Speaker 1: Wait, I'm not even sure if this is on. Hello,
Speaker 1: hello blank If you can hear me, ah, excellent, Well
Speaker 1: all right, then let's begin. This is deeply human. I'm
Speaker 1: your host, Dessa, and today I have donned the complete
Speaker 1: podcasters dress uniform, the petticoat, the bandelier, the two and
Speaker 1: a half cornered hat, the broadsword, the garter belt, the
Speaker 1: whole nine yards, well ten if you count the train.
Speaker 1: The inquiry at hand, why do we care so much
Speaker 1: about what other people wear? Now you might be thinking
Speaker 1: I don't care what other people were, But imagine for
Speaker 1: a moment that your sister shows up in a long
Speaker 1: white dress to somebody else's wedding, or are your wedding,
Speaker 1: Or that your first night with your new roommate reveals
Speaker 1: that he sleeps in a softball uniform. Or let's say
Speaker 1: I start telling the story of a friend who showed
Speaker 1: up to divorce court in fishnets, a basketball jersey, and
Speaker 1: a glowstick necklace. Wouldn't you lean in just a little
Speaker 1: to find out what is going on with these people?
Speaker 1: If I talked to a lot of my colleagues, let's say, well,
Speaker 1: I know nothing about fashion, you know, to one of
Speaker 1: the first things that they'll say to establish that they're
Speaker 1: not wasting their time on stuff that's trivial or insignificant.
Speaker 1: I don't agree with that at all. That is Professor
Speaker 1: Richard Thompson, Ford, and he's an intellectual who cares quite
Speaker 1: a bit about fashion, thank you very much. He professes
Speaker 1: at Stanford Law School. But he was driven by his
Speaker 1: sartorial interest to write a book called Dress Codes. How
Speaker 1: the Laws of Fashion made history. When tailoring really began
Speaker 1: to develop as a skill in Western Europe, what you
Speaker 1: see is the re sculpting of the body in order
Speaker 1: to present like a different type of body. The cinched waste,
Speaker 1: the dramatic skirts, the big shoulders. All of the powerful
Speaker 1: institutions in these societies are doing this, whether it's the
Speaker 1: church or the state. And all of these things are
Speaker 1: communicating in societies where most of the populations illiterate, so
Speaker 1: the communication is done visually. It's as though early fashion
Speaker 1: aimed to create the impression that rich and powerful people
Speaker 1: were fundamentally different sorts of creatures. Like think of those
Speaker 1: insane standing white collars that monarchs wore in their portraits.
Speaker 1: Queen Elizabeth the first late that kind of thing imagine
Speaker 1: putting one of those on for the first time. Uh,
Speaker 1: I look like a freaking cobra and this is awesome. Okay,
Speaker 1: no rule, only I am allowed to our cobra stuff. Well,
Speaker 1: me and some of my friends. You had laws that
Speaker 1: specified no one below the rank of a night of
Speaker 1: the Garter may wear a certain type of silk or
Speaker 1: a certain type of ermine, fur or tram and you
Speaker 1: talk about, like how emotional the response to this stuff was.
Speaker 1: In the very opening of your book, you talk about
Speaker 1: like a fashion faux paw that has children screaming in
Speaker 1: the streets, Women are feigning, dogs are freaking out. A
Speaker 1: dude's arm is broken because another guy whore is still
Speaker 1: cat right, Like we have feels on this One proclamation
Speaker 1: declared that they would be guards posted at the gates
Speaker 1: of the cities with a list of people according to
Speaker 1: their social rank, to make sure that no one dressed
Speaker 1: above their social condition. It's worth noting that we still
Speaker 1: have fashion guards posted at some gates, like brawny bouncers
Speaker 1: at swanky nightclubs serving side eye to your graphic t
Speaker 1: and denying entry to anybody in athletic shoes. And dress
Speaker 1: codes still function to distinguish social classes. Okay, we're pivoting
Speaker 1: the microphone here to a woman named Liz Wise. She
Speaker 1: works for de Brett's as an etiquet advisor. If, like me,
Speaker 1: you are a lowly commoner, you may not be familiar
Speaker 1: with the name to Brets. However, if you are a
Speaker 1: member of British aristocracy, presumably listening to this podcast while
Speaker 1: polishing your monocle, you will know it as an institution
Speaker 1: that's been concerned with hereditary titles and minding manners since
Speaker 1: seventeen sixty nine. Nowadays people can go to de Breads
Speaker 1: for advice. Someone has been invited to a fancy function, say,
Speaker 1: and they're not sure what would be appropriate to wear.
Speaker 1: Liz and her colleagues swooped to the rescue. Like batman,
Speaker 1: bat meant bat people for formal wear. I asked Liz
Speaker 1: to run down the dress codes that her clients might encounter.
Speaker 1: Absolutely most formal is white tie. Then there's black tie,
Speaker 1: which is much more common. There's also morning dress, which
Speaker 1: in the UK is the dress code for weddings primarily,
Speaker 1: but also for events like Royal ast Scott naturally, and
Speaker 1: then going down on the hard rocky there's lounge suits.
Speaker 1: And then there's the most difficult one of all, I think,
Speaker 1: which is smart casual. I'll note that Liz deals primarily
Speaker 1: with UK dress codes. When I asked about business casual,
Speaker 1: Liz suggested perhaps a lounge suit would be appropriate, and
Speaker 1: I broke it her gently that in the US crocks
Speaker 1: and board shorts might be closer to the mark. Formal
Speaker 1: posh parties, however, have more exacting standards, and those standards
Speaker 1: hit different depending on your gender. All the dress codes
Speaker 1: for ben are very very prescriptive, all the formal ones.
Speaker 1: They comprise a very sort of detailed breakdown of tailored
Speaker 1: garments and what the shirt should be like, what the
Speaker 1: tie should be like, what the buttons should be like,
Speaker 1: what the cufflinks should be like. It's absolutely codified to
Speaker 1: the nth degree. Scrolling through to bread social media accounts,
Speaker 1: the level of detail on dudes suits is pretty nuts.
Speaker 1: So tux shirts should be made of special Marcelic cotton
Speaker 1: because it's super stiff and can hold a mess of starch.
Speaker 1: Bow Ties should always be tied a little bit imperfectly
Speaker 1: to prove their hand done, just like how very important
Speaker 1: people smudge their signatures to prove its bend in real ink.
Speaker 1: To state the obvious, these dress codes have a very
Speaker 1: old fashioned idea of gender, and all sorts of people
Speaker 1: can cut a sharp figure in a suit. Shout out
Speaker 1: Genomone and oh n Lister from Gentleman Jack Total Fox.
Speaker 1: But a lot of this stuff sounds like a needlessly
Speaker 1: complicated Victorian costume party, relics of a long gone era
Speaker 1: and an aristocratic worldview that has fallen away out of favor,
Speaker 1: like our formal dress codes really doing much for us
Speaker 1: these days. Historically there was an absolute assumption that everybody
Speaker 1: had these clothes and they knew precisely went to wear them.
Speaker 1: But of course, I think for a lot of people,
Speaker 1: when they're presented with a very stiff formal invitation with
Speaker 1: a dress code specified in this dad age, it can
Speaker 1: be quite an oppressive thing, can't it, Because for an
Speaker 1: awful lot of us we don't have a morning coach
Speaker 1: or a tuxedo or whatever in our wardrobe. But I
Speaker 1: do think you just have to interpret them as a
Speaker 1: rather nice, kind of very intermittent aspirational thing. Sometimes it
Speaker 1: is nice to just discard your everyday clothes and put
Speaker 1: on something you would never normally wear. You're not pretending
Speaker 1: to be somebody or not. It's just it is dressing
Speaker 1: up and that's nice and now valued listener. A quick
Speaker 1: personal aside. For most of my professional life, I've worked
Speaker 1: as a gigging musician, something to fall back on if
Speaker 1: the whole nerdy podcast doesn't pin up. As it happens,
Speaker 1: I recently received an invitation to perform at a masquerade
Speaker 1: gala fundraiser thing that specified black tie. My bandmate Abbe
Speaker 1: and I weren't quite sure what that should entail, and so, now,
Speaker 1: drunk on power, I'm going to rest the controls of
Speaker 1: this podcast away from our dutiful producer, sorry Beth doors Locked,
Speaker 1: and exploit this interview for my own shallow it. I
Speaker 1: need some advice, so I'm showing Liz a potential outfit
Speaker 1: to get an expert opinion. This is one of my
Speaker 1: classic l b ds, my little black dresses. That would
Speaker 1: be absolutely fine. Yeah, but is it in any universe
Speaker 1: acceptable that I wear that with motorcycle boots. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: show you the boots. Wait, let's just open your heart,
Speaker 1: open your mind. The general recommendation would be that you'd
Speaker 1: wear it with heels, maybe something a little less clunky.
Speaker 1: I mean, in a way, the way a woman interprets
Speaker 1: black tie is to do with their character and personality,
Speaker 1: and if they can carry it off, maybe you can
Speaker 1: wear the motorcycle boots because you're wearing a very very
Speaker 1: nice little black dress. But you know it's not by
Speaker 1: the book. Put it that way. So like, as long
Speaker 1: as I ride a motorcycle into the event, secondhand dress
Speaker 1: and rented to CARDI, We've got a plan. If you
Speaker 1: have one golden rule, what would it be. You'll never
Speaker 1: ever enjoy a social event if you're physically uncomfortable. So
Speaker 1: you know, whatever you choose to wear, just just make
Speaker 1: sure that it fits, that you can move around in it,
Speaker 1: that you can sit down with it. I mean, that's
Speaker 1: the absolute goal, really, that you can make your entrance,
Speaker 1: you can look great, and then you can just forget
Speaker 1: about it. I'm wearing the motorcycle book. Not all of
Speaker 1: our choices about what to wear amount of simple decisions
Speaker 1: of personal taste or comfort. Some fashion is policed by
Speaker 1: like actual police. Back to Richard Our, Stanford law professor,
Speaker 1: For instance, there are a lot of cities in the
Speaker 1: United States where you know, sagging pants are outlawed. And
Speaker 1: people are arrested and fined for wearing sagging pants. In
Speaker 1: Fort Worth, Texas, the Public Transportation Authority banned writers who
Speaker 1: wore low slung trousers with signs that said pull them
Speaker 1: up or find another ride. Most of us, however, are
Speaker 1: more likely to run into a dress code as part
Speaker 1: of our job. In two thousand four, a U. S
Speaker 1: Court upheld the firing of a bartender from a Reno
Speaker 1: casino because she violated their rule that end i quote
Speaker 1: lip color must be worn at all times, and other
Speaker 1: employees have objected to mandatory high heels or a prohibition
Speaker 1: on men wearing long hair sidebar. Yes, we know Reno
Speaker 1: Casino sounds like a scene from a Danny DeVito feature.
Speaker 1: So we still have rules like that, but they're being
Speaker 1: enforced by the private sector more than the government. As
Speaker 1: part of the research for his book, Richards sat down
Speaker 1: to talk and listen to high school students, because kids
Speaker 1: are actually often subject to some of the more intense
Speaker 1: modern dress codes. Lots of credit card rules about you know,
Speaker 1: the skirts gotta be no more than a credit cards
Speaker 1: length away from the knee, their dress codes banning yoga pants.
Speaker 1: And the thing is that in each of these instances,
Speaker 1: whether or not the dress code is forced can depend
Speaker 1: on the girl's body. Two girls could show up to
Speaker 1: homeroom wearing the exact same outfit, but only one of
Speaker 1: them gets hit with a dress code violation. The teachers
Speaker 1: would even say, well, honey, she can get away with that.
Speaker 1: But you've got a different pot, right. So it's all
Speaker 1: about that and just and not distracting the boys. It's
Speaker 1: up to you not to wear something that's going to
Speaker 1: be distracting to man. I first ran into that particular
Speaker 1: edict at about eight years old when I wore a
Speaker 1: skirt to Sunday school. And if you're not a child
Speaker 1: of the eighties or a tennis pro, a skirt is
Speaker 1: a hybrid garment half skirt, half shorts into the sport
Speaker 1: and contemporary to the crimping iron. So as soon as
Speaker 1: I arrived to class and my sea green skirt, which
Speaker 1: fell just above my knees, the religious instructor ejected me
Speaker 1: from the room, sent me out to the playground and
Speaker 1: called my dad. And when Dad showed up, I was
Speaker 1: on a swing, not swinging. I got kicked out. I
Speaker 1: told him. He took my hand, come on, kittle. We
Speaker 1: went back into the building together. I hadn't ever heard
Speaker 1: my dad angry on my behalf, and it was drilling.
Speaker 1: The instructor explained that the dress code had been clearly communicated,
Speaker 1: we don't allow young girls to wear skirts because if
Speaker 1: young girls wear skirts, the older girls are tempted to
Speaker 1: wear skirts, and if the older girls wear skirts, the
Speaker 1: older boys will be tempted to sin against them. My
Speaker 1: dad thought this argument was hot garbage, and his response
Speaker 1: included the phrase sexual hangups. We left then my head
Speaker 1: held I in escorted victory march to the car. As
Speaker 1: girls get older, however, Richard describes a sort of catch
Speaker 1: twenty two. You either risk being branded as a temptress
Speaker 1: or you're not done up enough to be presentable. The
Speaker 1: dress code for women doesn't always leave a safe place
Speaker 1: to land in the middle. Richard says that was actually
Speaker 1: the thing that surprised him most during the course of
Speaker 1: his research. I'd say, yeah, it's function is to keep
Speaker 1: women off bound. Its function isn't to make women modest,
Speaker 1: or to make them sexy or pleasing. It's to make
Speaker 1: it so that they could never get it right. A
Speaker 1: dress codes aren't just about what's being worn, but who's
Speaker 1: wearing it, gender, race, class Some of our most complicated
Speaker 1: social dynamics are sewn right in. One thing that you know,
Speaker 1: I found is that there's a lot more strict enforcement
Speaker 1: in a lot of instances in poorer schools, in schools
Speaker 1: that have heavily you know, black or Latino populations. On
Speaker 1: the one hand, that's unfair because those kids are getting
Speaker 1: sent home from school more often than you know, rich
Speaker 1: white kids. On the other hand, you can see that
Speaker 1: some of the school administrators are trying to make sure
Speaker 1: that those kids know how to dress professionally and appropriately
Speaker 1: so that they can get good jobs later. And so
Speaker 1: it's not all malevolent. Some of it's kind of trying
Speaker 1: to deal with the world as it is rather than
Speaker 1: the world as it should be. But the idea that
Speaker 1: kids from marginalized backgrounds can dress up to get ahead
Speaker 1: is way too simple. Richard's book delves deep into the
Speaker 1: long and complicated intersections of clothing and race relations. Richard
Speaker 1: himself is black, and his dad actually trained as a tailor.
Speaker 1: Alongside his college degree. People of color often learned a
Speaker 1: backup trade in case racism thwarted their professional plans. Not
Speaker 1: all that long ago, Black people in the US could
Speaker 1: be penalized for dressing too well. After World War Two,
Speaker 1: racist mo moobs would attack black servicemen wearing their service
Speaker 1: dressed uniforms for being uppity. People were threatened by black
Speaker 1: people wearing refined, in elegant clothing. They saw it as
Speaker 1: an attack on white supremacy. They were angry that you
Speaker 1: had black people who were dressed better than white people,
Speaker 1: because that clothing communicated to everyone that the wearer deserved
Speaker 1: respect and dignity. In the nineteen fifties and sixties, civil
Speaker 1: rights protesters often wore their Sunday best two marches or
Speaker 1: to lunch counter sit ins, where they could reasonably expect
Speaker 1: to be met with every variety of indignity, if not violence,
Speaker 1: police dogs, batons, and fire hoses. More recently, writers and
Speaker 1: activists have critiqued that sort of protest dress code with
Speaker 1: the term respectability politics. They argue that no one should
Speaker 1: have to dress up to prove that they weren't humane
Speaker 1: treatment and equal rights, and doing so amounts to a
Speaker 1: concession to the mainstream oppressive culture. But Rich doesn't see
Speaker 1: it that way at all. People are bringing their Sunday best.
Speaker 1: That's not trying to ingratiate yourself with the power structure.
Speaker 1: That's a statement of defiance. That's a statement of opposition.
Speaker 1: It's a demand for dignity. I published a picture of
Speaker 1: myself running in a beautiful street in London, filling the
Speaker 1: wind in my hair. That is Massy Elena Jade. She's
Speaker 1: actually she's the last person to need someone else to
Speaker 1: introduce her. Okay, get hi, this is Massy. I'm from Iran.
Speaker 1: I'm a journalist, I'm a campaigner, but mostly I'm a
Speaker 1: troublemaker for my government. I'm a badass. Massey is also
Speaker 1: something of an online phenom. She's got millions of followers,
Speaker 1: and that photo she mentioned of her running in London
Speaker 1: started a massive movement. And that shot, taken in two
Speaker 1: thousand fourteen, Massey's wearing an orange jacket, jeans, a toothy smile,
Speaker 1: and her long dark hairs like flipped up behind her,
Speaker 1: still airborne as she descends from a bouncing step. When
Speaker 1: she posted this photo, women back in Iran left heartsick comments.
Speaker 1: They were envious of the freedom the Iranian government requires
Speaker 1: women by law to wear. His job and just a
Speaker 1: refresher here on terms. When I say he job, it
Speaker 1: means that you have to cover your hair in all
Speaker 1: your body. According to shah Yah Law and Chajury is
Speaker 1: more strict version of his job, it means that sometimes
Speaker 1: you have to cover your face as well. Touched by
Speaker 1: the feedback she received, Massey posted an even more daring photo.
Speaker 1: This one had been taken in Iran, where she had
Speaker 1: removed her her job in direct defiance of the dress code.
Speaker 1: This snapshot sparked a firestorm. Other women took similar potos
Speaker 1: and sent them to Massey to share, and soon she
Speaker 1: was buried in photographs. She uses these images to call
Speaker 1: attention to the plight of women living under the Islamic
Speaker 1: Republic of Iran. You've talked about the dress code as
Speaker 1: the most visible symbol of oppression. Can you explain why
Speaker 1: you think that it's so important to this government. Look,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna just ask a simple question. When you go
Speaker 1: to my beautiful country, Iran, how are you gonna understand
Speaker 1: that this is Islamic country through us, through women? Because
Speaker 1: we are the one that we carry the most visible
Speaker 1: symbol of Islamic republic. So basically, when Islamics take over
Speaker 1: the regime, the first thing that they do they write
Speaker 1: their ideology on our bodies. Massey, We've been talking about
Speaker 1: the compulsory hid job policies, but obviously there are women
Speaker 1: who choose to wear the garment of their own volition. Right, Look,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna actually make it clear that my dream is
Speaker 1: to walk shoulder to shoulder with my mother, who wears
Speaker 1: hitch ab in Iran, in in the West, without being
Speaker 1: forced both of us to take it off or to
Speaker 1: put it on. That's it. I mean, both of us
Speaker 1: want to be our true soul. We don't want anyone
Speaker 1: else to make decision over our own bodies. In Western countries,
Speaker 1: women are sometimes harassed for wearing clothing that isn't secular enough,
Speaker 1: and a lot of European nations have formally restricted women's
Speaker 1: head coverings. A woman's agency is hemmed in on both
Speaker 1: sides of this debate, given that so many fundamental freedoms
Speaker 1: are restricted in Iran, like female vocalists can't sing a
Speaker 1: solo for a mixed audience, married women can't obtain a
Speaker 1: passport without their husband's permission. People sometimes ask Massey why
Speaker 1: focus so much on the dress code part of it.
Speaker 1: If you don't wear a job from the age of seven,
Speaker 1: you won't be able to go to school. You won't
Speaker 1: be able to go to university, you won't be able
Speaker 1: to get any kind of like driving license, not at all.
Speaker 1: If you say no to compose your job, you won't exist.
Speaker 1: And that is why for US women, it's not about
Speaker 1: small piece of cloud. It's like the Berlin Wall. You know,
Speaker 1: when we are fighting against it, it means that we
Speaker 1: want to turn this world down, then the rest will
Speaker 1: get easier. For Massey, freedom of dress is very much
Speaker 1: related to freedom of thought. When I live in a
Speaker 1: country that the regime do not allow me to choose
Speaker 1: what I put on my head, the same regime won't
Speaker 1: allow me to control what's going on inside my head.
Speaker 1: Massey now lives in the US. In interviews, she often
Speaker 1: wears a white and yellow flower pinned above her left ear,
Speaker 1: and she comes off as comfortable, self assured, but her
Speaker 1: personal choices have had serious ramifications, even within her own family. Yes,
Speaker 1: my mom wears his job, but my mom is a
Speaker 1: woman who is not forcing other women to wear hedge job.
Speaker 1: My sister is my sister like was forcing me and
Speaker 1: other women to wear a hedge job because she was
Speaker 1: educated by the system that you have to take other
Speaker 1: women to have and by force, and she sees it.
Speaker 1: Massey had to fight to reclaim her personal freedom, first
Speaker 1: from her family, then from society and eventually from the
Speaker 1: government and others have paid for it to the regime
Speaker 1: actually went after my family arrested, my brother, intrigated, my
Speaker 1: mother brought my sister on TV to disowned me publicly.
Speaker 1: You know that shows that how they're scared of our revolution.
Speaker 1: These women who send videos to me are going in
Speaker 1: public protesting against the post to your job. They know
Speaker 1: about the risk, they know that this is going to
Speaker 1: be punishable by the regime. One of the women is
Speaker 1: only twenty years old, Saba. She received twenty four years
Speaker 1: prison sentence, more than her age. Another woman, Yos a man,
Speaker 1: she's only twenty two years old and she received sixteen
Speaker 1: years prison sentence. And I remember the day when I
Speaker 1: heard that, I felt guilty. I was like, what I'm
Speaker 1: gonna do, I'm gonna shut down this campaign. But what
Speaker 1: happened immediately their mothers joined the campaign. Their mother has
Speaker 1: actually made a video on saying that now we are
Speaker 1: the voice of our daughters. And to me, these women
Speaker 1: are like Rosa parks Off Iran what Rosa Parks did
Speaker 1: is an example for us because now we are suffering
Speaker 1: from gender apartheid. When Afghanistan fell to Taliban forces in
Speaker 1: Massey started receiving images and videos from again women too,
Speaker 1: bearing their hair or wearing white to protest mandatory dress
Speaker 1: codes of the new regime. Women of Iran and Afghanistan
Speaker 1: are the same. They don't want to be victims. They
Speaker 1: became warriors. They are not waiting for someone to go
Speaker 1: and save them. They want to save themselves. When you
Speaker 1: wake up in the morning and you look in the
Speaker 1: mirror and you get dressed, are you doing so with
Speaker 1: an awareness or a solemnity or a gratitude because of
Speaker 1: the life that you've lived before where you didn't have
Speaker 1: the freedom to adorn your own body. That's such an
Speaker 1: amazing question, and I'm going to be very honest with you. Um. Actually,
Speaker 1: my husband is listening now. Every morning when I wake up,
Speaker 1: when I see myself in the mirror, I say, oh,
Speaker 1: my God, you have such a beautiful wife. Look at me.
Speaker 1: I'm so beautiful. I grew up in the States relatively
Speaker 1: free to dress as I liked and pursue a career
Speaker 1: in music, But in my early days as a rapper.
Speaker 1: I was so afraid of being accused of leveraging sex
Speaker 1: appeal to get the job that I wore oversized men's
Speaker 1: athletic wear on stage, like baggy hoodies, beat up sneakers,
Speaker 1: and I didn't care much about fashion. A certain aloofness
Speaker 1: about clothing was almost a way to signal I was
Speaker 1: too busy being a serious artist. It's uh, it's sort
Speaker 1: of like the humble brag of announcing, oh, I don't
Speaker 1: have a TV. But fashion isn't something that you can
Speaker 1: opt out of the way that you can dancing with
Speaker 1: the stars. Even going naked would amount to a fashion statement.
Speaker 1: Dress codes reinforce group membership, you know, like we're amish,
Speaker 1: we're nurses, were straight edge, punks, were golfers. Clothing signals
Speaker 1: or challenges our social identities and our status. It's powerful stuff. Man.
Speaker 1: Fashion is important enough to society for governments around the
Speaker 1: world to get involved. A few hundred years after Queen
Speaker 1: Elizabeth the First proclaimed that per silk was for the
Speaker 1: nobility alone, President Barack Obama asked young black men in
Speaker 1: America to pull up their pants. We care about what
Speaker 1: we wear and what others were because it's shorthand to
Speaker 1: understand how we relate to one another. And if there's
Speaker 1: one thing that remains endlessly, desperately fascinating to humans, it
Speaker 1: is other humans. All right, Well, I change out of
Speaker 1: my podcast finery Man Bandaliers is itchy. Richard was kind
Speaker 1: enough to indulge me in a little lightning round on
Speaker 1: his own personal style. Do you own crocs? Crocs? No? No?
Speaker 1: What do you think about adults in onesies? No? No, nope,
Speaker 1: unless it's Sean Connery and gold figure suits with tennis shoes. Yes,
Speaker 1: but I don't think you mean that at all. Camouflage
Speaker 1: in urban environments not for me and secretly not for
Speaker 1: anyone else. Deeply Human is a BBC World Service in
Speaker 1: American public media co production with I Heart Media, and
Speaker 1: it's hosted by Mesa. Find me online at Dessa on
Speaker 1: Instagram and Dessa Darling on Twitter. See you next cast.
Speaker 1: A crowd of people can feel electric. Everybody plugged into
Speaker 1: some shared circuit. Feelings are amplified, Voices rise together, body
Speaker 1: movement sync up Next time on deeply Human. Why do
Speaker 1: crowds move you