THEY STARTED IT

Hollywood gets the credit—or the blame—for originating the trousered feminine mode. Here you see (left) Marlene Dietrich, who pioneered the fashion, and Glenda Farrell (right), who wasn't long in adopting the new style.

THEY FELL IN STEP

Here's a capital version of the trousered mode which seems to be sweeping the feminine style world. Sarah Williams and Minnie Stephens, neatly attired in men's suits, give Washington street crowds something to gasp at.

BY PAUL HARRISON

NEW YORK, Feb. 1[?].—"Trousers for women?"

Stylists, sensing the chance to establish an important new mode, say "yes."

Artists, casting critical eyes on the attempt to reconcile feminine lines with angular masculine dress, say "maybe."

Psychologists, concerned only with inhibitions and neuroses, say "No!"

For it seems that pants are considerably more than an article of apparel. They're a symbol of dominance. Men did not object very strongly when women began to wear short hair, or when they smoked cigarets, or drank cocktails, or adopted minor touches of masculinity in their attire. But trousers!—well, that's carrying the emancipation campaign a little too far, the Dietrichs and the Garbos and the hundreds of other lithe and lovely trousered young women notwithstanding.

For pants, say psychologists interviewed here, are a direct challenge to the fancied superiority of the male.

All Because It's a Man's World

Dr. V. E. Fisher, psychoananalyst and professor of abnormal psychology at New York University, gave this stern opinion of the trousered mode which now appears to be in for a nation-wide vogue:

"This is still a man's age, and our society is based on masculine values. Women no longer can win what they consider a sufficient esteem by fulfilling their natural biological function of raising a family. They are obsessed by a blind striving for accomplishment in man's field. And, as one step toward their ambition, they're beginning to wear trousers, and fedoras and shirts and ties and heavy brogues."

With the majority of women, however, the fad is still just a fad, Dr. Fisher believes. But even as such, it is an index of women's "innately exhibionistic nature," he declares. "In every normal woman there is a natural inherent tendency to display herself to the opposite sex," he continues. "This tendency finds expression through her clothes, but apparently never an adequate or complete expression. Thus she remains in a constant state of readiness to adopt some new exhibitionistic medium."

Sees Natural Death for Mode

Dr. Fisher believes the vogue will die because, he says, women will find that mannish suits are not exhibitionistic enough—being neither as revealing nor as beautiful as their own feminine garb.

But a more alarming opinion is expressed by Dr. Alfred Adler, internationally known leader of his own school of psychological thought, who has conducted research and written books concerning the "masculine protest" being made by women.

The trouble, as Dr. Adler sees it, is that too many girls want to be boys. Beginning in earliest childhood, youngsters are convinced that their fathers are somehow superior persons, who rule the household, provide the livelihood, venture out into the world, and have more desirable existences than the mothers. A girl is daily subjected to the argument that girls are less capable than boys, and are suitable only for unessential activities.

"And so," says Dr. Adler, "the obvious advantages of being a man have caused severe disturbances in the psychic development of women, until now there is almost a universal dissatisfaction with the faminine role."

Girls Will Be Boys!

Surveys conducted in girls' schools by the psychologists have revealed that at least 40 per cent of the pupils wanted to be boys, Dr. Adler pointed out.

"Men dress to please women, and that is natural," he said. "Women are educated to be attractive to men, in clothes and manners. That is natural, too, but many an intelligent girl rebels against this idea of developing her life to please men, so she makes a brave outward bid for equality by trying to act like a man.

"The only solution is to teach girls and women that they are in the ascendency, and that their equality is already an accomplished fact."

The psychologist admits that he personally considers the trouser mode very attractive, but there he is sharply at variance with two male connoisseurs of feminine appeal. George White, for instance, veteran producer of Broadway revues, is sure that masculine opinion will never tolerate the vogue.

"Would any sensible woman who had spent a lot of time and money developing a lovely figure, and slim ankles, hide her charm under a suit of baggy tweeds?" White questioned. "Not if she values her popularity! Would I costume a chorus in mannish pants? Not if I wanted to stay on Broadway!"

It's Unusual—But Is it Art?

McClelland Barclay, magazine artist and portrayer of beautiful women, has just returned from Florida, where a few women are appearing in trouser suits. Barclay thinks that, artistically, the fad is all wrong, and that it tends to subdue every desirable feminine characteristic.

"Take the mannish style in women's evening clothes, for example," he said. "Previously, men have worn black to offset the glamor and color of lovely evening gowns. But put women in dinner clothes too, and you've got an affair that looks like an undertakers' convention. It's more than ugly. It's tragic!"

Fuente: Niagara Falls Gazette (Niagara Falls, Nueva York), jueves 16 de febrero de 1933, p. 6 («Page Six»; la fecha consta en la cabecera de la página); reportaje sindicado de Paul Harrison (probablemente NEA Service; en una de las fotos se lee «NEA»), fechado en Nueva York el «Feb. 1[?]», con el segundo dígito ilegible. Transcripción íntegra, con el titular, los pies de las dos fotografías y los subtítulos de columna (en negrita), hecha sobre la imagen de la página (fultonhistory.com, Niagara Falls NY Gazette 1933 Jan-Mar Grayscale, 0635), de baja resolución, y cotejada con el OCR de los materiales, que solo recogía los pasajes de Adler. Se respetan las erratas del periódico: «psychoananalyst», «exhibionistic», «faminine» y «Is it Art?». El mismo reportaje apareció en el Victoria (BC) Daily Times del 25-2-1933.