Share your favorites on Show & Tell

Double exposure cabinet card of boy in DRESS and Pants!

In Photographs > Cabinet Card Photographs > Show & Tell and Victorian Era > Show & Tell.
AmberRose's loves1059 of 8469Art Deco Morpho butterfly wing silver earrings probably 1930,sGodzilla King of the Monsters Original Video and LaserDisc Cover Art
Love it
Like it

whitman75whitman75 loves this.
ho2cultchaho2cultcha loves this.
walksoftlywalksoftly loves this.
filmnetfilmnet loves this.
tom61375tom61375 loves this.
fortapachefortapache loves this.
inkyinky loves this.
TheGateKeeperTheGateKeeper loves this.
AmberRoseAmberRose loves this.
racer4fourracer4four loves this.
vetraio50vetraio50 loves this.
Virginia.vintageVirginia.vintage loves this.
valentino97valentino97 loves this.
See 11 more
Add to collection

    Please create an account, or Log in here

    If you don't have an account, create one here.

    Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate

    Posted 7 years ago

    (916 items)

    I have several of these multiple exposure images-- but this one has a GREAT twist.

    The boy is shown wearing BOTH a DRESS and pants and shirt!

    I have never seen this before in one of these double exposure images.

    Photograph dates from the 1890s and is by Paddack of Howell, Michigan.

    Reproduction of these images in any form is prohibited.


    Cabinet Card Photographs
    See all
    1911 M110 Sporting Life Cabinets Ty Cobb SGC 1 PR
    1911 M110 Sporting Life Cabinets Ty...
    Uhl Brothers Cigar Store & Indian Figure c.1892 Cabinet Card photo New Castle PA
    Uhl Brothers Cigar Store & Indian F...
    AJ Dillon 2020 Panini Playbook  Rc Locker Auto x6 Patch Booklet 22/99 Packers
    AJ Dillon 2020 Panini Playbook Rc ...
    Vintage Austria Royalty: Archduchess Elisabeth Marie Cabinet Card Photo c. 1890s
    Vintage Austria Royalty: Archduches...
    1911 M110 Sporting Life Cabinets Ty Cobb SGC 1 PR
    1911 M110 Sporting Life Cabinets Ty...
    See all


    1. valentino97 valentino97, 7 years ago
      Scott - can you give us a little background why dressing boys as girls was popular in the 1890's and beyond? I have a few pictures of grandfather in girls clothes. When I asked my mom she said it was fashionable to keep a boy's hair long for 3 or 4 years. Is this right?
    2. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      White dresses were worn for centuries by children. It was considered to be gender neutral-- and just considered infant/ child wear. It was worn by children up to the age of about 5 or 6. The reason for the white dresses were ease of changing and cleaning (Bleach).

      Also at about the same age children got their first haircut, so you will often see boys with long flowing locks that are considered somewhat feminine by today's standards.

    3. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks geo and vetraio!

    4. racer4four racer4four, 7 years ago
      He's Mama's darling!
    5. AmberRose AmberRose, 7 years ago
      I wonder what they will say about Gymboree a 100years from now.
    6. valentino97 valentino97, 7 years ago
      Thank you but my Grandfather isn't in a white dress - and it had nothing to do w/bleaching clothes. I hope my Mom remembers since I don't. Will find out more if I can. Thanks as always.
    7. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      My statement was on the historical aspect of boys in dresses. I don't know the specifics of your grandfather.

      This is from Jo B. Paoletti, a historian at the University of Maryland and author of Pink and Blue: Telling the Girls From the Boys in America:

      "For centuries, she says, children wore dainty white dresses up to age 6. “What was once a matter of practicality—you dress your baby in white dresses and diapers; white cotton can be bleached..."

      Read more:

    8. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks for looking gatekeeper and tom!

    9. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks for looking amber and racer.

    10. solver solver, 7 years ago
      Another amazing photo, scottvez. Do you think, and this is simply a guess, that the two images represent that the male child celebrated his "breeching" during this time.

      From what I've read, it was typical in the 19th century to photograph the child's father along with boy in his first pair of "trousers." An informative article from Wikipedia on "Breeching (boys):"

      Thanks for the great article from the Smithsonian. The photo shown of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a white dress is a stellar example. After carefully looking at it, down to the shoes and "chapeau," I would have never considered the child is male, no less FDR!

      Another interesting article "Boys dress" from the Victoria and Albert Museum of Childhood discusses a practical reason why male children wore dresses: ease of changing nappies.

      The article says "Breeching happened from the age of about four to eight-years-old, and varied according to different eras and families." It further says "From the 1920s onward, it became more normal for young boys to wear trousers. The introduction of new fabrics and detergents meant that trousers were easier to wash and iron and could be laundered more effectively."

      The photographer is Charles A. Paddack and at some point used "C. A. Paddack" for his imprint.
    11. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks for looking solver-- this most likely does represents the boys change from dresses to pants.

    12. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks for looking filmnet.

    13. scottvez scottvez, 7 years ago
      Thanks much for looking david.

    14. scottvez scottvez, 5 years ago
      Thanks much whitman!

      This is an example of a double exposure image to create "twins".


    Want to post a comment?

    Create an account or login in order to post a comment.