Sociology of clothingClothing has various sociological functions, including:
Thus wearing specific types of clothing or the manner of wearing clothing can convey messages about class, income, belief and attitude.
Dress codesDress codes function on certain social occasions and for certain jobs. A school or a military institution may require specified uniforms; if it allows the wearing of plain clothes it may place restrictions on their use. A bouncer of a disco or nightclub may judge visitors' clothing and refuse entrance to those not clad according to specified or intuited requirements: for example an establishment may not allow the wearing of sport shoes. Transparent or semi-transparent clothing can play with the boundaries of dress-codes regarding modesty, for example: in a wet T-shirt contest. Dress codes as a lower bound on body covering or modestyDress codes usually set forth a lower bound on body covering. No shoes, no shirt, no serviceThe aphorism "no shoes, no shirt, no service" captures a commonly-promulgated dress code. The phrase commonly appears on signage posted at many commercial establishments such as restaurants and shopping malls. Another common aphorism claims "this store is not a beach", a phrase recited almost automatically by store employees when encountering someone who does not meet the minimum standards of body covering, modesty, decency, or the like. Beaches and Urban beaches push these boundaries, as people wander from a beachlike setting to stores and restaurants nearby. Many of the stores and restaurants on or near beaches have such dress codes but do not enforce them. For example, Sunnyside Cafe, located at the Sunnyside Bathing Pavillion in Toronto, often does not enforce the "shirts shoes" dress code. The "no shoes, no shirt" slogan appears so prevalently in some settings that it has become the target of mockery and flagrant disregard. A number of groups, such as barefooters and other people who don't like dress codes, often deliberately disregard this specific dress code, as a form of breaching experiment or beaching experiment. Such action research, as well as activism, including deliberate violation by lawyers (deliberately violating no-shirts and no-shoes laws), is becoming more common. Musicians are even joining the mockery of this dress code; a Google search on the text string "no shoes, no shirt" returns No Shoes No Shirt No Problems, by Kenny Chesney. See also Mourning, Sharia#Dress_code, Trousers#Law. Inverse dress codesReverse dress codes, sometimes referred to as "undress codes", set forth an upper bound, rather than a lower bound, on body covering. An example of an undress code, is the one commonly enforced in modern communal bathing facilities. For example, in Schwaben Quellen no clothing of any kind is allowed. Other less strict undress codes are common in public pools, especially indoor pools, in which shoes and shirts are not allowed. This undress code is an exact reversal of the ubiquitous "no shoes, no shirt, no service" dress code that exists almost everywhere outside the public bathing environment. Gender and clothingVarious traditions suggests that certain items of clothing intrinsically suit different gender roles. In particular, the wearing of skirts and trousers has given rise to common phrases expressing implied restrictions in use and disapproval of offending behaviour. For example, ancient Greeks often considered the wearing of trousers by Persian men as a sign of effeminacy. Extreme flouting of conventions in this area may earn the label "cross-dressing". Clothing taboosPossible deficiencies in clothing itself may include:
One or more safety pins may temporarily alleviate some of these imperfections. Possible inappropriate clothing relative to the person wearing it includes garments:
Possible "inappropriate" or socially unacceptable ways of wearing clothing include:
Possible "inappropriate" or socially unacceptable situations of wetness include:
Possible inappropriateness regarding day-to-day variation of clothing:
Possible inappropriateness of clothing relative to the occasion (note also the concept of dress code):
Deliberate violation of clothing taboosOf course some of these clothing faux pas may occur intentionally for reasons of fashion or personal preference. For example, people may wear intentionally oversized clothing. The rap duo Kris Kross of two teenage boys wore all of their clothes backwards and extremely baggy. A common deliberate violation of clothing taboos is the removal of the shirt, together with pulling down the pants to show the underpants. The trend in underwear has moved toward underwear that looks less like underwear, e.g. instead of white briefs that say "Mr Brief" or "Fruit of the Lomb" in large letters around the waistband, trends have shifted toward undergarments that look like bathingsuits or beach shorts. However, because of the reversal --- a desire to show underwear --- some people are going back to the plain white underwear with bold underwearlike lettering around the waistband, i.e. familiar underwear brand names around the waistband, to enhance the violation of the taboo as a fashion statement. For women, deliberately showing bra straps has also become fashionable. UnderwearingSome people even strip down to their underwear as a fashion statement, as a form of protest, or to get attention (i.e. for advertisement). As a fashion statement, Tommy Hillfiger ran a series of large billboard advertisements showing mixed-gender groups wearing only their underwear in public. For example, groups were shown at outdoor splash areas, frolicking in nothing but their underwear. This implied a certain spontaneity, as one might find at an urban beach where people decide to strip to their underwear to cool off in a fountain on a hot summer day. Traditionally, people would need to have remembered their bathing suits, but because of the popularization of underwearing, the taboo of showing of underwear has been largely eliminated, and reversed, making the showing of underwear actually fashionable. As a form of protest, many groups have adopted the aphorism "I'd rather be in my underwear than wear fur". To protest fur, members may strip to their underwear in public. As a form of attention-getting, freshpair.com has created "national underwear day" and had large numbers of models walking through Times Square wearing nothing but their underwear. This helped to draw tremendous attention to national underwear day, as well as to freshpair.com. Reversalism in the sociology of clothingSocial attitudes to clothing have brought about various rules and social conventions, such as keeping the body covered, and not showing underwear in public. The backlash against these social norms has become a traditional form of rebellion. However, during the 2001 anthrax attacks, large numbers of people stripped to their underwear in parking lots and other public places, for hosing down by fire departments, often in front of TV news crews covering the events. A recent newspaper headline said "people would rather die than be seen naked in public", highlighting the unwillingness of people to violate their self-imposed and fully internalized social norms of body covering, even in a situation where mass stripdowns and washdowns could save their lives. External links
|
|
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from Wikipedia article. Browse Wikipedia for more information. |