Equality lies in inequality

Aristotle, in ancient Greece, reminded us of the importance of treating each thing according to its nature:

“Equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally, in proportion to their inequality.”
(Nicomachean Ethics, V, 3, 1131a)

As Lorenzo da Ponte wrote in Mozart’s Don Giovanni: one thing is not the other.

Different original morphologies

The original male and female morphologies are not the same. Although they share similarities, their main difference lies in the measurements and proportions of their internal structure and external structure.

The external structure can be modified; the internal structure, however, cannot.
Both structures —male and female— are similar, but not identical.

An egg is spherical, and a chestnut may look like it. But an egg and a chestnut are not the same thing.

The egg-chestnut invention: the unisex garment

Some brilliant minds —capable of inventing the “egg-chestnut”— have tried to design garments that suit both morphologies.

But if the internal structures are different, how can a single garment fit both well?
It will only look good if, despite different morphologies, the bodies resemble each other closely.

Think of a pair of trousers: while the waist-to-hip shaping in a male morphology is about 6 cm in a neutral body, in a female morphology this shaping usually doubles in half-contours.

The true unisex garment

The true unisex garment is one that, when worn by two people of different morphologies, looks exactly the same.

To achieve this, it is obvious that the pattern cannot be identical: it must adapt, because it covers bodies that differ in their internal structure and external structure.

A simple example is the fitted jacket: it does not adapt the same way on a body without breasts as on one with very developed breasts.