Feminism and vintage/retro dress

[ElderberrySyrup]

Been meaning to start this thread for ages.

I've been doing a spot of vintage dressmaking lately and hence looking at quite a few blogs on the subject. 1950s style seems to be the most popular and there were a fair number written by women who dress in 50s clothes because they love the 50s, when men were men and women were ladies and everyone knew their place. Often it goes with being a happy Christian SAHM.

However there are also some who find something subversive in vintage style (eg this one - I don't want to link to the happy Christian ones in case it gets bitchy and they seem like sweet people whom I have no desire to upset.) Tea dresses worn with tattoos are quite common.

It has also struck me that a fair few of my feminist friends are into vintage style crafting and dressing. At all the marches I have been on there have been a few marchers who could have stepped straight out of the 40s or 50s (there was an Edwardian one at Million Women Rise IIRC) and I have seen pics of quite a number at Slutwalk.

So, I'm intrigued and fascinated. What is the connection, if any? Is it about resisting MODERN fashion? It would make more sense if we were all dressing as Suffragettes or 70s women's libbers, but that's quite rare. And the clothes are often no more comfortable, or less sexualised, than contemporary fashion. Is it about acknowledging the constructed nature of femininity? Or is there no connection at all, is it that in any group of women in the UK in 2011 there will be a few retro dressers (is that the case?) and it just happens that a proportion of them are feminists?

Any thoughts?

there's an interesting bit in Susan Faludi's 'Backlash' about the women's version of the book 'Dress for Success' and the way it attempted to create a women's version of the men's office work uniform.

and at work/interviews you want to look neat and tidy, I cant pull that off with trousers and shirt, no matter how much I increase my budget.. so I end up wearing a professional version of my day style - a grey dress with a shirt underneath, that way I can relax and am not worrying that my boobs are bursting the buttons or the shirt is hanging out the back of the skirt/trousers etc. I feel I can be myself in a dress and I think it looks professional. If you look awkward in something it draws attention to your body more

I would personally prefer a high neck blouse, but again, they don't seem to make them for people with breasts.

I've bought lower cut tops than I would like, to wear with my dull trouser suit, because high necks draw even more attention.

Appropriate for work is much easier than appropriate for interview.

Another problem with 'prescribing' vintage style for work is that it can involve some quite uncomfortable undergarments. The New Look and what came after it weren't invented so women could get on with a job, it was from an era when a lot of serious misogyny was mainstream and they were trying to get women to prioritize looking nice for men.

I was reading this pattern review (I love her blog, I like her dry humour) and admiring the dress when I got to the bit about what she wears underneath it: 'A TMI note about undergarments: I wear this dress with a padded bra and a waist cincher with flexible boning, plus a slip and a 24" long double-layer nylon net petticoat. They make a huge difference in the fit and look of this dress.'

Out of interest, I tried on my new dress with a boned waist-cinching suspender belt thingy I had left over from my lingerie-buying days, and it looked even better..... then I thought no. Just don't go there. Uncomfortable undergarments are a step too far.

ElderberrySyrup - '.... the way it attempted to create a women's version of the men's office work uniform.'

That doesn't really work in my view. One practical issue that women need to be careful of when wearing a 'a female version of a man's suit' is that it tends to make women disappear when in a group of men. If all the men are wearing suts in grey, black, blue a woman wearing the same colour and being physically shorter and smaller generally will find it harder to get noticed in meetings.

Better to wear a clearly contrasting colour/pattern and or a smart tailored dress eather than a trouser suit in order to stand out among men where women are often outnumbered in professional settings.

LRD - very true what you say about men being better served in what is available as work clothes. DW used to work in The City and would echo a lot of what has been said on this thread. She wanted to look smart, professional and like a woman and be taken seriously. Clothes mattered a lot to her to set the right impression meeting clients but it wasn't easy. She likes 50's styling too.

I love the shape of it too - been wearing 50s clothes when I could get them since a teen and slightly annoyed now by how fashionable it has become because I preferred standing out from the norm a bit! I also like how things like big circle dresses are less revealing and a bit more comfy and fun than standard evening-wear. I guess I am still subversive in how I do it in that it includes copious amounts of body hair with the pretty dress.

The burlesque thing perhaps warrants a new thread of its own. I really liked burlesque when it first started around here a few years ago as it was mostly female audiences, playfulness rather than stripping, and celebrating the female form in all its diversity. But I have started to become uncomfortable with it, and I am not sure how much is me changing and how much is the nature of the burlesque I have been to changing. It has become more mainstream, more mixed, staring audiences without the lighthearted audience participation that used to exist.

beta there's a danger, especially with clearly contrasting colour/pattern, in standing out as feminine, rather than just standing out.

Looking groomed and ensuring your contribution is heard are better ways to make an impression. There is interesting stuff in "Delusions of gender" on why the latter is harder for women.

Yeah, it's tricky isn't it?

I think beta is right that if you are shorter (as I am), people do tend not to notice you. However, I've certainly seen some tutting when a woman turns up wearing a 'non-suit colour'.

I think the proportions of men and women, senior and junior, does really make a difference. When I've been to conferences where the majority of people are men, a lot of the women dress more like them, whereas when there are more women at senior levels, it seems to be more acceptable not to wear a suit, or to wear colours you don't get suits in.

I have also been told that, if you are a woman with a low voice, you will typically get listened to more than a woman with a high voice - how strange is that?

My figure goes in and out without a girdle or padded bra. Thats nor to say I am a perfect size ten with a flat stomach, just that I have vintage proportions, (though at 5'8 I struggle to find original vintage that fits)shops have for a lot better at designing for hour glasses recently.

Margaret Thatcher was trained to lower her voice, LRD.

Interesting about the proportion of men and women in a workplace affecting the way the women dress.

"I have also been told that, if you are a woman with a low voice, you will typically get listened to more than a woman with a high voice - how strange is that?"

I had a gruff voice due to sore throat for 2 weeks last month, easiest 2 weeks at work ever (colleague wise), everyone treated me like I was saying something important and intelligent even when I was talking rubbish, unfortunately I'm better now so will probably get treated like an idiot school girl again (even though I'm actually older than I sound/look and more experienced than most I work with, but unfortunately am quite softly spoken)

I am softly spoken and overly polite with it. I think that is something I need to try to change.

elderberry - that's interesting. I knew she had elocution lessons but never put it together with the pitch of her voice.

wholly - I have to say, I hate that that is so (that you feel you need to change). I'm sure you're right in practical terms but it is annoying, isn't it?

Interesting thread - I like 50s style clothes as they suit my shape, but like Rosalind, at 5'9 it's difficult to find clothing that fits - even though I'm a size 10 I still have to go for L, if not XL.

This has actally made me think of a girl I used to go to school with. She was at least as tall as me, but was quite stocky as well. She used to wear boyfriend jeans and shapeless shirts and tops and usually DMs. She was a staunch feminist. I lost touch with her but have reconnected via FB. She looks amazing now. She still has a very short hair cut, but only wears dresses now - vintage style, from all sorts of different eras. She looks incredible.

As for work clothing... what I don't understand is why some men don't seem to be able to disconnect what they see in front of them and what the individual woman they're dealing with actually is.

What I mean is, men are sexual beings to us straight women just as much as women are to straight men. Men's suits are designed to skim, flatter and enhance - shoulders are broad, chests and waists are flattered and improved, hips are skimmed and legs are lengthened. A man in a well-cut suit is a fine specimen to behold.

And yet women are usually able to contain themselves and take them at professional face-value. I don't understand what the difficulty sometimes seems to be in return.

In agree with dressing appropriately at work its not sexist at all, If a man came into work with his pants so far down his arse all you could see is boxers, or a peter andre style open chest shirt it would be seen as very un.pro

Its also about respect too I think, as someone said its not a nightclub its a place of work, you don't want to be inflicted with peoples unfettered body parts.

One woman once no joke wore long jumpers as dresses they came down just below her bum. she wore no knickers or bra I just couldnt fathom how she thought it was appropriate.

Sorry O.T

Vintage clothing can be a very welcome change in the moderm world of the low rise jean when you're arse is the general size of an island.

Dresses don't slip down with builders bum/knicker flashing potential ?

Slinking - is your friend STILL a staunch feminist?
What shoes does she wear with the dresses?

sorry to go against the flow here but i hate 50s style clothing except for weddings and other 'dressy' occassions. i am hour glassy and short and busty and blonde (curly) so i just feel a bit marilyn monroe in 50s silhouettes and like some ridiculuous 'seiren' (is that how you spell it?)

anyway, i am sure it's my feminist self that hates that look on me.. i am a practical, sporty person who cycles to work so although i will wear dresses, i mostly wear trousers and when i do wear dresses they will be soft and stretchy (usually woollen) and with thick tights or leggings and flat knee-high boots so i can cycle.

[my work means i only wear a suit about once a year]

I've found another blog post here about it.

the word 'dignified' comes up in one of the comments - y.

Like the blog post Elderberry. I think the whole craft revival is pretty feminist in that it is elevating the status of what was traditionally seen as women's work.

Maybe a bit of over-analysis on my part but I think the throwback to vintage dress could be seen as a rejection of the idea that women have to dress like men (shoulder pads, power dressing) in order to be accepted in a man's world, and that the male professional dress code shouldn't be seen as the default that women have to aspire to.

I'm pretty sure someone's said that already though!

Another tall hourglass lass here, who has been wearing vintage for the last 35 years. It was much easier as a size 10 than my current 16 though - vintage is so TEENY!

I have always LOVED wearing vintage gear, partly because I'm an irreclaimable History Geek and because the clothes are constructed for female-shaped females but also because it is such a powerful anti fashion-industry statement, and enables you to develop your own unique style as opposed to being a fashion victim.

And I just LOVE dressing up!

In my Right-On Feminist / Greenham days, it was NOT acceptable to dress outside the uniform of dungies and Doc-Ms. I went on a Reclaim the Night march back in 1981 with a girlfriend, and we wore lots of lippe, and heels and vintage velvet and those fingerless lace gloves that everyone wore back then (New Romantics anyone?) to make the (fundamentally important) point that ALL women should be able to wear what they want when they go out. You are less at risk when you're wearing a stout pair of boots that you can kick bollocks with run in, for example, than wearing stilletos and a pencil skirt after a night's clubbing.

Not ONE of the other wimmin on the march would acknowlege our existence. Shunned we were. Oh yes. We spent the evening chatting to the lovely policewomen who were escorting the marchers. They got what we were doing.

one of the comments on one of Gerties other posts on the subject, I think you'll like it:
'Sewing for ourselves is empowering. My favorite observation on that point is a line delivered by Jennifer Lopez in the movie Monster In Law. When JLo's MIL-to-be criticizes her for eating, by saying "You'll never fit into your wedding gown if you keep eating like that." JLo, a seamstress herself, responds "I am making my wedding gown to fit my body, not the other way around."'

That reminds me of my dressmaking teacher who used to say that if you learn to make clothes that fit your body you'll never have to diet again ... and sewing is so much more creative than dieting!