Translator: Lorinczy Reka Lecturer: Tímea Hegyessy
It is in the dressing that is mandatory,
what is allowed,
and there is what we think is prohibited.
For example, it is compulsory to cover our sexual organs,
so I would ask if there is someone here,
who came to mother-in-law naked today?
(Laughter)
However, it is permissible for the girls to wear men’s clothes.
Put your hands on the girl who may be in pants and jackets.
There are enough.
However, it is still forbidden for boys to wear women’s clothes,
so I wonder if there’s a guy who’s in a skirt here.
(Laughter)
And the 20th century was the age of transvestites in the West,
we can say calmly.
At the beginning of the century girls smashed social roles,
they pulled pants,
and then in 1984 Jean Paul Gaultier
he put the first boy model on the stage in his skirt.
What will be the fashion of the 21st century?
How will we talk in the language of clothes?
In masculine, feminine or possibly neutral sex?
I told you to talk,
because dressing is a language without words,
which we use every day.
It does not matter at all that we are stubborn,
or we’re laughing, joking or cursing,
when we get dressed in the morning.
Virtually spiritual, spiritual,
we put our social qualities on our body.
An expression that expresses an identity is clothing,
a live communication interface.
Usually, one of the most important things in history,
what we communicated with our clothes was our gender.
Those who did not do it correctly were the subject of ridicule or exclusion.
For example, I was very much mocked at my childhood,
because I was a girly boy.
Even then I did not wear a skirt at all.
But he was terribly irritating my contemporaries,
so that they could not tell me at first sight,
whether I am a boy or a girl.
Now we see the biggest fashion houses
and young people also laugh at the unisex and androgens fashion frenzy.
What it means?
Androgynous is the fashion,
when it is unclear and not important,
whether girl or boy is on the run.
And the unisex means pieces,
which boys and girls can wear, regardless of gender.
We see this.
The older generations of this indignation many times,
they shout at the end of the world and say,
“God, there will be genders here.”
Would that be a problem?
Let’s start at the beginning.
classically
(Laughter)
even before our birth
our parents are taking us blue or pink baby clothes,
appealing to the ultrasound picture
a concave or convex sexual organ when they were observed.
(Laughter)
And, in practice, they are outlined
our little blue or pink box,
the dressing that suits our gender,
and what we will have to wear in our whole life,
as Ken or Barbie does.
That’s how the story of fashion has evolved for thousands of years,
the compulsory dress code for women or men
marked the intangible differences between the sexes,
appointed social dominance relations.
It could only be an exception in places,
such as the slightly pungent world of opera or theater,
or say the aristocrats who stood above society.
There could be transvestites,
but it was generally forbidden to have sex between them.
We may ask that in the 21st century,
when the world’s big fashion brands are proposing such fashion,
do we still have to make a sharp difference between male and female fashion?
Or do we have to make a sharp distinction between men and women?
In any case, according to civil law,
since according to this the registration is done.
We get a single or two personal number,
with far-reaching consequences for family law.
Think of the institution of marriage.
But if the sexes really disappear,
then what will Barbie have with her bridal gown,
and what will Ken be with the groom’s gown?
At all,
as it looks from the outside?
You have to be careful because the appearance is cheating.
Wildlife is said to have many examples
the mixing of female and male cells within a living being.
For example, via the placenta
cells between mothers and their infants during pregnancy.
They have often found opposite sex organs
in dissection of the deceased, which surprised the researchers.
So we do not even consider our biological gender
black and white, rather mosaic.
Otherwise there are some good examples of this animal world.
My favorite is the hen cock,
one half of which is a hen and the other half is a cock.
And it is beautifully represented,
as if she had been in a pet animal in La Fontaine
Aristophanes are the legend of androgens.
He was the one who spoke in Plato’s banquet,
that originally there were no three,
one of them was an androgens,
these are beautiful beautiful, full of symbolism,
spherical beings,
which Zeus divided into two poison,
and since then reunification is their goal.
Also in Western art history
there are many boys-girls and girls-boys representations.
From the classical Greek-Roman sculptures,
to Renaissance aristocratic portraits,
or baroque, Rococo powdered wig,
painted face to man or woman.
By the way, we see it in different origins of origin
many times he thought of the man,
that the first person was biased.
For example, in the Jewish cabal.
And in the fall, we split into two,
men and women.
Jung also speaks,
that we all live in the psyche of the other sex.
So the guys have a part of a girl called an animation,
and the girls have a part of a boy called an animus.
I also think we’re a little shake.
It’s a bit, it’s a bit.
It is interesting to observe that in older spiritual cultures
there were temporary transitional sexes –
Mexican zapots, or even feudal Japan, for example,
who are a bit beyond the visible sexes
a more general, deeper gender schema,
and a more complex picture of humans.
It was also because of the Catholic Christian confessors
and they were practically eradicated with hunters.
But let’s see if we’re here in the West, how did this happen.
Karl Lagerfeld, Chanel Fashion Store price leader, said:
Fashion is the mood of the age.
We can ask then that in the 20th century
how was the age of the age,
when the ladies started to wear men’s clothes,
they started to wear pants.
What a longing they wanted
to know this garment?
Of course, equality and equal opportunities
they tried to pick up men’s clothes,
since in the patriarchal society
this power role was at the boys.
Probably not coincidence,
why the boys do not wear skirts in large quantities since then,
and why it is not possible to wear women’s overalls among men.
Probably,
because it has always been a disadvantageous social role.
The men did not think,
they want to identify with women’s roles in society.
Otherwise, the first skirts – after Gaultier –
especially warm men started to wear,
who are also of a minus status
they tried to avoid one more,
and gender-tolerant heterosexual men.
But we can still see that it started after the millennium
a great androgyne-unisex divade.
And then we can ask,
what are the designers,
who are presenting these collections.
They’re probably not crazy completely.
And we can see that the Z-generation,
so those who were born around the turn of the millennium,
they are the ones who say,
to be the first gender fluid generation,
as they live more freely and more openly than their predecessors.
They are much less obliged to consider themselves
the stereotype, the conventional, the social and the gender roles
within the family and in the workplace,
and this is what they say in dress.
They are the ones who are unisex fashion,
they wear a little bit of unisex pieces of body theme.
Such as Jaden and Willow Smith, Will Smith’s two children,
who are teenage style icons,
and it’s no coincidence that Louis Vuitton is a huge fashion brand
for example, based his previous campaign on Jaden Smith,
and he put on two iconic pieces of the women’s collection –
a skirt and a little top –
indicating that he is even a heterosexual young man
you can wear some clothes,
which are traditionally designed for women.
Otherwise, various utopian authors say,
that the fashion of the future will be genders-neutral,
From Imre Madách to the Matrix,
that practically scaffolders,
dressed in uniforms and long robes.
We hope this Marson will not be so.
Personally, I would be very happy for him,
whether it is unisex or androgens
would liberate dress from compulsory gender roles.
It would be very good if we could avoid the Marson with the same power
the scaffolders and uniforms.
I think the future of the dress is much more
spirituality, personality, creativity, and freedom.
And if it’s been here for about 100 years
the girls also wear pants to show their animosity,
I think this is a great moment,
so that boys can still wear their skirts.
It will be good for everyone.
I think it would be a great moment to,
to show that they live in them too,
that they are either theirs or theirs.
The world at this moment
you might need that much.
Otherwise, futures researchers say,
that they will disappear from the genders,
the Marson will disappear from the coat,
and the next evolutionary step may be androgen.
Then we will look at it in a few thousand years
these skirt-pants pictures,
as is now the case for Egyptian hieroglyphics.
We will not understand the difference.
But that would be good,
if in the future we would accept it instead of compelling the other compulsive,
that here we are together, in unity and in each other.
This means that women in men,
men in women.
It would be good to reheat Aristophanes the orb of the androgens,
at least in our spirit and mind.
All of us live in the other,
and we live in the rest.
So I think the future can be calm
a unisex future, whether in clothing or fashion,
but in personal numbers, in a registry,
law and social roles.
Then the rest will be done by this evolution.
But even if we meet someone,
we would not ask him right away,
whether you are a boy or a girl,
but to see, here you are, what kind of person you are.
Thank you very much!
(Applause)
It is in the dressing that is mandatory,
what is allowed,
and there is what we think is prohibited.
For example, it is compulsory to cover our sexual organs,
so I would ask if there is someone here,
who came to mother-in-law naked today?
(Laughter)
However, it is permissible for the girls to wear men’s clothes.
Put your hands on the girl who may be in pants and jackets.
There are enough.
However, it is still forbidden for boys to wear women’s clothes,
so I wonder if there’s a guy who’s in a skirt here.
(Laughter)
And the 20th century was the age of transvestites in the West,
we can say calmly.
At the beginning of the century girls smashed social roles,
they pulled pants,
and then in 1984 Jean Paul Gaultier
he put the first boy model on the stage in his skirt.
What will be the fashion of the 21st century?
How will we talk in the language of clothes?
In masculine, feminine or possibly neutral sex?
I told you to talk,
because dressing is a language without words,
which we use every day.
It does not matter at all that we are stubborn,
or we’re laughing, joking or cursing,
when we get dressed in the morning.
Virtually spiritual, spiritual,
we put our social qualities on our body.
An expression that expresses an identity is clothing,
a live communication interface.
Usually, one of the most important things in history,
what we communicated with our clothes was our gender.
Those who did not do it correctly were the subject of ridicule or exclusion.
For example, I was very much mocked at my childhood,
because I was a girly boy.
Even then I did not wear a skirt at all.
But he was terribly irritating my contemporaries,
so that they could not tell me at first sight,
whether I am a boy or a girl.
Now we see the biggest fashion houses
and young people also laugh at the unisex and androgens fashion frenzy.
What it means?
Androgynous is the fashion,
when it is unclear and not important,
whether girl or boy is on the run.
And the unisex means pieces,
which boys and girls can wear, regardless of gender.
We see this.
The older generations of this indignation many times,
they shout at the end of the world and say,
“God, there will be genders here.”
Would that be a problem?
Let’s start at the beginning.
classically
(Laughter)
even before our birth
our parents are taking us blue or pink baby clothes,
appealing to the ultrasound picture
a concave or convex sexual organ when they were observed.
(Laughter)
And, in practice, they are outlined
our little blue or pink box,
the dressing that suits our gender,
and what we will have to wear in our whole life,
as Ken or Barbie does.
That’s how the story of fashion has evolved for thousands of years,
the compulsory dress code for women or men
marked the intangible differences between the sexes,
appointed social dominance relations.
It could only be an exception in places,
such as the slightly pungent world of opera or theater,
or say the aristocrats who stood above society.
There could be transvestites,
but it was generally forbidden to have sex between them.
We may ask that in the 21st century,
when the world’s big fashion brands are proposing such fashion,
do we still have to make a sharp difference between male and female fashion?
Or do we have to make a sharp distinction between men and women?
In any case, according to civil law,
since according to this the registration is done.
We get a single or two personal number,
with far-reaching consequences for family law.
Think of the institution of marriage.
But if the sexes really disappear,
then what will Barbie have with her bridal gown,
and what will Ken be with the groom’s gown?
At all,
as it looks from the outside?
You have to be careful because the appearance is cheating.
Wildlife is said to have many examples
the mixing of female and male cells within a living being.
For example, via the placenta
cells between mothers and their infants during pregnancy.
They have often found opposite sex organs
in dissection of the deceased, which surprised the researchers.
So we do not even consider our biological gender
black and white, rather mosaic.
Otherwise there are some good examples of this animal world.
My favorite is the hen cock,
one half of which is a hen and the other half is a cock.
And it is beautifully represented,
as if she had been in a pet animal in La Fontaine
Aristophanes are the legend of androgens.
He was the one who spoke in Plato’s banquet,
that originally there were no three,
one of them was an androgens,
these are beautiful beautiful, full of symbolism,
spherical beings,
which Zeus divided into two poison,
and since then reunification is their goal.
Also in Western art history
there are many boys-girls and girls-boys representations.
From the classical Greek-Roman sculptures,
to Renaissance aristocratic portraits,
or baroque, Rococo powdered wig,
painted face to man or woman.
By the way, we see it in different origins of origin
many times he thought of the man,
that the first person was biased.
For example, in the Jewish cabal.
And in the fall, we split into two,
men and women.
Jung also speaks,
that we all live in the psyche of the other sex.
So the guys have a part of a girl called an animation,
and the girls have a part of a boy called an animus.
I also think we’re a little shake.
It’s a bit, it’s a bit.
It is interesting to observe that in older spiritual cultures
there were temporary transitional sexes –
Mexican zapots, or even feudal Japan, for example,
who are a bit beyond the visible sexes
a more general, deeper gender schema,
and a more complex picture of humans.
It was also because of the Catholic Christian confessors
and they were practically eradicated with hunters.
But let’s see if we’re here in the West, how did this happen.
Karl Lagerfeld, Chanel Fashion Store price leader, said:
Fashion is the mood of the age.
We can ask then that in the 20th century
how was the age of the age,
when the ladies started to wear men’s clothes,
they started to wear pants.
What a longing they wanted
to know this garment?
Of course, equality and equal opportunities
they tried to pick up men’s clothes,
since in the patriarchal society
this power role was at the boys.
Probably not coincidence,
why the boys do not wear skirts in large quantities since then,
and why it is not possible to wear women’s overalls among men.
Probably,
because it has always been a disadvantageous social role.
The men did not think,
they want to identify with women’s roles in society.
Otherwise, the first skirts – after Gaultier –
especially warm men started to wear,
who are also of a minus status
they tried to avoid one more,
and gender-tolerant heterosexual men.
But we can still see that it started after the millennium
a great androgyne-unisex divade.
And then we can ask,
what are the designers,
who are presenting these collections.
They’re probably not crazy completely.
And we can see that the Z-generation,
so those who were born around the turn of the millennium,
they are the ones who say,
to be the first gender fluid generation,
as they live more freely and more openly than their predecessors.
They are much less obliged to consider themselves
the stereotype, the conventional, the social and the gender roles
within the family and in the workplace,
and this is what they say in dress.
They are the ones who are unisex fashion,
they wear a little bit of unisex pieces of body theme.
Such as Jaden and Willow Smith, Will Smith’s two children,
who are teenage style icons,
and it’s no coincidence that Louis Vuitton is a huge fashion brand
for example, based his previous campaign on Jaden Smith,
and he put on two iconic pieces of the women’s collection –
a skirt and a little top –
indicating that he is even a heterosexual young man
you can wear some clothes,
which are traditionally designed for women.
Otherwise, various utopian authors say,
that the fashion of the future will be genders-neutral,
From Imre Madách to the Matrix,
that practically scaffolders,
dressed in uniforms and long robes.
We hope this Marson will not be so.
Personally, I would be very happy for him,
whether it is unisex or androgens
would liberate dress from compulsory gender roles.
It would be very good if we could avoid the Marson with the same power
the scaffolders and uniforms.
I think the future of the dress is much more
spirituality, personality, creativity, and freedom.
And if it’s been here for about 100 years
the girls also wear pants to show their animosity,
I think this is a great moment,
so that boys can still wear their skirts.
It will be good for everyone.
I think it would be a great moment to,
to show that they live in them too,
that they are either theirs or theirs.
The world at this moment
you might need that much.
Otherwise, futures researchers say,
that they will disappear from the genders,
the Marson will disappear from the coat,
and the next evolutionary step may be androgen.
Then we will look at it in a few thousand years
these skirt-pants pictures,
as is now the case for Egyptian hieroglyphics.
We will not understand the difference.
But that would be good,
if in the future we would accept it instead of compelling the other compulsive,
that here we are together, in unity and in each other.
This means that women in men,
men in women.
It would be good to reheat Aristophanes the orb of the androgens,
at least in our spirit and mind.
All of us live in the other,
and we live in the rest.
So I think the future can be calm
a unisex future, whether in clothing or fashion,
but in personal numbers, in a registry,
law and social roles.
Then the rest will be done by this evolution.
But even if we meet someone,
we would not ask him right away,
whether you are a boy or a girl,
but to see, here you are, what kind of person you are.
Thank you very much!
(Applause)
Please follow and like us: