Help me understand...”Modest Fashion”

I've seen a lot of Arabic women dressed up to the nines in designer 'modest' clothing in London, arms laden with shopping bags and faces plastered with make-up. They looked very attractive and glamorous, kind of like Arabic Kim Kardashians. I fail to see how that style really is 'modest', it seems to come more from a cultural desire to display wealth, in the same way middle Eastern people are also into wearing gold. I actually think modest fashion provides a loophole for religious women to get away with Instagram vanity, consumerism and showing off wealth. I really don't mind that, but it's hypocritical to then call the style 'modest' with all the judgemental and superior moral undertones the term has.

olympic level straw manning on this thread. I think I recognisePlanfrom the French 2012 team actually

Not just Plan Ceridwen posted this about Upfield You say you don't have a problem with women wearing this style of dress, but your posts repeatedly come across as if you do after many posts from Upfield saying she had no objection to the style of clothing.

All I want to buy is a few cheap, low cut, plain, dark, short sleeved t.shirts for work and normal wear

I buy mine from Primark and about 2 weeks ago there were literally hundreds. Uniqlo also has loads.

I looked at the pictures on page 1.

I would never wear anything like the models had on.
I have seen people in the streets with those type of get ups on and i just thought they looked so over dressed.
There was no freedom everything is so wrapped up.

As for the dress that supposedly broke the internet.

I am sorry but it is hideous.

I cannot wear maxi or even some midi type dresses. On a personal level I would only wear dresses in summer and don’t like my legs covered in the heat but also like a lot of people I am short and they are so long that they trail on the ground.

ATM judging by what’s in the shops I won’t be buying anything for a long time.

All I want to buy is a few cheap, low cut, plain, dark, short sleeved t.shirts for work and normal wear but as they have been labelled not modest then I will just have to go around in my painted and ripped t.shirts till the fashion changes.

There has always been choice.

Now there is none.

Value judgments based on clothing is not a Radical Feminist blind spot nor an observation exclusive to Radical Feminism

I'm not a radical feminist.

But that is what happens, fashion already sexualises women's bodies. Which is to say it sexualises them for men

The whole concept of modesty is to remove that kind of sexualisation from the picture

The point of changing fashions is to sell more clothes. Your first statement is a sweeping and not particularly accurate generalisation.

The concept of "modesty" is wholly unnecessary. Women are capable of and should be allowed to choose what they want to wear. Like Grimbles and others I do not understand how some posters fail to understand that labelling clothes as "modest" is an unnecessary value judgement.

The whole concept of modesty is to remove that kind of sexualisation from the picture.
What a startlingly naive idea. So presumably men who live in countries where women are covered in this way never have sexual thoughts about women in Islamic dress and never rape them? It's a common fantasy of men to imagine what women are wearing under Islamic robes, don't you hear the talk of Arab women who wear full on sexy underwear? One of the most popular porn genres of the day is women in hijabs sucking dick. The more something is made taboo, the more it's obsessed over. Modest clothing doesn't remove sexualisation, it signals that they are sexual property. The sexualisation of women is put at the forefront with modest clothing, only it's saying 'you can't touch this' rather than 'you can touch this' (please note this doesn't mean I think women who dress skimpily are asking for it myself, but that this is the sexist social myth that persists). As another poster rightly said, these kinds of oppression are two sides of the same coin.

yup. olympic level straw manning on this thread. I think I recognise Plan from the French 2012 team actually.

Exactly, Grimbles. But this has been said many times upthread and ignored.

I really dont understand why it's so hard to grasp.

Clothes that cover the body (long sleeves, long skirts, high necks, etc.) are not the issue.

Women wanting to wear long sleeves, long skirts, high necks, etc. are not the issue.

The labelling of these types of clothes, and by extension the women who wear them, as 'Modest' is the issue

PS and indeed that to argue that the female body needs desexualising in the first place is to view that body with the eyes of the patriarchy?

Returning to this thread after an absence of several pages, I’m astonished that it’s still running. There is a real failure on the part of certain posters to engage with the issues at stake - I sense fingers being stuck in ears and a lot of La La La.
Do people not understand that to say something is ‘not x’ means that everything else is ‘x’? That to claim long sleeves as ‘modest’ is to make short sleeves ‘immodest’? That to say that a certain style of clothing desexualises the female body is to say that all other styles present it as a sex object?
Radical feminists are demanding the right to dress without judgement from a male gaze. We are refusing to buy into this modest/immodest, whore/Madonna binary that has policed women’s self-presentation for millennia. We argue that women who choose to adopt these clothing labels are buying into this dialectic.
Please tell me what I’m not getting.

Goosefoot we are not focussing on Western fashion here, because the topic of the thread is 'modest' fashion. To launch into an analysis of Western fashion would be somewhat of a derail. Are you seriously suggesting that you've never seen mention of Western items such as high heels, lip fillers etc on FWR? Give over. You're saying that we're failing to suggest a feminist alternative way to dress, so essentially expecting us to solve the problem of international female oppression with some suggested items of clothing. It doesn't work like that. If you live in a sexist culture, the fashion industry being a part of that, there isn't really a feminist solution. I have actually made the best suggestion I can pages back, having clothing for women that is comfortable, practical, of a better quality and durability than the tat we're usually sold would be a start. I don't know if there is such a thing as feminist fashion designers, but that would be wonderful. Not to say there shouldn't be choices for more flamboyant, impractical clothing for special occasions, but clothes that are designed to be easy to care for and wear on a day to day basis. Better quality would help move away from fast fashion and it's destruction of the planet too. Sorry if that doesn't solve world patriarchy for you, I wasn't aware that was a task that was being demanded of me. I note that you haven't similarly admonished those who have failed to give any kind of justification for why they think women should wear modest fashion, or demonstrate how this solves patriarchy, other than the reason 'they're beautiful feminine clothes'. I actually think you're being quite patronising to those who support modest fashion, by holding feminists to a higher standard than them in terms of the argument you expect them to produce.

I am wearing "immodest" socks this morning. They are clingy and show off the shape of my shapely foot. I will be wearing immodest shoes later on. I hope no man sees me and has to wrestle with the overwhelming passion my shoes inspire when I'm out and about minding my own business.

I say again, the myth that dressing a certain way can reduce risk or avoid rape is dead and gone.

I worked in the UK criminal justice system until quite recently and have friends who still do and I can absolutely guarantee you that it is (more’s the pity) alive and kicking.

Having looked at the photos I don't think "modest fashion" is totally removing the sexual aspect from clothing. It's still clearly female clothing fitted to a female form in a way intended to be Beautiful and attractive as a priority over practical. The models still have boobs and bums, and I suspect that the fabrics of the looser items drape and move in an interesting way

I too hate the use of the word modest in this way and suggest the word religious would be more suitable

Perhaps because these value judgments are dictated by men in both Western and Eastern cultures while Feminists are more focused on the sweat shop aspect of the fashion industry.

Yes, all women are. I'm pretty sure most women on this thread give a feminist critique to Western culture and styles of dress too.

They aren't really. They refuse to explore what choosing clothing that avoided the oppression inherent in that style would involved, or what kind of thought process is involved in that, or that it would be a thought process at all. I've seen really only one acknowledgement that more extreme forms of covering women like the burka are in fact the flip side of the western approach. No realisation that avoiding both would require some principle for individuals to work on when making concrete choices, and that you could indeed give that a name, and that it would therefor exist in some sort of opposition to both of the others. And no real engagement by 99% of posters with the more significant questions being brought up, in fact pretty much ignoring them and mainly just making disparaging comments about individuals.

Tone policing noted, thanks.

If not you may wish to expand your mind with a bit of research.

See, this is the kind of attitude that I think really doesn't help. It just alienates people from the discussion, and from radical feminism itself, because it comes across as haughty and arrogant.

You talk about looking at it from both sides but you and Plan simply refuse to accept that the term "modest clothing" carries any value judgement.

Lol. I have literally said about 5 times on this thread, that I don't like the term 'modest,' because it implies that women not wearing this clothing are 'immodest.'

So, you've decided I've said something I've never said. Insanity. You did the same thing to Trewser and Plan. I'm not sure if you have reading comprehension difficulties or whether you are putting words into people's mouths deliberately but, well trolled.

I find the term 'modest fashion' as offensive as I would find New Look labelling its more revealing dresses 'tarty fashion' or 'slaggy fashion'. It sexualises women's clothes and by association their bodies in a sexist and judgemental way.

But that is what happens, fashion already sexualises women's bodies. Which is to say it sexualises them for men.

The whole concept of modesty is to remove that kind of sexualisation from the picture.

It makes no sense on the one hand to say, it is so terrible that fashion tries to make women into objects for men, which is a standard argument in feminism, and then complain that an approach to fashion that explicitly tries to avoid that is judgemental.

It's like people think that by pretending that the fashion industry doesn't design clothes in this way, it will make it so.

CeridwenTheWitch, you are projecting.
I understand you're coming from a radical feminist perspective, and I respect that, but I think sometimes radical feminism has these blind spots and this is one of them.

Value judgments based on clothing is not a Radical Feminist blind spot nor an observation exclusive to Radical Feminism.
Perhaps you may have heard of sumptuary laws? If not you may wish to expand your mind with a bit of research.

I guess Islam+Fashion+Radical Feminism was always going to be a bit of an explosive topic

You are creating a variation of Plan's straw man. The objection being taken is to the description of clothes as "modest" and , as another poster said, renaming normal clothing that women always choose and wear and have easy access to, as "modest" which drags women who would have nothing to do with it otherwise, into the values of woman-hating patriarchal religion

No one has objected to women choosing to wear whatever they like (as long as that is a free choice)

You talk about looking at it from both sides but you and Plan simply refuse to accept that the term "modest clothing" carries any value judgement.

It's great that you're experienced in Feminist advocacy, and with age comes experience wisdom. I have no problem with that, in fact they are both positive things.

However, in this thread it has come across in a 'I know best, you're all wrong' kind of way which is, well, patronising. Isn't it possible to have an interesting discussion without telling others their views are wrong and that they are doing feminism wrong? Just because you are (in your words) 'old' doesn't mean that you know everything, or are always right. This thread went off the rails because a few people couldn't accept that other people had a different view. I understand you're coming from a radical feminist perspective, and I respect that, but I think sometimes radical feminism has these blind spots and this is one of them.

It's honestly surprised me the level of indignance in this thread. I guess Islam+Fashion+Radical Feminism was always going to be a bit of an explosive topic.