The Androgynous Nature of Western Fashion Trends

When you think of androgynous fashion, what comes to mind? What does the word androgynous even mean? When we think of androgyny, it may come across as a niche experience that only a select few delve into with their fashion choices. But fashion has always been a clever tool of expression. It’s able to communicate things without words: especially about one’s gender or gender expression. But why is that? Why can’t we just wear whatever we want, without it always being perceived in a specific light? Well, I’m here to answer all those questions. By doing a deep dive into the modern history of Western fashion trends, we can see how much they’ve contributed to our shifting and complex understanding of gender and androgynous fashion.

The term androgynous can be traced back to ancient Greece, stemming from the Latin word ‘androgyne’: the two root words are ‘Andras’(man) and ‘Gune’ (woman). The word describes the presence of both male and female physical traits. The concept of androgynous fashion in Western society can be seen earliest in the 17th century amongst European aristocracy (note here that fashion has always been political: not only can it be an expression of self, but also of one’s status). Both men and women aristocrats dressed in elaborate and extravagant clothing that happened to share many details, such as lacing, ruffles, and lavish fabrics. Both genders shared similar beautification rituals, such as wearing large wigs, applying (extremely toxic) lead-infused makeup, and high-heeled shoes (which were originally designed for Persian soldiers to wear during horse riding and battle). Although the 17th century did see some blurring of gender expression fashion by the elite, it wasn’t until the late 19th and early 20th century, that major shifts would occur across Western society.

A historically notable example of this shift was the movement for women to be able to (legally) wear pants! The movement was sparked by Amelia Bloomer, a women’s rights activist who advocated for women to be able to wear loose pants underneath their skirts during physical activities (like biking), for practical reasons. However, bloomers were highly contested as women’s garments, due to their ‘masculine’ nature, and were strictly limited to cycling and other sports. With the rise of Hollywood and cinema in the early 20th century, celebrities began to hold a lot of influence on public opinion. By the 1930s, famous stars like Marlene Deitrich would help normalize women wearing pants as she wore them in films, and during public appearances. All of a sudden, people started to think twice about women in pants… Maybe it could be sexy and not just practical! But it was still seen as quite the statement- Deitrich faced much negative press speculating about her sexuality, and even threats of arrest, just because of her choice of bottoms.

World War II surprisingly had a large influence on fashion trends, as more women began to take on traditionally male-dominated fields in factories and other industries where they were required to wear pants for safety and practical reasons. However, when the war ended, so did the freedom to wear pants, and once again, women were encouraged (and even at times enforced) to wear more traditionally feminine garments like skirts and dresses.

Fast forward to the mid-20th century, we see the rise of the 2nd wave of Feminism, where women boldly demanded social and legal rights. And interestingly enough, women's attire was often used as a symbol of protest. Women burned their bras and would wear miniskirts during protests: nowadays a miniskirt may seem like a pretty standard going-out piece, but back then, it was quite the statement. It was a fuck-you to the unspoken standard of modesty that was expected of women: to wear one was a visual prioritization of the self over arbitrary societal expectations. Because women fought to wear pants as casual wear adjacent to skirts and dresses, we now seem to find skirts and dresses relatively formal. Fashion seems to work like a pendulum in that way, always swinging back and forth.

The rock industry would have a huge impact on androgynous fashion becoming more trendy. Stars like Elvis popularised more effeminate fashion with his bejewelled and low-cut jumpsuits; Jimi Hendrix with his ruffled blouses; and Bowie with his intricate makeup looks. Pop culture would allow androgynous fashion to enter the mainstream. The look came with the music, take it or leave it. By 1968, the New York Times would coin the term ‘unisex’ and apply it to all styles of gender-neutral clothing. Department stores began to cater to a completely new market: clothing made and marketed for both men and women. Unisex clothing (although not without controversy from traditionalists), was seen as a progressive development in the fashion world that prioritized functionality for both sexes.

“Unisex meant liberation from gender.” - Jennifer Park

Although, in retrospect, the primary purpose of men’s fashion has seemingly always been functionality- women simply adapted this feature as we gained more social power and standing in society. That being said, men still seem to get the short end of the androgynous fashion stick. Because there’s no ‘functionality’ argument behind androgynous fashion for men (as there was for women). Many men still seem to shy away from taking part in the trend, and there is much speculation as to why. The AIDS epidemic of the 1980s seriously impacted the way flamboyant men’s fashion from the late 60s’ and 70s was perceived. And because fashion responds to what is happening in society, it slowly fell out of popularity as queer people received much social and legal discrimination.

Nonetheless, fashion continues to be used to break boundaries. Both by designers and individuals like online fashion influencers. Fashion trends are always shifting, and our perceived gender boundaries are as well. The sooner we realize the rich history of androgynous fashion, the freer we will be to express ourselves as people, beyond boundaries of gender.