Choosing what to wear

[Seachangeshell]

Something I have been pondering recently is the choices we make about what we wear and how this relates to feminism. Sorry, not going to make much sense as I have a slight hangover and three small boys making a wild racket in the next room!
In a way it's a bit frivolous because fashion doesn't seem to matter all that much, but women have been controlled through what they are expected to wear. We have been told what we should and shouldn't wear. Women breaking out of these expectations can be seen as making a feminist choice. But then I've seen a lot on here about we can make a choice about what we wear but it's not a feminist choice.
For example, early in the 20th century women were expected to wear crippling corsets. A woman daring not to would be making a feminist choice.
A woman choosing to wear trousers in the 1920s was going against the grain. Trousers were for men, she shouldn't wear them. They made her feel free to be more active to take control of her space.
So now we have wearing makeup, shaving legs etc. as a feminist issue. Because it's society's expectation that we should look groomed then to go hairy and not wear makeup would be the feminist choice. Would it?
Or would it be that a woman should be able to do whatever she damn well likes with her clothing and body and that is feminist because she can choose? Because we have been controlled through rules about clothing in the past.
There, I haven't put that well but I know what I mean at least!

Interesting thread.
We are all conditioned with regards to clothing.
I see lots of threads on here telling women that unless they have a certain body type they shouldn't wear certain items of clothing.
The most common being leggings. The lovers of leggings state the practicality of them, yet the haters say to hell with that, I don't like seeing you in them.
I wear clothes for two reasons, practicality and style.
Sometimes i see something and think oh I like the look of that if it fits me I'll buy it. Of course I'm influenced by society, I dont for example wear a three piece suit as that is deemed ' menswear's. Neither does my son wear a dress as he is influenced to wear only masculine clothes. He has however recently bought a pale pink top and pale pink shoes and they look fab.

"I think that society's views about male appearance is at least as much of a feminist issue."

It's not, you know. If men want to free themselves from the shackles of the patriarchy then I'll cheer them on. But it's not feminism's job to do it.

Twelvety

The twentieth century saw fashion become less formal and more comfortable for men and women. Regency fashion was focused on men looking good in tight breeches ( yum) but as they were effectively leggings they didn't suit everyone. A short, fat Regency man might be able to join modern women talking about body shaming.

Robin Hood is known for wearing leggings but you would not catch a man dead in them now unless they were ballet dancer. It's shows how things change.

Leggings are interesting. I bought my first pair over 30 years ago. It was considered rather 'out there', then. They were so figure hugging and reminiscent of just wearing tights, not trousers. Then they fell out of fashion for a while and then came back.

Women regularly get body shamed for wearing leggings and not fitting the ideal body shape. But they refuse to let them go, precisely because they are so practical and easy to wear.

Robin Hood is known for wearing leggings but you would not catch a man dead in them now unless they were ballet dancer. It's shows how things change

Some of extremely skinny and very tight skinny jeans aren't far off it. The young male waiter in a restaurant I was in last week was pretty much wearing leggings albeit with a fly zip (I assume- I wasn't looking that closely)

I see lots of threads on here telling women that unless they have a certain body type they shouldn't wear certain items of clothing.

Indeed, as you say often with regards to leggings but also other clothing. This kind of thing is restrictive and also misogynist, rather frustrating when it comes from other women as well. It's this kind of message which is internalised by many girls from a young age and tells us we can't dress for ourselves, but always see ourselves as being on display and ensure we look "acceptable". We're thus told it doesn't matter if we like or feel comfortable in certain clothing, the important thing is to be deemed worthy of being viewed in it, ultimately through the male gaze as this view is shaped by what is regarded as attractive for women/girls.

There are also then comments judging women and girls no matter what we wear, so girls who may internalise these messages are also derided, as with a recent thread on another section of the board criticising "teenage girls" in general for how some apparently dress. All this shows how many pressures there are on girls and women when it comes to appearance and all the factors which impact our choices, often leading to judgement and criticism no matter what.

When does "this item of clothing does not suit you" become misogynistic?
I don't suit skinny jeans, that isn't me internalising patriarchy it's just how it is. I wear other styles of jeans.
One of my DSS does not suit skinny jeans so he doesn't wear them.

It depends why you think they don't suit you.

Clothes are like museums - you only get out of them what you put into them.

Some people have no interest in museums or clothes. For those people, just acquaint yourself with the basic minimum social information.

Everyone else thinks about what they like, what they don't like and why. Some of it is to do with aesthetic tastes, some to do with their own history, some to do with forms of oppression.

When does "this item of clothing does not suit you" become misogynistic?
I don't suit skinny jeans, that isn't me internalising patriarchy it's just how it is. I wear other styles of jeans

That is an interesting question.

I suppose the answer is that there is novobjective , unchanging standard of what is always aesthetically pleasing to the eye (kittens and other baby animals and roses excepted).

Therefore objectively skinny jeans neither suit nor don't suit you and your son but current standards of beauty imposed by a patriarchical society tell you and him they don't.

Personally - they don't suit me either.

I see lots of men wearing clothes that don't suit them.
This morning I passed several men.
Two obese men in jogging bottoms and polo shirts stretched across their huge stomachs. A group of older men at the bus stop who without sounding mean looked as though fashion had totally bypassed then. Then a skinny man in the shop wearing a hideous patterned t shirt and jeans far too big and the wrong style for him.
I did pass two women. One on her 50s and very stylish with highlighted hair and a nice green top on. The other a young mum with twins who looked very slim.
I don't know what this means tbh. Sometimes I do feel sorry for men in that a lot of them seem to be clueless about style and what suits them. On the other hand an awful lot of them would be aghast if women dressed with as little regard as they did.

SylviaPoe

It's about proportion, skinny jeans suit a slimmer line - hence why lots of young men wear them. Or if not slim then a proportionate line.

The errrrr relative difference in my legs - from top to bottom - suits a bootcut. So that is what I wear.

Am I being oppressed by patriarchy or fashion?

It's all fine of course to wear what you want for whatever reason, for yourself, for your friends, for men. It's all natural.

It's just when it goes beyond a healthy enjoyment and you start to feel pressured to dress a certain way because nearly everyone does, or when it begins to be physically or mentally harmful.

You're certainly not being oppressed by fashion in that instance.

People with great legs will always find a way of showing off their great legs. The same is true for all other body parts, and that is all about proportion. For example, if women with large breasts don't wear fitted tops, the material hangs from the breast down and makes them look like they have a huge top half and tiny bottom half.

You're being oppressed by patriarchy in the sense that if you go beyond a minimum standard of dress, there will be consequences for how you are treated, and the minimum standard for women is higher than the minimum standard for men.

With girls and women it goes beyond clothing, for which we're judged constantly anyway, and into general appearance as commented on in the original post on this thread. Makeup, leg shaving and so forth - pressure to alter ourselves to be viewed by others. Makeup to alter natural faces, removing natural body hair because we're told that "beauty" and "femininity" mean being hairless. These are specific pressures on girls and women which start from a young age and are difficult to negate and avoid.

That was a bit garbled. I mean for example in many workplaces, the standard for women is a higher one to achieve.

I also mentioned in an earlier post how the same items of clothing for girls are rather different to the ones made for boys - shorts being far shorter and tighter for girls for example. I feel this is relevant to this thread, as is many schools still requiring skirts for girls.

We are straying into Style and Beauty but skinny jeans look fantastic on tall, very slim young men and androgynously shaped young women beyond that I don't think they do anyone any favours.

The errrrr relative difference in my legs - from top to bottom - suits a bootcut. So that is what I wear

Am I being oppressed by patriarchy or fashion?

Possibly but isn't also that your body shape would make the ultra tight male skinny jeans uncomfortable?

SylviaPoe

That is the key "the minimum standard for women is higher than the minimum standard for women".

I was particularly struck by this on a recent visit to Washington DC. The women were immaculate the men.......not so much.

I don't think the minimum standard for women is only in workplaces although that is doubtless an important place where it exists. The judgement of women and girls no matter what is relevant as well, as was rather evident in that thread on teenage girls - numerous posts saying if you want to avoid harassment and even worse girls should "cover up". I posted to someone who said to me "So you're making sure you dress in as un-sexualised a way as possible then?" asking how exactly that would be and received no response.

Yes, no love, that thread was outrageous. Massive moral judgements are made about what women wear.

And I meant my post was garbled, not yours. Just in case that wasn't clear.