Desparate Scousewives
Amidst all the spray tans, vajazzling and hair extensions, vintage-loving women tend to stand out with an aesthetic that evokes glamour, individuality and femininity. Could the vintage girl then be a new form of feminism, an antithesis to the blingtastic, porn-star style that influences female identity at the moment?
I don’t quite know how it happened or when but far too many women around me seem to want to look like a porn actress these days. Or why else would they wax off their pubes, slather themselves in Fakebake and state Page Three Girl in their career goals? There is something about the passivity of this particular idea of femininity – there to be stared at, cum onto – that I find deeply infuriating. It’s just sad that we’re all meant to look like little plastic sex dolls – fake eyelashes, fake hair, fake tan, fake boobs.
To my relief (no really, it is!) there is a great big social group of women out there who don’t buy into this image – the vintage girls. Although the vintage scene is splintered into smaller subfractions of particular decades, musical styles, dances and activities, the one thing all these vintage-loving women have in common is their embrace of an altogether different femininity, one that’s individual, one that harks back to a time when glamour was exotic and empowering.
Although these girls look back at past style icons they don’t become carbon copies of their idols, they mix and match their style, they construct their own image, they don’t simply buy into a ready-made identity. And often they take inspiration from those pioneers of feminism, the smoking, partying 1920s garconnes, the sports-playing, car-driving women of the 1930s, the home front workers of the war years, the 1950s office workers slowly edging their way into the work place and the sexually liberated dollybirds of the 1960s.
some of my vintage-loving friends
image: www.aspreyphotography.co.uk
It’s no co-incidence either I think, that there is such a wide variety of body shapes – from really slim to really curvaceous – in the vintage scene as well as a much broader range of age from teenagers to women in their Fifties than any other social scene I have come across. It’s like the vintage girl has somehow managed to embrace her body rather than radically reshape it into the accepted norm, and I am convinced that wearing vintage is playing a part in this, because you don’t shop for it by size but by fit. I myself have gradually weaned myself of the idea that I am a certain size (I never really was anyways, given the vanity sizing issue) – instead I go by my measurements. If a vintage dress happens to not fit me I simply put it back, I don’t see it as a comment on me being too big, it doesn’t give me that feeling of horror when I couldn’t fit into my size on the highstreet, where it felt like every too-small dress was the entire clothing industry laughing at my failure to be a size ten with perfect breasts.
There is no doubt to me that ‘opting out’ of the whole female fakery is in essence a feminist stance, perhaps not knowingly so, but feminist none the less. What do you think – is vintage a new form of feminism?
Home
41 Comments
I LOVE this blog post so much! With the exception of a couple of reactionary gals I’ve come across online who apparently long for the days before “those pesky feminists” ruined everything for those wanting to be happy housewives, I truly do agree that there IS a general link here between women who are into vintage and a unique form of countercultural rebellion against mainstream hegemonic femininity that does seem to be a form of feminism. The mere act of wanting to value & preserve the clothing, histories, and identities of women of the past feels like a distinctly feminist act. So does the desire to fight the homogenising impulses of mainstream Western media/fashion industry/cult of feminine beauty; I know for myself that part of my gravitation towards vintage fashion (and 1930s in particular) related to disgust over the way mainstream media has co-opted the “sex is power” thread of the second wave movement and essentially helped brainwash a good portion of contemporary women into believing that what Jean Kilbourne calls “the right to remain sexy” is the only power and value they have, so they should waste as much time and energy as possible on looking and acting like strippers or hookers. Contrast the plastic ideals of femininity jammed down modern women’s throats with those embodied by 30s women like Jean Harlow, who oozed boudoir sexuality, but were also strong, smart, savvy and we see the disturbing fact: as much as we’ve “come a long way, baby,” there has a been a troubling social backslide and the idea that women of today are somehow completely more liberated than women of the past is short-sighted. I digress: the main point is that I think you’re totally on to something with your “thesis” in this post and I thank you for posting it because I’ve been musing over similar ponderings!!
Thank you Jill! I’ve been reading a lot of women’s biographies and diaries lately which has made me rethink my own ideas of feminism and what constitutes being a woman for me.
I think you are absolutely right when you point out that in valuing/preserving vintage clothing we also ultimately value and preserve the very existence of their previous owners and that this does indeded constitute a form of feminism.
I find it very disturbing that when it comes to ‘sex is power’, really, it isn’t women’s sexuality we’re talking about but it is women acting out men’s sexual fantasies, which is why – like you – I am so drawn to past ideas of female sexuality like the 30s femme fatals or 60s girls, who were fearless, witty and not afraid to say no.
I’m really glad you’ve been pondeing similar things!x
Thanks so much for this article, I was wondering the exact same thing. I live in Holland and consider myself one of the biggest anglophiles in the world
I adore everything British, it’s my dream to move to the UK one day. But there is one aspect I can’t stand and wasn’t aware of until years ago when I say ‘Snog, Marry, Avoid’ for the first time: all the fakery and slutty dressing. I was stunned! How can people consciously choose that look over subdued seductiveness and timeless beauty?
Just like you I’m crazy about vintage. I live close to Amsterdam so I go there whenever the urge strikes but Holland has got nothing on the UK, on more fronts than one
You can count yourself very lucky! I haven’t really found my style just yet (60s, 50s or 40s?) I’m still experimenting. I do get stares all the time but in a sea of Ugg-wearing, boob-flashing girls, I know I stand out in a good way. Love your blog!
xxx Maureen
I agree with the idea behind this post in regard to where vintage, and the act of buying it, fit into the modern world. Also with Jill’s comment above. However, I would like to point out that “hegemonic femininity” is not necessarily an entirely new concept or idea. So long as there have been fashion icons, there has existed an idea of the ideal women. Now, of course, we live in a society which is so much more open under the influence of mass media and social media that we forget that Anne Frank had movie stars pinned on her walls just like I had Britney Spears. This isn’t to say that women then fell under the spell to the same degree (which is why ‘hegemonic’ doesn’t really fit in regard to past eras so much as now), but they were not exempt from the idea of molding themselves to fit an ideal perpetuated by society. Marilyn Monroe had a nose job and a chin implant while Rita Hayworth had her hairline made higher by electrolysis.
Also this sentence strikes me. “It’s like the vintage girl has somehow managed to embrace her body rather than radically reshape it into the accepted norm.” I do radically rehape my body with longlines, bullet bras and girdles. The difference is that my accepted norm is from 1949, not 2009. Does this truly make it better or above what girls do now? They reshape their bodies far less in general, perhaps with the exception of spanx which are nothing compared to my hook in, zip up girdle. I embrace my size, yes, but my shape is still molded to fit the fashion of the era I am embracing.
Cee, you are absolutely right, I don’t think women have ever entrirely been free of a socially dictated idea of femininity. I think what distinguishes Rita Hayworth’s studio-enforced transformation from say, a reality TV star’s fake breasts/hair extensions/fake tan is that today women are made over to look like they’ve just emerged from a porn film. I know that women have always been moulded into something – androgynity in the 20s, regal princesses in the 50s, child-women in the 60s – but looking like a hooker is a new low…
I do think that you wearing a girdle and other vintage shapewear is very different from starving yourself into a size 10 or having a boob job. Out of all the possibly shapes out there you’ve made a choice, your transforming is a personal decision – I don’t think this is necessarily true of all the Katie Price look-a-likes out there. WHat do you think?
Thanks for the reply!
I have to agree that the extreme we are going to today disturbs me. I think it highlights the impact of media, beginning probably with WWII and the idea of the ‘pin up’ coming more into the mainstream and following right into the 1950s and the emergence of Playboy. Girly mags existed before, but Playboy took it in a new direction and opened it to a “wider” audience. Then you have the emergence of the VCR, in home viewing of pornography and slowly it has seeped into the everyday. There is an interesting documentary, Dreamworlds 3, which highlights the pornographic lens with which music videos in particular are made. Just look at any Rihanna video and you’d think S&M was the social norm!
I don’t think though that the ‘pornographic’ view of society is necessarily limited to just clothing and beauty choices though but is also prevalent in many attitudes today. I recently watched What’s Your Number? with Chris Evans and Anna Faris, and while I enjoyed it it wasn’t until I was later watching a 1940s film (sorry, I can’t remember what it was) that I realized how much funnier I found the older film specifically because it *didn’t* have a SINGLE sex joke in it. And if it did, it was wrapped up in such wit that you don’t quite realize what it is in reference to without a bit of thought…the type of thought where the noises go – “hahaha..wait…oooooooooh! MY!” Our culture in general has such a large focus on sex or maybe better highlighted as body functions, in regard to EVERYTHING.
I have made a choice, but I’m also an educated woman from the middle class. I’ve always been told to do what *I* want and encouraged to expand my brain. A lot of people aren’t so lucky and it isn’t necessarily their own fault so much as how they were socialized within our larger culture stream. The problem, I think, lies with our culture has a whole and the value system we keep perpetuating through the media that those girls aren’t challenging. As a whole, they aren’t not challenging it out of protest, but because chances are they’ve never been educated in any sort of way to believe otherwise.
That’s a good point Cee, I hadn’t really thought about how influential education is in this!
The media is very persuasive, most often without us realizing it. If you’ve never seen them, I’d encourage you (and anyone interested) to watch The Codes of Gender (http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=238) and Dreamworlds 3 (http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=223) which you can watch on that website, it’s just a small video. Also, Killing Us Softly is a Jean Kilbourne (who Jill mentioned above) documentary (http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=241) and even Mickey Mouse Monopoly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgxVvbai_nI) is pretty thought provoking on how femininity ideas are implanted into everything around us and how readily children absorb them without challenge.
Oh thanks Cee, I will definitely check these out!
Yes!! I agree!! You are on to something here. It is just hard to explain to non-vintage wearing types who might see vintage style lovers as wanting to be actually back in those eras. I wouldn’t mind, but only for a shopping trip and cultural visit! Fab post.
I’m sorry, but whilst I absolutely agree that many of we vintage-rs are feminists, I cannot say that vintage is in any way “‘opting out of the whole female fakery”. The hair is curled not straightened, it’s dyed red or black not blonde, everyone it seems wants hips…but also a wasp-waist and a 30DD bust (‘foundations’ are no more a real shape than spanx and a wonderbra) and there’s no bronzer but heavy eye-liner and red lipstick. Indeed there’s a certain pride many take in it and many have blogged about the work and fakery it takes.
I would say that to dress differently takes a certain amount of confidence and THAT is why a lot of independent women favour vintage (or indeed other alternative modes of dress). However, that said, some other of the ‘strongest’ women I know outside the vintage scene dress very ‘Essex’, ‘indie’, ‘goth’…because it is making a statement. Equally, you get some women who just aren’t too bothered about style (not scruffy- just plain dressers-which seems to garner comments far more than if they were men with minds on higher things).
It’s quite interesting too, that within European, urban Vintage ‘scenes’ you get a very empowered liberal attitude…but every so often you see a comment on a blog or forum (usually from a man- but sometimes from a woman) with a desire for women to go back to the past in terms of politics/empowerment as well as dress. Presumably they are part of vintage too?
One of the main issue I have with female-led ‘scenes’ is their tendency for some within them (no one here I hasten to add!) to judge other scenes/women – often suggesting they dress as they to because they are overly sexual or asexual, or too ‘under the thumb’ of men. Personally, I would be looking for solidarity with ALL women who dress with character and sometimes get objectified and judged as a result- whether they wear vintage and lipstick, short skirts and fake tan or black DMs and white foundation….
Well, I do think it’s a big difference who you fake it for – yourself, because you have made the choice to adopt a certain look and style – or to fit into a social norm that currently dictates you should aim to look like a hooker…
Hmm. The use of the word ‘hooker’ – as a simile it makes me uncomfortable – it’s loaded against not only the women we refer to here, but also as a male pejorative term for the women they use and abuse. Secondly, I see ‘dressing for the male gaze’ in both modern and vintage dress, for example women in an ‘amped up’ version of 50s (supertight wiggle dress with cleavage, seamed stockings, wasp waist, high shiny heels, red lips, BP fringe) which would have definitely looked inappropriate back then, and even now is VERY obviously ‘for the male gaze’. 50s springs to mind as, admittedly, there is crossover with alt and some confusion with some wearers between pin-up and burlesque, but equally a 70s string bikini top and jeans at a festival- yes, it’s a 70s look but chosen to be overtly sexual. There seems to be a metaphorical ‘get out of jail free’ card within many alternative dress cultures which, simply summed up is “we can say mainstream is ‘slutty’ – but because our signifiers are different (e.g. wiggle skirt not leggings, or goth corset not minidress), we aren’t’. When sometimes they just are, because the wearer has dressed purely for the male gaze and approval, to fit the agreed standard of beauty in that (sub)culture. The sexualisation is still happening, but it’s all the more insidious because it’s not acknowledged that that’s what is happening.
That’s what I mean though in this case – not sex workers but hookers as in male sex objects, there to fulfill a male fantasy and purely serve male sexuality.
Yeah, I agree with your point there. I wonder if it comes down to what we see as vintage girl.
Cee, I’m glad I came back around to read people’s comments here. I just wanted to note that I totally agree: there have always been hegemonic ideals of femininity which women have felt pressured/encouraged to fashion themselves after. I was addressing the difference between contemporary ideals and the ones I relate to more (i.e 1930s), esp. in relation to women, sex, and power. I personally gravitate towards the 30s because it was a time when the social ideals of femininity seem to have been more of a mix of outer and inner: form and function, brains/wit and beauty. I’m not denying the negative impacts of hegemonic ideals on women of the past as well as the present. Relatively speaking, however, I am agreeing with Lena that 21st c. ideals of womanhood are SO focused on sex/woman fashioning herself as quasi-blowupdoll-esque object that it is no wonder women are looking to the past for their way forward stylistically speaking, at least. YAY, great discussion!!!! The fact we’re having this on a vintage fashion blog seems to underscore Lena’s point (I’m not seeing similar on other fashion blogs!!)
As a former media studies/critical thinking instructor, I want to further add that I totally agree with Cee that education is key when it comes to attempting to counter the momentous ideological power which the media/advertising now holds over Western culture’s young people. The problem is that it seems advertisers have been indoctrinating that either resistance is futile or it is undesireable (i.e., it makes consumers think that they are merely providing them with what they want, even as they produce the ‘sex sells/sex is everything” values that they then claim only to be feeding via selling their products).
Anyway, adding to the list of interesting reads, Ari Levy’s book, “Female Chauvinist Pigs” is really relevant to some of the issues we’ve been talking about here: http://www.ariellevy.net/books.php?article=2
Ok, ok, my final thought: I don’t agree contemporary women restrict their bodies less. As Valerie Steele has noted, we’ve internalized the corset, trading steel and whalebone for “abs of steel” (so we control our bodies from within rather through external means). Then there are those needle point stiletto heels I see girls barely able to totter around in being THE footwear pushed in the malls and magazines. So, now women are choosing to buy binding footwear that renders them immobile, all to achieve a look. That’s not even talking about plastic surgery, botox, etc (which is now much more the norm). Again, I’m a 1930s loving nerd–the corselettes and undergarments from that era certainly hold one in, but they were designed with movement (dancing, playing sports) in mind as well (maybe different from undergarments of the 50s/60s?)…. Ah well, so much to think about. THANKS!
I find this really interesting. I do think that I meet a lot of women who I would consider “feminist” in the world of vintage, but is that just because that’s the world I am part of and they are the people I happen to get on with as their views are similar to my own.
I guess there’s a difference between merely wearing vintage clothing and buying into a whole look and lifestyle. I know a lot of “vintage” models who also model for fetish and bdsm brands, which isn’t something that’s necessarily all empowering when women are tied up and spreadeagled dressed in skin tight rubber?
I can only speak from my own perspective, but I often feel that part of the vintage look is about a rejection what seems to be the dominant cultural definition of sexy and attractive. Super Skinny, hyper tanned, legs like bambi, huge highlighted hair and no one really cares if you actually have anything to say. I’ve never been any of those things, yet I reject the notion that I can’t be attractive unless I fit into that definition. The vintage look might come from the past, but I agree with the point you make about not becoming carbon copies of their icons. I think it’s about finding your own way of being attractive, on your own terms, and also acknowledging that there’s nothing wrong with WANTING to be attractive!
Does that make sense? I have a cold!
I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss all “mainstream” girls as over sexualised bimbos, I’m sure some of them are independent thinkers with a mind of their own, but in my experience it’s the girls with the confidence to break away from the cultural norms and find their own way that are more likely to demonstrate that kind of intelligence. Not just vintage, but goths, indie kids *insert relevant sub culture here*
You make a lot of sense – despite the cold – Gemma!
In my true laziness (hey! its early!!) – I agree with pretty much everything RetroChick has said (sorry love!)
But one part of your post has really struck a chord with me personally:
“It’s like the vintage girl has somehow managed to embrace her body rather than radically reshape it into the accepted norm, and I am convinced that wearing vintage is playing a part in this..”
This, for me, has totally hit the nail on the head. Squeezing myself into a mainstream look made me feel awful about myself. Because I believed it to be the only thing available to me at the time. Dresses were for special occasions – or in my case – never. That was pretty much my whole teenage/early 20’s existence. And it was fucking hideous.
Cut to 2007 when I started to branch out into something a little more individual. The more history books I read & films I watched, the more I began to realize that, actually, clothes like that would suit me, the dresses, the skirts etc. So I began to expand. And that’s how I got to where I am today. And I have never been happier or more confident. I dress for me. The End. Yes, I could have dieted down to a size whatever, and although I did lose weight, it was for ME because *I* was unhappy with my image. I am not one for fashion mags or anything that tells me what the “latest trend” is, who’s boobs are bigger than who’s or where they got their lips done.
Anyway – as I said – it is early and I am not fully awake – but I am aware that I am entering waffle-off-the-topic-mode. And we can’t have that, can we?
Oh definitely!
I spent years wondering why High Street clothes never fitted properly, and assumed I must be a total freak. Since I started to move more and more towards a “vintage” look I’ve been happier and happier with my body. I mean, not always, I still want to lose a stone, but I’m happy with it’s shape. I don’t want to shrink my hips anymore!
Really interesting post, and discussion! Thought I’d put in my two cents.
I developed earlier than most of my peers, and basically had the figure I have now in middle school. Modern clothing just never fit. I’m naturally curvy, so things either fit here and not there, or vice versa. I’m also not toned, so stretch microfiber fabrics just highlight that. But vintage (particularly 1950s) fits like it’s custom made. I found a style that was both flattering to my figure, and that appealed to me greatly. This type of situation seems to be more and more common today, vintage is discovered because it actually fits! So in my case I haven’t molded my body with shapewear and such to fit into that eras I want, part of the reason I wear it is because it makes me look (what I think is) my best.
While it’s true vintage girls “fake it” too, I’d have to say most of the everyday looks of the average vintage girl are pretty simple, not all vintage girls are modeled after pin ups all the time. The strongest aspect of makeup is red lipstick. And usually water is used to set the hair, not heat and chemicals. At the end of the day the girdles come off, the lipstick is wiped, and hair is washed and natural. I’d much rather fake it that way than permanently change my body to fit an ideal. Goodness know’s I’d rather wear a girdle now and then, than go to the gym everyday!
I’ve actually heard from people (who know nothing of vintage culture) that they think women who dress vintage are anti-feminist. Like we want to completely go back to “the good old days”. I think the opposite is true. We can bring the good aspects of the past into the future, and leave the bad behind. I have never wanted to live in the past, I could not be doing any of the things I do today, let alone dress in clothing from 60 years prior and not get thrown into an insane asylum!
I have heard the same ‘you just want to be housewives’ comment too, and I remember watching a documentary programme on TV about vintage girls, which was so obviously cut and edited to look like they were not only a bit nuts but also stuck in the 50s in their take on feminism and a woman’s role.
I found this post via The Fiercest Liliputian’s blog, and I’ll just re-iterate what I wrote to her:
I think it’s because the emphasis is on the clothes, in the vintage scene, rather than the body. It’s about finding the perfect garment, and I agree that having to be aware of your own measurements and shopping from different eras does wonders for your confidence. I was wearing a vintage felt hat out on Saturday night, in fact, and a girl at the burger van told me she loved how classy I looked – yep, vintage can even make you look classy when you’re queueing up for a dirty burger at 1am! I also think that vintage fashion appeals more to other women, who appreciate the references and the effort that went into finding the clothes, whereas the kind of high-maintenace current fashion discussed in the article is purely designed to attract men. You have to ask yourself: what kind of girl do you want to be?
Of course, there are purists and extremists in any scene, and people can put as much or as little effort in as they want. I agree with the comments above pointing out that, unfortuantely, there are also snobs and bitches in every scene.
I’m going to read more of your site because I love finding new British-based blogs!
I think this is brilliant, and I agree wholeheartedly. I’ve constantly been ridiculed for the theorized irony of my feminist nature versus my vintage-feminine style. I’ve never quite been able to put into words what you so eloquently expressed.
The contrast between what I’ve been ridiculed for and vintage styling is almost ironic. Today women have become hyper-sexualized and have attempted to force themselves to wiggle into, what you perfectly described as, “the blingtastic, porn-star style.” Failure to fit into this Kate Moss mold results in a deteriorating self image. Whereas the natural female forms that develops into shapely, voluptuous curves, are so grotesquely ridiculed in local nail salon literature.
Despite having been an era of home-making and secretarial push back against the progressive 40s, shapeliness was not shunned. Nor was the natural shade of one’s own skin tone (rage against the tanning bed). For the most part, the era was into natural beauty; save a few eyelash extensions and lip stains. While the glamour and beauty of the 50s still loiters in the background, it gets ignored and questioned, quite unnecessarily.
Playing up one’s natural beauty is why vintage styling is progressive.
Thank you so much for posting!
I do heartily support healthy living: exericse, diet, moderation; obesity is still an epidemic, but seducing, even a moderately shaped woman into this barbie proportion ideal is ludicrous.
One’s natural skin tone was only embraced in the 40s if you were white – what about Rita Hayworth?
Their status as women of colour was used to ‘exoticise’ them. It was a mode of objectification, not a positive thing.
There are some problems here. Firstly, it’s putting the blame on other women – surely the feminist thing to do is blame the patriarchy? It’s the male gaze and the largely male ownership of the porn industry that leads to porn star style being demeaning, not the women who adopt it. Porn is a valid expression of female sexuality if done right and calling said women ‘sluts’ is just plain misogynistic. Vintage style is just as subject to the male gaze and the patriarchy. The last thing women need is female-on-female misogyny. Answer me this – what if women ENJOY looking like a porn star because they enjoy porn?
Hi Jade! I’m surprised to hear that you think I am blaming other women – I think it’s quit clear I am speculating about the sexualisation of the current female image, which is lead by male needs and male desires. I don’t have any issues with porn at all – I watch it myself – I just find most of it incredibly boring and predominantly catering to male needs (you know, fake tits, the whole cum shot thing, the fake ‘oh yeah harder…’). I really wish there was porn that would reflect my own sexual fantasies but I genuinely struggle to find any.
In some ways I agree with you Lena. I can only speak for myself, really, but wearing vintage has given me confidence in my body-type, my face and my hair. I do very little to change the way I look, I don’t even wear red lipstick very much because it doesn’t go with a lot of my looks (certainly daytime). But I honestly just think that’s because I’ve picked the look which suits me best, both physically and in terms of my lifestyle. I love earlier looks (Twenties, Thirties goes just as well with my figure) but they’re too high maintenance.
And therein lies my main issue with the prevailing vintage style. And indeed, it seems almost bizarre that there IS a prevailing vintage style. Most people’s idea of ‘vintage’ seems to be Forties/Fifties, super high glam – borderline burlesque. And that drives me up the wall. I think I’ve rambled about it before now, I don’t understand why so many vintage-dressers seem to have that tribal instinct – to all dress the same. I never understood why my mum found it hilarious when I was going through my teenage goth phase. She used to say ‘but you all look like each other, same black clothes, same boots, same make-up’, but I thought I was being ‘individual’. I can see her point now.
I agree with Perdita, that this is very little about feminism or empowerment but about looking sexy. It might be a 60-year-old version of sexy, but clearly it is just that. Red lips, pointed sweater-girl boobs (and how many burlesque artists have I seen with boob jobs? I’ve lost count…). Clearly people are still battling to change their appearance, even in the vintage world.
Now it’s a-ok to dress how you want (as long as it’s truly and honestly how you WANT to look) and it’s nobody else’s business really, but I also don’t think there’s anything inherently feminist about it. Presumably those vajazzled WAG-types want to look they way they do. I think feminism is a state of mind and of behaviour, not of appearance.
A good, thought-provoking post – thank you!!
Thanks for your comment! I have to admit, I’ve never really thought that there is a dominant vintage look to be honest. Perhaps there is – I can totally see your point there – but I guess because my own circle of friends is so diverse with people into anything from the 20s to 70s, it hadn’t really crossed my mind.
I do disagree with your last point though, feminism to me is most definitely also expressed through appearance (consciously or not) and always has been, from the purple and green of the early suffragettes to the mini skirts of the sixties and braless feminists of the 70s
Personally, I wouldn’t class the mini as any kind of feminist statement. Largely designed and marketed by men, and really quite unashamedly sexual, it was a trend that not all could carry-off but most felt obliged to attempt at the time. I love wearing my mini dresses style-wise, but I wear them in the full knowledge that men are looking at my legs and (if I were to bend over) probably my arse too.
Likewise, I think a lot of men were rather pleased by the whole bra-less look as well – if most films and sitcoms of the time were anything to go by. On The Buses-style “Fnar fnar”, etc…
And women are rarely ignorant of the effect such things can have.
If anything, I suppose returns to non-revealing, ‘feminine’ clothes like the Laura Ashley trend in the Seventies are more ‘feminist’. But even then, you could argue that they are appealing to a different side of men, less sexual but still making a statement of man-friendly femininity.
Oh now you’ve got me pondering!!
Yeah I think you are right there regarding the mini! I think the issue is that men will find anything sexy
Can you think of any kind of style that is truly female driven? Now YOU have got me pondering! Pondering is good!x
I had an interesting moment today. I work with young people and sometimes have to speak to girls about ‘inappropriate’ clothes. The ones with lots of bronzer etc’, they look daft but it’s clear they are just dressing ‘the same as the others’. The other day a girl came in dressed very ‘sexy-50s’ – obvious stockings etc’, and even to me (who wears things like that) it looked…creepy, because it wasn’t accidentally showing boys her own age too much leg, but TOO sexy and TOO ‘knowing’. It reminded me of this because I suddenly thought about audience (esp unwanted male audience)- what we ‘read’ as very overtly sexy (WAG style on younger women) might be less sexually charged within other scenes. But take a vintage look outside its 20+, strong woman demographic and put the same clothes on a weaker, impressionable girl wearing it for the wrong reasons, and suddenly it becomes as shocking as the pornstar look.
It really seems to be the ‘way’ and ‘pressure’ behind the clothes as much as the clothes themselves, I realised, after this incident.
Age appropriateness issue aside, which is important, obviously! But I don’t think there’s anything inherently unfeminist about wanting to be attractive.
As a straight woman you want a man to find you attractive at some point, and the same goes for men wanting women to find them attractive.
But I think the feminist stand point is wanting someone to find you attractive as YOU. A fully rounded human being with thoughts, feelings, emotions and opinions. It’s not wrong to try and find someone who’s attacted to you, it is wrong and unfeminist to try and squish yourself into a mould of what “attractive” is that is defined by society and assume that no one can find you attractive if you don’t fit that mould.
I have heard vintage dressing women saying the way they dress scares men off. Is that because they’re not able to deal with a woman who looks outside the accepted definition of “attractive”?
I find your last sentences interesting, this happens to me as a vintagedressing gal quite often.
Even if I’m wearing pants for the day, I feel that some men are struck by the very “womanly” feel they get out of you, may it be because of the pincurls or whatever else, but honestly, it is somewhat of a mystery to me. Apart from the “porn star look” which is the main focus among the comments, I believe the unisex style is as regular. Today we are used to seeing men and women dressed in similiar jeans and tshirts.
And not to forget, the vintage style is not all about glamour – more of every day glamour, surely – and to me the 50′s style is much more sex appeal-focused then the 30′s and 40′s. The modern day retro is contributing to this by twisting the 50′s fashion into very pinup and seamed stockings-tight dresses-high heels.
Well, now I’m starting to go into different paths, but there are so many interesting topics here. So, the vintage dress is about glamour but about function as well, the 40′s working girl style which I and others embrace for example. So again, to relate to some men being “scared” about this appearance, it has happened to me and I can’t really see why. Just to clarify, male attention can be very nice, but done this way, feels quite strange. Has some of you been thinking about this?
I really like the point you make about how when buying vintage it’s not focused on size. That’s really true and does say a lot about our attitudes on size and body image. There is a freedom there that women who buy modern (as well as sweatshop) clothes don’t have. We are bombarded with body issues through the media and since vintage is not in the mainstream we are effected less by those false ideals (maybe). And that is a feminist action to go against the norm.
I think Mary has hit the nail on the head with modern clothing for me. I used to get SO frustrated and upset because I am pear shaped and every goddamn hem is thigh high – a complete no no for a gal with a set of pins like sequioas. I got a bit more confident first, then I started wearing vintage, then I got more confident and felt happier in general. It is very sad to feel that you can only look a certain way because that is all the high street offers. And the high street reflects designers, who sell the perfect image of a woman being a gazelle like creature with big hair, big eyes, big lips and a tan. That is one reason why I started sewing again.
For me wearing or being interested in vintage fashion isn’t about other people, it’s all about me.
I’m pretty much the same body shape and size now at 24 as I was at 12, and for most of my teens I felt miserable because what was in fashion never suited me.
I felt like a freak, why couldn’t I wear the same things my friend’s did why wasn’t I “normal”.
It’s only as I’ve got older and become familiar with vintage fashion and alternative ideas of beauty that I feel more comfortable with “my beauty”.
Yes I may wear red lipstick and 50s style dresses but I don’t wear shapewear or set my hair. For me it’s about picking and choosing what I like, looks good on me and makes me feel happy the way I am, and it’s about what I think looks good not about other people’s opinions.
Most people I know don’t particular buy into the current idea of what we should be wearing, going for style over fashion. However I will say that the current idea of what feminie beauty “is” seems to be so pervasive that most people I know don’t even think about it they just accept it and if it wasn’t for dipping my toe in the vintage waters I probably would too.
Pingback: Vintage and Feminism | Ravishing Retro
I really, really enjoyed this article, so thank you for writing this up. I also feel a very similar way as you do about when a vintage piece doesn’t fit me: I simply put it back, admire it for a moment and think about how happy it’ll make the next person (admittedly, there are also times where I curse heavens because I really would have wanted THAT piece… especially with shoes!!!)