Fashion and Feminism

[ChristianThomas]

I don't think not caring about style and fashion (which are both considered feminine stuff right now) means being a feminist. Not caring about "feminine" stuff and finding them silly just means you're conforming to the male ideal and agreeing that the stereotypical male traits (not caring about fashion) are the right ones. you know, people who say feminists should have no make up, short hair, suits etc. they're just saying that for a woman to be strong she has to take on what is viewed as male adjectives. I don't think that's correct. Putting on a suit doesn't make you any more of a feminist than wearing a flowery dress. Being a feminist doesn't mean taking on male traits and dismissing everything viewed as feminine.

that's why I do think fashion and feminism can co-exist. because being a feminist doesn't mean dismissing everything that is viewed as feminine (like fashion).

It's really a dead match though, you can't win. if you care about your looks you're embracing that stereotype (women and looks) and making it even stronger, therefor accepting your given role in society and if you don't you're just celebrating the male traits and saying those are the right and the pure ones.

I just say enjoy whatever it is that you enjoy. what really needs to change is the view of fashion as something entirely feminine and of "feminine" stuff as silly.

Being a feminist means wanting equal rights between genders, not liking and disliking personal traits. I think almost every woman is a feminist, but she just doesn't admit it because she has that stereotype of them in her head.

I don't quite agree with you there on some parts.. because really how does a woman dressing up masculine conform to the male ideals and agreeing those are the right ones?.. That doesn't make sense at all.

The cliché male ideal (back in the 50's and all) is that a woman is interested in all the frilly typical feminine stuff. The dresses, skirts, household, children and everything. Saying that women who dress up masculine agree with those ideals makes it a complete contradiction, because they are doing the opposite and it's crazy to say that those who dress up masculine agree that other women should dress up feminine.

Women didn't start to dress up masculine because they agreed with the male culture. They did it to make a statement, that they could fit the male role (in the working world for example) just as well as the men could. That they didn't need to be dependent on the men to take care of them, that they could earn their own money and take care of the household themselves.
And another important factor is that back in the time that women slowly started to want more on terms of rights and career, they hardly ever wore anything else besides dresses or skirts that were either a bit on the wide side or tight. Easily said not the best choice for some jobs and all. Pants (and thus a masculine look) were just more practical and because of they got rid of the skirts and dresses it made a stronger impact on the male society who couldn't just ignore them as silly feminine women who got a little hysterical.

It really has nothing to do with the male ideals and celebrating those.

 

[saann]

ofcourse, but you can't really win. however you choose to dress can be seen from both sides.

I might have not made myself clear because what I meant was that feminists who believe that the only way you can dress as a feminist is to dress in a suit and shun all what's considered "girly" are not really celebrating feminism and are not in my opinion feminists. feminisim is about embracing everything and striving to be equal, not dismiss everything about female culture which a lot of people connect feminism to.

I'm not saying that dressing in a masculine way means agreeing with the male culture, I dress in a masculine way a lot of time. What I'm saying is that male dressing shouldn't equal feminism because that will mean that everything feminine is the wrong way.

 

[tigerrouge]

For me, feminism is the continual process of being aware of women's position in society, viewing situations from a variety of perspectives (social, sexual, economic and so on).

The significance of a woman's dress and appearance will vary according to way you look at the situation she's in - what might appear to be a 'choice' can seem very different when analysed on another level.

 

[fashionista-ta]

I don't quite agree with you there on some parts.. because really how does a woman dressing up masculine conform to the male ideals and agreeing those are the right ones?.. That doesn't make sense at all.

The cliché male ideal (back in the 50's and all) is that a woman is interested in all the frilly typical feminine stuff. The dresses, skirts, household, children and everything. Saying that women who dress up masculine agree with those ideals makes it a complete contradiction, because they are doing the opposite and it's crazy to say that those who dress up masculine agree that other women should dress up feminine.

Women didn't start to dress up masculine because they agreed with the male culture. They did it to make a statement, that they could fit the male role (in the working world for example) just as well as the men could. That they didn't need to be dependent on the men to take care of them, that they could earn their own money and take care of the household themselves.
And another important factor is that back in the time that women slowly started to want more on terms of rights and career, they hardly ever wore anything else besides dresses or skirts that were either a bit on the wide side or tight. Easily said not the best choice for some jobs and all. Pants (and thus a masculine look) were just more practical and because of they got rid of the skirts and dresses it made a stronger impact on the male society who couldn't just ignore them as silly feminine women who got a little hysterical.

It really has nothing to do with the male ideals and celebrating those.

And when women stopped to realize that the prototype of a successful working person is not necessarily male, they laid off all that silly Dress for Success stuff.

 

[Squizree]

My mother and my grandmother, who are by FAR the bitchiest, sassiest and strongest women I've EVER met, have always told me that while women have potential to do some pretty great things, leadership positions should always be given to men. Isn't it ironic?

Fashion, just like everything else, has the potential to both empower and degrade a woman and it's a blurry line between the 2. A plunging neckline can be daring and powerful but can also be sl*tty and desperate.
I love a woman who is confident and charismatic, but at the same time modest. Maybe I'm too traditional, but modesty and mystery should be key characteristics when it comes to the female gender role. Fashion can emulate these personality traits well, but only if the woman inside the dress is that way in the first place.

Katherine Hepburn is one of the most significant feminists I think. She really revolutionized how we look at women and the female gender today. She was one of the first women to popularize the use of pants on women, THAT takes confidence and charisma.

 

[Squizree]

ofcourse, but you can't really win. however you choose to dress can be seen from both sides.

I might have not made myself clear because what I meant was that feminists who believe that the only way you can dress as a feminist is to dress in a suit and shun all what's considered "girly" are not really celebrating feminism and are not in my opinion feminists. feminisim is about embracing everything and striving to be equal, not dismiss everything about female culture which a lot of people connect feminism to.

I'm not saying that dressing in a masculine way means agreeing with the male culture, I dress in a masculine way a lot of time. What I'm saying is that male dressing shouldn't equal feminism because that will mean that everything feminine is the wrong way.

Yes, feminist women dressing in suits is just a silly stereotype. But it's not a male ideal. Both men and women have this stereotype vision of feminists.
Gender roles have been around since the beginning of time and have been argued since the beginning of time as well, but nothing really started happening until the last 100 years or so because of the introduction of the information age. Technology has closed the gap between men and women. You no longer need the daddy to go out and do physical work in order to pay the bills. A woman can just as easily pay the bills by working from home on her computer. Technology has blurred the traditional gender roles of yester-century.
I think Caryl Churchill, one of Britain's greatest feminists of all time imo, had a really hard time expressing this issue in the 1970s because technology hadn't quite kicked into overdrive back then like it has these days.

 

[rollagasper]

Indulging in one's love for fashions and self-expression though fashion is not anti-feminist. People involve themselves in fashion in different ways. For some women, it is all about pleasing some others - men, other women, society in general. This would be about conforming, and is the reason why many people hold the notion that fashion is frivolous, all about succumbing to societal pressures, etc. Yet for certain women, fashion and dressing up is about self-expression. I mean, the Rick Owens woman doesn't really have anything to do with the societal image of "woman" and what a woman ought to look like. And even if you wear a feminine dress by Versace, it doesn't necessarily mean you cannot be a feminist - it just depends on the motive of your choosing to wear it, at least in my opinion. A feminist woman may choose to wear whatever independent from external pressure... But it's hard to say that we can really act without societal views and "realities" affecting us in some way. But then that's getting into po-mo stuff...

 

[Squizree]

See it's confusing because feminism is about celebrating womanhood and reinforcing your femininity, so shouldn't feminists be encouraging women to dress fashionably and to use fashion to let their femininity "shine"?

 

[tigerrouge]

Ah, but feminism is not synonymous with femininity. That was something that people explored in the 1970s - the idea that women could reclaim things which were considered as supposedly masculine and therefore off-limits. That ranged from career options to aspects of physical appearance. But female masculinity is an assault on the territory held by male masculinity.

Even today, the only 'acceptable' face of feminism is one that confines itself to - as you say it - reinforcing femininity. Women might now wear a trousersuit to work, without a second thought for the concepts that made such things possible.

Many women still fear that an exploration of themselves as a person will mean they'll end up somewhere outside of the system, facing strong disapproval and derision. Having seen what happened in the 1970s, women have internalised that response, and now use it to keep themselves in line.

But many things that we want to achieve in life will involve us going against the perceptions held by other people, coded in the social structures around us. We think nothing of doing so when it involves, say, the commercial success of a new business based on innovation. So we shouldn't feel a sudden lack of bravery when it comes to something on the scale of the freedom to express your potential as a human being.

 

[rollagasper]

I thought the feminist movement was about critiquing and defying the male-dominated social orders. In that case, it doesn't necessarily relate to embracing femininity. Or am I wrong in my understanding of "feminism"?

 

[*Truffaut*]

See it's confusing because feminism is about celebrating womanhood and reinforcing your femininity, so shouldn't feminists be encouraging women to dress fashionably and to use fashion to let their femininity "shine"?

I don't think that's what feminism is about. Femininity and masculinity are social constructs anyway, so when you say "reinforcing femininity" women are still expected to adhere to a certain socially accepted standard.
For fashion and feminism to exist there has to be choice for women to dress however they want. Not all women want to be traditionally "feminine" and that's perfectly ok.

 

[tigerrouge]

And the other side of the coin is that men should be free to express supposedly 'feminine' characteristics and traits, because if both sides don't participate in loosening the definitions, then what you end up with is a lopsided appropriation of masculinity for both sides.

 

[YoninahAliza]

^Yes exactly! Men ought to be able to express 'feminine' characteristics if thats how they feel without criticism just the same way women should be able to express supposedly 'male' traits. Without equal acceptance on both parts then the issue ins't resolved.

 

[fashionista-ta]

And the other side of the coin is that men should be free to express supposedly 'feminine' characteristics and traits, because if both sides don't participate in loosening the definitions, then what you end up with is a lopsided appropriation of masculinity for both sides.

The whole 'Men Are from Mars' thing just drives me crazy ... and I hear supposedly enlightened people talking quite frequently about "male" and "female" traits that are barely gender-associated at all.

You also hear some feminists talking about "Women are like this ..." Not all women!! Not all men!! It's very hard to accurately generalize by gender. I don't think 60% of the population is nearly enough to justify the generalizations I hear every day. (The Myers-Briggs T-F axis is the only one that's gender-influenced ... 60% of women and 40% of men have an F preference. That is, prefer feeling to thinking as their primary approach.)

 

[gius]

And perhaps that's the answer this other thread is looking for:
Why are Menswear adapting Womenswear trends

I wonder if we'll reach it in this lifetime. I don't even like the concept of a 'masculine skirt' Enough with all that already. But for the long term, it could be a form of baby steps

 

[KhaoticKharma]

Perhaps this has been addressed (I'm afraid I only skimmed the thread), but the fashion industry- modeling in specific- is the only profession in which women make more money than men.

I certainly think that the fashion industry feeds into a highly unhealthy image of women towards men: 98% of women are never going to look like Miranda Kerr, but for some reason that fact seems to be lost on the general male population. That lends itself to unhealthy images of women for other women and young girls as well (AKA the whole "your only beautiful if you have 33C-23-33 measurements, perfect skin and hair, and are willing to do whatever a man wants whenever he wants it however he wants it" thought profess). But is the fashion industry really the only industry that does that? Doesn't the auto industry suggest that you're only as good as your expensive car? Doesn't the electronic industry suggest that you're only in the in crowd if you have the latest iPhone?

I doubt any industry will ever shoulder the responsibility for promoting an unattainable lifestyle. It's up to parents and educators to stress, from an early age, that it doesn't matter what you wear- be it four inch Louboutins because you like the way they look, or ballet flats because they're more comfortable- you can still be beautiful, intelligent, and confident, and that anyone who doesn't like you for you is not worth your time. There's nothing wrong with wearing True Religion jeans and carrying Chanel bags; there is something wrong with letting that define you or someone else, positive or negative.

 

[Diorablee]

Personally, I think the fashion industry degraded itself over the years. I mean, from the models to some designers duplicate the other's work, it's taking away the originality that fashion has to offer.

 

[kimberwyn]

Well I found out earlier this week how harshly some so-called feminists can judge everyone in the fashion industry w/o even understanding how the industry functions. There was an article about Christina Hendricks whining about designers not providing her with dresses because of her size, which they branded as "sexist" and "sizist". Most of them said the same thing about stores that only carry a certain size. Mind you, these are people who don't even know what a sample is (and are too close-minded to actually listen and learn when you explain it to them because they already have such staunch views/opinions of the industry).

It's kind of funny how some of these people seem to think every fashion house and boutique has unlimited finances but it gets kind of annoying when you constantly have to defend your own job or business practices. For whatever reason, most people realize that businesses need to make money, unless that business is fashion oriented, and then any semblance of common sense or intelligence just goes out the window

 

[Drusilla_]

^but sometimes, those business practices aren't really very friendly to the women/people being subjected to them, e.g. the difference in the treatment of models in the 80s/90s and now. I mean, one could argue that it's in the business's interest to have a very young girl who's willing to do anything to get the job modelling for them, but that wasn't always the case- some "business practices", like AA's shop staff hiring policy that treats employees' looks as more important than their actual work, or the flood of work that Terry Richardson gets despite the fact that his castings and sessions sound like they border on sexual coercion, for instance, are just plain laziness and hypocrisy.

On the other hand, you're right, some people just don't get how the industry works AT ALL. I don't condone nepotism or borderline abusive work conditions (the latter especially for models, who tend to be the youngest, most vulnerable people in the industry) but come on, I'm tired of hearing "but why can't they have models who look like meeeeee?!", "OMG!! How offensive, calling a show 'Highland r*pe!", "OMG!! Corinne Day promoted heroin chic!" and things in that vein.


In other news, I'm very glad Picture Me is getting a US premiere, it needs to be seen.http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2010/09/sara_ziff_tktk.html#comments

 

[Lilliana]

oh gosh, this might become a longer post, as I have spent quite some thought on that subject.
First of all I think that fashion and feminism cannot only coexist, but must and always have. it all depends on how you define fashion. I think, you cannot escape fashion - at least the way I understand it. it is a language in a way, your looks are that first moment of communication you have in most cases - note, they are really not always accurate communications - but we all send an image out by the way we look. this might be fair or not, but it is. hairy and baggy, heck, that is quite some fashion statement.
so the whole debate is at the core more about is fashion that is commonly perceived to be pretty or expected feminist. I think that comme de garcons (ha what irony) or dries van noten can easily pass as feminist - louis vuitton on the other hand - puh.
than again is so hard to say what feminism is if you look closer, the main ideological disputes were in the 70ties and 80ties. I think, nowadays we are all more about gender studies. In the 60ties it was feminist to wear a miniskirt - at least for some - it was a liberation. fashion is always about the context - the zeitgeist. it is in my opinion it is a symptom not a cause, but the dividing line is blurry.
but uhu - forgive the unconciseness of this post - I don't know whether it's good idea to come home early on a Saturday and post about feminism - but too dizzy to stop. so anyway, I think a main point has always been can one want to be commonly perceived to be attractive, or even sexually appealing, and feminist. What I can say, hell yes. There is this long history of women being degraded to sexual objects that resulted within feminist theory in a certain ambiguity towards sexuality (unless lesbian) as such. The sexual revolution doesn't really deserve it's name when it comes to women's sexuality. In my opinion, what is missing is: it is commonly agreed that it is wrong to perceive women as sexual objects, but not so commonly accepted to see them as sexual subjects. The whole point is that you cannot reduce people to their sex, not that it doesn't exist. Though I agree that the idea of masculine and feminine is a social construct when it comes to abilities and social roles. if a woman wants to be perceived as sexy she should be able to do so, but it would be wrong that she has to be at least pretty to have some good chances for a good life.

In a nutshell: Feminism isn't about what you wear, but about what you think and about what you do.