Help me understand...”Modest Fashion”

[OhDear2200]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-50067975

There is something that bugs me about this and I need the MN feminists to help me out (be gentle it’s my first post in this area though a regular reader).

Sooo what is it that bugs me?

Why do we need commentary on women (yep no mention of men) and what we wear? Or am I over reacting is it just a conversation about fashion?

But if a man wore baggy trousers it’s not called modest is it??! It’s called wearing baggy trousers. Why is a woman modest or not modest.

Help me either get a grip or understand this better???

Also, the cut of the clothes is absolutely key to this whole discussion. The cut is the very reason they are called 'modest.'

Brilliant post Arnold

If 'modest' means 'humble, not drawing attention to oneself' then furiously signally how 'modest' one is is not the least bit modest

This aspect always gets overlooked.

As for maternity wear, I don't know where you live Ceridwen but what you are saying didn't apply in 1989 when I was pregnant or breastfeeding in 1990.

A good example is this blouse. The neckline is much higher than would be a standard western cut

That simply is not true. It's actually a style of blouse I would buy and have bought long before this idea of "modest" clothes came. That blouse is no different from what shops like Hobbs or Cos sell.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree Shona. You are not seeing what I am seeing when I look at the designs, cuts, tailoring and layering of these clothes and no amount of me explaining it seems to help so I wish you all the best.

Also, the cut of the clothes is absolutely key to this whole discussion. The cut is the very reason they are called 'modest.'

Then 'modest' is definitely being used in the sense of 'holier than thou' which is the whole issue.

The top you link is not especially unrevealing. Personally I wouldn't wear it as I favour tops with loner sleeves and bodies to keep my hands and bum warm and loose polo necks that I can tuck my chin and nose into. My choice is less revealing but does not signal 'modesty'. Or perhaps it is my failure to post selfies of myself on Instagram that is 'immodest'.

I realise you dislike the word too, but am flabbergasted at some of the efforts to defend it.

Shona, the maternity wear in 1990 was minging and there were certainly no jeans. I know that because I worked for the company who invented them!

To be honest I'm flabbergasted at the aggression on this thread by a few posters. It was an interesting, calm discussion at first and now it has become very hostile with people getting very angry for some reason. When people get like that, it just shuts the discussion down. Hostility is uncalled for. It's possible for people to disagree without telling others that their views are 'nonsense' and 'absolute rubbish' as some posters have done here.

Yes it's very odd.

I don’t think I’ve been aggressive. But I do feel very strongly indeed about this. The rolling back of hard won rights is a real danger at the moment. And the language we use is important. If “modest” becomes a desirable quality for women’s dress, it’s only a short step to “modest” becoming a desirable quality for women’s behaviour. And, as is always the case, the word is defined by men.

I don't see aggression on this thread.

Strong opinions yes, sarcasm too, but not aggression.

Women with strong opinions are often labelled aggressive in a way men expressing themselves similarly are not in my experience.

Basically, women are not behaving modestly.

There’s a name for an argument being an example of what the argument is about, if you see what I mean. That’s what’s happening here.......

To be honest I'm flabbergasted at the aggression on this thread by a few posters.

What aggression? Disagreement does not equal aggression, nor does stating an opinion assertively.

This smacks of being told off for not being "ladylike".

I guess it depends where you draw the line at strong opinion and aggression. I don't think it helps in a discussion to tell other people they are 'wrong' and that their opinions are 'absolute nonsense' and 'rubbish' for example. I think most people would walk away when people start talking like that. It's not a male/female thing, it's just about being respectful of other people and their views.

Totally agree with BertrandRussell and ArnoldWhatshisknickers. Fashion and the way it is marketed is aspirational. If these clothes were solely being marketed to Muslim women, I may still critique it but wouldn't feel so strongly about it as it's their business. The phenomenon of 'modest' fashion appears to be more complicated than that. It's the creep in of 'modesty' as an aspirational value in fashion for all women under the guise of wokeness that is so disturbing. I haven't meant to offend anyone, but it IS tedious when someone continually, intentionally doesn't engage with the points you're making and keeps coming up with defensive comments that are based on a willful misreading of what you've said. That's the danger of arguing on the topic of religion, people who are heavily invested find it difficult to be objective and not take it personally.

Why not call it “Modern Islamic dress”? That just about covers it. Or Clothing of the Book” I rather like that- and it’s satisfactorily multi faith.

Shona, the maternity wear in 1990 was minging and there were certainly no jeans. I know that because I worked for the company who invented them!

I don't wear jean but your description of maternity wear in 1990 bears no resemblance to what I wore. I can't remember the specific brand but it involved longline cotton jersey/ linen cardigans and tunics and longish cotton or cotton jersey skirts which were smart enough for office wear.

The claim by Ceridwen that that blouse she linked is some sort of unique new style is simply not true. It's a perfectly ordinary blouse- there's nothing new or novel about it and the neckline is definitely not much higher than would be a standard western cut

I'm not being in the slightest bit defensive. I'm just explaining how it happened.

As a matter of fact, I started a similar thread months ago complaining about M and S having a 'Modest clothing' section on their website.

Iirc noone agreed and I think the consensus was that I was being ridiculous and slightly racist.

The claim by Ceridwen that that blouse she linked is some sort of unique new style is simply not true. It's a perfectly ordinary blouse- there's nothing new or novel about it and the neckline is definitely not much higher than would be a standard western cut

This is your belief, it is not fact. The cuts ARE different, because they are specifically being designed by and for Muslim women. If you can't see that, that's not my problem, but stop telling people they are wrong because you are unable to see something.

Trewser I wasn't directing my comment at you.

I think 'talking nonsense' or 'rubbish' are pretty mild phrases.

It's not like anyone has been told to 'fuck off' or 'stop spounting shite' or 'go fuck themselves'.

The only questionable comment I recall was one comparing Kate Middleton to a bicycle which I'm not sure what to make of. Otherwise its been perfectly civil.

And I wore maternity jeans in the 90s so they were definitely available then.

In the late 90s, yes they were!

Ceridwen- what is different about the cut of that shirt? I’m sure I’ve made very similar ones over the years. Incidentally, for modest dress I would expect it to be longer.

Maternity wear has been around a while. Blooming Marvellous, for example, opened in the early 1980s, I think.

OP I read the same article when it was published and it really annoyed me. Referring to ‘modest’ fashion implies that other clothing is immodest or somehow less virtuous. Yet no one would describe a man wearing trousers as modest and a man in shorts as immodest. There is no value judgement placed on a man wearing shorts. I find it offensive and increasingly I feel like the BBC is holding back women’s rights.

Well I had my eldest in 95 so I'd say mid 90s onwards at the very least Trewser.

This is your belief, it is not fact. The cuts ARE different, because they are specifically being designed by and for Muslim women. If you can't see that, that's not my problem, but stop telling people they are wrong because you are unable to see something.

No it is not my belief. It is a fact. That blouse may well have been designed by a Muslim woman with a target Muslim audience but it is simply not true to say the neckline is much higher than would be a standard western cut. I own blouses like that. It's a standard style. I've owned many blouses or tops in a similar style and a similar neckline because I don't like low cut tops. It has never been a problem buying tops which aren't low cut.