September 17, 2004

According to Reuters, “slutty” fashions will be on the outs next spring and demure will be back in. Women will be covering themselves with more fabric than a winter mannequin at Macy’s. And the days of women baring their “bottoms” may be over.

“In recent seasons,” says the article, “fashion has been filled with skimpy tops exposing midriffs, cleavage-revealing necklines and jeans slung so low that precious little was left to the imagination -- looks impossible to avoid on such pop icons as Paris Hilton and Britney Spears.”

But no more. The 1950’s look is making a comeback. Women will be wearing sweaters, blousy linen and dresses with hemlines hovering below the knee.

Trend forecaster Merrill Greene says the reason for the change is in response to recent events around the world. “It's a way of protecting oneself,” she said. “We might feel insecure about showing off, of looking too out there and too American.”

What a load of bunk. Look, there is a reason that the pendulum is swinging from slutty to modest: slutty didn’t work.

Don’t get me wrong, I marveled at some of the things young women have been wearing -- or, to be more precise, not wearing. I sit in a coffeehouse writing most days and am amazed at some of the scantily clad outfits that walk in.

Radio host and author Dennis Prager had some interesting observations about this clothing. He said young girls are dressing so “loud” because in a world that has torn down any distinction between men and women, it is one of the few ways young girls can distinguish themselves and draw attention.

But the strategy doesn’t work. Yes, they get attention for dressing as they do, but not the kind of attention they necessarily want. The kind of attention they get, from men anyhow, is the lowly kind. It’s not a very lasting curiosity, either. And it turns any mystery about the remarkable beauty of women into something clinical and matter of fact.

The great irony of our times is that as we think ourselves ever more liberated and progressive, the truth is we had a better understanding of the unique nature of men and women 50 years ago.

My own parents came of age in this period, a time when women worked to distinguish themselves as distinct feminine beings (you can be arrested for saying such things these days). A few years ago I went to an event at which my mother and father were joined by five other couples from their high school -- each of the couples had been married more than 40 years.

What stood out about these couples was how ladylike the women were and how gentlemanly the men were. You don’t hear the words “lady” and “gentlemen” much these days, but that’s what they were.

The ladies carried themselves with grace and dignity. They dressed well and there was a clear eloquence and class that resonated among them. They understood the concept of modesty and understatement. The ladies and gentlemen complimented each other in a perfect harmony and it was quite a site to behold.

Because when they were young, they understood the nature of men and women way better than young people do today. They understood romance and how men and women must be distinct and unique for it to occur. But today, young women are trying to BE men, and yet they know far less about men than their mothers and grandmothers did.

Well, ladies, here is all men think and want. Jack Nicholson summarized it in one line in the movie “As Good as it Gets.” When he told Helen Hunt why he loved her he said, “Because you make me want to be a better man.”

Hey, maybe as our culture relearns the lessens of modesty, poise and class, we men might want to become better, too. We certainly need the improvement. Now if we can just get men to stop dressing like women we might be onto something.

Tom Purcell

DISCUSS THIS IN THE FORUM!