-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 02:55:42PM +0200, Gergana Petrova wrote:
Hi all,
About the T-shirts, Amanda, I don't think Theresa was suggesting to have only "unisex" T-shirts - she suggeted having two types - "fitted" and "unisex". Maybe I am wrong about this, but I haven't heard any "opposite feedback" (coming from women, presumably?) suggesting we should only have one type of T-shirts for everybody...
Unisex is not a mix between the male and female cut. The unisex cut is basically identical to the cut traditionally associated with men (same chest, waist, and hip measurements).
Basically it's is giving everybody men's cut, but telling women to be happy about it, since it's labelled "unisex". I don't see why RIPE NCC should only offer "unisex", especially given the diversity efforts we are making. The biology of men and women is different. Women have breasts, smaller waist, bigger hips. That's why unisex (aka men's cut) does not fit women well. I support Theresa's suggestion to offer two cuts. As for the labeling, I also support labeling them "fitted" and "loose" (rather than "mens" and "womens") or any other way, so people can make up their mind themselves.
In conclusion, I do not believe women should be happy with a staight cut, that doesn't fit their biology, simply because it is labelled "unisex". I think we should offer two cuts and lablel them in a gender-neutral way.
It's not just about the cut, care needs to be taken in how the printing is laid out. What looks fine on a flat male chest, can look at best weird, and at worst offensive on a large female chest (think parts of designs cut ff by boob shape). T-Shirt design is hard. Calling a traditional mens cut "unisex" is just wrong. I like the "fitted" and "unfitted" labelling. J -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFbzcwH42M0lILkmGIRAg6fAJsFI9zbtrh0le+9758UyRUr+GJzfACeNa9Q U4uxClOrygso6DgW/d3ytGs= =j+Ql -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----