Cross dressing was associated with homosexuality for thousands of years. However the sumpturay laws in Europe was enforced make sure women were not feminists and to make sure they are not impersonating a man or are transgender. Alot of transgenders cross dress which can lead to them getting sexually harrased.
Great commentary. I remember watching a program on TV about this, many years ago. One of the things that was pointed out was that during the raids, police would actually strip search people to see if they were wearing the proper underwear and would charge them with crossdressing under their anti decency laws if they didn't.
It is interesting to note that even though we're in the first fifth of the 21st century, there is still a lot of violence directed towards gay men than women. Why is it still more acceptable for women to wear pants or wear their hair short than it is for men to wear anything that is remotely feminine or grow their hair out? I used to get harassed a lot at my job, from my store manager to my co workers, because of my long hair and my androgynous appearance. I was treated like a leper. I even had one male co worker say to me, "why don't you get a haircut and look like a real fucking guy?" However, I stayed true to myself and always have. Many years have passed since those times and I still have long hair, although it has gotten a lot thinner and is starting to show more grey than I like.
About a year ago, I had this very large umbrella that was purple, I was teased about that too. Seriously, don't people have more important things to worry about than the choices I make to keep me dry when it rains? How do people associate the colour purple with sexual orientation?
We still have a very long way to go when it comes to tolerance and acceptance of anyone who does not follow "societal norms" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
I really love the editing and the added visual representation of the topics! Amazing work.
She mentions restrictive dressing laws seem to mostly fall on women. Well, in western society men's clothing is dull, uniformed compared to women's clothing. And, can include men's. So, there's actually no such thing as men's clothing, only unisex and women's.
It should be as acceptable in society for men to wear skirts, as it is for women to wear pants. And, that part of the man's anatomy needs to be kept cool.
At many office workplaces the men must always wear suits, or at least long pants, shoes and socks. Whereas, the women can e.g. in summer wear a tank top, shorts and open toed shoes. Gee, if a man wore that there, he more than likely wouldn't still be there. One can say that the suit is the western equivalent of the burkha.
Yeah well, in society only girls and women can get gender equality, rights, liberation, individuality. And, the biggest obstacle to men's being ironically other men.
Invariably if a woman brings up women's issues, she'll be praised and liked. Invariably if a man brings up men's issues, he'll get contempt. Double standards.
You can thank Beau Brummell for the state of men's fashion over the last two centuries.
I just want to point out that crossdressing was a major problem for Joan of Arc too and a large part of the excuse the English used to put her to death.
I love to watch your show. Youre an excellent communicator. Hint: no need to rush. If your info is excellent people will enjoy taking it in at a more user-friendly place.
User friendly pace, not place
Yes! I like sound! :D
I looove how every single photographic example of cross dressing you show from the past is f***ing gorgeous 🌟
Get better tastw, lawmakers 😉
All hail the majestic Flying Spaghetti Monster !
Ramen!
Another super-being to be consumed by the IPU, yum!
Heresy. "There is only the Emperor, and he is you Shield and Protectot." Book of the Astronomicon page 67
You had to mention spaghetti! Now I'm hungry. Where's my pasta? Thanks a lot e4!!
"It should be what's inside that count, but people seem to have a lot of ideas about what's outside" : indeed, people are so keen at pointing out superficial details and not even try to understand what's inside 🙄
Can we start normalizing masc presenting people wearing femme clothing please I'm getting tired of the discrimination held against them for no good or rational reason.
Danielle, you are a fantastic writer and host! I love the content from this channel!!
It might be interesting to do a show about the evolution of women's hemlines.
Or men's
During the past 100 years skirt length changed with the economy: strong economy - short skirts, weak economy - long(er) skirts. Unless it’s in a religious extremist environment where women are always blamed for men who can’t control their sexual urges.
The evidence suggests that James Barry was probably what we would now consider a trans man-after he had completed his training, his friends offered to arrange for him to travel to South America, where he could have practised medicine openly as a woman, but he declined. He also took very great pains to make sure his anatomical sex wouldn’t be discovered after his death, requesting that his body be buried in his bedsheets “without further inspection”.
I don't really know how I feel about the school uniform thing. It was always annoying for me, personally, but I also know wrangling kids on a tight budget and trying to teach them isn't easy either. I feel like a child psychologist would be the best person to ask these questions. But if we asked a psychologist for anything in America... well...
I like the idea of uniforms bc it's allot cheaper to dress a kid in a uniform. You don't have to worry about what the other kids are wearing and if your clothing will help you fit in. When I was in school, my father bought our school clothes from the dollar stores. I was embarrassed that I didn't have fashionable clothing so I got a job and got my clothing from thrift stores. I did not and do not appreciate that lesson. BTW he had the money, he just did not want to spend it on my mothers' children she had with him.
I don't mind uniforms in general, I do mind that dress codes are used to punish girls for having shoulders (yes, really, google it) and wearing shorts. Because those sexy, sexy shoulders on the 13 year old girl are soooo sexy that they will distract the boys from learning. So girls get pulled out of classrooms, which does not distract the girls from learning of course, to check their clothing and make them wear something else. Boys meanwhile have like one rule to follow. Make uniforms simpler and unisex, problem solved. Workplace dress codes sometimes require women to wear heels, which are cause long term and sometimes permanent damage to the feet, legs and back. I don't think many workplaces would require men to wear an item of clothing that would cause damage just by wearing it.
ties
this was just as good as i was hoping! thank you for fixing the lack of audio!
James lived his life as a man. He was perceived as a man, he wanted to be perceived as a man, so I suspect he identified as one. He could have been a trans man, because trust me, living your life as a gender you don't identify with is hell. A cis woman would eventually crack, haha.
These kinds of laws actually created huge problems for girls in Norway back in the day... From stories I've heard from my grandparents and other adults girls often couldn't go to school during winter, because have you tried walking around with no pants on during a Nordic winter? It can get dangerously cold... So many girls stayed home, or secretly wore pants just to get to school even though they weren't allowed to.
Now with more sound! :-D
I LOVE the urgency of your delivery. It completely fits the subject matter
Thank you so much for this video
❤❤❤
It helps me feel empowered to rock both, dress and suits as a trans man and not to care about what anybody says!!!
So much love to you and your channel
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Sunday
Yes! Danielle! Out of studio episodes, yas!! You need that!! WE need that!!
Frankly, if someone who is female is wearing it, I think it counts as female clothing.
Cross dressing in the theatre has actually been normal for centuries. In Shakespeare's day women weren't allowed on stage so all female characters were played by men and boys. In the 19th century music halls of England, cross dressing acts were common with both male and female performers. And even today, the pantomime still makes use of cross-dressing.
Really enjoyed your video and the cute overalls!! question ...does a bra count as 2 clothing items? It covers 2 body parts! Lol
It is considered one piece. I am thinking the reason the came to three pieces of clothing is that the people of Buffalo that came up with that rule were too prudish to name the three pieces of clothing.
Looking it up just now, it seems the general idea was that butch women typically wore a T-shirt, no bra, jeans, and tennis shoes - three pieces of clothing considered masculine. It would then depend on how picky a police person (man) was on whether to harass such a woman or not. I note that the typical female teenager of this time (50s) stereotypically wore a sweater, bra, skirt, sneakers, and bobby socks - not so unlike, but note the bra, the thing females would later remove in the 60s to represent women's liberation
That's not how we use "wicked" out here. It's close though. Lol! Thanks for the shout out none the less!
That was wicked awesome!
At 5:01 you mention that Doctor James Barry ""pretended"" to be a man, when he was actually transgender...
“If you’re a woman and wearing pants you can go to jail”
Me:EHEHE I’m wearing my pj
Dr James Barry was a trans man, not a cross dressing woman
Lesbian Amazon Sister found the terf. Anyway please stop ciswashing history. He lived as a man in both his public and private life and requested to be buried as one after he died.
Misha Toor
Most historians don't like attributing modern terminology onto historical figures. Sometimes they will say things like, same sex attraction or gender nonconforming, because we often can't know for sure how these people felt.
While I agree that there is a significant chance Dr Barry was trans, there is also a big chance they weren't. We simply don't know for sure, and I would agree that just pretending trans people didn't exist before 1960 is nonsense and exclusionary and assuming everyone was cis unless proven otherwise is BS.
However, we do not know Dr Barry's stance on the matter. I can understand why most historians would be careful with placing a label on someone that they might or might not have chosen for themselves.
The solution would be to word very carefully what the actions of a certain person were, to try to not interpret their identity for them and emphasise that while they did not call themselves trans (afaik) they well could have been.
They? Is there more than one of him?
they
1.
used to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.
2.
used to refer to a person of unspecified gender.
Oddly, I first began to notice this sort of thing when I realized my workplace dress code was more permissive for women than men. They allowed women to wear sleeveless shirts and head scarves, whereas men weren't allowed to wear anything on their heads, and a similar exception was made for dresses. They didn't so much say that been couldn't wear dresses as they defined the acceptable criteria for dresses in terms of how women could choose to dress.
Season 2 confirmed.
Those "laws" never made any sense and never belonged in society at all.
I love this host
What a neat channel. And to think, if it hadn't been for that PBS survey I might never have heard of it 😅
Why did you jump from the historical laws across the world restricting dress due to status, to the earliest gendered crossdressing laws specifically in the USA?
If your tracking the history of the subect in general then shouldn't you mention where and when the first law came about and how it spread, rather than just when it happened in USA?
I notice it a lot with USA based videos, often when talking about the first time an ideolagy, trend or law becomes popular they only talk about the USA's history with it not the wider world. It's fine to present a show following the USA's history with things like this but can't really call it the origin of everything if you're only concerned with when and where the subject matter started in the USA.
To be fair, it is a US channel and aimed at the US population so it would naturally zero in on US based issues. Otherwise, where would you draw the line? At strictly Western History? That would also make it less than global. In the interest of time, you have to make choices about what you do and don't cover.
By the title of the channel, the video intro and the paragraph below the video it advertises its self as a general fact/history channel, not a USA one.
Why draw a line, it's supposed to be the history of laws against cross-dressing so mention the pertinent facts relating to that subject. They should have at least linked the ancient history to the modern day by mentioning which country first made it a law, which had the most laws or which punished those prosecuted hardest before focusing on America. They cut out a large part of "the origin" of the history of the laws to jump to the USA,
I find its something unique to American documentaries, often they only mention what year something was invented but often not who, where, why or how something was invented if it wasn't in the USA. For example, I was watching a US program supposedly on how the steam train changed "the world", they only stated that the steam train was invented in 1804 then with no other information offered they jumped to an in-depth look at when the railways arrived in American and how they grew and changed the landscape of the USA. This would have been a good documentary if it was the history of the American railway but it was supposed to be about the effect of the steam train on the world.
Lady Lockett, I hear you. But the honest answer is that most Americans don't care about the rest of the world in any detail. Not me, of course. I am a geographer so it matters greatly to me and I try every day to remedy that situation. There is a great quote I like to give my fellow countrymen "War is the gods way of teaching Americans geography." That being said, NPR is an American channel. It is basically the American version of the BBC. And as the largest English speaking economy in the world, you might be able to forgive the average American their myopic view of the world, as well as the products made to cater to them. The short answer is that if the channel went into greater detail and covered the entire global history of any one of the subjects they cover, the average consumer would tune out. It would simply be too long. I guess you could say tha the title should be "How the Steam Train Changed OUR world." Unfortunate, but it is a reality. Peace.
Lady Lockett
The problem with doing a global perspective is that history tends to be written in the language of the people who care about it... and that's usually the people that live in region where the history happened. So, Spanish people care about Spanish history, Canadians about Canadian history, and so on and so forth. So, these videos would end up still being English centric, because they probably wouldn't have the budget to scour through non-English speaking histories.
I don't agree, I watch a lot of documentories and more often than not those made outside of the US will always mention the general origin, history and facts of the subject in question and will only focus on one countries history with it only if it's of perticular note. Whereas i've noticed a trend in US based ones to only mention when or how whatever the subject is, arrived or affected America (unless of course it was invented there, then they are quite detailed on it's history).
The video focuses on one small subject not a whole country's history they could have easily mentioned the examples linking ancient and modern day I gave earlier with out it being a long video. They simply didnt want to and presented only information in regards to the USA while advertising the fact it was the general origin of the subject.
It just seems to be a trend or habit i've noticed when watching US made documentories.
Great video...very educational. On a personal note, I hate wearing clothes and only use them for skin protection and temperature regulations . Non- binary folks, like myself have always had trouble witk gender- based laws.
No you haven't
Kjell C How is it possible that they haven’t if historically non binary identities weren’t accepted or even acknowledged in western cultures
DELIGHTFUL
New subscriber here. Your enthusiasm for the subjects is captivating. I am now hooked.
Damn! How much coffee do you drink? You talk really fast. You have such interesting information but I always feel like I miss too much. I'm also a little worried about you not getting sufficient oxygen. Maybe record these before that 3rd cup or after lunch when your more relaxed. . . Unless. . . . . . . . Holy crap!. . . . . . . Your not that energetic all the time are you?! If so, I want your secret! Please!
And I thinked i put at x1.5 speed.
From 2008 to 2014 there have been a series of laws against saggy pants in Michigan, Tennesee, Georgia, Louisiana, and Florida. So such clothing related laws are still getting published in the US.
“Should women be forced to wear high heels as part of a uniform”? I wouldn’t even have thought to word it that way. And I’m a guy! Instead, I would’ve said “Should men be allowed to wear high heels as part of their uniform if their female colleagues get to do it?” Lots of men would love to, I’m sure. Short men, for example, may wish to get taller especially if in the service sector helping customers over the counter and whatnot. What about transgender women and men? Surely they deserve a chance to put their best foot forward just like everyone else. Gender equality (or lack thereof) affects everyone. 🧐🤔🤨
@Lesbian Amazon Sister it wasn't high heels made originali for man but after the woman tried to copy them (men),the mens stop wearing them?
P.S.: happy to see you again.
High heels have been worn for centuries by both men and women. I don't know why men stopped, but it couldn't have been because women started.
I think it had to do with the fall of French monarchy. Suddenly, everyone did the impossible to avoid dressing as before, as they could be signaled as royalist. So a new fashion prevailed (the empire fashion) which was considered more "sensible" and "natural" than the previous one, and was completelly different: lack of heels for men, lack of huge skirts for women, lack of make up for both, etc... (fun note, once Napoleon lost his favour, fashion changed again, to a completelly different style)
In the 70s men wore platforms lol
I am in favour of everyone wearing whatever the hell they want, however, enforcing only women to wear footwear that is painful and causes longterm and sometimes permanent damage to the feet, legs and back is bullshit. Go wear high heels then and change the culture in your office or workplace. Women have been trying to get rid of nonsense rules in the workplace about heels for a while. Having options is the point.
According to one of the first fashion magazines, fig leaves were the ultimate style choice, and they were unisex to boot.
So you’re not gonna mention the couple of bible verses that prohibit cross dressing. I’m sure this was the basis on most of those laws.
Do you know how far I had to scroll down to find your comment? My thoughts exactly
I've read every book of the bible. There are no verses which specifically prohibit cross-dressing. I would not expect there to be because women and men wore basically the same clothing in ancient Israel. The basis for the laws was the connection, however tenuous, between cross-dressing and homosexuality: and/or witchcraft as in the case of Joan of Arc. The video maker kept mentioning Joan, but actually she was burnt at the stake for dressing as a man which was considered evidence of her being a witch. Although granted her real offense was serving the French King. Additionally, at least in the English-speaking world, cross-dressing was associated with the decadent Tudor establishment in the 16th century. Thus the Puritans railed against it, because they were seeking to destroy the Tudor establishment. Undoubtably they tortured some poor Bible verse to that end, but you are living in the 21st century and perfectly capable of interpreting Bible verses for yourself.
Angels are usually depicted as being both male and female, i.e. as perfected humans. God is also deemed to be both male and female. St. Paul said: "in Christ there is neither male nor female". The Bible's stance on the issue of gender-bending and cross-dressing is fairly clear: it's perfectly fine. After all, an obsession with physicality and the flesh is evil and the work of the devil. A true Christian concerns themselves only with the person beneath the flesh.
Deuteronomy 22:5 “A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God."
@@rperlberg Technically that verse could be referring to clothes for religious services or telling women not to steal men's clothes. Remember everyone wore robes back then, and robes are basically dresses for men.
+rperlberg, alright I stand corrected. There's one, in the book of rules that hardly anyone follows. The reasons why rules against things are made is never really to do with religion unless the state in question is a theocracy. It's to do with politics. The rules against cross-dressing in America were made because the people who founded the original colonies were all rebelling against the Tudor establishment, which tolerated cross-dressing.
"High heels" were originally designed for royal men and soldiers. For the former, it was to boost height (since men were much shorter from 1400-1800), for the latter it was to keep your footing in deep mud and for easy mounting of horses (a heel, small or large, allows your foot to stay in a stirrup without much difficulty). Also, pink was originally developed as a color for young boys or for women in England. It was supposed to represent a lighter version to bright/deep reds, crimsons--which were for men. Its possible that the pink's "fleshy" tone (depending on race/skin color) seemed to bring out a softer, thus diminutive aesthetic in women ?? I think its hilarious that some suggest that pink is only for women because a vagina is that color...aha... and aren't there multiple skin colors (for vaginas as well)?? and don't some men also have pink penises?? Just because a sex may have that color somewhere on their body doesn't mean that they alone are assigned to wear that color... what a weird world.
thumbs up for compelling delivery! could listen to her all day
I always thought it was strange my mom "had to" wear dresses when she was growing up....didn't realize it was a case of "it's against the law" and not a case of "strict parents and teachers"!
Hello. I have a suggestion. I'm curious to know about time. Who invented the 24 hour cycle? Why 24 hours? Why didn't we divide the day in 20 hours, for example? Or 50? And why 60 minutes per hour? Why not divide an hour in 100 parts and call each one a minute? Wouldn't that fit our decimal math model better? I mean, we divide each second in 1000 milliseconds. And what came first? The second, the minute or the hour?
Thank you so much for considering my suggestion.
Love your show. I think it is very original and I learn a lot from it. Thank you (and your team) for all your hard work.
You can find a lot of other videos on youtube about this. I'd rather see them make a video on a topic that hasn't been talked about much.
@DanielleBainbridge You are a really excellent presenter. I look forward to watching more content presented by you.