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???

I have absolutely no idea why my post was deleted. It was (I think) a list of suggested alternative names for “modest” clothing. Would whoever reported it care to explain why?

Clothes are clothes. The word modest conveys a moral judgement. Therefore to describe clothes as modest makes a judgement about the morality of the wearer and, by implication, about those who choose to wear clothes which the subject (the describer) does not describe as modest.
Is this a controversial statement?

I missed Bertrand's comment, though I see the incredibly weird Kate Middleton one remains. Moderation can be very odd round here at times.

I'm good with the term 'clothes'. Or if you prefer 'ordinary clothes' or 'bog standard clothes' work for me.

I’ll be fascinated to see whether anyone’s prepared to explain why they reported me. There are a limited number of suspects!

It shouldn’t be controversial Flora. You’ve clearly summed up the facts.

End of?

I am saying I agree with your post!

I’m sorry that was a clumsy response. What I meant was does that mean the argument is concluded? I wasn’t addressing you directly!!!

It wasn't creepy, it was saying that just because KM wears 'modest' and unclingy clothing doesn't mean we can't see how thin she is, as thin as a bicycle. It is possible to see what someone's body is like. It's a saying which clearly noone has heard except me, and maybe the mumsnet moderators.

Oh! Then I will give your argument a finishing mumsnet gavel.

Jaeger, Austin Reed, Alexon, Planet, Windsmoor, Country Casuals, Liz Claiborne

Brilliant. Just the kind of brands to appeal to a modern Middle Eastern woman who wants to be at the height of fashion.

Brilliant. Just the kind of brands to appeal to a modern Middle Eastern woman who wants to be at the height of fashion

The thread was about the creep of term "modest" into standard UK use. The reference to those brands was a response to your absurd suggestion that it was impossible before this to buy stylish but modest work wear.

Your comment about imagining Kate Middleton naked including the weird reference to a bicycle is deeply creepy.

The reference to those brands was a response to your absurd suggestion that it was impossible before this to buy stylish but modest work wear where was that?

she is, as thin as a bicycle. It is possible to see what someone's body is like. It's a saying which clearly noone has heard except me, and maybe the mumsnet moderators

Well Google doesn't seem to have heard of this saying either. I think you may be confusing it with "thin as a rake". Doesn't make it any less creepy.

Yes, you keep going on about how creepy it was. I understand that you find it deeply disturbing and I apologise if you find the idea of bicycles creepy.

Thin as a bicycle?
How rude.
We are talking about modesty and some says something like that about KM
Do your Converse fit comfortably?

But its fine to criticise Kim Kardashian?

Anyone can wear what they want (if they live in a society/economy that allows that) but ‘modest fashion’ in this context is specifying gender norms for women. Only women. As has been done for centuries in patriarchal societies.
It’s promoting (or enforcing in some circumstances) a certain look of ‘femininity’ (not expected of or allowed to men).
You also don’t see a typically masculine-coded-clothing take on ‘modest fashion’ for women. Even though if the aim is covering up, many men’s clothes would be very suitable for that as they are often high necked and long sleeved and down to the ankle..

This thread is reference to the word modest and a women's clothes range. What has Kim got to do with this?
Genuine question.

Oh do you know, i started typing but then got bored. Read the thread.

Dont know if it's a countrywide thing, but round here ugg style boots get called 'slag wellies' by some people.

If calling clothes modest is ok, then I guess referring to boots using terms like 'slag' is ok too, right?

and I apologise if you find the idea of bicycles creepy

There is nothing creepy about bicycles- what an absurd thing to say !!.

The creepy part is imagining Kate Middleton and indeed Kim Kardashian naked and posting about it - particularly in a discussion about "modest" clothes.

What has Kim got to do with this?

Trews posted that she imagines both Kate Middleton and Kim Kardashian naked. Kate M, apparently is , to use the expression no-one apart from Trews has ever heard of, "as thin as a bicycle"

I think Trews is a bit confused- the expression is "thin as a rake" or
"thin as a whippet"

Thin as a bicycle is new to me, but instantly reminded me of the phrase "I'd like to ride her' which may be why some people find it a bit off?