Starship Asterisk*

neufer wrote:OMG! Did I miss something in the posts that gave it away?

bystander wrote:

neufer wrote:OMG! Did I miss something in the posts that gave it away?

http://www.geckzilla.com/

neufer wrote: By the by...
how does one get more than one child great grandparent into a single photograph?
Some sort of time machine?

geckzilla wrote:I should actually email my dad and ask him who those people are.

geckzilla wrote:

neufer wrote: By the by...
how does one get more than one child great grandparent into a single photograph?
Some sort of time machine?

I should actually email my dad and ask him who those people are. He's supposed to know... amusingly, I was searching for my family tree on my mother's side and found a document claiming my grandfather and grandmother were siblings. Maybe I'm inbred.

RJN wrote:Are you sure, makc, that (our) Nereid was a "she"?

harry wrote:I do not understand Nereids attitude... Where is he coming from and what does he think.

Nereid wrote:hary, if you wish to think of Nereid as a "he", then of course you are free to do so. OTOH, you may consider checking the etymology of the name.

geckzilla wrote:There, I fixed the description.
You would never guess the gender of each individual without knowing their names. ...
Perhaps they were a little more than a little off.

geckzilla wrote:The one not wearing a dress. I should have gotten a scan of him standing next to this human skeleton he assembled. He was a cool guy. Though, for all I know, the dress-wearing Otto was cool too and his parents were the weird ones for making him wear a dress.

My guess is that for some reason he didn't have any other clothes to wear at a young age but with three sisters there were leftover girl clothes.

http://histclo.com/Style/skirted/Dress/dresswhy.html wrote:
Younger boys in the 19th century commonly wore dresses or other skirted garments. This was a convention that had existed for centuries. This convention sharply declined within a decade around the turn-of-the 20th century. It is not clear just why this change occurred in such ahort period of time.

Why Did Mothers Outfit Boys in Dresses?

The modern reader often asks the question of why were boys outfitted in dresses. This question largely exists because of the invention of photography. Thousands of photographs from the mid- and late-19th century show boys wearing dresses and this does not even count the images of boys with long hair who are commonly seen as girls in these old images. This of course was done by doting mothers as they were the ones caring for small children. It was done across class bariers for centuries. This was not an exclusively Victorian custom, rather, it was the norm in European cultures for centuries and it continued to the turn-of-the 20th century. Actually we have three questions here. 1) Why did boys begin to wear dresses. 2) Why for about five centuries did boys wear dresses. 3) Why did the centuries-long convention largely disaapear within the space of only anout a decade?

Why Did Boys Begin Wearing Dresses?

Why did boys begin to wear dresses. This is perhaps the most difficult question to answer because it concerns a period for which actul records are limited. We can only speculate at this time. We think that the development is associated with the development of pants/trousers. Throughout the medieval period men and women dressed similarly in gowns. Women's dresses were somewhat different, but the basic garments were quite similar. This only began to change in the Renaissance when younger men began wearing tunics with long hose rather like tights. These developed into pantaloons or modern trousers. It is at this point that boys and mens clothing diverged. Young children in the care of women continued to be dressed alike. It is not clear why young boys continued to be dressed like girls. It may be that mothers saw no need to make this change. Here they may have been sociological factors. Women may not have seen the need for dressing boys as men or thought it very important. There may have been practical reasons such as toilet training which would have been more difficult for little boys wearing hose/tights and pantaloons/trousers. We have not yet found any written work addressing this question.

Why Did Boys Wear Dresses?

Boys continued to wear dresses through most of the 19th century. We only see the popularity of this fashion waning after about 1895 and by about 1905 it was no longer a major fashion convention. It did not entirely disappear and we continue to see a few boys in dresses until after World War I. After the War, however, it became the exception rather than the rule. Only infants wore dresses. The Sears Catalog used to sell complete baby layettes suitable for either sex, complete with frilly dresses, into the 1940s.

Why Did Boys Stop Wearing Dresses?

Why did the centuries-long convention largely disappear within the space of only about a decade? This is another issue that we have not see addressed in other sources. Here we can only speculate at this time. It may relate to changing attitudes toward childhood. Children were regarded as asexual beings until Freud's work in the late-19th century. We are not sure, however, to what degree this had penetrated the popular mind. Freud's work, however, was affecting professional thought. Another factor is public education. Younger children were no longer closeted within the family, Most boys began school at age 6 years. They could not wear dresses to school. And their little brothers would not be happy wearing dresses. Modern media exploded at the turn-of-the century. Newspapers and magazines could print photographs for the first time. Movies began to become popular. This meant that popular fashion became increasingly pronounced, leaving less latitude to the doting mother. The development of rubber training pants may have been an important factor. One researcher suggests that the earlier Little Lord Fauntleroy craze was a factor. Mothers rushed to breech their boys so they could wear Fauntleroy suits. And perhaps those grown up boys remembering the indignities of the Fauntleroy suit, involved themselves in how their younger sons were dressed to a greater degree than their fathers. A reader writrs, "Some people at the time, most prominently President Teddy Roosevelt, were stressing that boys had to be "real boys". [Nugent] The word "sissy" then began to be used more frequently. People become more gender conscious, promoted by advertising companies. As I said in an earlier e-mail, did the people want gender differentiated garments/shoes, or was it the companies' profit motives?">>

Orca wrote:Man, I am no where near 1 kilopost. But then, I did kinda vanish for a while there.

By the way, I just noticed our titles. Science Officer, I like that.
Though I usually go by hep cat daddy-O rabbi...

Harry               2839  / 1.84 ppd since Fri Nov 18, 2005  / G'day G'day G'day G'day
Neufer              2429  / 3.23 ppd since Mon Jan 21, 2008  / Quotidian Quotationist
Chris Peterson      2169  / 1.93 ppd since Tue Dec 07, 2004  / Expert Cloud Angler
BMAONE23            1975  / 1.09 ppd since Wed Feb 23, 2005  / Commentator Model 1.23
bystander           1894  / 1.50 ppd since Mon Aug 28, 2006  / Sanitation Guru
orin stepanek       1529  / 0.92 ppd since Wed Jul 27, 2005  / Resident Geezer
makc                1430  / 0.73 ppd since Tue Oct 12, 2004  / Best Title in the Universe
apodman             1173  / 1.30 ppd since Wed Aug 15, 2007  / Teapot Fancier (MIA)

neufer wrote:"Sanitation Guru" breaks the 2,000 mark!
(It's not exactly clear whether that is a comment on himself or the rest of us.)

bystander wrote:BMAONE23 breaks the 2k barrier!

Harry               2839  / 1.84 ppd since Fri Nov 18, 2005  / G'day G'day G'day G'day
Neufer              2525  / 3.23 ppd since Mon Jan 21, 2008  / Quotidian Quotationist
Chris Peterson      2205  / 1.93 ppd since Tue Dec 07, 2004  / Expert Cloud Angler
bystander           2107  / 1.58 ppd since Mon Aug 28, 2006  / Sanitation Guru
BMAONE23            2001  / 1.09 ppd since Wed Feb 23, 2005  / Commentator Model 1.23
orin stepanek       1533  / 0.92 ppd since Wed Jul 27, 2005  / Resident Geezer
makc                1459  / 0.73 ppd since Tue Oct 12, 2004  / Best Title in the Universe
apodman             1173  / 1.30 ppd since Wed Aug 15, 2007  / Teapot Fancier (MIA)