because bakc in those day children (of any gender) has identical clothes. The clothes were long gowns. I believe this was done due to how easy it was to change the child- but I'm not positive.
this is how gender colors first started. people wanted to dye the gowns so some were pink and some blue, instead of all white. They wanted the girls to have blue, boys to have pink. but later that idea was reversed.
2006-12-05 05:00:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, boys did wear dresses back in Victorian times. The practice was more wide spread in Europe than in the States. There was some practical value to potty-training, but it goes beyond that. It was also more common in higher classes.
It seems that the mothers just thought that pants were impractical for little boys and they thought their little boys looked so cute in dresses. They would even let their hair grow long and put it in curls. Yes, they did look like girls. About the only difference I could find is that the boy's dresses did not have aprons. Aprons were popular on girls.
http://www.royalgenes.biz/alt.genealogy/thread158.html
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/firebombing/personal.htm
2006-12-06 17:54:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dr. D 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you click on the link below, you will find instructions on the proper way to dress children in the Victorian times. The reason boys were dressed as little girls is that the outfit afforded easy access to "potty training" days. Four and older wore pants because they were "too old for skirts" and began wearing different kind of Knickerbocker suit.
Ages two to three continued wearing skirts (amongst other underthings) for ease of getting the lads to the potty. The nappies and pilcher were changed to cotton or linen drawers. The drawers would have a small hole in the seam of the lower front crotch for his convenience.
Boys and girls would continue to dress primarily alike until the boy begins to process of becoming breeched (leaving off the skirts completely).
2006-12-05 13:42:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by terryoulboub 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
That was just the style back then.
2006-12-05 12:58:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by luckyaz128 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
B/c that was the fashion at the time.
2006-12-05 14:36:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by missgigglebunny 7
·
0⤊
0⤋