Podcast Summary: Acontece que no es poco | Mujeres con pantalones

Host: Nieves Concostrina (SER Podcast)
Date: March 6, 2023

Episode Overview

In this thought-provoking episode, Nieves Concostrina takes us on a historical journey through the symbolic and literal prohibition of women wearing pants. The theme is less about fashion and more about control—how, across centuries, male-dominated societies have legislated what women may or may not wear, often with absurd tenacity. The conversation blends Concostrina’s signature wit with sharp historical insight, highlighting both the ridiculous and the serious consequences of these gendered sartorial norms.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Historical Roots of Clothing Prohibitions

• The Biblical Origin
  • [02:25] Nieves invites listeners to check Deuteronomy 22:5, which forbids women from wearing men's clothing and vice versa, noting:

    “...el Deuteronomio, para quien no lo sepa, que es la mayoría, porque es infumable... Moisés estaba muy preocupado por la moda hace 3.500 años...”

  • She jokes about how these ancient texts are written (“un poco como habla Yoda”) and mocks their relevance, given that clothing distinctions made little sense in biblical times when “todos llevan falda, todos van con túnicas.”
• Double Standards in Clothing Laws
  • Nieves points out that while there’s no record of men being penalized for wearing skirts, “las mujeres han tenido prohibido por ley usar pantalones hasta el mismísimo siglo XXI.”
  • She draws on global examples, from Popes to Maasai, making a humorous aside:

    “...les gusta a ellos travestirse mucho...” [04:22]

2. Modern Examples of Institutional Prohibitions

• Work Uniforms and Recent Changes

  • [05:54] The hosts discuss how it wasn’t until 2004 that women working for the AVE (Spanish high-speed trains) could legally wear pants.

    “…se autorizó el uso en 2004…”

  • Similar cases are cited for airlines: Air France only allowed female flight attendants to wear pants as of 2005, and British Airways not until 2016.
  • Nieves highlights the absurdity of having to "authorize" what should be a natural adaptation to societal change:

    “...cuando tienes que autorizar expresamente algo es que antes lo has prohibido...” [06:19]

• Sweden’s Train Drivers’ “Skirt Protest”

  • [06:57] In 2013, Swedish railway conductors, banned from wearing shorts in the heat, wore skirts (which were allowed for women, and thus not explicitly banned for men), cleverly skirting the rules.

3. Civil Legislation in France and Turkey

• France: The Law Against Women in Trousers

  • [08:08 – 10:42] Nieves reveals that in Paris, women were legally barred from wearing pants from 1800 until 2010. This archaic law only allowed exceptions for women on “un manillar de bicicleta o en las riendas de un caballo.”
  • A memorable story:

    “A Marlene Dietrich la amenazaron con detenerla en París, aplicando esta norma en 1933…” [09:53]

  • France’s Minister of Justice in 2010, Michelle Alliot-Marie, had herself been denied entry to the National Assembly in 1972 for wearing trousers, quipping:

    “...si el problema son mis pantalones me los quito ahora mismo.” [10:20]

  • The law was only officially repealed in 1980, and full access to the Assembly was granted.

• Turkey: Parliamentary Restrictions

  • [11:24] In Turkey, the ban on female parliamentarians wearing pants was lifted only in 2013, following requests by Safak Pavey, who needed to wear trousers due to a prosthetic limb.

4. Other Notable Global Cases

• USA: Slow, Unwritten Change

  • In the US, no written Senate ban existed, but women wearing trousers was de facto forbidden by social convention.
  • In 1989, Rebecca Morgan’s wearing of pants in the Capitol became news:

    “Tengo frío. Hay una ola de frío. Washington, Coño, estamos en febrero.” [12:41]

  • It took coordinated action by Barbara Mikulski and Carol Moseley Braun in 1993 to effect a rules clarification allowing pantsuits.
  • As late as 2017, US Congresswomen rebelled against a dress code banning sleeveless tops, organizing a “viernes sin mangas” protest. [13:56]

• Spain: No Clear Parliamentary Ban

  • Nieves clarifies she is unaware of any express prohibition in Spanish parliament, though it is deemed unlikely any woman would have challenged the Francoist order:

    “¿Iba a llevar pantalón en la falangista Pilar Primo de Rivera? Yo creo que no.” [12:09]

5. Icons Who Defied Convention

• Marlene Dietrich
  • Famously threatened with arrest in Paris (1933) for her masculine attire; legend has it the police did not dare stop her.

    “Así que desembarcó en Cherburgo, se puso pantalones, tomó un tren a París y en la estación la estaba esperando la policía que por supuesto no se atrevió a arrestarla.” [14:22]

• Katharine Hepburn
  • Celebrated for her preference for trousers; once remarked:

    “Sí, tengo una [falda] y me la pondré para tu funeral.” —on being asked by Barbara Walters if she owned a skirt. [15:11]

  • Concostrina notes, ironically, Hepburn died 20 years earlier than Walters.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Religious Law’s Absurdity:

  “Está escrito un poco como habla el Yoda.” — Costrina, [03:16]

• On Legislative Hypocrisy:

  “...cuando tienes que autorizar expresamente algo es que antes lo has prohibido...” — Nieves, [06:19]

• On France’s Pantaloon Law:

  “En noviembre de 2010 dejó de ser delito en París. Repito, 2010.” — Nieves, [08:25]

• Michelle Alliot-Marie’s Iconic Response:

  “...si el problema son mis pantalones me los quito ahora mismo.” — Alliot-Marie, recounted by Nieves, [10:20]

• Katharine Hepburn’s Retort:

  “Sí, tengo una y me la pondré para tu funeral.” — Nieves quoting Hepburn, [15:11]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [02:25] — Biblical origins and Deuteronomy
• [05:54] — Modern uniforms and the slow adoption of pants
• [06:57] — Swedish train drivers’ skirt protest
• [08:08] — French law against women’s trousers
• [10:20] — Michelle Alliot-Marie’s protest in Assembly
• [11:24] — Turkish parliamentary ban and its repeal
• [12:41] — US Senate dress code; Rebecca Morgan’s story
• [14:22] — Marlene Dietrich threatened with arrest
• [15:11] — Katharine Hepburn’s wardrobe defiance

Tone & Style

The episode is characterized by Nieves Concostrina’s trademark blend of irreverent humor, sharp observation, and a clear feminist perspective, never shying away from exposing the absurdities and injustices of historic (and recent) gender norms.

In Essence:
This episode is a witty, eye-opening reminder of how deep-seated and recent some gender-based restrictions are, prompting reflection on how much—and how little—has changed. Anyone interested in gender history, law, or simply enjoying a good historical rant will find this episode compelling.