Re: The Origin of The Cravat (Was: Are Ties Phallocarps?)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Stephen Wray: "Re: people who eat dirt"
• Previous message: Edmund: "dominant male and fatherhood"

In article <48arqu$9ao@news.cc.ucf.edu>, clarke@acme.ucf.edu says...
>

>Ties are certainly taking over the world. Only arabs consistently
>eschew them. Even Castro wore a tie in his recent UN visit.
>Ties must be very primitive then, connecting to some limbic
>level in our brains.

No, it's just because the western culture is taking over the world. You don't
see ties used with Arabic clothes, for example. The *tie* isn't taking over,
the *suit* is.

If the tie was of such importance, it would not be hidden beneath the coat or
jacket. The suit is taking over, because the western world is taking over, and
the tie is more common than the bowtie, because it looks better and isn't in
the way. (My experience).

It still is clearly phallic in it's nature, of course, but since not all
culture has a phallic symol in it's mail clothing, I don't thing it has such a
deep symbolic meaning.

• Next message: Stephen Wray: "Re: people who eat dirt"
• Previous message: Edmund: "dominant male and fatherhood"