I think that, not just form (pants vs. skirt), but also fabric has always played an important role when it comes to how we decode things. I'm sure that 75 years ago, perhaps less, denim would be considered purely for men to wear, and more precisely for the working class. Today, it is unisex. And we know of thin fabrics which are still connected with women's clothes,like shirts and, to some extent, pants.Stu wrote: ↑Sun Jun 02, 2024 3:15 pm Nobody batted an eyelid - why? Because the dress was made of a towelling fabric and therefore it is unisex. Apparently. Even though it wasn't called a dress, it absolutely was exactly that. Had it been made from any other fabric, it would have been considered to be an exclusively female garment, but somehow towelling takes it OK for a boy.
How is that rational?
Then there are colours, of which yellow and red, at least once, were were considered female, whereas grey, blue, and green tended to be manly. Today, it is fluid. Have a look at Italian men. They seem to wear all colours (pants, socks, shirts) and they are everywhere to find in men's sections, whereas we longer up North still tend to be a bit more conservative.
Stu, I think it is great that your daughter is able to put your grandson in a dress, also in that fabric, without anybody finding it strange. We have come a long step forward, as I see it.