Hola a todos. Mi amigo/My friend is interested in buying some new shoes. He was looking online at a local store’s inventory to buy them there. He saw some shoes he liked in a pretty red brick colour with a safety reflective strip all around the shoe so he could easily be seen by motorists and cyclists. But turns out they’re only for females. Guys must buy either black, grey or brown with no reflective strip all around the shoe, only in the back. Guys don’t need to be concerned about their safety on the streets? And what a wonderful colour selection with black, grey or brown. He was rather incensed about this where guys are limited to three drab, dull colours. I told him that when I was monitoring The Q (the major television shopping network) that I heard this bull shit all the time and it annoyed me too. On The Q, they sell clothing/shoes for females, but occasionally sell items for men and women, such as a major league corporate logo sports jacket. The programme host would rattle off this list of colours that an item came in. Then she (it was usually one of the female hosts) would say, “And we have black for the guys.” Black for the guys? Do you mean to be sexist? Suppose a guy doesn’t want black? Why can’t the guys decide what colour they want for themselves rather than the sexist retail industry dictating what guys will buy/wear? With The Q, this was also the case even if the item was not something to wear. Suppose a guy wants the item in pink, orange or yellow? Apparently, the retail industry has this extremely outdated mentality that colours are for a certain gender or have a gender. That’s news to me. Colours are either feminine or masculine, and all colours except black, grey or brown are considered feminine and are only to be worn by females in some sexist way of thinking? Ludicrous thinking.
I’ve seen this nonsense repeatedly myself when looking at guy’s clothing online. Some male shoppers have left comments saying, “Really like this [fill in name of clothing item] but wish you had more colours.” Well, the reason they don’t have more colours is that because you, as a guy, aren’t supposed to like colour. To be a “real man,” “macho,” and “masculine” you’re supposed to be into two or three drab colours (black, grey or brown) and that’s it. The only pretty colour men are allowed to like is blood red, which represents violence (think the US flag). Yet another example of the fucked-up society we live in.
I learned from watching The Q how fucked-up the retail mentality is. And so very prudish at times. It was quite a learning experience for me. Some of it I already knew, but it was as if their audience consisted of conservatives afraid of seeing the human body. The host would say, “Girls, this top gives full coverage” and “Ladies, this covers the tush.” Too often they were selling mostly drab, dull, pastel colours on their dreary-looking mortuary-grey and white studio sets. “The tush?” Who still says that? And this stuff about “this item gives full coverage.” They meant it covered the ass. They could talk about certain female body parts, and their cameras did their best to show them (clothed of course) such as keeping the camera on the model’s boobs, vagina area in tight pants or on her
butt, oh excuse me, I meant to say “tush.” (roll eyes) But they wouldn’t dream of doing the same with any guys, if they had any guy models (which they didn’t), except on the odd occasion where they had a couple of guy models for a hair care product. Yes, imagine the hypocrisy if they sold clothing for guys, and had guy models modeling pants/jeans, for example. They would keep their cameras so far back from him so that the viewer wouldn’t “see anything.” Or, the only closeups would be of the guy’s “tush.” The moment he turned around to face the cameras, those cameras would pull away quickly. I have no doubt that would be the case. There’s such a double standard.
But if you’re a guy, expect to see mostly black, grey or brown as your drab colour options, no matter what you’re interested in buying. Chau.—el barrio rosa