Why are modern mens clothing styles so poor?

Excluding pure sportswear, workwear and other functional clothing, ordinary people have few opportunities to wear a full set of formal wear/casual wear in their life. Even for daily casual wear, mens clothing is not as rich as womens clothing in terms of materials, elements and patterns.

 1.png

First in terms of materials everyday mens clothing is mainly made of cotton 97% cotton 3% polyester fibers and spandex fibers while linen is rarely used. Womens clothing in addition to the above materials can include ordinary silk gauze yellow silk acetate fibers which are affordable and better quality materials such as silk cocoon silk and cashmere which are commonly used for womens clothing. Recently with the rise of traditional Chinese womens clothing silk satin and other fabrics have gradually returned to the market but these materials are not used for mens clothing at all.

Second, in terms of layout and elements, for mens wear, the tops include short-sleeved/long-sleeved T-shirts, shirts, hoodies, jackets, and windbreaker jackets, while the bottoms include long pants and five-pocket shorts. The layout and elements used are solid colors/stripes, simple large prints, casual sportswear style, and fitted/pointed toe pants.

Womens wear includes not only these items, tops also feature halter necks (the closest mens counterpart has been labeled as outdated and low-quality for middle-aged and elderly men), bottoms come in seven/five/three/short shorts (mens shorts shorter than knee level are almost exclusively worn by those below third grade), and women-specific dresses, skirts, shorts, and mini-skirts. The patterns and elements used include those from mens wear, as well as floral prints, embroidery, and sheer low-cut designs

In short, the materials used for mens clothing! Patterns and elements are fundamentally different from those of womens clothing, naturally less diverse. Ultimately, this is because society has seen significant ideological liberation among women, leading to the expression that women can wear whatever they want in the clothing field, whereas men have not achieved this ideological liberation, resulting in the limitation of clothing options available to men.

 2.png

The Misalignment of Gender Show: The Evolution of Mens Wear

When the dense hair of humans disappeared, people began to make up for it in other ways. They sewed clothes made of animal skins, wore necklaces made of teeth, and tattooed their faith

If human beings continue to develop according to the relationship between male and female in animals, then men may always be the main characters on the stage of history, while women can only be spectators or supporting roles.

But the reason why we are human is that our intelligence continues to develop, inventing tools, and gradually getting rid of animal characteristics.

The establishment of the marital system has subtly altered gender relations, another reason being that human evolution has endowed humans with advanced brains, making the head proportion much larger than during the embryonic development stage. To reduce the risk of difficult childbirth for mothers, human infants are born prematurely before they have fully developed. Therefore, human infants are actually premature babies, which means that after birth, infants must receive prolonged and meticulous care. As a result, human males must form more stable marital relationships with females and must also share the responsibility of raising offspring.

This has led to a misalignment of sexual displays: women have also begun to dress up in order to maintain their longer-lasting sex appeal.

So, a womans sex appeal and the flaunting that goes into maintaining it are more important than a mans.

In primitive times, just like the beautiful feathers of male peacocks, long hair originally embodied a mans charm. After civilization developed, men began to describe inexperienced women as: "long hair, short knowledge," thus men shaved their beards and cut their hair shorter. Women generally grew their hair long and styled it in all sorts of bizarre ways, wearing elaborate and intricate clothing.

Of course, dont misunderstand that mens showboating has never stopped; at this point, it has evolved from simple and direct flaunting to a broader and richer variety of displays. Taking the Western world as an example, before the 19th century, especially with the renowned beauty-loving king Louis XIV, mens attire, like womens, emphasized decoration to display class and wealth disparity, leading to a period of exaggerated and splendid male fashion.

 

Until the end of the 18th century to the early 19th century, mens fashion experienced Fru Gerey (John Flugels "the Great Masculine Renunciation of Male Fashion" also known as the modernization process of mens wear (modernity) which is commonly used in domestic clothing history books.) The types and styles of mens wear began to stabilize removing excess colors and decorations moving towards a simpler and more orderly image.

The Peacock Revolution is about challenging the modern norms of mens fashion that went from the end of the 18th century into the 20th century.

ashion studies scholar Bollett (Jo Paoletti) In *Sex and Unisex*, the second wave of feminism is linked to the "Peacock Revolution," where the image of men underwent a series of reflections and reconstructions during the rise of feminism in the 1960s. The Peacock Revolution suggests that a mans body can be displayed, can be filled with desire and fantasy, just as the Beatles can be consumed by the passions of young girls.

The Peacock Revolution is a challenge to the patriarchal society and the definition of positive traits through fashion, penetration of the body and color in popular culture. This is in the same vein as the second wave of feminism that emerged at that time.

Men can release the most primitive instinct of showing off, and women can also upgrade the show-off to have more equal treatment in the relationship.

Its outcome, like the feminist revolution, was as dramatic and even more fleeting. Like the sexual revolution of the 1960s, it was idealistic and romantic, but not yet fully liberating men: encouraging them to unleash their long-suppressed primitive instincts.