By 
I like to think about the myriad of possibilities in a language when coining new words; words that have an inclusive value, that do not segment or define social groups. While reading the article, “Introducing GQ’s New Masculinity Issue, Starring Pharrell” written by editor-in-chief Will Welch on the occasion of CQ October issue, I thought and thought about the “new masculinity” speech and a new word that could somehow replace that term, masculinity, now saturated with stereotypical meaning.
The solution was mix-culinity. on the one hand, the idea of a mixture of ingredients and possibilities emerges in this potential neologism; on the other, it breaks down the masculinity that is based on social rigor, and judges by not allowing any “mistake”.
The consideration on the concept of masculinity – and by reflection of femininity – lies in rethinking the meaning of each term. Therefore, we should no longer talk about the guide for the perfect masculine man, but offer disruptive options, which challenge the concept itself. The central point lies precisely in recognizing and embracing a change in the ideal of masculinity.
Starting from stereotypical clothing attributable to men and women, solutions can be offered as long as those labels of “masculine” and “feminine” are no longer used, which unquestionably trap people’s ways of being.
Already from last September catwalks have we seen that brands are imposing fewer and fewer rules: from Tommy Hilfiger whose models wear suits to the Balenciaga fashion show where garments are interchangeable.
Our perceptions, and perhaps judgments, are constructively changing in favor of greater inclusion.
Balenciaga Womenswear Spring Summer 2020 Collection
Embed from Getty Images Embed from Getty Images
Tommy Hilfiger NYFW
