AMA Fashion and anthropology. Everything happens for a reason…

[ArseInTheCoOpWindow]

I’ve been asked to start a thread in this.

I wrote a 50,000 word document in this and lectured in it for years. Fashion doesn’t just ‘happen’

It is essentially a social history particularly as regards women. This is mainly from the 1800’s. There is a reason for all those lovely Jane Austen type dresses.

So fire away, or l can drop little gems in here and there.

@TheCountessofFitzdotterel

Not to mention some of the late Elizabethan styles…

Or the shapely calf of the Georgian Era

I think the codpiece was very sexual. But l can’t think of any other time.

Word up!

@PineappleCakes

Interesting thread about Western fashion.

But @EmpressCixi initially posted about Japanese traditional dress and OP responds about "the Chinese thing" ffs Stick to Jane Austen please.

no need for that snotty comment at all- this was a lovely, enjoyable read until that

Look, I appreciate that this has been a lovely, interesting thread in the main.

But conflating 2 distinct cultures is a mistake. So acknowledge it, accept that it was a typo or just lack of care, or you just don't give a fuck that you're being offensive. Whatever.

I personally don't like to see such passive intrinsic racism go by unnoticed - if you consider this position snotty or nasty, so be it.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow goodness I hope that's one trend that never comes back!

@PineappleCakes

Look, I appreciate that this has been a lovely, interesting thread in the main.

But conflating 2 distinct cultures is a mistake. So acknowledge it, accept that it was a typo or just lack of care, or you just don't give a fuck that you're being offensive. Whatever.

I personally don't like to see such passive intrinsic racism go by unnoticed - if you consider this position snotty or nasty, so be it.

I must admit it rankled with me too. The two words don't even look similar, there's no excuse really. At least acknowledge it was a bit crap op.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

Ok Bowing out now.

Hope those who were interested enjoyed it. Didn’t take long for the thread to turn.

That's a shame.

I really enjoyed this thread while it lasted. Thanks for your insights.

Years ago I read somwhere that it used to be that there was a fashionable silhouette and women wore garments that helped them acheive that, like stays (and later corsets), bum pads, stiffened petticoats, crinoline hoops, bustles. Now there is still a fashionable silhouette but we are expected to modify our bodies to achieve it, through dieting, exercise or surgery. So while the hourglass silhouette had its moment in the say 50s it could helpfully be achieved through girdles and wide skirts (creating illusion of hourglass).

@banivani You have entirely missed the point. Hourglass-shaped women are real women. It is our real, natural body shape. We don't wear special underwear, and we don't "achieve" it through dieting, exercise or surgery. It's our natural body shape. And now we've been ignored by the fashion industry for so long that people are literally accusing us of achieving it in an unnatural way. Can you not see how upsetting that can be for people? You're literally saying that our natural body shape doesn't really exist, and that we've all had surgery or wear corsets etc. I'm hourglass-shaped because I just am, because that's the shape my body became. I didn't choose it and I didn't create it by artificial means. Please, think about what you're saying.

Another hourglass here, quite an extreme one. It's bloody annoying that anything that fits the bust and hips is too big in the waist, but I've come to realise that my shape just isn't that common and I can't expect most mass produced stuff to fit it. I've found the places that do and made friends with my local seamstress. It sucks, but actually, why should anyone take something mass produced off the rack in a random shop and expect it to fit them in particular? Friends of mine with different body shapes have the same problem.

@DrSbaitso But I don't agree that our body shape "isn't that common". It is. We are real women just the same as everything else, and actually, I never had this much trouble finding clothes to fit until about ten years ago. Something has happened in the fashion industry during that time, in which the clothes started being made for different body shapes from what they used to be.

The reason we should expect mass-produced, off-the-rack clothes to fit us is because we should expect the fashion industry to make clothes to fit the shape that people are, not the shape they'd like us to be. I am the size I am, I'm nowhere near as rare as people are insinuating, so yes, I do expect shops to make things that fit me. The reason they don't is pure prejudice - as shown in the other quote above, people are literally accusing us of being artificial and not really existing, all "achieved" through artificial means. It's insulting. My body is as natural as anyone else's.

Pockets!

We all love dresses with pockets. I once owned a dress for about 6 months and wore it multiple times before I realized it had pockets! It was a pleasant surprise.

What is the reason behind women’s dresses not having pockets?

I must be one of the few women who doesn't like pockets on my skirts and dresses. They spoil the line if I put anything in them and I worry they're not secure.

But I don't agree that our body shape "isn't that common". It is. We are real women just the same as everything else, and actually, I never had this much trouble finding clothes to fit until about ten years ago.

I've always found it very hard. It was only about ten years or so ago that I started finding decent stuff.

Our shape ISN'T that common. Of course it's real and a lot of women have it, but it's not the most common one by a long shot. The most common shape is pear. I don't know who's more common, apples or hourglasses, but hourglasses don't form a majority of British women overall. I think apple is more common, actually. It would certainly explain why dressing is so hard. We're not unicorns or anything, but as a percentage of the population, no, we aren't the biggest group by a long shot.

The reason we should expect mass-produced, off-the-rack clothes to fit us is because we should expect the fashion industry to make clothes to fit the shape that peopleare, not the shape they'd like us to be.

But we are all different shapes. If everything fitted us, where would the pears and apples go? And hourglass, pear and apple are the bluntest, most basic categories of body shape. There's lots of variation among them.

The reason they don't is pure prejudice

It's really not and you mustn't take it personally. It's a business and they want to sell...they're not trying to make veiled judgements on you, but you can't walk into a mass produced shop and pick up something and expect it to fit like it's tailored for you.

Most women don't have my proportions because I am me, not most women. Most women don't have the proportions of ANY given single woman. It's mass produced stuff, it cannot fit everyone, you have to find the place whose core customer is your demographic.

I agree it sucks. It's hard to find stuff and then you have to pay more for alterations. But it's not personal and it shouldn't be surprising. It's mass produced, we are not most women and the apples and pears need stuff too.

@MarshmallowSwede

Pockets!

We all love dresses with pockets. I once owned a dress for about 6 months and wore it multiple times before I realized it had pockets! It was a pleasant surprise.

What is the reason behind women’s dresses not having pockets?

Oh, please please reply to this one OP 😬 or DM me.

I now almost exclusively buy dresses with pockets. No pockets, no deal. I have wondered for years who is designing the majority of clothes made for women - because if women were designing, why wouldn't more skirts and dresses have pockets?

I can't remember where right now but I was recently on an online shop and you could filter by pockets!

Pockets are a feminist issue…

Historically women's pockets were a bit like a bum bag worn on the hip under the skirts, which had a split in the side for access to pockets. That's why Lucy Locket lost hers, it was not an integral part of her clothes. Menswear had built in pockets much earlier.

They were also little drawstring type bags that women used to hold.

Just had something delivered today. No pockets it’s going back!

Pockets from the V and A

www.vam.ac.uk/articles/womens-tie-pockets

Great thread OP - I did a bit of work on costume and social history at one point.

On the hourglass figure - taking a very long historical view men were inclined to be attracted to young women with small waists as it showed that they weren't pregnant by another man.

IMO I think that the androgenous silhoutte that is so popular now is partly influenced by the number of homosexual fashion designers in the second half of the twentieth century and partly by the greater availability of food to the population as a whole. Fat women used to be well off, once the poorer classes began to have better access to adequate food the long lean silhouette espoused by Chanel became more popular as it reflected the life of the upper classes who could spend time outdoors playing tennis on their back garden court/sailing and swimming on the Riviera etc as they had the leisure time to do so.

@Havilland

How does fashion incorporate the massive rise of obesity?

Up to the 1980s and the early 90s, my generation and previous were on the whole, slim/trim.

Now there are fat people everywhere and has this made it difficult for designers who obviously want to make their designs as aesthetically pleasing as possible yet the consumer has an ‘undesirable’ figure to clothe?

Would that not be more why saggy, baggy clothing is popular?

I think this is why 70s clothing has never really come back. It was all about the waist back then. Even big flared jeans, they looked as good as they did because they were high waisted with a t-shirt tucked in.

Baggy 90s clothes (as they seemed to me, at the time, I was 20 something in the 90s they cover up a thick waist much better.

I think 35% of the population being overweight is a big factor, they could put 70's clothes on the catwalk but they'll never filter down in a mass market kind of way because the low percentage of us who have the waist to carry them off is few and far between. I've a 30'' waist myself. Not standing in judgement!

70’s was massive a few years ago. And the waist is having a bit of a revival now! I remember because l bought a bag with tassels on! 2016?

Crop tops emphasise the waist, bodies that fashion underneath so the same.

It's never come back in a filtered down on to the high street way though.
The odd thing has come back as a fleeting trend. I know because I look out for seventies things! Obviously bags with tassles aren't affected by the obesity issue.

The 90s were largely a rerun of the 70s and crop tops were very fashionable. So were bodies, which are also back now. Plenty of opportunity to show off a small waist. The hourglass figure wasn't in fashion though. Wonderbra was a thing but you were supposed to be tall and thin with it, definitely no hips or bum. I remember the terms "waif look" and "heroin chic" being used everywhere without irony, and of course it was also the era of the fucking Hit By A Cartoon Steamroller Bra, aka the Minimiser.

Honestly, I can hardly call myself a fashionable person and someone who constantly follows fashion trends. My comfort, the quality of clothes is more important to me. Also, because I wear Abayas uk because of my religious beliefs, finding something of high quality is even harder, but it's great that there are online stores like Amani's where I can always find what suits me.