By Brianna Savoca
Zebra, cheetah, leopard, and crocodile prints flood retail stores around the country.
Fall fashion shows full of fur and leather clad models project the trending style of wearing animal-esque clothing.
However, these trends subconsciously convey the message women wearing animal prints and furs are animalistic in nature and behavior, and therefore lack intelligence and culture.
Common patriarchal beliefs use biology to justify the reason why women are oftentimes viewed as the lesser sex. By using this naturalistic perspective, when compared to men, women are closer to nature whereas men are the cultured sex.
Since women menstruate, have babies, and breast-feed, these natural processes often barricade them from participating in cultural activities. Typical gendered roles mean the man works, gets educated, and participates in society, and the woman stays home, raises children, and feeds the family since the husband provides the resources for her to do so.
With this stigma already commonly ingrained in society, does wearing fur or animal print help feminists cause to fight typical gender roles if it subconsciously relates women to animals?
Society needs to recognize women, no matter what type of clothing they wear, as intelligent human beings with brains. Women are not simply bodies. Women are not just objects or animals to be used for sex.
Unfortunately many of the images in fashion magazines or models walking down a runway seem to perpetuate this barbaric notion of women being the other, or the reproductive sex to be used by men. Women in fur or animal print draws upon these ideas women are simply sex animals.
Many strong, smart, intelligent women who carry themselves confidently wear fur or animal print, and the trend probably will not disappear anytime soon. If you think the idea of women wearing fur or animal print is too extreme, tell me this: When's the last time you've seen a man wearing fur boxers or a zebra thong for his woman?
No comments:
Post a Comment