Pink? Must be gay!

P Hudson

Super Member
I live in one of the gayest areas in the world. Let me assure you that while many of the people here are activists, politically engaged, etc., they wear no more pink than anyone else. In fact, I'm sure I wear more pink than the average person on the street, because it is more closely associated with Brooks Brothers and traditional American clothes than with anything else. I hear comments about it all the time, but they are consistently snide remarks from friends who know that I'm not gay. I suppose if you live in an area where there is virulent gay-bashing, and for some reason the association between color and life-style has been made, then I would advise caution, but I can't imagine this is a common issue.
 

P Hudson

Super Member
I know a gay couple who are professionals, and gosh darn it, wouldn't you know it! Those guys dress just like professionals! :icon_saint7kg:

That sums it up.

One question though, if you can't ask a dumb question about clothes on this forum, where can you? Should we just rule out all dumb questions? What if the OP had asked if people in Wisconsin don't wear navy and orange at the same time because it is often associated with the Bears, and wondered if that association bothered them? I understand that the actual question is more charged than that, but I'm not sure why we can't have a conversation. Personally, I wear pink a lot but would never wear orange, except on St Patrick's day. There, I said it--sectarian, political and sporting, all in one offensive statement.
 

IvanD

Senior Member
Just mentioned this thread to a gay work colleague.
We got on to the subject of pink clothing, and it turns out I have more than he doe's.
On a serious note though, myself and my colleague agreed that this type of stereotyping really should have no place in todays society.
Live and let live.
 

justonemore

Elite Member
Thank you hudson. at least a few people can have an open and honest conversation on topics that may be out of the ordinary and perhaps considered offensive. I find it funny that thise quick to critique the topic are also quick to respond yet on all my serious non society related questions refering to clothing get an average of 3 responses mostly by newer members. I've had benefit if mr. kabbaz's experience only once on serious topics.
 

Shaver

Suspended
The implicit assumption of this post, being that homosexuality is a negative and something to be avoided, is distasteful.

The assertion elsewhere that pink is 'for little girls' is also offensive.

I presume that members appreciate that many of their esteemed associates on this forum will enjoy a multitudinous range of sexual preferances?
 

cdavant

Elite Member
We must be careful not to let an irrational prejudice against prejudice color our perceptions. Sometimes a color choice does signify membership in a group of somewhat questionable character.

Here in the South, for example, the color orange is worn almost exclusively by fans, attendees, and the (rare) graduate of Tennessee and Clemson. For this group the color provides a certain utility. It can be worn to the game on Saturday. It is worn hunting on Sunday. It is worn the rest of the week picking up trash along the highway while out on work release...

Pink is not a problem, but orange will bring out the slurs. It often gets ugly once the season starts.
 

Haffman

Super Member
Not sure why this question has attracted such hostility. Its a perfectly reasonable question and was phrased in a non-judgemental and conversational way. If its not interesting to individuals they can just read another post. We can see by the number of replies its interesting to others.

For the record I was told by a colleague only last week that pink shirts were "gay". I work in London. Like other forum members I just thought it was a dumb thing to say.
 

Alexander Kabbaz

Tech and Business Advice Guru
That sums it up.

One question though, if you can't ask a dumb question about clothes on this forum, where can you?
Of course you can. Actually, we see more dumb questions than any other kind. :)

This thread was not a question about clothes by any stretch of the imagination.

At least a few people can have an open and honest conversation on topics that may be out of the ordinary and perhaps considered offensive. I find it funny that thise quick to critique the topic are also quick to respond yet on all my serious non society related questions refering to clothing get an average of 3 responses mostly by newer members. I've had benefit if mr. kabbaz's experience only once on serious topics.
Of your roughly 100 posts, only 3 have been on the topic of shirts which is my forte. The vast majority have discussed shoes. I generally don't speak about shoes. Not that defense is necessary ... but neither was your comment.

On topic: Back in the 1970's, those of us old enough to remember watched friends die ... and nobody knew why. I all-too-vividly remember the first funeral of one of my fellow DJ's. And the second. And the third. It was the time before HIV/AIDS was known for what it is. Your question speaks about a very sad era in the U.S. - one in which wearing pink might have been thought a sign of being gay by the ignorant and predjudiced.

Thankfully, society has advanced. HIV is now a known factor and efforts at eradication/control/cure are universal. And pink is now considered exactly for what it is - a very soft, beautiful color in which most men look spectacular.
 

CuffDaddy

Connoisseur
I thought it might be of interest to the members to read this article, which claims that the pink-is-for-girls-blue-is-for-boys was a marketing-driven decision made in the 1940's, and that prior to that, the "standards" were often reversed. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/When-Did-Girls-Start-Wearing-Pink.html

Regarding the other concepts floating about in this thread, I say: Thank God/goodness/force-larger-than-yourself-of-your-choice that attitudes are changing towards homosexuality, such that "not looking gay" need no longer be a preoccupation of straight men. For many previous centuries, that fear of not being (mis)identified as gay was a serious factor in men's clothing choices, and a brake on flamboyance*. I tend to think that a number of things currently in fashion would not have been so readily adopted if the taboo against "looking gay" was still in place. Even where I dislike the thing embraced (pointy shoes, crotch-hugging clothing), I find it encouraging that the fear of being thought homosexual no longer deters straight men from dressing as they please - not so much because I want men to be able to dress as they like, but because it suggests that being incorrectly though homosexual is no longer horrifying.

*In the literal, non-euphemistic sense.
 

justonemore

Elite Member
Thanks everyone for the lively conversation. It appears that the distasteful draws heated debate and passion no matter how we think. I do wonder if there'd be such an outcry here if I mentioned wearing a full hajab/burqa to the airport while speaking loudly in Arabic. We speak of portraying a message with our clothes. Even if it is unfair we have come to the conclusion that we must dress a certain way for employers (who may be biased), dates, and other events. Try wearing a cross and american flag in certain places you're asking for trouble whether you feel you have the right to do so or not. I myself don't care if you're sporting a mini skirt and high heels but it's not going to stop the hillbillies behind me from stringing you up. fair or not it's the danger in any society when we allow norms to become rules (even when speaking of other dress)

We all seem to be interested in color and the way it works. Could the simple answer of been that pink may indeed make certain men look effeminate just like other colors will wash out certain people's faces? I've been told this when I wear pink (and with 2 daughters it's one of my staples, and no I don't push pink on them because they're female, I believe male and female eyes are attracted to different colors usually).

Instead we're all upset that someone might mention something we'd all like to imagine is in the past when in fact these posts show that it is still very much on the tip of everyone's brain. We may have done away with polio and smallpox but should we avoid discussing because of the millions who died?

Mr. Kabbaz. I'm sorry to have singled you out. What you stated is correct; I'm more into the shoe stage and you're into shirts, socks and Swiss underwear. Please understand that I highly appreciate the time you (and others) take to answer people's questions(even mine) and that I have adored following the site these past 3 years. I felt that as moderator you pretty much set the "disgusting" tone for the post instead of making it an educational opportunity for those who are new or may disagree with certain viewpoints.. You may have noticed that this is my first "controversial" post and that I come here for advice and to offer what little I know on the topic in a respectful manner versus to start fights. I simply wanted to get an idea of people's thoughts and nowhere did I use derogatory language or advocate violence against any race, sex, or preference (sexual or not). Perhaps the end of your last post was the best of your answers. Yet indeed my original post was about clothing and the message it portrays.

Either way, I'm done with this thread. Onto a new pair of shoes (or perhaps some Zimmerli). Best to all who participated in a patient manner and understood the difference between a discussion and strait out bias.
 
Last edited:

eagle2250

Connoisseur/Curmudgeon Emeritus - Moderator
...no more than a tartan plaid shirt from LL Bean makes you straight!

Yes, but regardless of ones "orientation" and depending on the Tartan design being worn, if you run into the wrong Scotts man, fueled by some testosterone induced maniacal rage, you are going to get your a** beat, absent the proper ancestral authority to be wearing said tartan.

Good golly, it seems unpleasant sterotyping exists on both sides of the pond and is distasteful regardless of wich side of the pond on which it takes place! :icon_scratch:

PS: I wear pink because the gals seem to think it looks good on me!
 

Joseph Peter

Active Member with Corp. Privileges
I am a practicing attorney in Chicago for 24 years and have been married 22 years. I have pink shirts and ties in my rotation and have never worried about any such issues. My work sometimes takes me to, shall we say, less than upper class areas of the city, and I have never perceived any unusual looks or threats. Further, the only responses I've received about them has been positive. A non-issue as far as I am concerned.
 

Alexander Kabbaz

Tech and Business Advice Guru
Mr. Kabbaz. I felt that as moderator you pretty much set the "disgusting" tone for the post instead of making it an educational opportunity for those who are new or may disagree with certain viewpoints.

I'm sorry to keep coming back to your replies but this topic is one of import and specificity reigns.

1] I am fully aware that you had no malicious intent in starting this thread and never implied such. Had you I would have answered as a moderator and not a member.

2] I beg to differ with your characterization. I did not term your postulation as disgusting. I used the very specific "ignorant" ... for to ascribe the predjudices of yesteryear to this time is exactly that.

My statement that this thread is not about clothes stands. It is about societal stereotypes. We may presume the man driving the Bentley to be a wealthy Wall Street honcho. Instead, he may well be the auto mechanic or a car thief. That's not about cars; it is about stereotypes.
 
Your email address will not be publicly visible. We will only use it to contact you to confirm your post.

IMPORTANT: BEFORE POSTING PLEASE CHECK THE DATE OF THE LAST POST OF THIS THREAD. IF IT'S VERY OLD, PLEASE CONSIDER REGISTERING FIRST, AND STARTING A NEW THREAD ABOUT THIS TOPIC.