ARE MEN MORE VAIN THAN WOMEN?

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3468, 23 April 1920, Page 2

ARE MEN MORE VAIN THAN WOMEN?

‘ LOVIS OF FINERY THE F.-\iUlo.’l‘ OF & IIL7SR:\.\'D. f NE\\" HAT As N}.'RV'E oumg_ I I If men are not‘ more vain than ‘iwonion, Ihvy. 'l:uvo at least. according i to Dl‘. l‘Jli7.ubot'h »‘>‘loan Cliosser, a coriain amount o‘f reason for being so. In 1101' lu<:.tul'c on “Clothing and its_ Influence,” at the liuslitiite of Hygiene, in London, she said that the popular supposition that -,bl<.>t.llixl;; exercised :1. special fuscimition upon women was :1. fallacy. with no more foundation than the idea that women were better looking than men. It was a logical fact, all throug'h the animal species, that the female was less beautiful, loss Vain, and less influenced by'person:ll mlornmont than the male. To iiistuxlce only birds, flu,‘ robin, the ‘wild (luck, and the pencock -were the personification of nialo beauty and male vani‘r_\,'.A lldoas o‘.f <leconc_\f in dress appeared to depend upon .clinl:lt(‘. upon flu.‘ pori(nl, and upon national clml'u<3l'ol'i.<-M tics, but p1'c:1(:l1o1:s zuul pllx'isi'-.4 wen‘! justified in (+on<,lmuni.ng‘ bare btivlis and 1 over—Llispla_\'o(l :Inl<los at on ngru \\'hi<-h I was usually associated with “crochet: in the firelight.-" I

When dl'oss vwas considm'od from the hygienic point of viow, it was freqllenfly fmmd that‘ too mml_\;' gzll'mCnfs were worn by the poor, and too few by the rich. A She had <?x2lnlimrd children in Hm elelnentary schools who wore 13 dif~ ferent articles of clothing; while girls of a different. social class appeared to c(H}si;lCx‘ t‘ln:lf—+at 'lo:!st" ‘for e'l\'onin_g‘ wozn--~nmm than two g:u'l'nen‘rs and :1 <ll'os;< was frxnnpy.

ht foot\\'o:lr women s:t('l'il‘iced the llygioniré to the. artistic. Much influenza and pll(>.umoni:l \\‘oul«.l be pi'évented by v. Imivox's:ll docrov Hmt every girl who worked «aw:\_\' from) home should wear light wovovllen stockings and good soled boots or shoes.

])ross had 1-. frotnendolls inflnonco upon mollt':xlity. . The ‘uel'Vou.\‘, depressed typo of wmn-an responded well to the stimulus of benuitiful clothes. When p(.‘Op](‘ were men‘ral]y and s}_»iritu:llly at :1 low e‘bb they should try what buying something nice for *;henlselves would do.

A new hat might lmvo :1 gl'o:LTer therapeutic stimlllativc: value than any tonic purchased -at the chemist. ’_Pllv lecturer quo_ted some commonsense advice about clothes given by Sir Janlos C‘.-111i'i1e_, who said that the normal average amount of clothing roqixircd in :1 temperate climate was one pound weight for evol'_\,‘ stone weight. of the body. If 2: Woman weighed .10 stone her clothing should weigh 10 pounds.

The “clothes sensoi,” L‘ik'v the artistic or musical sense, was seemething apart. from business 01' }u'ofcssional abilities. . I 1: '\\':lS*WiSdolll to be dressed fitly according to the occasion, and, other things being‘ equal, :1 1111111 would like His Wife beftor if she had the clothes sense. The feeling‘ that one was well and suitably dl‘o.<sod brought 11a1.'1nony to onc’s C‘ol)S('i<nuSl)(?S.% mud poljson:xlil’y.