tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post4014563019074560257..comments2024-03-14T16:03:32.434-04:00Comments on Gertie's New Blog for Better Sewing: Vintage Sewing and Gender PoliticsGertiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04314542159287533507noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-18306147957131319202011-07-05T21:54:21.982-04:002011-07-05T21:54:21.982-04:00I actually refuse to wear jeans because I find the...I actually refuse to wear jeans because I find them extremely oppressively uncomfortable, both physically and also emotionally; because I feel 'expected' to wear them due to their incomprehensible ubuiquitousness in our society nowadays. Don't get me wrong, denim's a great, hardwearing fabric but jeans, ugh!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-90006187673747930002011-01-25T18:30:03.364-05:002011-01-25T18:30:03.364-05:00Wow! What a powder keg of fantastic ideas. There...Wow! What a powder keg of fantastic ideas. There are a few that I wanted to add my two cents to. Molly, I hear you loud and clear. I work in economic development and spend a lot of time at the big boys table, as far as we think women have come, I would love for some of these academics to spend a few days in the pumps of a woman working in a seriously male dominated field. That being said, I wear skirts and dresses every day. I'm not a feminist, I'm a humanist and a caraleeist, I feel most confident in a dress with a flattering silouette and if I plan to make my mark, I know that I won't be comfortable doing it in kahkis. Chin up and hemline no more than two inches above the knee for a business meeting (advice from my grandma).<br /><br />One thing that I think that is most important when looking at the history of fashion is the actual evolution of fashion. Today I hear a lot about the opressiveness of certain eras, but I jst don't see it. Fashion has always evolved from the minority and marginilized members of society, stolen and adapted to fit the population as a whole. I don't see cloches from the 20's that women adorned with secret codes to signify their relationship status or a woman in the 50's taking pride in her outward presentation oppressive, I see it just as liberating as ripping down the crtains of Tara to make a ballgown.<br /><br />Vintage inspired fashion isn't paying homage to the oppression of women, it is celebrating the voices that they created for themselves with the resources they had.Caraleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16494661890619810791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-89713171107375310312010-08-03T08:25:37.297-04:002010-08-03T08:25:37.297-04:00Just to add my 2 cents to this topic, I really thi...Just to add my 2 cents to this topic, I really think women must avoid falling into the trap of thinking that the fashion of yesteryear symbolises oppression and today's trends are for the free woman. When it comes to the pressure on women to present a perfect representation of whatever fashion-houses have decided is the feminine ideal, really nothing at all has changed since the 50's. They had girdles and wiggle dresses, we have platform 6-inch heels and bodycon. Realistically all a woman can do is be true to herself and only endorse the trappings and clothes she finds empowering and gets pleasure from wearing.Stevie Jaynenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-61440501613600213542010-01-08T18:08:33.215-05:002010-01-08T18:08:33.215-05:00did I write yvs saint laurent? It might have been ...did I write yvs saint laurent? It might have been Christian Dior instead. regardless, both fashions were embraced by women.<br />Ali-KrystaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-55868644309001689172010-01-08T18:02:36.725-05:002010-01-08T18:02:36.725-05:00I don't think that wearing clothing styles fro...I don't think that wearing clothing styles from the 1950's or 1940's is a contridiction for femminism,as there have surely been worse times for women in history. Yes, those styles are from around the time when womens voting was first accepted, and before the time when a womans hourly working rate was equal to a mans, but (I'm not saying that this era was not important, it is the most symbolic) surely the most important era of womens rights was the first world war, when a shortage men forced society to accept women as valued and able members of the workforce and to accept women as more than a household commodity to look pretty in extremely restrictive garments. Do not forget that the 1920's enjoyed its own rise in femminism, during which women abandoned the corset for the bust-flattening camisole, which was less restrictive (though still held the figure according to fashion)<br />In ancient Eqypt, women were, not considered completely equal to men. People may argue that there were powerful Eqyption queens, such as Cleopatra, Nefetiti and Nefetari, but they forget that the only gained their place on their throne because all male heirs were unable to take the throne, and they were controled by a large number of male advisors and priests, like many 'rulers' of a country, they were not the ones with real power, instead only acting as a face for that power. <br />In the medieval period, women were not just seen as objects to be sold off to another family, but were villified by the church, that often claimed that they were the devil in earthly form, set in place to tempt man. Do women reject medieval inspired fashions that come around decade after decade because of this? No, they don't. Eqyption styles were embraced in the 1920's femminist revolution rather than reviled.<br /> We may CHOOSE to wear these styles because we like them. the important thing here is choice. At the time 1940's and 50's fashions may have been started by male fashion designers in order to make women look more appealing to men, but in this decade the resurgance in those fashions has occured in a rare way, it is been started and driven by the female publics choice first, as an anti-fashion, against the (still) predominantly male fashion industry that has demanded that we be stick thin and androginous. This is very similar to the dispute that happened between fashion designers coco chanel and yves saint laurent, one side for female control over dress and the other for pleasing male fashion designers, all that has happened is that the aesthetics in such a dispute have traded places.<br />For this reason I do not think that using vintage fashions are anti-feminist. <br />My personal opinion is that so long as women feel empowered in what they wear, femminism triumphs.<br />Ali-KrystaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-17530795390124613162009-12-23T16:19:23.422-05:002009-12-23T16:19:23.422-05:00Love this post and some good comments.
A point to...Love this post and some good comments.<br /><br />A point to make is how restrictive it was to look good and slim in the type of dress Ms. Draper wears.<br /><br />Women resorted to actually starving to fit into the tiny waisted fashions (yes, Dior did win out in popular preference - by women - note a male designer designed how a woman should appear body wise).<br /><br />A tiny corseted cinched in waist maintained with a typical breakfast of toast/grapefruit half/black coffee - this is what women had to hinder themselves.<br /><br />A corset can help with posture, but mainly it was restrictive - restricted circulation, movement, eating and breathing.<br /><br />It was also interesting how women followed and fawned over the latest fashions. Such snobbery over wearing 'out of date' (last years') clothing. This made women have to financially fork over (or be very good home seamstresses) to look presentable.<br /><br />Also don't forget the clothing care work that went into a wardrobe - ironing, washing the collars and cuffs separately, hand washing delicates, etc...<br /><br />Yes, it looked elegant and everyone was presentable at all times - but good to know now we can all schlep on our low-care comfortable sweats and yoga pants and sneakers and clogs and show up anywhere and still be let through the front door!<br /><br />Do not forget women were not allowed into dining establishments if they were wearing pants in the fifties and very early sixties - talk about sexist.<br /><br />Ladies who lose weight now refer to their jean size as a measure of progress. Used to be the waistline measurement - I think that is definitely progress.Valeriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11603226739389756358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-89366763014327870062009-12-19T17:09:32.497-05:002009-12-19T17:09:32.497-05:00Stellar post! I must agree with you...the stylings...Stellar post! I must agree with you...the stylings of the 50s were indeed more flattering, but the fact that women today have a choice means we are not oppressed. We wear these fashions with confidence. Love your blog!Some Like it Vintage.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11991784506231066989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-10378386897421005382009-11-19T14:52:33.101-05:002009-11-19T14:52:33.101-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-73782885776771090062009-09-15T15:38:17.754-04:002009-09-15T15:38:17.754-04:00I have not read all 53 comments but here are my 2 ...I have not read all 53 comments but here are my 2 cents. In my very humble post-feminist-era opinion, feminism is about choice. It's about women being able to choose anything from lifestyle to clothes to whatever. So, when I hear someone say "you are so not a feminist because you do x, y or z" it really grinds my gears. If I CHOOSE to be submissive to my husband (which I am not, just to clarify) then it is MY choice and hence an act of feminism. If I CHOOSE to wear girdles (again, I do not) then it is MY CHOICE and another act of feminism.<br /><br />Just because some women choose to live like those 50s housewives does not mean they are not feminists, it just means they are exercising their right to choose and that is all feminism is about.<br /><br />Off my soapbox now.Junehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11963491040124724656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-27864481764246063622009-09-06T22:54:06.499-04:002009-09-06T22:54:06.499-04:00My mother was a young woman during the 1950's ...My mother was a young woman during the 1950's and that era more than any other captivated her creativity and style. Once the 1960's set in, she gave up trying to be in fashion. Once the rules were tossed away (matching purse and shoes, no white before Memorial Day or after Labor Day...etc...) she considered modern fashions to be just chaos.<br /><br />Collectively, we as a society forgot how to look appropriate for special occasions. We became a casual, disposable, and sloppy people.<br /><br />For some of us, it has nothing to do with gender politics and everything to do with celebrating an era when clothing was not made of cheap materials in a crowded sweatshop in the third world. An era when tailoring and fit were important.suzqnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-16018344037158656782009-08-16T00:02:33.150-04:002009-08-16T00:02:33.150-04:00Hi all. I'm enjoying flicking through the blog...Hi all. I'm enjoying flicking through the blog and just wanted to chime in on this discussion which I think raises some important points. <br /><br />To be honest, sometimes it scares me to see young women devouring aesthetics from bygone times so hungrily they appear to actually be trying to promote an archaic lifestyle. <br /><br />Ain't nothing wrong with wearing a well-fitting, flattering skirt of whatever cut, and enjoying it. I like 50s styles especially because I find them flattering - and there's room for creativity when making one's own clothes. <br /><br />But when some women get into the 50s housewife, or pinup, or 60s stripper ('burlesque' they're calling it) styles with with a lot of 'tee hee, look at me, isn't this fun?' and no display of critical analysis, one can't help but feel this is regressive and shows a lack of respect for the struggles women have endured to get where we are today. <br /><br />Gertie states this is not where she's coming from, but I think there are a lot who are probably quite clueless when it comes to the past. They may claim they're appreciating a style with a pinch of irony, but in actual fact, they just want to look pretty. And the net result is they're just promoting archaic values.<br /><br />Granted, it's a fine line - but Dita Von Teese, for example, is way over it. And anyone who watches Mad Men and is considering getting a wiggle skirt so they can look like a sexy secretary should at least be aware of their motivations.<br /><br />The danger in promoting archaic lifestyles and values is that they again become the norm. And we don't want that. Do we?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-42159806626688677452009-08-15T22:49:51.037-04:002009-08-15T22:49:51.037-04:00REALLY interesting discussion. I wanted to say th...REALLY interesting discussion. I wanted to say that in general I have found that gals who most embrace the retro-50's aesthetic in their personal style tend to be MORE rather than less aware of the history of female emancipation, and are more rather than less independent, freethinking, questioning types. Or it may be that I just tend to meet/be exposed to gals who are of a generalised feminist outlook because that's what I am too... but no, there seem to be too many smart, sassy, accomplished and thoughtful gals bopping around in their fifties-inspired finery for this to be a coincidence! Proof of this is the very considered responses you have received here. I particularly enjoyed reading elizabethe's thoughts on the concept of bodily respect. In a fashion climate that seems to be asking us to expose more and more actual flesh to be considered attractive, I think a swing-back to more refined and dignified may be overdue.EmilyKatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02202548680341378684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-5992202699925692312009-08-15T17:09:07.701-04:002009-08-15T17:09:07.701-04:00This is such a fascinating blog and such thoughtfu...This is such a fascinating blog and such thoughtful comments from your readers. <br /><br />This was a repressive time, but as history goes, it was less repressive than the 40's which was less repressive than the 30's, which was less repressive than the 20's.<br /><br />The fortunate thing is that with each generation we seem to make more progress.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-21979655650991175612009-08-15T08:00:08.358-04:002009-08-15T08:00:08.358-04:00wearing a 50's dress doesn't mean you wish...wearing a 50's dress doesn't mean you wish you lived in the 50's! i don't see why reviving vintage styles has anything to do with gender politics. if wearing something makes you feel more sexy or confident then i think that's making a feminist statement!Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05504768263989996169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-8845852062127846342009-08-14T14:00:22.116-04:002009-08-14T14:00:22.116-04:00I wanted to add that a lot of the comments have br...I wanted to add that a lot of the comments have brought up the very good point that, in their time, a lot of vintage styles were seen as quite revolutionary and liberating for women. One of the reasons I love vintage clothing is that it gives me the chance to trace women's history in a very concrete way.Catherine Shuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06759711296632260503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-81199408375275637982009-08-14T13:57:45.511-04:002009-08-14T13:57:45.511-04:00I'm glad to see this post, as it's certain...I'm glad to see this post, as it's certainly something that I've thought of from time to time when I slip into one of my 1950s dresses. For me, the issue is compounded by the fact that I'm Asian American. When many of my treasured dresses were made, Asian Americans faced an amazing amount of prejudice and were marginalized in ways that's hard for us to wrap our heads around now. "Mad Men" notes this with the "Oriental family in Pete's office" prank and the waitress in the Japanese restaurant. Whenever I flip through an vintage Sears catalog or old issue of Life magazine for inspiration, I keep this in mind (especially when I stumble upon articles that refer to "Orientals" as "moon-faced" and "inscrutable." Sigh.). <br /><br />One of the reasons that I started wearing vintage clothing, however, was that I simply did not feel comfortable in a lot of modern clothing, which are sewn to standard sizing that seems to ignore my own curvy measurements and are often too revealing for my taste. Frankly, I feel a lot more comfortable in a wiggle dress (provided that it's not too tight) than a pair of skinny jeans. Aesthetically and emotionally, vintage styles just feel right to me. <br /><br />I guess the upshot is: I wear vintage clothing with joy, but it is also a daily reminder that I am extremely lucky to live in these times, when attitudes toward women and minorities are a good deal more enlightened (though they still have a long way to go!).Catherine Shuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06759711296632260503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-65847629550985744912009-08-14T13:07:11.348-04:002009-08-14T13:07:11.348-04:00I just found your blog today and have really enjoy...I just found your blog today and have really enjoyed it. I agree with most people's comments about we woment can wear what we want. I live in skirts. I love them. Coincidentally, I posted about a vintage pencil skirt pattern on my blog Monday and how I had made it and could hardly walk in it. I didn't know they were called wiggle skirts, but I remember having to use a lot of hip swing to get around in it. Is that where the name comes from?Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03124759791502821282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-49796815007147927972009-08-14T07:48:11.813-04:002009-08-14T07:48:11.813-04:00I don't consider myself a feminist, but I don&...I don't consider myself a feminist, but I don't consider myself a lot of things because I don't like labelling myself. That's irrelevant, really. I started thinking about if it's justifiable to wear fashions from a time that was, in many ways, oppressive to women but, I realised, if I don't wear the things that make me happy just because I think they may offend someone else's sensibilities, then I'm just oppressing myself! And by wearing fashion which isn't mainstream, I have more freedom than many girls of my age who feel the need to follow trends. Plus, the fashions I wear look better on girls who have curves, yet many fashions from eras when women were liberated (I'm think the '20s and '60s) are only really flattering to women who have the shape of boys! (There's nothing wrong with that if it so happens to suit you but I just look terrible in those clothes!!)<br />What annoys me is that people might look at me and assume that, because I choose to wear clothes I like, feel comfortable in and find flattering - which just so happen to be the fashions of the 40s and 50s - that I must subscribe to the political and social ideas of the time, too! <br />I could say so much more but it wouldn't be well thought through, at all!<br />This is a really great post. <br />-Andi xAndi B. Goodehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02332787961396491990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-39058054975720685262009-08-13T11:30:35.685-04:002009-08-13T11:30:35.685-04:00Gertie, I clicked on this link last night from Amb...Gertie, I clicked on this link last night from Ambika's blog (into-thefray.com) and thought of this discussion:<br /><br />http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/thearts/2009641382_undies12.htmlAntoinettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09398754886656482414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-72163637615891195932009-08-12T12:26:47.510-04:002009-08-12T12:26:47.510-04:00Ooh, Meg, love your point about Joan on Mad Men. E...Ooh, Meg, love your point about Joan on Mad Men. Especially when you consider her story line in the last season--she became very oppressed in both her career and her relationship. But I think one of the reasons women gravitate towards her as a character is the confidence with which she carries her body. It's such an anomaly on today's tv.<br /><br />Johanna, thanks for your point of view. I just deleted your double comment, fyi! That little message looks so ominous. :)Gertiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04314542159287533507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-29898912850669998802009-08-12T12:10:26.510-04:002009-08-12T12:10:26.510-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Johanna Luhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13829280594947262409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-49951702711243831962009-08-12T12:09:55.908-04:002009-08-12T12:09:55.908-04:00This debate has been raging in the comment section...This debate has been raging in the comment sections in the Swedish vintage blogs too. Most of those young bloggers, in "done" hair, high heels and fitted dresses, labels themselves as staunch feminists, and for them it's all about reclaiming and freedom of choice. I find these girls really cool and intriguing. <br /><br />Although I do get provoked when people talk about being "feminine" or "masculine" as a virtue. For me, as a feminist born in the early 70's, I see this as a potential minefield. I think gender stereotypes is the cause of many problems when it comes to equal rights and opportunities for both sexes<br /><br />As for myself I do feel restricted in those original vintage garments, they make me more self conscious about how I look, move and feel. Basically I feel less free as a person. So I alter these patterns too and usually turn tapered dresses into slightly a-line. <br /><br />As for spending a lot of time on grooming, it's again not for me. But I don't see why a girl who spends a lot of time trying to perfect a 40's coif should be criticized for being image obsessed when I'm sure punks spend at least the same amount of time on their mohawks!Johanna Luhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13829280594947262409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-85433746257155248372009-08-12T11:37:59.084-04:002009-08-12T11:37:59.084-04:00Being someone who is both in a male dominated indu...Being someone who is both in a male dominated industry and a passionate sewist/knitter/baker, with a love of vintage I haven't been able to indulge much in just yet... I have thought about this. But in a modern context. While Canada doesn't tend to have the Ultra Right Wing Conservative population that's been pretty loud in our neighbours to the south, the pouffy-dress/apron wearing/sewing woman has a connotation attached to her that's stereotypical and not well rounded. I still shock my colleagues when they find out I knit, let alone the rest of it. And those who I've met through knitting are shocked I do research in the physical sciences. <br /><br />I don't see vintage clothes as symbols of oppression. I do see that others reflect stereotypes on you depending on what you wear, how you look, and what you do. So I have to choose these things carefully in important situations - when starting at a new job, when travelling for work, when presenting a new pattern for my line ;). Once people have made my measure, have slotted me into their hierarchy, then I start stretching the boundaries and making them think twice. I become the Researcher who can bake/sew/knit, rather than "oh, isn't it cute that girl can write code?". <br /><br />Having gotten a little older, I no longer conform to the expected stereotypes of wherever I am or whatever I'm doing in order to earn some respect - I expect the respect. I also know that some situations call for a certain presentation and don't flaunt the limits too badly. But once I'm well ensconced in a workplace, there's no reason I can't wear cute skirts and my own designs while I'm pounding on the keyboard for 6 hours, so I do. Because I'm more comfortable, and I happen to like it. If I get a few grey haired men to stop linking appearance and productivity, bonus!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-42420704766114402362009-08-12T07:42:23.444-04:002009-08-12T07:42:23.444-04:00I grew up with a bunch of women that didn't li...I grew up with a bunch of women that didn't listen to the convention of their day and was raised to do the same.<br /><br />I don't consider myself a "feminist" because I don't need a group of women validating my being a woman. I do consider myself to be a strong and independent woman. <br /><br />I thought the purpose of the whole movement was to give women the right to choose what they saw fit, for themselves, not fit into a stereotype of what other women consider that to be. If you want to stay at home and take care of a house, go to work, be single and never have kids...all of this is what being a "feminist" is, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this what was fought so hard for? <br /><br />I choose to wear clothing *I* want to wear. *I* choose to look like I stepped out of the 50s...or not. My choices. That's the key thing here. <br /><br />I had a group of women in my family I admired who were "opressed" in their 50s wiggle dresses and fashions of the time. All of them had jobs, a couple even had rewarding careers, they made money and the lived their life as they saw fit...doing it with grace and style. To me, I never have seen these fashions as being oppressive, or unemancipated to women, because they weren't. They were strong and independent women who looked good doing what they damn well wanted to do. The men were just along for the ride.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3259455441759015869.post-16384388448099964872009-08-12T05:53:54.210-04:002009-08-12T05:53:54.210-04:00The previous comment about the Sartorialist got me...The previous comment about the Sartorialist got me thinking that may be we are approaching this question from the wrong angle. The premise of the argument seems to be that because the 50s were before women’s lib (if we ignore the Suffragettes) the fashions at the time are tainted in a way that modern fashions are not; wiggle skirts are a sign of oppression but skinny jeans and vertiginous heels are not. However, it seems to me that slavishly following the contemporary fashions of any era is an oppression we are in danger of opposing on our selves (the reasons for which would provoke an interesting discussion on its own).<br /><br />The Sartorialist’s complaint that women’s heels weren’t high enough in a particular city in 2009 seems just as oppressive as being ‘forced’ to wear a girdle to achieve the fashionable shape in the 50s.<br /><br />The choice of women in the 21st century to wear the 50s’ silhouette therefore takes on a different meaning for me. Most of the people you see wearing these clothes seem to be part of an alt. scene (even if that scene is just being too ‘big boned’ to look at all attractive in the current fashions). They are choosing these clothes because they are an expression of themselves and as part of a rebellion against the main-stream; for me, being able to do this is part of their emancipation from the oppression of fashion.<br /><br />The clothes have lost their oppressive meaning by the very nature of them being worn now, in this culture.<br /><br />Similarly I find the comment that Joan is the strongest character in Mad Men intriguing and I think is supports my argument. We have imbued her character with some of the feelings we have when we wear these clothes. We see her as the sexy, independent wiggle silhouette to Betty’s impractical and dependent fluffy girly-ness. However, leaving aside the fact that all the characters are floored (one of the really appealing things about the show), if you really study the plot and characters it is Peggy Olson who’s really pushing the boundaries of the woman's place in the work-place, moving from secretary to copy writer, despite debilitating set-backs. And I’ve noticed that she’s someone who doesn’t get discussed a great deal on fashion blogs because her clothes don’t float our boat. I wonder what that say’s about us! Is she not a strong woman because she’s slightly dowdier?<br /><br />This has been a really interesting discussion.<br /><br />Meg xAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com