For today's street style post I've decided to take advantage of the distinct differences in the above street style shots to talk about gender and sexual identity, especially the way one's gender is or is not expressed through sartorial choices. But, to switch things up, I decided that as all subjects are presumably of the female sex (though not necessarily gender), I would "pass the mic" to Nora of Genderqueer Fashionista (a fellow Virginia transplant!) for her perspective on the outfits in these photos and what they say about the person wearing them. Ed. note: I showed Nora the top and bottom photos in this set, then realized I had two other pictures that helped illustrate the topic. Her commentary refers to the top and bottom shots only, but points she makes are applicable to all four photos.
People who are non-binary gendered--that is anyone who identifies or presents their gender outside the boxes of male-assigned, man identified and female-assigned, woman-identified--blur the lines between bodies, presentation, and gendered expectations. And I think style is a big part of that. How we dress signals a lot about ourselves, and one of the most basic elements of that is gender. Person two seems to be signalling a non-binary identity with their clothing, where person one could much more easily be acknowledged as a woman.
Click through to continue reading this post!
Person two is doing gender in their own way. Their clothes aren't clearly men's nor women's (since the way fashion works is that clothes cannot just be for humans, they have to be gendered) and thus, you can't really discern how this person identifies in terms of gender. They could be genderqueer, transmasculine, cismale who happens to have hips, a masculine woman, or many other options. They look androgynous, but not in a way that's particularly stylish or comfortable for most people.
To me, what person 2 is doing is much more revolutionary. We live in times where it's not strange that men and women often wear many of the same garments. This is far more complicated when your gender does not neatly fit one of those boxes. It's hard if you have a "masculine" (read: broad shoulders, V shaped upper body, no hips, etc.) body to find skirts and dresses to fit you and vice versa for folks with "feminine" (hips, narrow upper body, breasts, etc.) bodies to find button down shirts, blazers and trousers that won't emphasize those traits.
The whole "tomboy style" moment does feel like something that is for straight, otherwise conventionally beautiful women, where genderqueer/queer style is something that may have some of the same elements (button downs, oxford shoes, utilitarian bags, looser fit, preppy/classic pieces, etc.) but is something fundamentally different. Gender of course is different than sexuality, but I do feel like straight women do "tomboy" differently than queer folks. I hope we'll get to a point where that's not the case, where folks of all varieties will embrace the gender spectrum, but it will take time. I'm glad at the very least that many shoe designers are taking note of the fact that not all people like to wear heels!
Thank you, Nora! Like this post? Then check out My Frontiersmen and Some Boys Like Me.
