nerad@closus.DEC (03/28/84)
!libation >Subject: Women's clothing? WHY??? > >If it is true that women's clothes are more expensive than men's, and not >made as well, the paradox is even stranger -- don't forget that many women >MAKE clothes, saving a great deal of money. I'm under the impression >(please correct me if I'm wrong), that it is primarily women's clothes >(well, and children's clothes) that get MADE. I rarely hear of a man, or >woman making dress shirts, suits, and sports jackets for men, or even >slacks. (Sweaters are another matter!) > - Toby Robison *sigh* I am a professional woman. DEC pays good consultant rates for my time. Tell me that I save money, when I am working a 50-90 hour week, and have to spend time making clothes. You have to value your time for home activities at the same price as your worth in the marketplace. The reason women and children traditionally have had their clothes made are twofold: 1) Men have more day-to-day requirements in society to dress in clothes that look SPECIFICALLY as though they are NOT HOMEMADE. The technical complexity of a dress shirt, suit, etc., is beyond the normal home seamstress (or seamster? :-) The elaborateness of men's business dress stems from the status of looking like you can afford, and care to have, someone professional make your clothes. (Note that this dates from the days before ready-made, off-the-shelf men's haberdashery, and before "standard" sizes. Men's fashions still reflect an earlier era's snobbery.) Women were only expected to dress in fancy, professionally made clothes, for the few overt social occasions that were allowed them: courtship, and socializing in the context of display of their charms. Therefore, while men's clothing styles reflect the desired conformity of the traditional workplace, women's styles reflect the desire to be noticed in their display. In societies where the men must attract the women in the courtship (several African cultures come to mind...) men's styles are the more varied and outrageous, the better to attract unique notice--and women's styles tend to be more subtle and conformant in their variation. 2) Associated with women's inactivity in the day to day workplace, their time is not commercially valued, therefore they are considered to have the "free time" necessary to sew. Sewing is a complex skill. It takes a good investment of time, a cursory knowledge of design (and these days, mechanical devices) at a minimum. It takes the cost of materials, tools, AND LABOR to produce a piece of clothing. Unless one's time is not being recompensed at a rate that makes it more worth your while to buy instead of sew your clothes (i.e. how long will it take you to sew a dress--5 hours? How much does a dress cost in the store? $60? That's $5/hour you are "saving", if the materials are free. Are you paid more than $5/hour in the workplace? Then BUY the dress, if you can budget it!). This is assuming that you do not sew as a hobby. I sew as a hobby, but I only sew things that I can't buy (like period or sf/fantasy costumes). There ain't no such thing as "free time," only time for which you pay yourself! Shava Nerad Telematic Systems (@DEC Ed. Svcs.) {decvax, allegra}!decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad