Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Help me understand...”Modest Fashion”

634 replies

OhDear2200 · 13/11/2019 13:54

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???

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 15/11/2019 11:41

Is “immodest” a clothing category?

Florabritannica · 15/11/2019 11:58

Oh Plan.

  1. I don’t think any of us are saying that co—opting the kind of clothing that ‘modest’ dressing excludes is a feminist statement per se.
  2. I am puzzled by your assertion that the fact that some women are compelled to wear a particular type of clothing by men (which is undoubtedly true) means that women who wear ‘modest’ clothing are therefore acting entirely from choice and not under any male compulsion. Can you see that the one does not follow from the other?
UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 12:05

Upfield,
I will answer by flipping the question
Actually, you've evaded the question.

Dressing revealingly for young women is advised and celebrated in Western society as a feminist statement of sexual empowerment.
Socially perhaps, but not via religion, the opposite is the case.

Why then, should Western women be made to wear revealing clothing, if they do not wish to do so?
They shouldn't, they're not, and I haven't argued they should anywhere, so what's your point?

Why is it that before the modest clothing trend, less revealing clothes were only designed for and marketed to over 40yr old women?
As others have said, the same clothes were always available, but fashion goes through cycles. Sometimes longer dresses and more covered up styles are 'in', but they don't usually have a sinister, sexist label which casts aspersions as to a woman's virtue attached to them. I'd say in general that high fashion is designed to be as outrageous as possible, to grab attention on the catwalks, and then these styles then filter down to the High Street. Part of this is sexually provocative outfits. High fashion is about sex and the display of wealth, trends are dreamt up to make money. Retailers have obviously seen the earning potential in churning out 'modest' fashion and selling this to all women as the latest thing.

The ideology that all young women only dress modestly because they “are made to” by men is false.
Yes, I've also acknowledged women wear it for all sorts of different reasons.

Yes, some are, but equally as many are forced to wear revealing or no clothing by men. Namely the millions of sex workers worldwide.
Why are you mentioning this? Are you implying from what I've said that I in some way approve of women being forced to wear revealing outfits in the sex trade? Where on Earth do you get this idea from?

no one type or style of clothing in the western world is representative of patriarchy.
I agree, why do you have the impression that I don't?

It's you who seems to see this as an 'us and them' scenario and are pitting women against each other, then projecting this onto me. The opposition I have is against oppressive, patriarchal codes for women's dress which, as I've mentioned numerous times exist in all cultures. It's not about being anti-Muslim or telling women what to wear, but analysing specifically 'modest' fashion as a recent phenomenon, because that's the theme of the thread.

So, back to my original question, that you haven't answered but instead have laid out yet another bunch of straw men arguments. If dressing modestly, as you admit, does not protect women from unwanted male sexual violence, then why do religions advise it? Why should women wear it? Don't you think there might be some sort of underlying agenda there in terms of controlling women as the possessions of men?

BertrandRussell · 15/11/2019 12:11

Plan - do you think “immodest” should be a clothing category? If not, why not?

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 12:15

Plan It's interesting that you can't seem to get away from this idea that because we're critiquing modest fashion, that means we advocate wearing revealing clothing as a feminist way to dress. Nobody here has said that. You seem to be stuck in the virgin/whore binary, when what I would have thought is abundantly clear (since it's been spelt out so many times), is that what's being argued for is the right to not to be cast into either of those roles at all, especially by not labelling clothes (and thus the women wearing them) as 'modest'.

Trewser · 15/11/2019 12:22

plan, don't bother. This thread is almost parody now.

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 12:24

plan, don't bother. This thread is almost parody now.
Care to elaborate on that little dig? Or do you have nothing of worth to add and just want to take sides because you're feeling offended?

Florabritannica · 15/11/2019 12:30

I just wish someone could come up with an actual argument that one could engage with instead of repeating the same points that were answered pages ago.

Trewser · 15/11/2019 13:06

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ShonaAndTheWaterHorse · 15/11/2019 13:10

Why is it that before the modest clothing trend, less revealing clothes were only designed for and marketed to over 40yr old women?

Well flipping the argument, as you refer to it Plan, doesn't work here because that statement simply isn't true.

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 13:16

It's a feminist forum, what do you expect us to do, quietly go along with sexist ideology out of female socialisation?

If you're accusing me of racism I take that seriously and I'd like you to back that up. You don't get to censor women talking about women's rights by throwing that one about. You complain about women calling each other 'handmaidens' (which I actually haven't done anywhere) and then throw a deeply offensive insult at me to try to shut me up. It's interesting you think this is an appropriate tactic to silence women that disagree with you, rather than presenting any kind of counter-argument and engaging.

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 13:27

I'd also like to know why you think this is about race, since 'modest' dress is not born from race but religion? Islam, Judaism and Christianity have all been referred to in association with modest fashion, with members of all races in all of those religions. The biggest market is for Muslims, which has why this has been referred to the most.

PlanDeRaccordement · 15/11/2019 14:11

Upfield, speaking with you is exhausting. You constantly change your questions. It’s gone from “made to wear” to “should wear” every exchange is similar with you moving and shifting the questions meaning.
I flipped the argument, so your answers are my answers.
Go in peace and trouble me no more please.

BertrandRussell · 15/11/2019 14:12

“ The biggest market is for Muslims, which has why this has been referred to the most.”
I wonder if it is in the States. Lots of fundamentalist Christians there.

I do wonder why some posters are fighting so hard for “modest” not to mean what it patently obviously does. What’s behind it?

MIdgebabe · 15/11/2019 14:18

It is possible to find modest Male fashion being talked about, eg

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-47859204/the-rise-of-male-modest-islamic-fashion

If you google, you have to include the word Male ( the default for modest fashion is modest female fashion) and then all links have a link to Islam

And people say FWR doesn't do intersectionality

Although it is quite common to see Islamic family with the men in sleeveless t shirt and shorts and the women in full head to toe

So there is a religious aspect, and a sexist aspect and a sexist religious aspect ( when different standards are applied to male and female)

PlanDeRaccordement · 15/11/2019 14:19

Florabritannica
I said essentially not all young women are compelled but that some are compelled to wear no clothing, revealing clothing or modest clothing by men. This is because many posters seem to have it stuck in their head that most women wearing modest clothes are doing so out of compulsion. Which is not true for western society.
Please reread my post as you have mis-stated what I said.

PlanDeRaccordement · 15/11/2019 14:22

Trewser- I agree. Lots of intolerance here and rampant policing of feminism. Makes for an exclusionary and biased environment to be honest. Can’t be feminist and modest apparently. That’s like matter and antimatter colliding.

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 14:32

It’s gone from “made to wear” to “should wear” every exchange is similar with you moving and shifting the questions meaning.
I flipped the argument, so your answers are my answers.
Go in peace and trouble me no more please.

So still evading the question then. 'Should wear' or 'made to wear', I'd be interested in your answer in any case, you choose. No need for the histrionics, you're on a forum, people generally ask and answer questions, that's what it's for. Here's the original question again:
Dressing modestly is advised in Islam to protect a woman from sexual attention. But you have also said that the way a woman dresses is irrelevant, any woman can be raped no matter what she wears. Why then, should Muslim women be made to wear modest clothing, if modest clothing doesn't protect them?

Oliversmumsarmy · 15/11/2019 14:35

Why then, should Western women be made to wear revealing clothing, if they do not wish to do so? Why is it that before the modest clothing trend, less revealing clothes were only designed for and marketed to over 40yr old women

I don’t think I have ever been forced to wear revealing clothes.

And I am interested to know what (clothing or anything) has ever been marketed to women over 40 apart from an insurance policy to make sure your family doesn’t suffer when you are gone and a certain German shampoo.

Women over 40 are invisible to the marketing departments and as you get older you just disappear from view.

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 15/11/2019 14:38

Can’t be feminist and modest apparently.

Define 'modest' in this context or it isn't possible to respond.

If by 'modest' you mean 'not wearing revealing clothing' then many feminists don't wear revealing clothing.

If by modest you mean 'humble' then many feminists are humble.

If by modest you mean 'does not object to a label that places a value judgement on perfectly ordinary clothes and sets women who don't wear other perfectly ordinary clothes as 'immodest' in opposition to those who do wear the first set of perfectly ordinary clothes' then no, that is not a feminist position. How can it be?

UpfieldHatesWomen · 15/11/2019 14:42

Makes for an exclusionary and biased environment to be honest. Can’t be feminist and modest apparently. That’s like matter and antimatter colliding.
You're being included in the discussion, very much so. You don't get everyone to just roll over and agree with you if you don't answer questions and keep making the same straw man arguments and points that have been debunked over and over again, the same would happen if we were discussing any other issue. Nor to you get others to roll over and agree with you by stamping your foot and calling us all a bunch of meanies or echoing the insults of others on the thread. You get people to agree with you by making a valid point. I have in fact agreed with you on a number of points already, in case you hadn't noticed. I certainly haven't tried to tell anyone they can or can't be a feminist, but I do disagree on the issue of modest clothing. Religion doesn't get a free pass for sexism as far as I am concerned. Feel free to present the case for modest clothing to be a feminist decision, I would actually be really interested to hear a different perspective.

MIdgebabe · 15/11/2019 14:46

It is the action of labelling some clothes as modest that is making a value judgement

. Dh thinks I dress modestly because I don't show my bra or pants,( he didn't even say I should cover the bingo wings ) , and i amn't wearing sparkles and spangles

So most people might think that most western clothing is already modest...therefore this seems to be adding a new , more restrictive , meaning to the phrase.

Oliversmumsarmy · 15/11/2019 14:46

Why then, should Muslim women be made to wear modest clothing, if modest clothing doesn't protect them

Because it is a power thing.

Telling a female how to dress and enforcing that dress code through religion is a power thing.

“Protecting” someone by making them invisible so people don’t see them as women is the ultimate power trip. Goes along with the always having to have a Male with you so no one has to even talk to you.

Making someone invisible.

CeridwenTheWitch · 15/11/2019 14:47

Trewser- I agree. Lots of intolerance here and rampant policing of feminism. Makes for an exclusionary and biased environment to be honest. Can’t be feminist and modest apparently. That’s like matter and antimatter colliding.

Agreed. They also deliberately misinterpret what people say and then attack them for it.

Look how they demand that people reply to them, after they bulldozed the thread, shouted down anyone who disagreed with them and then they wonder why people don't want to continue the discussion. Hmm

MIdgebabe · 15/11/2019 14:47

Oh , and sorry about blowing my own trumpet here, but that clearly makes me both modest and feminist and a long time happy customer/contributor to this board