MY LADY'S DRESS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 58, 9 March 1923, Page 4

MY LADY'S DRESS.

The fact that certain feminist societies are making a vigorous protest against the return of the long skirt may Btrike most people as merely humorous, yet Others Will see that some bearing on sociological life is involved. Women are beginning to realise with some reeentment that they are in the hands of a small but powerful organisation, composed of men, who decide how they ehall be clothed. Some time ago a popular English magazine gave illustrations of fashions which these arbiters at one time or another vainly tried to force on the world, owing to the determined resistance of certain women, including even the mannequins whose business it is to set 'the ball rolling. Amongst the absurdities one noticed a crinoline effect in front only, while another monstrosity was the padding of one shoulder to make it look higher than the other. Though these creators of feminine fashions were beaten on these and other occasions it is by Jio means certain that they will be successfully resisted in their attempt to revive a mode which has often held sway, and which has for some an aesthetic appeal, like the long skirt. Women rebels against the revival will have, of course, many supporters. Even in the unhygienic past tp.ere were bjttar opponents of this style of drees. Oliver Wendell Holmes has a slern rebuke for so-called "ladies" who consent to be scavengers, and states that if a woman has no better method of displaying her husband's wealth she may certainly tic a piece of silk to her gown and trail it through the gutter, but that she should certainly unpin it before entering the house. In the literature of twenty years ago it is almost amusing to read attacks on the "mock mpdeety" of young ladies who would not lift their trains to cross the road. This hatred still remains, and will be a help. Again, the danger from germs is more realised nowadays, and that will assist the women in their fight for a style of drees that is rational in the beet sense of the word. On the other hand, there are to-day difficulties which were formerly less pronounced. Contradictory as this may seem, women themselves point out that the new age ai independence has really given them less independence in matters sartorial- So many of them nowadays are engaged in occupations or professions that, even I ike men, they dare not indulge in eccentricities of manner or appearance. To do so is to p(it a drag on their success, great or small, according to their position and the profession they follow. There certainly seems something in this view, for those of us who are to look back a few decades can remember cases where women because they were leisured anc| had no employers dared to follow their own tastes. Such were the "rational" dress reformers of thirty years ago, invariably women who could "afford" to do as they liked. Many individual cases of independence can also be recalled. Times have altered now. We hear of a band of young girls in the Auckland Public Service who are uniting to boycott the long skirt if it returns. Their spirit is undeniable; they will, however, have a difficult time unless public opinion comes to their aid. Should these mysterious unknown arbiters really intend such a return, and should the women with their new faculty for organisation succeed in routing them that defeat may mark a new era in matters of this sort. It may mean that Fashion, that is to say the constant changing from mode to "mode, the change being frequently extreme will completely Jose its power with women, as it has with men. Up till a hundred years age men were under its swey as much as women, and in medieval times, it is said, even more so. The chaßges were just as abrupt inconvenient and unhygienic. Now the sterner sex have subsided to what is by comparison at least, a uniform. Some prophesy that this will He the same ending in the case of women, only the uniform.in their case will be more becoming. It is not too fanciful hewnver. to assume that if women ever became freed from fashion they will <*o the extreme rather of inventiveness and originality. Convinced Uiat her type was the Elizabethan, one might be found in such a costume, modified, of course, to suit modern conditions; her sister again might decide for a lifelong adherence to the Greek tunic effects, which really are the mode to-day. The world might then be ljke a fancy dress ball, only the outdoor conditions would be taken into consideration. However that may be, we may hie qujte sure that our women, sensible and level-headed as they are. will never of their own free wi|l adopt for outdoor wear the anachronism of the skirt that trails on the ground.