The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-01-19
ANENT RATIONAL DRESS.
A Weak Imitation OF Masculine Modes Is
Not Desirable For Women.

. WAX Imitation oil Masculine Modes Is
Not Desirable For Women.
Souevhero in the depths of the women's
,,,o,-onent there is a project for the adop-
49,, of n difTerent style os dress for ladies
from, that now commonly worn. III gossip
can be trusted. the iunovators are engaged
Mt the present moment IN contriving
"something in tho nature OF dual gar
ment." other than the divided skirt, which,
during all the years 1t has been before tue
world-in the minds eye chietly-does not
appear TO have won even that lmtcu
amount of approval known as success
d'estime. AS am anxious TO help the
ladies in rationalizing their dress, which
has got a little Off the plumb OF perfect
propriety, perhaps they will allow me to
present them with n few elementary prin-
ciples upon which alone, as IT seems to me-
they can hope to build securely.
do not claim any inherent fitness in
this or that cut of garment for one sex or
the other. says a writer in tho Chicago
Times. Tell me what, for any reasen, the
incrained custom or experience of race
has been, and will tell you how it must
feel about dress. Trousers or petticoats-
it matters not which sex adopts which!
The essential thing is that the dress Tor
both sexes should not be cut to the Same
pattern. Hence it is that in the orient.
where women show some preference for
tho trouser-shape (e. e., the Turkish
trousers of the princess in pantomlme),
the male garb tends to run into tho petit
coat.
am afraid the ladies who advocate
what they are pleased 10 call rational
dress work from their heads and not from
their hearts. They are actuated by some
vague hope of placing the sexes upon an
equal footing, of giving woman better
chance IN the battle of life, in which she
Is said to DO handicapped by her pettl-
coats. They also argue, perhaps, that in
such n climate as ours trousers may be a
cleaner article of outdoor wear than n
skirt. They may insist further that.
Blu; why enumeratc the score of reasons
why women should act as men, or mon as
worneu2 Are they not all set forth in the
advanced feminine literature of the
period?
Plausible as some of tho reasons may
be, they do not for a moment weigh in the
balance with that little principle of mine
the sexual idea and its associations.
For good or evil Europe is committed to
trousers as the characteristic male gar
ment, the symbol and badge of manhood
and TO the pettlcoat as all tnat is sNeetly
and seductively feminine. Tho positions
might have been reversed. They may
still DO reversed; for if women insist upon
wearing tho male apparel Far excellence
men in self-defense will be driven to the
petticoat.
Now, do the ladies of the Rational Dress
society realize what a potent charm and
attraction they are asking their sex to re
nounce in the familiar petticoat, ant
what sentimental difficulties and draw
backs would be created by an adoption o.
the proposed dual garment in its place
/ cannot think they do realize these
things, otherwise this mischievous agita
ton in favor of mems clothes for womer
would never have been heard of.
That the race would run any risk of he
coming extinct through the carrying out o
tho scheme, l do not say. If the onl!
woman there was to love insisted upoi
wearing trousers-well, VIC should have &
love her and make the best of it; and in du
timo n new set of associations would grow
up around this garment-no longer thei
"unmentionable,' but a source of Inspira
ton, emulation and high resolve; AM
women, TO do them justice, with the es
thetic sense of her sex, would, no doubt
slash il, and frll II, and pull il, and en-
broider it. and make it a very presentabl
garment indeed, as unlike the .origina
Dattern as II could well be. But tn
change would mean n revolution IN sent
mont and poetry, which IT would take