To think that we don't need a London Modest Fashion week??

[Cherrysoup]

Given that we're not living in the Victorian era?

So, London Fashion Week is not the same thing as this one - it's not ever remotely aimed at women who aren't a) running Vogue or b) so eye wateringly spectacularly rich they can afford to spend upwards of £30k on haute couture. And it IS important and useful, economically - see that great scene in The Devil Wears Prada where Meryl Street outlines the production and logistics chain that lead Anne Hathaway to be wearing that pretty colour of blue on her chain store sweater.

This looks like it's aimed more at middle-class-to-wealthy women who aren't looking to buy just high fashion but something that fits their lifestyles and who aren't western by origin and so have a different idea about what wearable luxury clothes should be like. I don't like the word modest particularly but it does fit with what this week is about and what the women who go to it are looking for.

IF you subscribe to the idea that all these poor wimmins are being controlled by their menfolk (which I do not, by the way, but if...) then calling it modest and then having all these wonderful sumptuous clothes available that are really fashion forward and just as much about being attractive as LFW clothes are, then it can actually be positioned as really subversive - "Yes darling, modest fashion, isn't it wonderful?" *comes home with sexy column dress.

I do think a lot of the name is about signalling and positioning a difference to western fashion, not about modesty or about the idea of compliance mooted above.

IF you subscribe to the idea that all these poor wimmins are being controlled by their menfolk

I think people here realise it's more complicated than that.

Sorry, I still find it incomprehensible that anyone thinks of clothes in that way.

In reply to a comment about "modest" being for older women.... Can anyone seriously say that they wear exactly the same things at 45 that they did at 25, even allowing for changes in fashion? I might have got away with hotpants and a cami top without a bra at 20, not at 40 and certainly not at the age I am now. And it's not because I'm being suppressed or marginalised by the patriarchy or whatever other buzzwrods the leftie feminists throw about - it's because I don't want to do the school run dressed like one of Little Mix. Or go to a posh restaurant with DH in one of Kylie's stage outfits.

Common sense, surely?

Given I've never dressed like little mix I can confidently say that I do pretty much dress as I did when I was 20. The only significant difference is my work wardrobe, as when I was 20 I was working on a building site and now I'm based in a office.

"I would totally be glued to sensible fashion week"

Agreed. The word 'modest' is indeed loaded, which I don't like but the style of clothes appeals to me as a non-religious person.

I might have got away with hotpants and a cami top without a bra at 20, not at 40 and certainly not at the age I am now. And it's not because I'm being suppressed or marginalised by the patriarchy

Can I ask what you mean when you say "got away with"? And why did you dress like that in the first place?

And why did you dress like that in the first place?

Dress like what?

Another point re "English is not the only language in the world, modest does not just mean what YOU think it means"

Modest is an English word (from Latin, I googled). Using an English word in English, in England, usually means people will interpret it as what that word means in English.

At 20 I was going out clubbing with my student friends and working in a bar part time. I was much slimmer than I am now and was interested in following fashion.

25 years later I'm not going clubbing and have a more professional job. What was "appropriate" going out and work wear then wouldn't be now. It's not rocket science.

Sorry Chipped that was to Tinfoil who wrote those words. I was just wondering if the reasons for wanting to dress a certain way (cami top and hot pants) would not be the same at 20 as at 40.

Because like you my dress preferences haven't changed since I was 20.

Sorry crossed wires again!

If it's as part of the London Muslim Lifestyle Show, what is wrong with calling it Muslim Fashion?' As I would assume it doesn't include the other cultural versions of "modesty" mentioned on this thread

Pencils - I'd ^love* that week!

I was interest in this thread modest clothing has been bashed as a term by some in the past so I've just googled "modest clothing" and browsed uk.pinterest.com. Beautiful clothes. I'm 45 and I'd wear most of them. Very glamorous. Not at all a nasty connotation.

I can't see that modest has no opposite - it clearly does.

So mummy what constitutes clothing that isn't "modest" and what would you refer to it as?

What was "appropriate" going out and work wear then wouldn't be now. It's not rocket science.

Well quite, but you've kind of proved my point. You say you're not suppressed by the patriarchy but you've obviously been influenced by what is deemed to be "appropriate" in certain contexts.

And if it is "appropriate" for women to go out clubbing in miniskirts whilst not so for men then look at the reasons behind that and I'm afraid you may find a whiff of "patriarchy" about.

I understand that you probably enjoyed it so Go You! But it doesn't mean those pressures don't exist.

So maybe it is "rocket science" for you after all

You're telling half the worlds women that even though they say its their choice, you know better. Ethnocentric arrogance.

My ex grew up in Saudi and remembered vividly the state employed Modesty Police beating women who had accidentally exposed their hair.

Some women chose to wear Islamic clothing, some do so because of societal pressure and some are beaten into doing it. I think it would be pretty arrogant to dismiss any of these experiences.

My ex grew up in Saudi and remembered vividly the state employed Modesty Police beating women who had accidentally exposed their hair.

Indeed. Women wouldn't be arguing amongst themselves over dress and the connotations of it if there weren't men beating women up and putting it in their minds that their bodies are to be hidden. Or if there weren't men propping up an industry that is based on women dressing a certain way to indicate her sexual availability.

Both sides of the same coin.

In reply to a comment about "modest" being for older women.... Can anyone seriously say that they wear exactly the same things at 45 that they did at 25, even allowing for changes in fashion? I might have got away with hotpants and a cami top without a bra at 20, not at 40 and certainly not at the age I am now

But what on earth has that got to do with clothes being modest?

At 18 I wore long Indian cotton hippy dresses; at 19 I had a pair of velvet jeans so tight I had lie on my back to pull the zip up worn with over the knee boots; when I started work at 22 I wore neat, tailored skirt suits; now I wear a selection of 40s and 50s style dresses and eccentric tailored clothes.

I don't think any of these are "modest"

Newsflash- Fashion does tend to change somewhat over 20 years

I am certainly wearing the same as I used to twenty years ago - Jeans and a nice top! - I'm not sure what point you are making here?

I'm wearing pyjamas. Not the same ones as twenty years ago, but I certainly wore pyjamas then

Yup. I'm in jeans and a T-shirt.

But are they modest pyjamas beyond