So what makes the ‘modest’ clothing list??

[MissChief001]

Was browsing the M&S app and came across an option for Modest Clothing in the Women’s drop down list. So are they saying all clothing items outside of this is deemed not modest? And who decides what is modest? If I cover myself with a duvet do I become ‘extra modest’??

I think the term originated from within the community which want garments that are not revealing.

If you want the term changed, you'll need both to come up with a new one and then get the community which devised the term they wanted to change (globally)

Or perhaps decide why you think "immodest" (or revealing/sexy or whatever) is a bad thing. It's not shameful to dress in any of those ways, and you can change thought patterns that leave you feeling that

New look, boo hoo, Pretty Little thing,
Next used to and you can still see it if you search for it but its not a main link on their page anymore.

My first thought was "Oh come on, who cares? It's an easy way for religious women to find appropriate clothing. Not my bag but that's fine."

But actually examining the language - "modest" is a very loaded word that suggests other clothing is "immodest" (asking for it").

With some of the high profile police behaviour and attitude towards sexual assaults we have, it's not an unreasonable idea to examine the language we use about women.

More religious nonsense. God hates shoulders and knees, apparently.

Thank you for clarifying.

I try to avoid those retailers so haven’t seen that.

For me, wearing a revealing top, dress, skirt if OK. I'm not judging what people wear. I am however pointing out that words do have meaning, and that often not wearing modest clothing insinuates that if it's not modest then it's immodest. And that the person wearing it is therefore unacceptable. There was actually a row at the school that my kids attended because the trousers that were sold by the school were too tight for the Muslim girls. So labelling trousers as modest doesn't make them so. They were actually immodest to them. So it is judgy.

What a fanciful response! No one here that objects to modest is due to some shame that immodest clothing creates in them. It’s annoyance at the judgement inherent in those terms. Are you seriously suggesting immodest carries no inherent value judgement?

I don't have a problem.
You could happily view there are 3 types of clothing: modest, average, and more revealing.
If you decide the opposite of modest is 'asking for it' that is your problem, not the retailer's.

I suppose they could call them "full coverage clothes" or something

I think the point being made is that society or sections thereof has to an extent decided that and women are suffering as a result. Examples have been given.

It's common in many countries to have a dedicated modest clothing range in clothing stores, which is marketed as such. I see no issues with m&s including this as a filter for women in the UK who choose to dress modesty for religious or other reasons.

It's the term used that's the problem

The implication is that other clothes are immodest which is a nasty thing to say about the clothes most people wear

And in sone mens minds it is giving a message that these women are immodest and therefore not good women who deserve all they get

It is a term that carries a judgement with it . Words matter and can really sway peoples feelings

"Full coverage " would not be judgemental

I was raising it as a possibility ffs

Well, as it happens, There's a section on there called Filthy slut.

I stocked up and Husband had a great time.

It might make them immodest - especially if strapless/low cut/short hemline etc.

So what?

why all of the outrage at some clothes being immodest? What’s wrong with that?

Why is ‘immodest’ ‘nasty’?

And in some mens minds it is giving a message that these women are immodest and therefore not good women who deserve all they get

theres literally no evidence that men are scouring the M and S website for examples of clothes not in the ‘modest’ section so that they can judge women wearing them.

that’s frankly, bollocks.

Because showing a bit of arm isn't immodest. Showing the neck isn't, showing a bit of the chest, not cleavage or boobs isn't. But that is generally speaking what is being suggested. As I have said, I'm not judging what women wear, I don't believe that any clothes should be judged as modest or immodest. The driver about what makes clothes modest also often comes from men within religious groups, and the women have to go along with it. Just have sections with long sleeve shirts, tops etc and leave the customer to decide suitability. I know people won't agree with me and don't get the fuss, that's fine. As it happens I don't shop at M&S because I don't like their clothes, but I still object to what I see as a value judgment.

I’m a Muslim woman who would usually head straight to that section online and tbh after reading some of the responses on here I have to agree - words matter and this is a poor choice of wording. I have never deemed others who don’t cover up as immodest, the clothes barely register, I just know I wouldn’t wear them if I had to choose iykwim. The word that comes into my head whilst choosing items is “permissible” but that obviously isn’t as marketable and permissible means different things in every religion, plus there are also women who choose to wear loose clothing for non religious reasons of course. I quite like a pp’s suggestion of “full coverage items”.

I agree words do matter. And 'Full Coverage' is clear and neutral

Modest dress is a term in common use. It makes it easier for women who want to dress in a certain way to find what they need in one place on the website.

I think some posts on this thread have unpleasant undertones.

I've just googled modest dress and Asos, Boohoo, Shein, Next and many others all have a specific range. It's really not an issue.

If you think people are being racist, have the balls to come out and say it.

I agree.

I consider the alternative to ‘modest’ to be ‘normal’. Comfortable clothing, suitable for me, for the context, with no attempt to be ‘modest’.

For me, if I was going to a funeral, for example, my clothing choices would veer towards ‘modest’. On a beach in a bikini (possibly topless) I would call that ‘normal beach attire’.

I don’t attach a moral value judgment to any dress code.

The poster didn’t suggest men are scouring the M&S website. We all know women and girls have been shamed for what they wear, asking for it etc by both men and women.