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 really dont understand why it's so hard to grasp.

Clothes that cover the body (long sleeves, long skirts, high necks, etc.) are not the issue.

Women wanting to wear long sleeves, long skirts, high necks, etc. are not the issue.

The labelling of these types of clothes, and by extension the women who wear them, as 'Modest' is the issue

Exactly, Grimbles. But this has been said many times upthread and ignored.

yup. olympic level straw manning on this thread. I think I recognise Plan from the French 2012 team actually.

The whole concept of modesty is to remove that kind of sexualisation from the picture.
What a startlingly naive idea. So presumably men who live in countries where women are covered in this way never have sexual thoughts about women in Islamic dress and never rape them? It's a common fantasy of men to imagine what women are wearing under Islamic robes, don't you hear the talk of Arab women who wear full on sexy underwear? One of the most popular porn genres of the day is women in hijabs sucking dick. The more something is made taboo, the more it's obsessed over. Modest clothing doesn't remove sexualisation, it signals that they are sexual property. The sexualisation of women is put at the forefront with modest clothing, only it's saying 'you can't touch this' rather than 'you can touch this' (please note this doesn't mean I think women who dress skimpily are asking for it myself, but that this is the sexist social myth that persists). As another poster rightly said, these kinds of oppression are two sides of the same coin.

Value judgments based on clothing is not a Radical Feminist blind spot nor an observation exclusive to Radical Feminism

I'm not a radical feminist.

But that is what happens, fashion already sexualises women's bodies. Which is to say it sexualises them for men

The whole concept of modesty is to remove that kind of sexualisation from the picture

The point of changing fashions is to sell more clothes. Your first statement is a sweeping and not particularly accurate generalisation.

The concept of "modesty" is wholly unnecessary. Women are capable of and should be allowed to choose what they want to wear. Like Grimbles and others I do not understand how some posters fail to understand that labelling clothes as "modest" is an unnecessary value judgement.

I looked at the pictures on page 1.

I would never wear anything like the models had on.
I have seen people in the streets with those type of get ups on and i just thought they looked so over dressed.
There was no freedom everything is so wrapped up.

As for the dress that supposedly broke the internet.

I am sorry but it is hideous.

I cannot wear maxi or even some midi type dresses. On a personal level I would only wear dresses in summer and don’t like my legs covered in the heat but also like a lot of people I am short and they are so long that they trail on the ground.

ATM judging by what’s in the shops I won’t be buying anything for a long time.

All I want to buy is a few cheap, low cut, plain, dark, short sleeved t.shirts for work and normal wear but as they have been labelled not modest then I will just have to go around in my painted and ripped t.shirts till the fashion changes.

There has always been choice.

Now there is none.

All I want to buy is a few cheap, low cut, plain, dark, short sleeved t.shirts for work and normal wear

I buy mine from Primark and about 2 weeks ago there were literally hundreds. Uniqlo also has loads.

olympic level straw manning on this thread. I think I recognisePlanfrom the French 2012 team actually

Not just Plan Ceridwen posted this about Upfield You say you don't have a problem with women wearing this style of dress, but your posts repeatedly come across as if you do after many posts from Upfield saying she had no objection to the style of clothing.

I've seen a lot of Arabic women dressed up to the nines in designer 'modest' clothing in London, arms laden with shopping bags and faces plastered with make-up. They looked very attractive and glamorous, kind of like Arabic Kim Kardashians. I fail to see how that style really is 'modest', it seems to come more from a cultural desire to display wealth, in the same way middle Eastern people are also into wearing gold. I actually think modest fashion provides a loophole for religious women to get away with Instagram vanity, consumerism and showing off wealth. I really don't mind that, but it's hypocritical to then call the style 'modest' with all the judgemental and superior moral undertones the term has.

Yes, Shona, some here seem to be determined to see us as hating all Muslim women for daring to discuss this topic. I find people who exhibit this attitude are often those who've hardly ever met any Muslim women in their life and are freaked out around them, desperate to talk about how 'cool' they are with another woman wearing a headscarf etc. Those of us who actually do see Muslim women as equals perhaps don't feel so much need to wrap them in cotton wool and tiptoe around this subject. If there's something they disagree with they're more than capable of engaging themselves and don't need a non- Muslim woman holding her hand to her forehead in a mock faint on their behalf.

I've had another look at the BBC article. What a vacuous, dishonest puff piece it is. The pictures featured are of women wearing perfectly ordinary and not remotely noteworthy clothes of a kind that are just normal everyday wear.

Clothes fine- so long as women have a genuine free choice to wear them.

Calling them “modest” - not fine.

Agree. I’m also giggling inwardly at the nonsense of the term ‘modest blogger’.
More seriously though, I realised when reading the piece how closely associated the word ‘modest’ is with concepts of self-effacement and self-erasure, which has made me even more troubled at the way it is entering the mainstream as an approbatory term for female behaviour.

Goosefoot

You want an analysis of the fashion industry? Well here's mine.

The industry exists to persuade people, especially women, to part with their hard earned buying new clothes they don't need every year in order to make £££. It doesn't give a damn about the sexualisation of women one way or the other and will jump on any bandwagon for profit.

'Modest' is such a bandwagon. The industry doesn't care about the connotations of the word they just want women to spend money.

I, by contrast, don't give a damn about the clothes. They're just clothes. I care only about the connotations of the word 'modest' and the implication that by not following this fashion, which I won't be any more than I've followed any other, I am 'immodest'. Not immodest because my clothes are any more revealing than the fashion trend. If anything my clothes are less revealing. But immodest because I am not going out of my way to 'signal' my modesty by wearing the 'approved' style and being a good little girl who parts with £££ in order to gain that approval.

If the style of the season were labelled 'sexy' I would be equally irritated by the connotation that women who weren't falling for the demand we part with £££ weren't attractive.

I remember an American Christian blogger talking about how it was about being kind to men in your life not to put them in “the occasion of sin....”

The industry exists to persuade people, especially women, to part with their hard earned buying new clothes they don't need every year in order to make £££. It doesn't give a damn about the sexualisation of women one way or the other and will jump on any bandwagon for profit

'Modest' is such a bandwagon. The industry doesn't care about the connotations of the word they just want women to spend money

That is a far more accurate analysis than Goosefoot's.

I think the best approach to 'feminist fashion' would not be to focus on clothes at all and to encourage women to not police one another based upon their clothing, unlearning internalised misogyny. Women do the work of the patriarchy when they use terms such as 'modest' or 'slutty' etc. It's been expected of me to solve the problem of how women are supposed to make 'feminist fashion choices', which is misleading, as it suggests I would agree that women should be judged by what they wear, and there is some sort of correct feminist clothing choice to make so that women may be judged positively. Women shouldn't be judging each others' inner qualities based upon the length of her skirt at all, certainly not by using terms such as 'modest'. That's what needs to be unpacked, and that's what some of us here are attempting to do.

Trewser

Not in my area. I think it was last year Primark stopped selling their plain v neck t.shirts and there are none of there plain shortsleeved scooped neck t.shirts only long sleeved things out now.

I had a fairly good look around Uniqlo yesterday and didn’t see anything short sleeved.

Well, its autumn winter now so i wouldn't expect many short sleeves about, but I bought two navy v neck short sleeve ts from primark about a month ago. I don't think its a conspiracy. Its always been hard to find the perfect t! Sunspel are amazing and do v necks but very expensive.

Morning everyone. Just reminding everyone of our talk guidelines. This thread is edging towards being a bunfight and we don't want to have to delete it. Can we keep comments to the issue under discussion and leave the personal attacks to one side? Thanks!

Edging towards a bunfight 🤣🤣

It's a full-on bunwar (in skinny jeans and vest tops)!

I've seen a lot of Arabic women dressed up to the nines in designer 'modest' clothing in London, arms laden with shopping bags and faces plastered with make-up. They looked very attractive and glamorous, kind of like Arabic Kim Kardashians. I fail to see how that style really is 'modest', it seems to come more from a cultural desire to display wealth

I give you the Louis Vuitton hijab. And to preempt Plan et al , no I am not saying women should not be allowed to wear a Louis Vuitton hijab but calling such an eye- catching ostentatious display of wealth "modest" is a bit silly isn't it?

Modest can mean having or showing a moderate or humble estimate of one's merits, importance, etc.; free from vanity, egotism, boastfulness, or great pretensions or -free from ostentation or showy extravagance: which are admirable.

Or it can be used as judgemental policing of women's clothing.

Or it can be used as judgemental policing of women's clothing

When you say 'judgemental' do you mean posting a picture of a woman wearing clothes and then describing them in vaguely derogatory language?

Asking for a friend.

Do you think that “modest” as a description of a woman’s clothing range has no value judgement attached to it at all?

Trewser What do you think was derogatory about what Shona said?