How different do you think fashion would be in a female-dominated world?

[JerZ]

As for how fashion would be different if women ruled, who knows? In general, fashion throughout history has in large part focused on proving that the most fashionable were the most rich, illustrated by the fact that the fashion(s) were so non-utilitarian as to be downright ridiculous. Sometimes you couldn't have sat down, much less pulled a plow or done laundry in a giant pot with a paddle.

This has often included men and still does in some ways (those awful falling-down pants someone gave as an example...these guys can barely walk, everything is falling down, they swish and jerk their hips around to keep everything on while still looking "cool," OMG) or hairstyles that obviously involve a lot of upkeep...stuff like that. Or awesome suits that button and close and fold in ways that definitely restrict movement. Ties generally really restrict too and as I understand things, aren't exactly comfortable (somebody correct me). Same principle, though I think in previous times women were more restricted fashion-wise to prove they were taken care of and didn't have to do a thing, so there was that factor even above and beyond the "look at us, we're privileged and have other people to do physical tasks for us" factor. In this case a wife who was even more fashion-silly was a shot in the arm to the husband who was obviously a good provider and blah-blah.

So...different if Western society had been primarily woman-dominated? Who knows. There would probably have been differences but I don't think it would be some sort of comfort Utopia or anything. No matter who dominates in what society, people always have something to prove and there will always be those who are competitive. Fashion thrives on these two factors.

[Whiskey River]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzAwU_1JzYI


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_bFCJc0IOg