テート・ギャラリーのインスタグラム(tate) - 7月7日 02時35分

George Romney’s Mrs Johnstone and her Son (?) c.1775–80. ‘The question mark pulls us up. Is the gender of this wide-eyed child in doubt? In fact, the identity being queried is that of "Mrs Johnstone". (The painting’s traditional title may disguise an extramarital liaison in the Johnstone family tree.) The ambiguity of infants in eighteenth-century pictures offers a challenge to modern norms. The clothes and hairstyles we see now on toddlers tend to ensure their assigned genders are instantly legible. In Romney’s day, unisex frocks were standard for children under five. That historical, all-gender wardrobe is a startling reminder that surface details such as ringlets, low-cut bodices, frills and pink bows have no natural link with gender.’ – Alex Pilcher, Tate’s Senior Web Developer and the author of ‘A Queer Little History of Art’ and ‘Love’ (both available from Tate Publishing). See Tate's collection through a queer lens with works selected and interpreted by Tate’s LGBTQ+ staff network 🌈 Link in bio. #Pride #Pride2019

[BIHAKUEN]UVシールド(UVShield)

lilianamariamoretti There was a practical reason for unisex dresses for children in the past. Those dresses were used by older brothers and sisters and they were in very good conditions because under a certain age a child isn’t able to walk and so can’t ruin the dresses. A very simple and sustainable reason for all-gender wardrobe in the past, even in rich families.

ahsetstudio @march1310 What a strange reply. Boys and girls were dressed quite the same for centuries in dresses, with only certain accessories giving away gender...and as to antibiotics....um, what?? And if you think mistresses and adultery didn’t happen, you seriously need to read a lot of history books.

march1310 Antibiotics were not available then and women could be imprisoned for adultery. So your gender neutral theory on a backward time in history holds no weight and is a ridiculous stretch.

jolnir.wotanblut @jolnir.wotanblut do you know how difficult it would have been to get both the paint and the dye? Pastel colours was late 1700s not whatever monstrosity this is.

andreas_insta We have a book over here, describing the Netherlands of 1920’s having the skirt in all cases for children under five, so not particularly 18th century ;)

ma_caudalie @jolnir.wotanblut You cannot see the colour from a photo, you have to make a research of the painting's pigments and I doubt you did

>> 飲む日焼け止め！「UVシールド」を購入する