Robin Abcarian had a rather snarky piece in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times about what she calls the "Sausage Casing Girls", those young women who dress in styles entirely too small and tight to fit their bodies: Letting It All Hang Out. It begins:
THE Sausage Casing Girls are everywhere this summer, their muffin tops hanging over their hip-skimming jeans, clothes shrink-wrapped around fleshy bodies that look as if they’ve been stuffed — like forcemeat — into teensy tops and skintight pants.
I don’t know about you, but I became instantly defensive and wary after that sentence.
Still, Abcarian does touch on something important:
One is tempted to applaud the Sausage Casing Girls; after all, Southern California is an epicenter of body consciousness, and here they are thumbing their noses at the idea that they must be whippets or Lindsay Lohans to wear the current styles, which for the last several seasons have been exaggeratedly body-hugging and skin-revealing. Perhaps all that self-esteem building has finally paid off.
But this phenomenon does not appear entirely to be about self-acceptance and the conscious abandonment of repressive physical ideals. It is far more complicated than that. Yes, there are plenty of young women who can confidently say that they are happy with their less-than-svelte shapes — and that is to be applauded. But there are many others who in the rush to be fashionable are unable to admit that they are larger than they wish to be, or that their bodies just don’t look good in the clothes they are choosing. Instead of reveling in their big, beautiful bodies, many girls instead are deep in denial, pouring themselves into clothes that are putting them in a python squeeze.
I hear this sort of discussion all the time from my students and my youth group teens. Call it the "What was she thinking?" phenomenon, after the question that so many young women pose when they see a peer wearing clothes that, to their mind, are much too small for her body. On this blog, I’ve regularly made the case that "Sisterhood is easier in winter", and yesterday’s Abcarian article is a fine case study of that unfortunate truism. When the weather turns warmer and clothing styles become more revealing, many women do become more energetic in the "verbal policing" of the clothing choices of their peers!
Whether she’s aware of it or not, Abcarian is engaged in a classic behavior: substituting supposedly objective judgment about aesthetics for the less socially acceptable (but still ubiquitous) condemnation of fat and revealing clothing. In other words, the progressive Los Angeles Times wouldn’t print a similarly long article in which the author decried miniskirts and tube tops as fashion choices for adolescents; that sort of op-ed might only be found in a conservative magazine. But the Times is perfectly happy to run a long piece which, in only somewhat sympathetic language, asks again that nasty sotto-voce question: "who does she think she is to think she can get away with that?" For Abcarian, aesthetic ridicule ("muffin tops?") is an acceptable form of criticism because it’s rooted in supposedly value-neutral fashion sensibilities in a way that moral criticism is not.
Abcarian is right, however, about the dearth of choices that so many young women have for summer fashions. Tight and revealing clothing, modeled by the likes of Paris Hilton, is easily found in malls and stores from Nordstrom to Wal-Mart. And it’s certainly true that the social pressure to dress according to these fashions — combined with the sheer unavailability of other choices — means that a great many girls and young women will find themselves squirming and pulling and tugging to get their bodies into clothes that seem, objectively, to be too danged small.
Abcarian is also right about the huge psychological impact that sizes have on self-esteem, even when virtually everyone recognizes that the numbers used in women’s clothing are arbitrary and unreliable:
"Everyone wants to buy a small size, even if it looks terrible," said psychologist Nancy Etcoff, who directs the Program in Aesthetics and Well Being in the department of psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital. "There is shame in buying sizes that are above 8, which some think is already a big size."
Etcoff said that one of her patients, a 16-year-old girl, was traumatized in front of friends when one held up a pair of her size 7/8 jeans and said, "You wear these? I could get two of me in here."
Both Abcarian and Etcoff suggest that young women’s attachment to numerical sizes is so strong that they will "deny reality" in order to fit into the size they think they ought to be. After all, though the article doesn’t point this out, young women tend to self-describe using sizes: "I’m a 2" or "I’m an 8". You don’t hear those gals saying, "I generally wear a 6"; instead they frequently say "I am a 6." The size becomes more than a measure of hips, waist, and inseam; it becomes a key component of identity itself. If a young woman wants to think of herself as a "4", for example, then, as Abcarian and those she interviews suggest, she may do everything in her power to squeeze into a "4" rather than wear a larger size. The psychological cost of admitting that the smaller size doesn’t fit is simply, apparently, too high to pay. Physical discomfort and the risk of public ridicule are thus less important than maintaining one’s self-concept as a 2,4,6,14, what-have-you.
So what’s the feminist answer to this problem? Is it a problem at all?
As a pro-feminist, I’m aware of the uneasy relationship between feminism and fashion. There’s a tendency within the loosely organized feminist community to never criticize a woman’s clothing decisions. The very notion that there might be an objective standard of beauty is one of which feminism is traditionally very critical; we who work in this field are understandably reluctant to judge women’s personal fashion choices. We tend to save our criticism for the fashion industry and the media, while remaining deeply respectful of the personal sartorial decisions of women. Hence my anger at the rather nasty (to my mind) way that Abcarian’s article begins.
But feminism does care about women’s physical and psychic comfort. While we might dispute whether or not certain jeans styles are more appealing than others, we can easily agree that physical comfort for women is a fundamental feminist good. We ought also to agree that body acceptance and good self-image are also laudable and important goals. There isn’t a quick-fix solution that can provide young women with these comforts. Simply encouraging young women to "cover up" and resist the imperatives of Teen Vogue doesn’t get very far. It’s one thing to ask a thirty year-old woman to opt out of the "beauty myth"; another thing altogether for older folks to ask sixteen year-olds desperate for attention to also opt out and refuse to "play the game." When we do that, we tend to come across as patronizing old people who "just don’t get" how intense the pressure to be fashionable and desirable truly is.
The first phase of the solution is clear: non-judgmental conversation. Young women, perhaps particularly the so-called "sausage-casing girls", are not nearly as in the dark about what they look like as Abcarian imagines. A few may be brimming with genuine self-confidence, but others are anxious and defensive and wary of condemnation, or worse, ridicule. No matter how well-meaning older folks might be, saying "Honey, that just doesn’t look good on you" is only likely to reinforce that anxiety and defensiveness. Giving young women an opportunity to open up, safely and without risk of judgment, is key. Let them begin, as they surely will, by talking about "other girls" and their fashion decisions. If the environment is safe enough, the conversation can gently turn to a young woman’s own self-image.
There’s a lot in the Abcarian article to discuss and unpack. As feminists, we must be careful to direct the brunt of our criticism not at young women but at the cultural and economic institutions that form and shape their ideals and their self-image. At the same time, we must work with these young women to help them resist and respond to deeply unhealthy messages about their bodies. And we’ve got to find a way of doing that that will be heard and received. That will mean doing what Abcarian could not do: suspending our own culturally-shaped aesthetic sensibilities, biting back our own well-meaning criticism, and actively listening to the concerns, desires, and fears of the young women with whose bodies we are apparently all so concerned.
what adds to the “i’m an 8″ madness is that an 8 at nordstroms is not an 8 at wal-mart. the vanity sizing phenomenon in women’s clothing can drive one to the brink of insanity. you’re supposed to know what size you “are,” but it ends up being a crapshoot depending on the store or the brand.
so, we exhaust ourselves trying on two to three different sizes (and cuts! don’t get me started on the cut issue with jeans) for every establishment we visit. and if you find something that fits, stock up, because next season, the same size and cut might fit you differently (i’ve had this happen at the GAP more than once).
madness, seriously. i’m tired just thinking about it.
This might be one topic where I’m pretty much in agreement with you Hugo. I would target the criticism at women and teen magazines and the MTV-type TV stations that commodify the female form. Sadly a lot of women buy into the messages being sold to them. I think if you become obsessed by your own looks, you’re likely to suffer from low self-esteem. If not, you’re setting yourself up for future low self-esteem. Women need to take a stand against this obsession and boycott the magazines and TV stations that promote it.
Most shopping is going to be depressing for girls over the average 12-14 size, since the stores that their “fashionably sized” friends can shop at simply don’t carry anything above a 10 or at most a 12, and even those sizes, as kate said, are going to be a lot smaller than at Walmart or Target. There are stores for larger women, but the fashions tend to be targeted at middle-aged women and the selection for teenagers isn’t great.
Watching my younger sister going shopping is always distressing, but at least she’s really open to talking about it and trying to see why things are the way they are. For her, seeing more celebrities that are talented and stylish larger women - like Queen Latifah and America Ferrera - is a big encouragement. Unfortunately, white actresses like Kate Winslet have “sold out” on their statements about being comfortable with their larger-than-average bodies because they just weren’t being offered roles. Bleah.
Boy, this is a hot issue. I’ve completely been guilty of rolling my eyes at girls who’re dressed inappropriately for their body type, but I’m working on it.
What Not to Wear can give a little insight for how to look sexy without looking tacky, but you’d have to ignore the first fifteen minutes of the show — where they blast the makeover candidate about how horrible her current choices are. From there, they steer her toward flattering, age-appropriate choices and work with an eye to the positive. THAT part is worth watching.
For now, I keep reminding myself that it’s taken until my 30s to look at the numbers on a tape measure rather than those on a scale and/or clothing label. I can’t expect a teenager to immediately grasp that she’ll look thinner wearing clothing with a bigger number on the tag. Cut out the tags, if you must, but please, you’ll look much sexier if what you wear fits!
Sizes and cuts are very frustrating in womens’ clothing, and it doesn’t help that the more expensive brands and stores have “smaller” sizes while the cheaper stores, like Walmark or Target, the sizes seem larger. A 6 at Dillards is going to be an 8-10 at Target. So those of us who shop economically seem to be “fatter.”
What Not to Wear can offer some good advice to people who insist on buying ill-fitting garments, but many of the episodes seem to choose people by class as much as by taste, finding it easier to stereotype them as stupid and ugly because they deviate from the “upper middle-class” norm. Bikers, punks, and rednecks are easy targets but that doesn’t make “yuppifying” them good for their self-image. Just because clothes are currently faddish doesn’t make them more flattering than outdated fads.
I’d rather see someone look extremely frumpy or dated but full of confidence than see someone follow the arbitrary rules of fashion in an inoffensive manner.
Vacula; I was saddened by an episode in which a Goth was stripped of her style to look yuppie, which is a sort of an identity and political shift, not just a clothing thing. (Although she seemed really happy, so who am I to judge?) So I totally know where you’re coming from.
Personally, for the very first time in my life, What Not to Wear has shown me what the basic aethetic ideas are behind the structure of clothes and how they interacts with body type. I was outside of the land of having a clue, by a long shot: and I knew it and was not comfortable with my choices. Anything “fun” that I bought languished in the back of the closet, and I shuffled off in my ill-fitting jeans and black t-shirts. Following their *structural* advice about what shape clothing will work for me has made me more comfortable and confident in my body, & I wear a wider range of clothes in more interesting fabrics and styles, etc., because they’ve dressed folks with my shape and I’ve seen the difference objectively on others. So I send blessings to WNtW’s little Tabloid Heart, even though I’ve never spent $5000 on a wardrobe!
Sorry, Hugo, that’s probably off topic.
Vacula - You do make a good point. I’ve also found myself annoyed when they steered someone toward classic “professional” clothing that was entirely inappropriate for the person’s true day-to-day life. I mean, c’mon, how many times will a daycare provider really wear that fabulous suit? And the person in Florida…do they really need a New Yorker’s wardrobe?
Arwen - That was more the point I’d intended to make, was about the lessons on shape and fit. With a little creativity, the basic ideas can apply to many different social types — although that’s not really where they head on the show.
For what it’s worth, I’ve considered nominating myself as having the most god-awful-boring wardrobe known to mankind. I used to have more of a sense of style…what the heck happened?
~~~~back to Feminism~~~~
This is one of those points where I wish that there was more of a “uniform” acceptable for women. I’m in the beginning of “The Beauty Myth” (15 years late, I know), and the figures she cites about clothing maintenance for men versus women are staggering. I’m looking at a return to work that would require a professional wardrobe, and I’m seriously trying to figure out how to do my own version of the man’s suit/shirt/tie that will keep me from falling into fashion hell financially. Even when we’re not pressured to look like a hot mama, there’s always something, isn’t there?
Over the weekend, I was at a club where a very curvaceous woman was wearing clothes much too small for her: she had a “muffin top” mid-section and her breasts simply did not wish to be contained by her much too small top. Even her shoes seemed to be several sizes too small – she was trying to dance and was all but unable to do so; crippled by her clothing. I was struck by the struggle she was having – too big for her clothes, trying desperately to be sexy for her date, unable to just relax and enjoy herself because her body kept trying to escape from her too small clothing. She was continually adjusting her top to keep it from coming off, having to watch every step to keep her feet in her shoes.
Because you’re not comfortable in your clothing, you are more aware of your physical self - constantly adjusting your clothing draws attention to you physical self while preventing you from focusing on other matters, ie conversation or personal safety. A woman in ill-fitting shoes that slip off her feet, in clothes so tight she can barely move is a target for physical assault.
The sausage casing girl (by the way, a disturbing metaphor) is doing her best to be sexy; she is aware that her mid-section isn’t flat, but she is attempting to draw the eye elsewhere – breasts, thighs, butt. Yes, very few people know how to choose clothing that is appropriate for their bodies, but more so, very few people understand that the human body comes naturally in different shapes and sizes. Rather than dress for her body type, the sausage casing girl is dressing for the body type she wishes she had.
rather than dress for her body type, the sausage casing girl is dressing for the body type she wishes she had.
Possibly, especially with regard to the shoes. But equally possibly, she’s dressing for the body type she used to have. Very few of us have the money to buy an entire new wardrobe every time we go up or down 20 pounds, even if we have the desire. Same reason you sometimes see skinny girls enveloped in baggy clothes, although they don’t get quite the same judgments passed on them.
What really interests me in the discussion of what girls should or should not wear based on body type is where the criticism comes from. I am a size 10/12, but I’m also six feet tall, so I always get annoyed when I hear other young women saying disparaging things about wearing a double-digit size; like it or not, some of us will never have Paris Hilton’s body. My first semester of college, I worked out five days a week, but my body never significantly changed: I still had a butt and hips and breasts, and a little extra padding on all of them. On the other hand, I know incredibly small girls who eat nothing but junk and still fit a size 4, so I can’t stand the idea of judging someone based on their size.
I also go to college in Charleston, SC where being pretty is a full-time job for some girls (I am not kidding when I say there are girls who will not go to their first class if they are having a bad hair day). The funny thing is, most of the pressure to look good comes from other women. I have met plenty of guys who find my exta padding sexy, and I have met plenty of guys who don’t; I rarely feel like I have to look or dress a certain way solely for the benefit of men. Other women can be incredibly catty to each other and that’s what distresses me. If young women can’t get support from their female peers, who can they really turn to? I went to an all girls high school, and it always amazed me that everyone (including myself) felt such pressure to come to school fully made-up and dressed as stylishly as uniforms would allow. And don’t even get me started on sixth grade girls trying to dress like they’re 21.
I think the thing that disturbs me most about this phenomenon is the right we all think we have to critique other people’s clothing. (And, yes, this criticism is almost always aimed at women.)
Hugo, a point I think is germane: When one is happy and comfortable in themselves, one tends not to consider other people’s differences from one some sort of social emergency. Yes, people who dress in uncomfortable clothes to follow fashion suffer from poor self-esteem, but so do those of us who obsessively monitor the clothing choices of others in order to make them conform to our sense of fashion.
Hooo boy. This one resonates for me. My stepdaughter is a “sausage girl”. I’m a size 14/16 myself, not obese (i’m fairly fit, i’ve done a few half marathons), but definitely a big woman. But my 16 yr old stepdaughter is 20 pounds heavier than I, with the overweight belly hanging over the belt of the low jeans, the breasts oozing from the tee shirt 2 sizes too small, the very very short skirts, and the low jeans doing the plumber crack in the back. Totally inappropriate and frankly, not very attractive. (She looks fantabulous in a snug party dress or when she minimally covers her tummy, she is a gorgeous girl–nothin’ wrong with her size, but those clothes stress all the unattractive parts!). But even so, she complains if men look at her salaciously. Does she not “get” that putting her breasts into a tight tight tiny tee-shirt two sizes too small sends the signal that she wants men to look at them? You don’t get it both ways. I think this is a need to “fit in” with her (inevitably) emaciated looking girlfriends who can look tight-n-tiny and sexy in the clothes that just make OUR pretty girl look, well, not good.
Sigh.
Meanwhile, one of my graduate students wears the same bare-midriff look in the lab, complete with plumber’s crack on the low cut jeans. She’s a cute girl, tho’ I never find this an attractive style myself. Stylish it may be to the younger set, but even in a profession that is a jeans-and-tee-shirts style,like lab science, this is not appropriate–too trendy, not practical. We were at a meeting and she bent down to retrieve something and that exposed her crack—well, it’s not a way for a young woman to make men in a technical field evaluate her professionally. She’s really smart but this trendy style sexualizes her in a negative way. They won’t take her seriously this way. I’m not sure how to bring this up, because I want her to be an exuberant young woman who is herself, but I also want her to be evaluated for her brain and not her butt.
And, before Hugo jumps all over me ;-) this is the real world we work in, not what we might want. It doesn’t matter that we may wish that men and women iinteract differently than they do, things are as they are, and we have to give our girls ways to deal with the reality and not the ideal.
Does she not “get” that putting her breasts into a tight tight tiny tee-shirt two sizes too small sends the signal that she wants men to look at them? You don’t get it both ways.
Good point IT.
Directed to Hugo and other WS students/proponents: surely WS would be of the belief that it’s a women’s right to wear whatever she likes, anywhere she likes? Surely it’s not her fault if men ‘can’t help themselves’ and visually harrass her?
If you think she should be consciously aware of the reactions of others and therefore wear the appropriate clothing, then what about the wider feminist argument that it’s fine to wear short skirts/crop tops in a dodgy area known for random rape attacks (I’ve heard this many times before) - it’s a woman’s right to do this? Isn’t a person partly responsible for his or her own safety? I wouldn’t walk around a well-known danger area for mugging with a brick of money in my hand. The mugger is still at fault of course (he/she is personally responsible), but I helped set-up the scenario.
I applaud Hugo for the honest post though…
And now we come to the more irritating, and more dangerous, problem of critiquing other’s women’s clothing, as very nicely illistrated by IT and perplexed. This problem, being a smaller part of the larger problem of lookism.
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT I WEAR!!! My clothes don’t make me any more intelligent, any more witty, or any more confident. Really, the only thing that changes is (maybe) some astetics and people’s perceptions of me.
So when people say I should “expect” guys to look at my breasts, or that I’m treated less respectfully at work because I’m “not dressed professionally” I want to scream at them. Loudly. Possibly throw something at them. Guys look at my breasts no matter what I wear: I have large breasts. It does not matter what I wear, I could wear sweaters and they still gawk. And I don’t deserve this, I don’t deserve being made to feel like an object, and no one is entitled to my body. (Whether in fantasy or in real life rape). perplexed, if I’m walking down main street butt-ass naked, I still shouldn’t get raped: you have a very dim view of men if you think that men are just waiting for a girl to not be sufficiently covered in order to have an excuse to rape them. Plus, you are also adding to the very real, and very social guilt that rape victims have if you say that stuff. They start second-guessing themselves about their clothing, like they “did” something to get raped. You don’t do anything to get raped, and you don’t do anything to be objectified. End of discussion. Our bodies aren’t something to be compared to money. (Damn, I wish I could extend this analogy to something of men’s…I dunno, like if a guy was wearing a speedo, he was just begging to be castrated: somethig that conveys both the violation and the idiocy of the statement).
On the professional rant, people don’t seem to realize that SUITS ARE EXPENSIVE. It’s like there’s an additional class bridge to get into the professional careers, you are sneered at if you don’t have tailored suits. I’m begging for jobs right now, and I had to go get a suit before I even got a job. And I never understood the facination with suit clothes anyway: they’re uncomfortable, they’re impractical, and especially if I was a lab assiastant, I wouldn’t want to be getting chemicals on something so expensive. What is with our facination with outward displays of wealth if we are supposedly a classless culture? What is with the conspicuous consumption that we all feel beholden to?
Fashion is dumb. Where whatever the hell you want: as long as you feel comfortable, go ahead. All dressing should be for your own edification: if you want to look pretty, go ahead and look pretty. But really, I have to ask, what tangible benefit is it providing? We don’t have the right to critize other’s self-expression. And we’re stupid if we judge somebody on what they’re wearing, not to mention extrodinarily shallow.
End Rant
perplexed, if I’m walking down main street butt-ass naked, I still shouldn’t get raped: you have a very dim view of men if you think that men are just waiting for a girl to not be sufficiently covered in order to have an excuse to rape them
No. You are saying ‘all men’ here. I’m saying that in certain areas, there are some men who may see a scantily-clad woman as a target.
I think Hugo is being refreshingly honest in this post - he’s saying: “look, if you wear a short-skirt and revealing clothes in a lecture, it gets noticed and it’s an unwanted distraction“. It’s as unwanted as somebody waving their hands around in the periphery of your view when you want to concentrate on what someone is saying in front of you. Hugo is speaking as a man (and honestly). As a man myself, a woman wearing revealing clothes in that setting is obviously distracting.
I’m with the posters here who say there’s a case to be made for dressing appropriately, depending on the situation.
You don’t do anything to get raped, and you don’t do anything to be objectified.
I disagree with you making this a black or white issue. It’s not so simple. Take two people:
Person A is aware of his or her surroundings and acts appropriately to help maximise his/her own safety (I call this being personally responsible).
Person B lives in a theoretical ideal world where they beieve they ought not to be a victim of any crime (of course), but because they will not be to blame for crimes made against them, they deliberately refuse to take care about their own personal safety.
I can guarantee you that Person B has a far greater chance of being a victim of a crime. I’m not just talking about rape here - all crimes. I’m self-employed, and if I behaved like person B, companies would be ripping me off left right and centre. I’d never lock my car and I’d leave my wallet on a pub table whenever I went to the toilet. I don’t do this because I am aware of the reality of each situation, no matter what my ideals are.
Our bodies aren’t something to be compared to money.
I’m not surprised you’re ranting - you’re taking my words the wrong way - you’re arguing with a strawman. I’m saying both theft and rape are crimes. So is murder. So is white collar crime. People who commit crimes are responsible for their crimes. I’m just saying : don’t set yourself up to be the victim of their crimes.
Heo Cwaeth and Antigone: total agreement. To me, anything that reframes this issue as a question of what clothing should be unacceptable misses the point, and simply furthers this sense of entitlement about what other people look like, and the implication that women should appear as attractive as possible to men at all times (and that this takes priority over concerns of comfort, budget, etc.).
Antigone said: “IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT I WEAR!!! My clothes don’t make me any more intelligent, any more witty, or any more confident. Really, the only thing that changes is (maybe) some astetics and people’s perceptions of me.”
Except that if you’re dressed inappropriately for the setting (e.g., wearing an evening gown to the lab, a miniskirt and fishnet hose to a job interview at an accounting firm, etc.) it is saying something about your intelligence, judgement and common sense. It doesn’t matter whether or not you like it, whether it hurts your feelings and/or sensibilities, or otherwise insults you, it simply is the way it is - dress codes are part of many, if not most, jobs. Suck it up and go with the program or look for a different line of work.
And in this regard women have it no worse than men. I’ve heard all the rants about pantyhose, etc., but we have ties, expensive wool suits, uncomfortable shoes, etc. Indeed, women have a lot more options vis-a-vis the clothes they wear than men do in most situations where dress codes are applied or enforced.
Perplexed, you may have misread my sisterhood is easier in winter post. I do agree that folks allow themselves to be distracted by women who aren’t wearing much; I place the locus of the blame, however, less on individual women’s clothing choices and far more on those who have been taught that it is acceptable to leer and judge.
As a man, I have control — and so do you, perplexed — over where my eyes go. The problem is not revealed skin, it is the cultural and sexualized meaning assigned to that skin, and the perception that what others choose to reveal is something we are entitled to ogle and judge.
yes, but this is the real world, Hugo and Antigone. My stepdaughter comes home in a huff because some guy on the street shouts comments at her breasts because of how she dresses. Should he have shouted at her? No, but he did. THe point is, if she wants to dress in a certain way (and she can, as unattractive as it is), some men will respond in a certain way. That is a cost she pays for dressing as she does. She is dressing in a way that promotes a very sexualized view of her body.
Similarly with my student. Should some guy oggle her butt, and not consider her brain in a conference setting? No, but again, not the point what he SHOULD do. It’s what he DOES, so she has to pay that cost. And for a woman in a technical field dominated by men, getting categorized as a bit of “all right” rather than a peer is a problem. Sure, she can do what she wants. That’s not in question. But she needs to understand that she will pay a price. She can scream all she wants, Antigone, but it doesn’t matter if she doesnt get the fellowship or the job b ecause of judgments made about her clothes, whether those were right or wrong.
It has a cost, whether you like it or not. We don’t live in a society as it should be, we live in a society as it is.
You are not happy with the response of society to women dressed in this way. But I don’t think that’s very realistic. This is the society and climate we’ve got, so how do we help empower girls right now?
My stepdaughter dresses like a sausage girl. Your response seems to be that’s our problem for thinking it looks bad. I argue that it’s equally a problem that SHE is inculturated to think that is the only style that looks good.
By the way, hear the sound of the ice cracking? Whodathot I’d ever agree with Mr Bad, must be hell freezing over….
(though trust me, a tie ain’t NOTHIN on pantyhose)
Perplexed, you may have misread my sisterhood is easier in winter post. I do agree that folks allow themselves to be distracted by women who aren’t wearing much; I place the locus of the blame, however, less on individual women’s clothing choices and far more on those who have been taught that it is acceptable to leer and judge.
As a man, I have control — and so do you, perplexed — over where my eyes go. The problem is not revealed skin, it is the cultural and sexualized meaning assigned to that skin, and the perception that what others choose to reveal is something we are entitled to ogle and judge.
I’m not talking exclusively about judging and leering - I’m talking about general distraction, which in itself is unsettling and annoying.
You also seem to be contradicting your statements made in the ’sisterhood in winter’ thread. To quote yourself regarding the woman who entered your lecture wearing a miniskirt:-
The whole thing left me annoyed. It always does this time of year. What saddens me most is not the fact that my students tend to pay less attention to me in a situation like this one (though I confess that does bother me, naturally), it is that so many people - especially my female students - are left feeling uncomfortable.
Now according to your latest response, it is your student’s fault they are feeling uncomfortable. You’re now saying they’re ‘allowing themselves to be distracted’ (i.e. the onus is on them to ignore it, not for people to dress appropriately). I realise your original post is a few years old and you may have changed your mind, but I think you were spot in observing what REALLY happens when a woman wears revealing clothing (i.e. the unpleasantness of the distraction from observers).
In reality, do you expect the vast majority of a group to adjust accordingly to the individual’s rights to wear what he/she pleases (however inappropriately) or for the individual simply to dress appropriately? The words “tail”, “wag” and “dog” spring to mind here.
As a man, I have control — and so do you, perplexed — over where my eyes go. The problem is not revealed skin, it is the cultural and sexualized meaning assigned to that skin, and the perception that what others choose to reveal is something we are entitled to ogle and judge.
Come on Hugo - do you really think it’s about some socially engineered feeling of entitlement men have? I think it’s more about a hardwired response in men - it’s an arresting sight - something men are compelled to view, often against their better judgement. It’s something I think men would rather view away from the office, the university, the library, the high-street, and in a more appropriate setting (night club, strip show, GF dressing up, whatever).
You seem to be switching from “that’s not appropriate clothing” now to “the viewer is at fault for daring to view”.
I agree with your last post IT - in fact, isn’t it more worrying for feminists that young girls are focussing so much on trying to look sexy? What about more focus on their personality and intelligence? Isn’t it worrying that the only ‘role models’ (i.e. famous women) young girls have these days happen to look sexy and that’s often WHY they are famous? I think that is in itself rather oppressive. It’s like a lottery - you don’t choose your looks, so all the popular girls are popular through sheer luck. What about a meritocracy? Women gaining kudos and respect from what they do, not what they look like.
When a woman gets yelled at for wearing a swimsuit at the beach, whose fault is that?
I think it’s disingenuous that those who are defending being judgmental about what other people wear do so by appealing to contexts where a formal standard of dress is expected, like the workplace, when the original article talked about “the local mall, any beach boardwalk or the sidewalk in front of your neighborhood high school.” This was never about dress codes. This is about women being told that they should limit their clothing options simply because someone else doesn’t think they’re sufficiently attractive.
yes, but this is the real world, Hugo and Antigone. My stepdaughter comes home in a huff because some guy on the street shouts comments at her breasts because of how she dresses. Should he have shouted at her? No, but he did. THe point is, if she wants to dress in a certain way (and she can, as unattractive as it is), some men will respond in a certain way. That is a cost she pays for dressing as she does. She is dressing in a way that promotes a very sexualized view of her body.
Anyone who responds with “this is how it is” is complicit in the system. I KNOW this is how it is, I’m aware that everybody on the planet considers themselves entitled to judge how I look. The question is, do you support that, or do you work to change it? Dressing like a nun does not guarentee that someone will not get yelled at, and if you tell your stepdaughter that she needs to be responbile for the rest of the world’s response to her, she’ll be miserable and frustrated. You can’t control people’s responses to you.
You can control your responses to them. If she comes home in a “huff” because someone yelled at her (nice connotatively dismissive of her justified anger, by the way) you don’t tell her “What do you expect” you tell her to shout back at them. Tell her to yell “fuck off” in their general direction.
She’s not looking for a sexualized view of her body anymore than a woman who shows her ankle in Afganistan is looking to be raped.
Either justify that guys should be able to yell at, objectify, and sexualize woman, or do your part to change it. People shouldn’t hide behind “This is how it is”, or “this is the way it’s always been”. Tradition doesn’t mean that it’s right. And part of changing it is examining your own reaction to things. When you talk to somebody, are you checking labels or seeing what they’re wearing, or are you listening to what they say? If you see an attractive member that you find yourself sexually aroused, do you feel entitled to express that arousal, or do you respect their boundries? If you see someone who is attractive whom you are not attracted to (same gender, different gender if homosexual, what have you) can you get over your jealousy (the cause of the discomfort, I think Hugo is referring to) or do you think that your emotions override respect of their person?
Justify to me spending time, effort, and money in a bid that will be completely unsuccessful at making sure that no one will yell, harass, or sexualize me.
You would think the Los Angeles times would have better things to do than play some high school bully game called “let’s pick on the fat girls”! I though that term “sausage casing girls” was very rude and sexist…and the article itself very unprofessional. Save the snarky fashion commentary for Glamour or Cosmo, that’s what I say…
btw there are thin women who wear overly tight clothes that show way too much skin, and if you ask me, they don’t look any more attractive than the larger women do. I think most women today regardless of their body size could stand to cover up and be modest in their attire.
When a woman gets yelled at for wearing a swimsuit at the beach, whose fault is that?
LOL - thanks for the strawman jfpbookworm, but we’re talking about a whole different universe to that - inappropriate clothing. Nobody here has argued that a swimsuit at the beach is inapproptiate wear. I think it is highly appropriate to wear swimwear at the beach. Seems you are arguing against imaginary people.
This was never about dress codes. This is about women being told that they should limit their clothing options simply because someone else doesn’t think they’re sufficiently attractive.
Seems Hugo has left the thread when I called him on his contradictory opinions. So what’s it to be Hugo? Can a woman wear what she wants in any situation, or do you think she should address appropriately?
Save the snarky fashion commentary for Glamour or Cosmo, that’s what I say…
They have a special license for being snarky or something? Makes me wonder why feminists give Cosmo a pass everytime - like they’re untouchable or something - must be a sistah-hood thang. I personally think magazines like Cosmo are damaging women on a daily basis, with the 100% approval of women. Talk about self-abuse…..
See my new post, Perplexed. But nothing a woman wears or doesn’t wear justifies ogling or rude remarks. Women’s bodies are not the source of male distraction — male inability to exercise self-control is.
See my new post, Perplexed. But nothing a woman wears or doesn’t wear justifies ogling or rude remarks. Women’s bodies are not the source of male distraction — male inability to exercise self-control is.
…which contradicts yet again with your previous post made here:-
Two girls in the back row began to whisper furiously, passing a note back and forth with great alacrity, all the while staring with undisguised hostility at the object of all of this attention. Of course, many others were carefully observing me, trying to see if I was “checking out” my scantily-clad student. It was distracting for everyone.
The blame, according to the article I quote, lies apparently not with the audience who seem subjected to an annoyance, but the woman who dressed inappropriately.
Yet, according to your latest post, it apears that everyone is wrong and the women dressing inappropriately has a right to dress inappropriately!
Another quote:-
What saddens me most is not the fact that my students tend to pay less attention to me in a situation like this one (though I confess that does bother me, naturally), it is that so many people - especially my female students - are left feeling uncomfortable.
More tellingly:-
When the warmer weather comes, and exposed flesh begins to appear in larger splashes and patches, the anxiety level can be palpable! Here at my immensely diverse community college, it is not uncommon for some women to snarl sotto voce “who does she think she is” when they see a fellow student on display. Meanwhile, many of my male students can barely focus on the work before them.
The bolded quote would appear that women’s reactions to bare flesh should be kept in check. What do you propose, Hugo? Surely they are at fault here, since the barer of flesh is not to blame.
The unequivocal contradiction to your latest article:-
I recognize as well that revealing dress fosters a culture of competition, even among college-aged women, and that competitiveness does irreparable damage to the already fragile bonds of gender solidarity that those of us in this field are working so hard to foster.
You’re against it here, clearly. So now you’re a proponent of a culture of competition? Nice one, Hugo.
As a feminist, I think Cosmo sucks.
Feel better Perplexed? You’re strawfeminist argument has been refuted.
Feel better Perplexed? You’re strawfeminist argument has been refuted.
….just waiting for 1,000,000 other votes to come in! :)
Don’t need to: you said “100% approval” without anything to back it up. Well, I just refuted your 100% approval statement, and I want some clear evidence that a majority of feminists support Cosmo (Because I’ve read some pretty heavy critisms of woman’s magazines).
Heck, most women I’ve discussed this with don’t like Cosmo.
Perplexed, who takes magazines like Cosmo or Glamour seriously? I sure don’t…so they can be as snarky as they want because they’re stupid publications and a waste of money. I don’t consider them REAL journalism, and any woman who would take whatever they say serious needs to have their head examined.
I expect BETTER from a serious newspaper like the Los Angeles Times, that’s all I was saying. For chrissakes, we have a war on, there’s poverty, and untold damage to the environment and yet they think it’s “news” to be small minded and rude about somebody’s clothing choices based on body size? sheesh!
One more thing: the term “feminist”, just like the Bible, is subject to and open to interpretation. There are folks calling themselves feminists whom I seriously doubt even know the meaning of the words. So just because someone call themselves feminist, it doesn’t mean they truly are.
“As a pro-feminist, I’m aware of the uneasy relationship between feminism and fashion. There’s a tendency within the loosely organized feminist community to never criticize a woman’s clothing decisions. The very notion that there might be an objective standard of beauty is one of which feminism is traditionally very critical; we who work in this field are understandably reluctant to judge women’s personal fashion choices. We tend to save our criticism for the fashion industry and the media, while remaining deeply respectful of the personal sartorial decisions of women. Hence my anger at the rather nasty (to my mind) way that Abcarian’s article begins.
”
ooo, Hugo, I don’t know about this per se. Perhaps when the clothing is of Western flavor, but I’ve experienced outright hostility once from one of my old women’s studies profs because I wore the hijab… Perhaps in this case, I was running up against a bit of an old school sort, wherein feminism was more oriented towards white, middle class, christian women, or … well I couldn’t say. I still think the f community needs more work in the international arena, if you ask me.
I’m sorry, Leila, that you had that experience — it certainly doesn’t reflect what I do in my classes, or what most of my colleagues do. (I have had many Muslim women over the years wear hijab, and I’ve only once heard a fellow student issue the standard canard about it always being a symbol of oppression. But we can do a better job of protecting the dignity of those in hijab and the miniskirt.
IT says: “And, before Hugo jumps all over me ;-) this is the real world we work in, not what we might want. It doesn’t matter that we may wish that men and women iinteract differently than they do, things are as they are, and we have to give our girls ways to deal with the reality and not the ideal.”
Actually, your concerns are entirely legitimate. I’m not sure how you’d address them, but here’s my experience: I ate compulsively & didn’t do much exercise, so I was overweight for most of my childhood. Add to that the fact that I developed a mature body very early (big breasts already at 13yrs -fit that in a school uniform!) and my early teens were no picnic. But my mom taught me the delicate balance betw being aware of societal standards and at the same expressing one’s own unique expression -even flouting convention in creative ways. Two important things: one: develop your girl’s unique personality & make her AWARE of her own unique beauty (you probably do it already but teens need reminding of this like they need reminding to clean their rooms ;) what can I say?) and two: show her the options. Esp these days I notice a proliferation of bigger sized clothes & stores that strive to create a positive image of “big, beautiful womanhood”. These clothes are tailored to emphasize all the best bits -not only that, there’s an enormous range of styles to choose from -everything from sweetly sexy to “quirky artist” to mainstream -whatever.
Lastly, I think Hugo is too defensive here. Yes “what was she thinking” was a catty response, but somebody really needs to take these girls respectfully aside, help them find their inner selves & help them develop a style that truly fits THEM as unique, beautiful human beings. Quite apart from the empty, copy-cat nature of their responses to style, these clothes restrict their movements & I’m positive they are unhealthy. I’m sure these clothes cut of circulation in important places & chafe the skin -those clothes are a health risk!
Perplexed said: “I agree with your last post IT - in fact, isn’t it more worrying for feminists that young girls are focusing so much on trying to look sexy? What about more focus on their personality and intelligence? Isn’t it worrying that the only ‘role models’ (i.e. famous women) young girls have these days happen to look sexy and that’s often WHY they are famous? I think that is in itself rather oppressive. It’s like a lottery - you don’t choose your looks, so all the popular girls are popular through sheer luck. What about a meritocracy? Women gaining kudos and respect from what they do, not what they look like.”
AMEN to that!
Yes, this is a free country, but we have a responsibility to show respect for others. Wearing clothes appropriate to the situation at hand is as much about how you portray yourself as it is about whether or not you respect others. We do not empower girls by letting them simply dress in unhealthy ways, but by giving them the full range of tools to dress appropriately & creatively. This is tricky, but I find that society is generally reasonable about this [with the exception of jerks, whom I consider a strange genetic anomaly & ought not to be counted here ;-) ].
Somewhere else Hugo made the point that we live in community. Yes, we have the right to dress in whatever we want so long as it is within the range of public nudity laws, but there is such a thing as good taste, creepiness, creativity & unprofessionalism!