In the last couple of years, we have beheld a trend on the radar: androgynous fashion. Although it isn’t something new, because designers like Coco Chanel gave women the possibility of wearing pants in the 20th century, we have hung it the tag of hit. A very arrogant idea, keeping in mind that fashion is nothing but a feedback.
The truth is the so – called genderless fashion is growing more common on catwalks. Gucci, for instance, went into it at its Spring/Summer 2016 Menswear show, where we could see bows or lace shirts.
On this issue, Gucci CEO Marco Bizzarri pointed out to InStyle: “Alessandro Michele [Gucci creative director] has in fact always presented his men’s and women’s collections together, so this is a very natural progression”.
However, one can stop for a minute and think if this is another way of classifying people.
Even though “gender lines are [actually] blurring”, as Ruth La Ferla wrote for The New York Times, we keep naming everything around us, not to be able to approach them so we can understand better the development of our society, but to be shocked or even worse: to discriminate.
Fashion is art, and, as American artist Keith Haring once said, “…it should be something that liberates the soul, provokes the imagination and encourages people to go further”.
So, why don’t we begin to enjoy art and freedom once and for all? We have to decide what we want to wear or who we really are. Nobody should say the opposite. It is true we all have moral standards, political slants or values, but these don’t give us the right to change others.
Thus, we should permit society to flow in full terms. If a man wants to get a bag or wear some makeup, it’ll be his choice, only his. At the same time, if a woman wants to put a tuxedo on or to stop wearing bras, it’ll also be a personal choice, only hers.
That’s why I find androgynous fashion a bit unnecessary. At the end, we have described it as the possibility of gender fluidity, when it has always – or, at least, most of the time – been a matter of choice.