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

[Cherrysoup]

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

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

I experimented with a variety of clothing (and make-up, and heels) from the age of about 15 to 23, mainly because I was trying to find my own identity and way of expression in the context of being raised in a society/world that told me my worth was based on my sexual availability in relation to men. In the same vein, I had lots of male friends and hardly any female ones when I was 16-19, because I transitioned to 'cool girl' mode and thought I 'just wasn't like other girls, and got on better with guys' because I couldn't reconcile 1) what society told me girls were like, with 2) the qualities that seemed to demand any form of ostensible respect as an equal from men, or with 3) how I viewed myself and my interests.

I dress differently now, in the same way that I approach interpersonal relationships with men and women differently now. I am in a place where I am far better equipped to understand the different pressures placed on women and girls and to analyse my behaviour against that background. I am also slightly older and in a monogamous relationship, so the pressures on me are different. I am not sure how being single would influence my dress at this point. I don't judge how people dress. I do judge people who bring the issue of morality into clothing, especially when they show no willingness or ability to understand the feminist issues involved.

I find it all a bit boiled frog myself.

MrsWhite I found it didn't matter what I wore, because they were just there, announcing themselves to the world. I wasn't forthright when younger and absolutely hated and didn't know how to deal with the attention so I do know exactly what you're saying.
But still, this is transference of responsibility to the woman, modesty seen as superior ( when talking in the religious context ). I can't support the idea that my children deserve less respect because they aren't.covered. I see it the same as those virtue agreements young christians make to their fathers in the states at Purity Balls. Feck that.

Given at least one of the runway shows is being put on by a company from Saudi Arabia, where "modest" dress is imposed by the police I think any woman, regardless of their religion, is entitled to show an interest in a fashion show being held in London muhajaba which uses the term modest.

Is the company owned by the mutaween? I'm sorry but as a woman who chooses to wear hijab I don't see your point chippednailvarnishing

""High Street stores appear incapable of making dresses any longer than mid-thigh (which I lack the legs for unfortunately) or with necklines decent enough for work and young men standing over my desk

Goodness knows what high street you are on. That is a ridiculous statement.""

No it isn't. I love the prints that Oasis do, but they concentrate on above the knee, styles.

They were doing a fashion spot on "This Morning", Women were dressed by their partners. On Woman was put in a beautiful print dress, but she said that it was too short. Her Partner agreed, but said he had trouble finding anything longer. The presenters were constantly saying "but you've got great legs", as though that means we don't get to choose, or it's a must to show them.

I spent the day in the Trafford Centre just before summer and if the garment was mid length, it had strange splits/gaps.

You need an s&ab thread birds, they'll find you some decent dresses :)

*s&b

I'm grateful if I can find clothes with...

pockets
fabrics that aren't wafer thin and...
(the holy grail of clothing) - sleeves

Don't most actively religious people of all walks dress modestly? Christians,Jews,muslims,mormons...etc they are against dressing 'provocatively' as a general rule.

"Is the company owned by the mutaween? I'm sorry but as a woman who chooses to wear hijab I don't see your point chippednailvarnishing"

I think people take issue with the term 'modest' in this context. It implies that not covering arms, neck and legs is immodest e.g. isindecent, indiscreet, immoral. It is only a short leap from her to blame victims of sexual harassment and rape for their immodest dress etc.

As the general trend in the UK and most of Europe is not to cover these body parts there is a worry that labelling Muslima clothing as 'modest' in the context of fashion week, e.g., pop culture promotes the thought that women who dress in typical western dress are 'easy' and 'asking for it', which would be horrible and unfortunate.

I like a lot of the fashion I saw on the website and would prefer the organisers called it Muslim fashion week, more bold and assertive whilst less loaded with moral judgement. I'd be quite interested in going, i think the atmosphere is going to be amazing.

But isn't telling a huge number of women that they shouldn't use a word about themselves because you don't like the implication you think it means about you a bit.....I don't know the word for it, but it doesn't seem ok to me?

It's not accurate though, is it? There are quite a few examples on this thread of what "modest" clothing means to other cultures (that contradict each other), and this is clearly Muslim-based only. So just call it what it is?

So just call it what it is

The people who are using it would probably say that they are, and that they see it as accurate. I'm guessing anyway.

If your looking for longer skirts and dresses try Hobbs.

As well as what Circle said, if we are happy to have companies from countries that enforce "modest" clothing coming to London to boost their trade they should be open to interest from *the obsessed and offended non Muslims" you refer to. Especially as the women in such countries don't have the choices we do here in the UK.

"But isn't telling a huge number of women that they shouldn't use a word about themselves because you don't like the implication you think it means about you a bit.....I don't know the word for it, but it doesn't seem ok to me?"

As far as I know nobody is "telling" the organisers to rename their event. for example by organising a protest march. A number of older runway models togaed a protest last week at London fashion week they took issue with LFW's focus on very young, very thin models. Anything that takes place in the public eye today is open for criticism from the public. I personally think Muslima Fashion week would sound much stronger and more confident. Modest Fashion Week is a bit of an oxymoron and therefore, to me, insincere thus, ironically, immodest.

I can't believe people think this is Muslim-bashing.

It's patriarchy-bashing.

Stop crying racism whenever people try to stand up for women's rights.

Most of those companies have female designers who are choosing to design those types of clothes. I don't disagree that it could be called Muslim fashion week instead of modest but some of those designers are hoping to attract non Muslim customers too, it's a business decision, not meant to offend people who show their arms in public.
There is also a huge range of interpretations on what is correct outerwear by Muslim women too, a lot of those clothes wouldn't necessarily be seen as correct hijab, and would just be viewed as modest.

Stop crying racism whenever people try to stand up for women's rights

Is it all womens rights though? It can be patriarchy and muslim bashing at the same time.

I don't understand how anyone can read the thread and claim Muslim bashing? No one at all has any issue with there being a show, just the idea that it demonstrates "modesty"

BBCNewsRave A lot of Muslim women, including me, are really fed up of being told that we do not wear hijab out of our own choice, that we are forced to wear it and opressed by ''the patriarchy''. It's offensive.

Nobody said that here?

Wear what you want I really don't care.

But label clothes modest and I will object. Not subscribing to someone elses religious clothing rules doesn't make you immodest.

No one at all has any issue with there being a show

The thread title is "We don't need Lodon Modest Fashion Week". That would be about the show itself, not the name?

Many practising Muslims do not cover their arms, legs, neck and head. The current global trend for covering up is not so much religious as cultural. I find this trend interesting especially as I personally do not like overly sexualised clothing.

However, I reject the notion that women who do not cover specific body parts are immodest.

One thing we can always be sure of is the 'male gaze', although in more equal societies l believe men do tone this down as they are more accustomed to girls and women being strong and competent in their own right rather than objects of male desire.

In terms of the 'male gaze' (lust, whatever) globally I'd love to see a large scale change and for men from all cultures to learn to behave themselves in a 'modest' way that is to not over estimate their own powers and importance and to stop treating females as lesser than males.

muhajaba And you'd wear it if men had never suggested it was "modest"?

I wasn't forced to wear miniskirts either, but I did because somewhere along the line I was led to believe women should be decorative and sexy and that a miniskirt was....

Anyway, whatever floats your boat, my main issue with it is describing it as "modest". Implying that women's bodies are somehow "immodest" if they aren't covered up. That women are responsible for men's lustful thoughts.