dat aesthetic tho...

In the 'world' of the office, fashion is an important part of presentation. However for women, should we consider it to be a prison?

This mentality begins in elementary school through until high school, at the very least. A DRESS CODE. Varying widely from showing a plentiful amount of shoulder and leg [how scandalous ;) ] to some dress codes that have you show no skin except for your hands, face, and maybe a little bit of arm. This excludes those schools that use uniforms (which is a another debate - not necessary for this example).

The mentality instills that just because we are women, we have to dress a certain way to be respected amongst our peers, specifically the opposite sex. As well as the discourse around clothing depicting whether you are a 'prude' or a 'slut.' In my experience, women have many more rules in regards to what they can and cannot wear to be able to be respected equally to that of men. Take cat-calling for one thing, but also take teachers calling you out for wearing shorts that cover everything they need to be covering - in the hot summer - inside - with no air conditioning. ARMS LENGTH rule (do these people not understand people are proportioned differently!!!)

This is strongly involved with female upbringing, but also as you become a professional.

My friend the other week [you know who you are :) ] brought up the discussion on why we as women feel the need to dress a certain way, when we are going out, working, staying in etc... Going out (more skin the better - also the colder), working (professional - blazer, blouse, skirt/pants, high heels, or more expensive looking shoes). It is very common to see women wear less clothing when going out - and then end up being cold. Why do we do that to ourselves, was it ingrained into us by the society we live in? Do we just think we look better with less clothes? Is that what we are comfortable with? Are we 'feeling' ourselves? the questions go on and on, and to be perfectly frank I didn't know the answer, I still don't fully know the answer. It could be a combination of all these things and more. As well - she (the friend) - also posed the discussion that men can wear layer upon layer and still 'look good' but when women do it they are not considered as 'attractive,' which is a very valid point and true - but why should it be?

This goes into female work attire as well, why should women feel the need to wear high heels and skirts all the time if they are uncomfortable? Also take the food serving industry, they make their waitresses (in many cases), wear black mini skirts and heels to do their jobs.

Added in with a pop culture reference, every 'high' business based (law in particular) show (How To Get Away With Murder, Suits, The Good Wife, etc...) all of these high power women, the majority of the time are wearing skirts and high heels. I'm not saying that this isn't because they might like them, or even because the costume department chose them... I am questioning why do women feel the need to possibly torture themselves with standing and walking in high heels all day long?

In my opinion, I always have this pressure to look a certain way, to be able to be taken seriously at either an interview or a job. Moreover this pressure is obviously very different than my opposite gendered counterparts. I can not even imagine how difficult it would be for other genders within the spectrum as well (I cannot speak to it, since I am cis-gendered). I think women, men, gender non-binary, trans etc... should not have this added pressure to fit into a certain mould to be able to get a job, that in every other aspect they are qualified. (I would not suggest nudity but that's just my opinion - just don't feel constrained by clothing boundaries - not clothes themselves).

Other than professional clothing 'aesthetic', is the gendered 'aesthetic' of exhibition and museum spaces. I would like to point out one example in particular that another friend of mine (different this time - but you still know who you are) suggested. The Imperial War Museum (I know I reference this museum a lot, I just have a lot to say about it...) was too 'masculine' in its display and aesthetic. I questioned, "how so?" and she replied that everything is very dark (grey tonal colours) and everything has very sharp and angular edges, which is what she associated with masculinity in art and design. I wouldn't argue on that front, I do agree that this museum definitely has a strong masculine sense.

This comes out even more so when you reference the material/subject matter/objects highlighted in the museum. In this sense, military (Imperial military) history has been portrayed as a highly masculine HIStory. Since the subject matter of the IWM is well... in its name - it would make sense the aesthetic follows the subject matter. However what about all the women in the war? There were a lot, there is historical fact to back this up. Women not only stayed 'at home' and actually continued the battle on the home front (keeping the country afloat), they were nurses, factory workers, and even disguised themselves as soldiers on occasion.

Why is it that a very minimal amount of this 'female' history is showcased in the IWM? This photo on the left shows: Denis Smith (Born Dorothy Lawrence) who was an English reporter who disguised herself as a man to go undercover during World War I.***

The 'highlight' of a more female focused military history consisted of an alcove on the second floor looking out, with no ledge to stand on to see the front, and a stand-to wall blocking the back of the 'display' of objects. As well there was no obvious labelling, however it was all things 'women' during the war (uniforms mostly). This is just disappointing to me - especially that this national museum does not equalize the military history of this country, when women were a huge part in both world wars [at least not obviously].

* Side-note, women in the war dress-code: skirts, dresses and heels

What I would suggest to the IWM is to put some life and colour back into their design, as well as combining hard and soft edges for architectural intrigue within their galleries, combine the stereotypes of aesthetics for all genders, why not? it does work. [Example: Canadian War Museum - I am a bit biased since I am Canadian - but damn that museum does a good job in their main galleries].

*Edit - I am also all for embracing your feminine side, in wearing a dress and a skirt, however when it comes with a price of female stereotyping and "proper work wear" as well as comfort - is it really worth it to continuously wear them every single day? I don't think so, I think it would be better to mix it up a little, change the flow of things (a little more unpredictable) which then bridges the gendered aesthetics still present in our society (especially when men wear skirts - breaking gender norms - it's great)*

Thats all I have to say on the matter for now, I hopefully can further my own knowledge in this particular topic, as I hope that you all get something out of this post.

As always... see ya later gals!