5 ms·
Yes. The bottom 1%’s clothing will always be more indicative of the average clothes of the time than the top 1%’s.
by usednet 3y ago
Yes. The bottom 1%’s clothing will always be more indicative of the average clothes of the time than the top 1%’s.
- thrwaway1337 3y agoSo what? TFA is not about the working class nor does it need to be. Why this fixation on comparing yourselves with the poor?
- antihipocrat 3y agoThe article makes a lot of reference to class. Wigs, stockings and heels were associated with being of the aristocrat class. Which, as the article states, could make one wearing such things a target.
- rsynnott 3y agoI think you're misreading that a bit (it is confusingly written). > During the French Revolution, wearing dress associated with the royalist Ancien Régime made the wearer a target for the Jacobins. Working-class men of the era, many of whom were Revolutionaries, came to be known as sans-culottes because they could not afford silk breeches and wore less expensive pantaloons instead _Prior_ to the revolution, the Jacobins (who were largely bourgeoisie) would have been wearing that dress, distinguishing themselves from the working class (who _didn't_ wear the stockings). The revolutionary period is being used to illustrate a change here, not the norm.
- itjustisthough 3y agoAffliction Olympics.