I blame women. Dude wear what chick accept

if guys don't wanna bend to the whims of women and be feminized just to get laid, they could always just have sex with each other....oh wait

Found you at 20% upvoted. Speaks to the type that lurk on the new queue here.

We're all queerbag gaylords.

To me this has nothing to do with straight or gay. It has everything to do with stripping men of their masculinity. Drag culture is one thing, where men mocked society, and this was a good thing. But there seems to be a massive campaign to feminize all men, and demonize those who don't go along with it. This weakens our society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ

Why do some gay men go out of their way to talk differently? What does being gay have to do with your voice?

I think it very much is part brainwashing

I think most gay guys with any sort of femininity to their voice or a lisp had those things before they realized they were gay and were more than likely being made fun of/bullied for being gay by sounding like that before they had discovered that about themselves.

Top right beside the points total if you view the desktop version of the page.

...you mean people who aren't self conscious of their own masculinity?

Why would those who aren't self conscious suppress the discussion with downvotes?

Because I found it utterly ridiculous.

The people who are downvoting the discussion are probably self conscious too. I don't do that, but I do downvote threads I find preposterous.

Thereby suppressing the discussion.

You see the other post about the man that is 35 weeks pregnant?

The article confused the genders

Make men more womanly, and you have a weaker population that's more easily manipulated. I got down voted hard last time I said this. But I don't care. All the 50 million new genders? Pushing people to reject masculine traits? I'm a chick, and I can see how this is making a generation of girly men that are easily led around.

And it looks like your post is getting brigaded by naysayers. lololol

We see right through you. Hope it's worth it.

yeah, do tell.

You ever going to answer? Or are you just making baseless remarks? What fucking side are you on? Hope it's worth it.

Check this out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ

Salty_Crotchbeard

Chick

0_o

What, a chick can't have a salty crotchbeard? WTH??? triggered.

Who cares what men wear? I mean really, who gives a fuck? Who cares?!?

Why do you care what men wear? Are we all pussies because we don't wear deer/bearskin anymore? We don't wear armor? We don't plow fields? Does that make us lesser humans? wtf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ

behavioral sink

Yes. This exactly.

It's a good video. It shows what's going on in society today. The rats that ate other rats are our politicians. Literally exactly what happened in the experiment is happening in real life.

lol, yeah except for the controlled environment, as they noted in the video. But yeah, if you watched the one I posted, Camille Paglia talks about how early Greek art showed robust manly men, and the art before they collapsed depicted much more effeminate men. She talks about false sense of sophistication in these types of people and how this breeds a desire for heroic masculinity. Heroic masculinity seen in today's case in the evil that is ISIS.

I guess my point is that there needs to be balance. All I hear about these days is toxic masculinity, and a million genders that are better than male, and then I see shit like romhims, and lace suits for men. It's not good.

I mean I wear daedric armor at all times, the hell you wearing? Worn leather?

The guy literally lays out in his post why he gives a fuck.

Excuse me but they already said their thought-terminating cliché - how dare you respond!

Totally. Your masculinity will be completely shattered if you wear something a woman might wear.

By the way look at this sissy:

https://i2.wp.com/clothesonfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Goldfinger_Sean-Connery_terrycloth-playsuit_mid-rear.jpg

I mean, James Bond is the epitome of traditional manliness. I certainly don't find Sean Connery was diminished for having worn a certain type of fabric on his body.

But, considering I'm a woman the answer to your question would undoubtedly have to be no.

Except he did: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_5HSi2XUAgiC6P.jpg

Along with some other interesting outfits: http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/sites/default/files/ckeditor/images/news/130515-sunspel-swim-shorts-sean-connery.jpg

https://bamfstyle.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/tb-beach-shirt2.jpg

So if the shorts were just of that time period (along with the pink color) why is clothing of today's age any different?

Sounds like to me it's just fashion changing like it always does, not a conspiracy against men.

No Zardoz diaper?! Miss opportunity!

Yeh but he will slap the Shit of any bitch https://youtu.be/oo0d1zTAFKA

So I don't see Ur point. Would a man today say what he says

I have no clue what you are trying to say.

Your strawman connery example for my strawman example.

Yeh he wore the clothes but also slapped the bitches. Men now would just ware the clothes and take it like bitches. Do you see the problem?

No, because you're misrepresenting my argument. Just because I assert that someone looks good wearing something ( or in this case the real assertion was that our ideas for what is masculine/feminine change all the time) does not mean that I have given a pass to all other actions they might engage in. The discussion was about his clothing choice, not anything else, because the rest is irrelevant.

No it is not irrelevant... Because being masculine is a general trait... a combination of a personality and action... Being masculine means doing the right thing regardless og consequence. It means having a strong belife in core values. Men do not have that, they know what they are "allowed" and "not allowed" to do. Right and wrong does not come in the mix.

It is very cute when people mention the idea about masculine/feminine and change all the time... Weeeeelll not really. Hot and beautifull is always hot and beautiful. Fat and ugly is fat ugly and worthless ... Sure it is unfair.. but ...

No masculine is not a general trait. Masculine is an adjective that can be assigned to different objects. A razor can be masculine. A ball can be masculine. A word can be masculine. Obviously these things don't have "actions".

Masculine is a vague concept that we can assign to different things or people. However it is not a clearly defined concept. You obviously have an opinion about what that idea entails, but it's not an objective truth because that idea is different for everyone.

And your entire second paragraph is ridiculous. It's well documented that theses concept change. Pink used to be an exclusively male color. High heels used to be very fashionable for men. Colorful and flamboyant attire was all the rage in the renaissance for the high society male. This doesn't even address the act that the concept of masculine and feminine are drastically different around the world.

As far as your "fat and ugly" comment it's just factually incorrect. What we considered beautiful has drastically changed depending on where and when you lived. For much of western society's history being fat and bald was considered attractive.

Nooo... I am pretty sure you are confused... Sure colors and razors can be masculine and feminine... Just as much as coffe machine can have a name.

But, pink, blue, red, heels, etc . etc. Does not make women horny, scared, moralized, subservient.

We are talking about two different things.

Let us examine history:

Cleopatra... Not fat and ugly. Drawings on the pyramids.... Tall and fit... Vitruvian Man ... Tall and fit.. Ancient drawings from the Olympics and Greece.. Yehh no fat and ugly... David's Michelangelo ... TALL AND FIT !!!

So .. please show me when did we as people not have "different" standards...

I'm not the confused one here.

European Renaissance - woman wanted recessing hairlines and would pluck or shave their hair to achieve this look. They would also often completely remove their eyebrows.

Ancient China - feet were literally deformed to be considered beautiful with the use of foot binding.

Mayans - would purposefully deform the skulls of children to make them elongated.

Japan - black teeth were considered the standard in married women through the 19th century.

17th Century England - veiny cleavage was very attractive. Because having pale skin was considered a sign of wealth and status women would actually draw on blue veins to make their breasts look paler.

Greeks - considered unibrows to be very attractive and women would often draw them on.

These are just a few examples of how beauty standards can change dramatically.

You are confused as fuck... All those examples are strawmen...

It is like pointing out Botox.. and calling it a beauty standard... Get one thing.. PICS OR IT DID NOT HAPPEN! LOOK AT THE ART !

Or plastic surgery. or other kinds of plastic surgery...

And stop with the straw men.... Ugly is Ugly. Fat is Fat. Pretty is Pretty... It is so simple. Women get fucked by men ! Women do not like feminine men... Simple !

Provide pics of ancient history or it didn't happen! Great argument you got there. This is well documented in history, if you reject established facts then this conversation is going nowhere. You also don't seem to understand the subjectivity of things you are stating as fact.

Bye.

http://i.imgur.com/DlctR1t.jpg

Please tell me how you think that beauty changes during the ages ??

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/be/4b/98/be4b98990991a4da6e7819d8469c64ef.jpg

https://s3.amazonaws.com/classconnection/296/flashcards/4028296/jpg/potrait_bust_of_a_flavian_woman-1492B1BC6910E4579A1.jpg

http://www.peterbrown-palaeoanthropology.net/Images/ohaguro.jpg

I bet you belive also that Marilyn Monroe was overweight.

lol hilarious

No. Nope. No way. This is not true. Guys, straight guys are surely not wearing this right? Is this a troll? Tell me you're fucking with us! TELL ME!

Not Marlboro men. They don't sell that shit in Flavor Country!

Try wearing that to your job at the forge.

Why does that second link go to a page that shows 357,000 dollars has been put up? Omg this country is fucked.

I mean Dave Chappelle quit his show because he didn't want to wear a dress…

I never understood his position on that. White men in movies and tv have worn dresses many, many times throughout entertainment's history.

It's certainly not something limited to people of colour.

But white men have been wearing dresses in Hollywood for decades

The first that come to mind are Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon. I just watched Reds 2 last night with John Malkovitch and in the final scene he is wearing a dress. It's not new or limited to blacks.

I long for the days when men with beards knew how to build bookcases and other things. Now the guys with beards probably couldn't change a spare tire or chop a piece of firewood. So kinda the opposite of what you're saying...

I can't get the link to open. is it this?

Read as "Fermentation of Men".

I like my men like I like my kombucha.

Because the USA has been systematically and purposefully turned into a nation of pussies by TPTB. It's an intended strategic tactic. And it's been damn effective unfortunately.

Yep, we've gone from the strongest, most prosperous nation on Earth to the strongest, most prosperous and most fabulous nation on Earth.

That's progress right there!

Seriously? There is zero reason for clothing to be gendered in the first place, it's a construct, it's divisive, and holds us back from leveling up. It's fabric, that's al. and it's meaningless on its own. the only gender it has is what we've attached to it. Stop worrying about this type of nonsense it only serves as a distraction.

the lace shorts and romphims

I would never wear such a thing but I couldn't care less if someone else did, has zero to do with me. What someone chooses to drape over their body is their business. Are you feeling like someone would force you to wear an item of clothing that is historically feminine? Or would you feel threatened as a man if men around you started wearing clothing that was traditionally worn by women? Would you have any feelings about women wearing more masculine clothing, men's haircuts, and appearing androgynous in public?

Except there's not.

What is the evidence is this "agenda"? The existence of this clothing doesn't prove any agenda.

You're the one making the claim.

If it was real you could provide evidence.

A google search is not evidence. What specifically proves your claim?

So? What does that have to do with anything?

Are you saying no conspiracies have evidence? That we can only trust random people on YouTube?

So do you get all of your beliefs from other people? Your OP clearly implies that the lacy shorts and RompHim are part of an anti-masculine agenda. Where is the evidence for that?

Yes, but ideally that should also be paired with original thought and critical thinking.

Opinions aren't fact, and you shouldn't treat them as such. There hasn't been a single ounce of evidence presented in this thread, just wild speculation and unsubstantiated claims.

I'm a bit more discerning with my viewpoint.

You seem to have a poor understanding of what the term theory means in that context.

A theory isn't whatever pops in your head, it's more akin to an educated guess. It should be based on facts and evidence, it should provide a deeper insight into universal truths.

If your "theory" can't be substantiated then it should cease to be, but hide behind a poor semantic argument.

I honestly don't even know what that is supposed to mean. If you're trying to say you've given me more than other conspiracies have, that's not really saying much.

Entertaining an idea is not the same as believing it.

I do see the bigger picture, fashion is a constantly changing interest that has no reflection on masculinity of the population. Fashion is optional, diverse, and in constant flux.

There are concerns about certain chemicals and hormones in the our water and food supplies but you are attempting to conflate two unrelated issues to try and shoehorn in your point as relevant, when it's not.

I'm a skeptic being skeptical, not sure why that should be surprising for anyone here.

I've had conversations with other people in this thread if that's what you're asking, but why does that matter?

You out way too much stock in upvotes. It means there are people who agree with you, not that you are right. You also have a large group of people who disagree with you. This is not a census of the general population, it's an internet forum with limited numbers and limited exposure. Not even every person who frequents this sub has seen or voted on your post. Many people will upvote or downvote for reasons other than agreeing or disagreeing as well. If they want to promote the conversation, even if they disagree with your view they might choose to upvote. You need to get some perspective.

This forum is supposed to be for skeptics. That's the basis of conspiracy theories; being skeptical of the government and forces in power. I'm not laying out all my beliefs in this thread. If you're that interested you can either go through my posting by history or wait until a more appropriate venue comes up.

Don't pretend like you know anything about me. I came here to discuss your assertion that the articles of in your OP somehow relate to a person's masculinity.

Because it's not an obscure topic? Are you the gatekeeper of masculinity now?

Yes I'm a woman, and your "feelings" are highly subjective and likely do not accurately represent the reality of the situation. Putting all that aside for a moment, let's focus on the real question this post started with, how does the existence of this clothing diminish your masculinity?

Feelings are subjective, who knew!

You are conflating separate issues. Masculinity is a social construct, not a feeling. The way one feels about being masculine or not is a matter of how they perceive themselves to measure up to that construct. Those feelings do not actually reflect the state of masculinity itself. What we consider "masculine" is defined by society at large and can change drastically from one location or time period to another.

Additionally subliminal marketing has the goal of selling product, there is no evidence to suggest that there is an effort to make men weaker or more effeminate. There is also no evidence that wearing clothing that might be considered "feminine" does anything to either the mental or physical status of a man, assuming it's voluntary.

Yes, really. If you aren't aware of that perhaps you should spend more time familiarizing yourself with the term before you try and disagree with someone about it.

It can be a true statement, just not a literal one. The same way you can "feel blue" despite blue not being a feeling. Blue is a stand in for the feeling of sadness. "Feeling masculine" is a stand in for feeling all of the complex traits and meanings that go into that word. It's phrasing that has evolved out of our complicated language system.

Again, you can say you feel masculine, but that does not make masculine a feeling.

You'll need to clarify this, I don't know what point you are trying to make.

If challenging your point of view is equivalent to beating you down then perhaps you shouldn't post your controversial opinions in a public forum.

I'm not here to feed your ego. You'll have to be melodramatic with someone else. Bye.

It is possible to prove theories. Perhaps you aren't well versed in the meaning of that word.

Do you think wearing a color can change hormone levels or something? Pastels have no inherent meaning. At the turn of the century, pink was seen as a color for boys and baby blue for girls (from Wiki, quoting a 1918 text):

The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.

How can a pair of shorts make anyone more feminine? Seriously, tell me how this happens. Are kilts OK? What if the kilt was in pastels?

And who is pushing it? I mean they are being sold, no one is forced to buy them.

If you've done the research, please just summarize the effects of a pair of shorts.

The whole idea is nonsense. Every time we argue with them they just comment to receive upvotes from each other. You'll see it when they're overly persistent in getting you riled up. Must be a penny a paragraph or something.

Quite the summary.

But you are not answering the question - how does a particular pair of shorts lead to feminization?

Your argument isn't following any sort of logic. You can market whatever - that doesn't mean anything. What traits are masculine that you think are somehow being diminished by a pair of shorts? And how do they effect those traits? We've already established that the color can't do anything.

Dude, I'm a chick. Not into lace shorts either though, or pastels for that matter. More of a solid color person myself.

But the significance we attach to cloth and color is purely cultural and changes with time. There are a lot of colors and clothing styles from the past that people may think are effeminate now, but weren't back then. It's even true currently - a lot of people find guys clothing Europe to be "gay" looking, but no one there thinks that.

Haha, then don't buy them. See? No forced emasculation anywhere.

If guys start wearing a lot of lace and pastels, it just won't be seen as feminine anymore.

It happens gradually through the manipulation of semiotics of everything from the things we see on TV to the things we are exposed to on school.

Stop worrying about this type of nonsense it only serves as a distraction.

When your aim is an ultra-right Christian dictatorship, this kind of thing is far from a distraction; it's a call to arms.

The crocodile hunter rocked the fuck outa a romper & ain't a damned one of us more masculine than he was! I got a "man dress" from when I was in Africa & still wear it occasionally; comfy as fuck!

Well maybe, but if he did wear one, none of us would have the balls to call him on it...

As nice as photos and stuff seem, it doesn't seem to be working (whatever agenda you believe), as all the guys around this area want to be pumped up rappers or some variant thereof.

Surely you're just getting older and more suspicious of new trends? Another major factor is that people do dress ridiculously nowadays to have some kind of individuality, and as everyone is ridiculous in some way, it's completely stupid to call them out on it.

Can you honestly see, with the influence of thug culture, violent military shooter games et al, these men prancing around in skirts? Maybe some men might do, but the rest? It seems rather absurd.

I meant that the ridiculously dressed person would feel it stupid to call out someone who wore something differently ridiculous. Not that you were stupid for questioning it.

Maybe there really is an agenda to suppress masculine traits. Or maybe the agenda is to blur gender. So practically speaking develop a different concept of gender that transcends the customs and traditions we assign to them today (dresses for women, suits for men etc). Perhaps the intention is to weaken aggression as a masculine trait.

Is that so bad? Most of the world's problems are caused by angry dudes.

Hey, haven't you seen Wonder Woman yet? Most men would can only dream of being that feminine/badass!

Hey, are you aware that's a COMIC BOOK FANTASY?

No woman can complete in any major league sport--football, baseball, basketball, hockey, soccer--without getting stomped. In boxing or MMA, she'd get killed.

It's laughable that people are trying to make the sexes equivalent in every way. It's just not true. And there's nothing wrong with that; it's women who've been brainwashed into thinking that there is.

Who said anything about equal? The problem with hanging your hat on the undeniable genetic differences between the sexes is that we overlap to several stddev's of the mean.

In other words: Yes, a mid-level male athlete will beat a top -level female athlete in most sports but any professional-level female athlete would mop the floor with your sorry ass.

The vast majority of humans are functionally and practically equivalent relative to the human peak.

In Scandinavia the transformation is complete. A generation of manginas.

Considering their countries are prospering much more than any other country on Earth....I'd say they are doing pretty good.

If it takes being a mangina to live in Sweden, Finland or Norway, sign me up.

Finland's not that bad though, we're much more manlier here, even our women (in comparison). So our women are hot yet a bit manly (in a sexy way meaning they'll drink beer and talk about cars, do weightlifting etc. just see the Hydraulic Press Channel -dudes wife for a great example of what our women are like), but our men are even manlier so it evens out. We don't just take the multiculturalism thing automatically either, we are very vocal about sensible immigration. Left leaning but not to the point of Sweden.

Nobody said it is bad...

It is actually fucking magical. Since most men are manginas, women are DESPERATE... Like really desperate... So some gym time, some game and some good clothes... and you start fucking DESTROYING tinder.... And best of all is you don't even have to worry about any of them get pregnant. Since there is sooo many manginas, they take care of your children ! Fucking magic ! If they do a bad job you can even call the police and they will move your kid to another mangina. Also treating women like shit is comepletly acceptable. Equality and stuff....

It is like this... Would killing 90 % of the earth population be bad ? Yess... but not for the 10%. Then it will be good...

So moral of the story is> DO NOT BE A BITCH !

Somebody on my FB feed posted an ad for those lacy shorts and they were roundly mocked by pretty much everybody. I bet they flop big. Perhaps there will be a small cult following in the gay community, but nobody's going to much wear those out in public.

If you're defining your masculinity by the clothes you wear I've got some bad news for ya bud. Also, fashion is and always will be seen as a feminine construct, the very fact that you're concerned with it in the first place, instead of directing your energy elseware into more consctructive or 'manly' avenues, says a lot about your person in general. Finally, who gives a fuck what other people wear?!

No. you GTFO. Eunuch bitch.

A wild asshole appears!! Unprovoked and with no relation to the conversation what-so-ever! What will you do?

(Fight) (Run)

Oh right. My account age means everything I forgot. An agenda to force you to dress like a girl? Haha okay. Because fuck the war on drugs, the poor, massive surveillance, and the rise of the police state, its those fuckers trying to get me to wear a romper!! Laughable os right.

LOL

Oh no!! Bad words and girly fashion for men!! Beware! You're hilarious fam for real haha

Rules 4,10

Rules 666

;((((

be whatever you want, if what someone else wears bothers you it says more about your insecurities than society or anyone else

get over it

http://www.xxlmag.com/news/2016/08/rappers-dressed-like-women/

I believe. it goes farther than that rappers in dresses, weird lyrics. Lots of male on male kissing. The whole rap game is getting pretty gay and femimized. I only seen this with rap. Not rock or anything else. Seems like there is an ulterior motive.

Yeah, because adrogyny wasn't at all prevalent in glam rock, alternative, or "emo" scenes.

The alt emo scene is the same as the rap game now. I kinda forgot about all the black makeup, feminized look

Oh come on. Scene kids were wearing girl jeans a decade ago. What about frat guys and pastel polos?

Scene kids were wearing girl jeans a decade ago

bowie, eno, ny dolls, ferry, glam rock, all wearing girls clothes and makeup as were all of their fans. and that's just going back to the 60s and 70s

Also, look into how plastics that we use regularly release estrogen mimickers into our food/water. It's not estrogen directly, but what does a mimicking agent mean for us on a long term scale?

Haha. I wish. I just did a bit of research when someone on here was mocking some of AJ's crazy rants. I didn't want to believe AJ's sensationalized claims, but there were nuggets of truth and that's where the research lead me.

Endocrine disruptors is the term you're looking for.

Thank you so much!

Quick Google and wow. There is so much more info to find now that I know the correct term.

Gender bending has been around since the 70s and 80s, they always try to promote this but it's doesn't really ever take off. Women aren't really into it unless we're talking about Prince.

Please address then the historical tradition of male aristocracy wearing heels and young boys wearing dresses. Please, in a civil, mature, and respectful way - devoid of an immediately emotional and defensive response, and provide sources. Would that historical example be a "feminization" of men/women? What we understand/label as feminine/masculine changes over time. I feel this statement is severely misguided and lacks historical understanding.

I don't see a problem with more gender-neutral clothing choices for men. It's not like 'traditional' men's clothing has disappeared from stores. What other people wear doesn't concern me, and I expect others to reciprocate that respect.

"Make men more womanly, and you have a weaker population that's more easily influenced."

Fashion is a result of social constructs; it's not hardwired into our DNA, and in my opinion, has no effect on how weak or easily manipulated people are. Using this logic, you are suggesting that women are weak and easily manipulated in their 'feminine clothing', which is a problematic argument in itself. Would a woman who wears masculine clothing instantly become strong and difficult to manipulate?

Thanks for your reply.

I did read the comments, but unfortunately, I couldn't find any evidence of the agenda you theorised. You provided a link to a Google video search of 'feminization of men' in a reply to one comment, which simply opened up a page of YouTube videos of that title, but nothing specific.

I'm interested to know what other 'factors' you're referring to, as the only factor mentioned in your post is about clothing; hence why my comment also only mentions clothing.

The whole idea is nonsense. Every time we argue with them they just comment to receive upvotes from each other. You'll see it when they're overly persistent in getting you riled up. Must be a penny a paragraph or something.

Stop worrying about this type of nonsense it only serves as a distraction.

When your aim is an ultra-right Christian dictatorship, this kind of thing is far from a distraction; it's a call to arms.

Quite the summary.

;((((

Finland's not that bad though, we're much more manlier here, even our women (in comparison). So our women are hot yet a bit manly (in a sexy way meaning they'll drink beer and talk about cars, do weightlifting etc. just see the Hydraulic Press Channel -dudes wife for a great example of what our women are like), but our men are even manlier so it evens out. We don't just take the multiculturalism thing automatically either, we are very vocal about sensible immigration. Left leaning but not to the point of Sweden.

Nobody said it is bad...

It is actually fucking magical. Since most men are manginas, women are DESPERATE... Like really desperate... So some gym time, some game and some good clothes... and you start fucking DESTROYING tinder.... And best of all is you don't even have to worry about any of them get pregnant. Since there is sooo many manginas, they take care of your children ! Fucking magic ! If they do a bad job you can even call the police and they will move your kid to another mangina. Also treating women like shit is comepletly acceptable. Equality and stuff....

It is like this... Would killing 90 % of the earth population be bad ? Yess... but not for the 10%. Then it will be good...

So moral of the story is> DO NOT BE A BITCH !

Don't pretend like you know anything about me. I came here to discuss your assertion that the articles of in your OP somehow relate to a person's masculinity.

Feelings are subjective, who knew!

You are conflating separate issues. Masculinity is a social construct, not a feeling. The way one feels about being masculine or not is a matter of how they perceive themselves to measure up to that construct. Those feelings do not actually reflect the state of masculinity itself. What we consider "masculine" is defined by society at large and can change drastically from one location or time period to another.

Additionally subliminal marketing has the goal of selling product, there is no evidence to suggest that there is an effort to make men weaker or more effeminate. There is also no evidence that wearing clothing that might be considered "feminine" does anything to either the mental or physical status of a man, assuming it's voluntary.

You'll need to clarify this, I don't know what point you are trying to make.