If the question is why men don’t wear skirts, the answer lies in the 18th century: the Great Male Renunciation
We have it so internalized, so assimilated, that perhaps you have never thought about it, but here goes one of those questions that sound like a truism: Why do men and women dress differently? Why is it that when we go to a wedding, a gala or an elegant dinner, it is taken for granted that they will wear a more or less sober suit and discreet colors while they will wear dresses and heels? Why are ‘men’s’ clothes usually more functional than women’s clothes? And already, why don’t we wear skirts, like was wondering recently David Uclés? As is usually the case when we talk about fashion (social trends in general), none of the above is the result of chance or simple whim. Why do you dress the way you dress? Things as they are: if you are a man (at least in the Spain of 2026) and you go to a meeting in a dress and heels, it is quite likely that your colleagues will be surprised to see you cross the door. However, the same clothing on a woman would be considered very normal. Because? That same question was recently asked by the writer David Uclés. And it’s not the first. Before him, others had already slipped it, such as the designer and photographer Ana Locking, who in another recent interview on the SER network encouraged men to be much more risky when selecting their wardrobe. “If you want to feel sexy today, dress sexy. The boys’ legs are super sexy, the boys’ necklines are super sexy. Open your neckline, wear a skirt, some shorts, some ankle boots with a little heel,” encouraged Locking after lamenting that, as they mature, men “clip their wings” when they confront the closet. “What they will say comes into play a little bit, feeling vulnerable.” Is it just social pressure? It depends how you look at it. Fashion in itself is a social construct, but the tendency that leads us men to opt for sober clothing and banish skirts, heels and clothing that may be considered ‘extravagant’ from our wardrobes is explained by another reason: the story. In fact, it is not a guideline that has always been applied. Come take a walk through the Costume Museum or El Prado to prove that when it comes to men’s fashion, sobriety has not always been synonymous with good style or elegance. For example, this canvas of King Philip V with his family painted in 1743 by Louis Michel van Loo or this other work from the end of the 17th century, also preserved in El Prado, and in which Jacob-Ferdinand Voet shows us Luis Francisco de la Cerda, IX Duke of Medinaceli. Is there anything that catches your attention about them? Wigs, high heels and brilli brilli? Exact. If you look at both works you will see that the men wear wigs, heels, stockings, loose jackets that fall almost like skirts, and an abundance of bright colors, the kind of clothing that at that time (late 17th century, first half of the 18th century) denoted status. If you think about it it makes sense. What they show us Jacob-Ferdinand Voet and Louis Michel van Loo They are characters dressed in colorful outfits, although they are not what we would say ‘functional’. But… Why should they be? If anyone could afford that kind of clothing it was aristocrats who didn’t have to work. Who doesn’t like heels? William Kremer explained it well in 2013 on the BBC when reviewing The history of high heels and why men stopped wearing them. Again, it may sound like a far-fetched question, but it actually makes a lot of sense and reveals even more about our history. For centuries heels were worn in the Middle East as part of horse riding clothing. And not only for aesthetic reasons. With them Persian soldiers could stand on the styles, stabilize themselves and adopt a good posture to use the bow. When at the end of the 16th century sha Abbas I of Persia He sent a diplomatic mission to Europe to gather support. The nobles noticed the Persian-style shoe. They liked it so much that over time they began to wear high heels that highlighted their size… and their social rank. And all that with heels? That’s how it is. “One of the best ways to convey status is through the impractical,” commented in 2013 Elizabeth Semmelhack, of the Bata Footwear MuseumToronto. Perhaps heels were not very advisable for walking through the countryside and the paved and potholed streets of the 17th century cities, but did the same nobles who posed for chamber painters dressed in clothes as luxurious as they were cumbersome have to do so? “They don’t work in the fields nor do they have to walk a lot.” Why did they stop being used? Times have changed. And the way of thinking. When they review the history of fashion (especially men’s fashion) historians usually stop at the Enlightenment, between the mid-17th century and the beginning of the 19th century, a time in which intellectuals opted for a way of thinking in which what was rational and useful was prioritized. Also education about privileges. Status is no longer an inherited gift, but the result of training and work. As far as fashion is concerned, this translated into a new sensitivity that favored the use of garments comfortable and functional. In England, for example, even landowners ended up embracing a more practical style, better suited to managing their properties. At least that’s how it was among men. The rational aspect stood out among them; The emotional nature was highlighted in them. Did only the Enlightenment influence? No. The Enlightenment mentality played a crucial role, but historians usually point out an episode that (although inspired by the Enlightenment) is much more specific, both geographically and temporally: the french revolution. Against this backdrop, the way one dressed became more than a simple aesthetic choice or a mark of status. … Read more
