The Board of Directors of the Associated Dress Industries of America has endorsed longer skirts for women. We are told that Paris has decided that women must wear longer skirts than those in vogue for the past two years. But will the women go back to the longer skirts? I doubt it. It would be more reasonable to expect them to adopt knickerbockers instead.
Those who would increase the length of feminine skirts again may have failed to recognize and appreciate the two things that have so popularized the short skirt as to give it permanency. Two things every woman strives for. The second is personal comfort and freedom. The first is to please the men. She has not failed to observe the effect of the short skirt on the susceptible male. And she has discovered a new joy in the freedom of locomotion unimpeded by the longer skirt.
The greatest objection to the short skirt doesn’t seem to have been touched upon at all by those who are clamoring for longer skirts. The short skirt is perilous to millions of women only because of the demand it creates for extravagant hosiery. The temptation to dress up the exposed nether members is irresistible and the smaller the income of the working girl, the more determined she is to make the best possible showing of her exposed limbs. Silk hose at $2.98 to $7.50 a pair and up is made a perplexing item in the cost of living to millions of working girls and the daughters of working men. Eighty-seven per cent of the families in the United States have incomes of less than $2,000 a year. It would be interesting to know to just what extent the silk hose craze robs these 87 and more millions of food, clothing and home comforts.
From the editorial page of the Independent, Elizabeth City, N.C., Friday, Oct. 28, 1921, W.O. Saunders, editor.
No comments:
Post a Comment