Prospects for Mainstreaming

by Malcolm

Some time ago Malcolm sent me an article to publish about the 'Nylon Gene'. He has now composed a thoughtful article in two parts in response to the Mainstreaming thread on this blog. This is the first part.

Despite having spent considerable time reading your blog (and checking out some of the links) I'm still coming across things for the first time.  Recently I was following the "Mainstreaming men's hosiery" thread.  What follows is largely a response to what I read there.  The first part deals with the kind of issues raised by Mmm and Rich and your responses to them.  Then follows an examination of the idea of tights fetishists as a valid or workable category.  I know you enjoy a challenge!  I do note that some of what's here you've had a go at addressing in your responses to Mmm and Rich, but I think I'm taking a slightly different angle.

Prospects for mainstreaming of tights for men

I have a brother who works in marketing who maintains that successfully understanding the prevailing zeitgeist and the way it is shifting is the marketer's holy grail and that getting it right is damn near impossible and probably involves some degree of luck; being in the right place at the right time.  Presumably this is precisely the dilemma that faces hosiery manufacturers as they look at an uncertain future and try to decide which directions to take.

My own feeling is that your pessimism in "Mainstreaming Men's Hosiery VI " is well justified - we're dealing with something that is never likely to be more than a niche market and even were it to become the "in" thing to do, the fad would pass as quickly as it arose and the practice would revert to the domain of the eccentric and be the subject of ridicule once more in much the same way as, say, some of the fashions of the seventies have subsequently been regarded.  There's nothing new in this, of course.  In "Vanity Fair" (1847) Thackeray on one occasion describes the buffoon, Jos Sedley (a minor character but a subject of ridicule throughout) as "tiresomely dressed in tights".  (Don't ask me for the page number; it's a long book.)

So what's so ridiculous?

I suppose from the point of view of the prevailing orthodoxy it is unmanly for a man to show an appreciation of and delight in fine fabric; he's "acknowledging the sensitive and sensuous parts of (his) personality" (Roadrunner).  This is especially the case when it fits him as a second skin. 

The style gurus Susannah Constantine and Trinny Woodall clearly have the attitude that tight is feminine and they usually seem to be right on the money.  The man in tights is showing an interest in something that is perceived as intrinsically feminine even though we may argue that it is sexy but essentially genderless.  The orthodox observer is perhaps also likely to extrapolate and imagine that if he likes tights then he probably likes women's underwear and all the rest of it and, as we can see from some of the contributions to the blog, this is sometimes the case.  So there's more fuel for a good laugh because in general, men in women's garb want to look alluring and often finish up looking grotesque.  The disconnect between his imagination of himself and the reality that all can see, like the Emperor's new clothes, is obviously ridiculous.  So, to the orthodox mind, by association, the man in tights is heading down that same road and is thus ridiculous.

Then there's the suggestion of the wearer revealing something very private about himself.  Something of a nature that many people would have difficulty in admitting to themselves, let alone put on public display.  As I mentioned last time, the aspect of sexual allure around tight and feminine clothing has never completely vanished for me though it has diminished with habituation.  I understand what Roadrunner is driving at when he says, "the obsession stems mainly from the frustration in gaining legitimacy, or approval", but I don't completely buy it.  Drawers full of tights, writing a blog, talking at length about it to whoever seems interested, indicates a love which persists whether one finds it accepted by others or not.  We love what we give our time and energy to.  I suggest a tights wearer could test the depth of his "obsession" by self-denial and abstention for a period and then observe his rising excitement on his first return to wearing.  Obviously I'm speaking from my own experience here, but my guess is it would match that of many others. 

I would also guess that some observers of you on one of your outings are processing all this in their minds at lightning speed.  You've admitted to your readers that there was a sexual element to your early wearing and I suggest the observer who is harbouring his own guilty secret is going to see you in that same light.  If he's in complete denial about his own inclinations, if he's young, lacking in self-awareness and self-esteem and inclined towards anger and aggression, you could find yourself in some danger.  A lot of potential tights wearers might just not feel physically safe enough to do so depending on where they live.

When you wear your tights in public you're declaring yourself, you're making a public statement about who you are and what you think is right and you're laying down a challenge and looking for a response. To be ignored can, in some contexts, result in disappointment. What you ideally want is positive reinforcement, to be told you look good in your tights.  (This happened once to me and I was most gratified.  I didn't know the woman very well, but it was obvious that she could see the practical advantage of my tights with shorts and thought it looked good too.)  I would suppose that facing this reality suits a certain personality type and that some would-be wearers would balk at the confrontational nature of the exercise, perhaps satisfying themselves with secret or exclusively home-wearing.

Having explored public wearing, this is pretty much where I've arrived.  I note how some talk about being "comfortable" in their chosen attire, but I remember one of the real (professional performing) drag queens on whom the characters of "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" were based saying in interview that for him cross-dressing wasn't about being comfortable, it was all about risk and the excitement of doing something naughty, of breaking a strong social taboo.  To be comfortable he dressed in unequivocally male clothes.  So it is with me.  When I'm in the hardware store I don't want the distraction and associated discomfort of wondering whether I'm being judged unfavourably by the bloke who's serving me and the possibility that the triggering of his prejudices might interfere with my getting the advice I'm seeking, to offer a typical example.  I also don't want to generate embarrassment in those close to me, especially my kids.  From their point of view I'm probably embarrassing enough already without turning up at their school in my tights.  Maybe when they're older, if they're self-assured and open enough I might again leave the tights on when going to town.

Rather than acceptance of male hosiery per se, wouldn't you agree what we're really after is a more tolerant and accepting society generally, such that anyone can wear whatever they like, play with their appearance in whatever way appeals to them whether or not that conveys subtle or even overt sexual messages?  We seem to have more-or-less arrived there as far as piercings and tattoos are concerned; why not with what mainstream society deems cross-dressing?  In recent years I've heard two serious discussions on the radio about men and the "unbifurcated garment".  So I'm not completely pessimistic about dress choices for men becoming a little more catholic.  

I don't suppose we're going to see a lot of men in skirts, dresses and tights anytime soon, but I can envisage a future where the rigid attitudes that determine the ubiquitous and universally dull choices on offer in the menswear store have broken down to the point where a much wider variety of styles are offered in a variety of places, as is the case now for women's wear.  The commercial availability of tights for men could be an indicator of this kind of change.

The internet has a role to play here, and your blog as part of it, by confirming to all sorts of people with niche interests that their predilections are valid and that slavishly following the mainstream is not one's only option.  As people at large become more aware of the amazing diversity of human imagination, endeavour and expression, I would hope it becomes harder to condemn difference even though in many cases one wouldn't go there oneself in a month of Sundays.  I'm not too keen on piercings but if it turns some people on then that's their business.  Your experience of wearing your tights out and about would suggest that perhaps progress is being made here.  But it would be unrealistic to expect there might one day be hordes of others following your example.

If you would like to comment on this entry, please click on the 'Comments' link below.

tags: mainstreaming  tights  tolerance  

links: technorati