A while back, I quoted Laila Lalami to this effect:
Meanwhile, the abundant pity that Muslim women inspire in the West largely takes the form of impassioned declarations about “our plight”–reserved, it would seem, for us, as Christian and Jewish women living in similarly constricting fundamentalist settings never seem to attract the same concern.
Indeed.
I’ve also been critical of “feminists of convenience” who regularly denounce Islam, but when it comes to issues such as reproductive rights and affirmative action in the West, often vigorously affirm the conservative stance.
And then there are those, like Tim Blair and his minions, who like to have a giggle about Islamic dress codes for women. For instance, in this post about a manufacturer of Islamic swimwear in Australia.
I wonder what these folks think of this new entrant into the US swimwear market. WholesomeWear. WholesomeWear is for all faiths and none. Or is it?
The company may not be preaching to a specific denomination, but it is nonetheless preaching. Ferguson describes her family as “Christian people who love the Lord.” And the swimsuits are “a ministry.”
If you go in the water wearing these swimsuits you’ll drown!
Well, perhaps the solution lies in the even more modest swimsuit:
http://www.wholesomewear.com/slimmer-c.html
Only a brazen hussy would wear such a suit as you can still their seductive ankles.
I have an alternative solution to the problem of women appearing unwholesome: put out the eyes of men who look at them and have unpure thoughts. What? No takers? Funny that.
(And isn’t it funny how ‘wholesome’ clothes from all religious codes also restrict movement so severely?)
More seriously, an interesting development in Turkey. Islamic leaders are removing misogynist passages from the Hadiths:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/14/AR2006071401381.html
By the way, this is ME the one and only Kate, my charming gravvy appears to be on the blink.
All the gravvys are gone, Kate. I cleared my cache and now everyone is a question mark. I feel kinda naked. Perhaps we could get some sort of modesty for missing gravatar softwear going?
Hey, it is those women who show bare ankles that are the problem.
There is a lovely line of swimwear on the market at the moment called the “Vandstone”It comprises a full body length black plastic rubbish bag tied off at the top with a pink plastic bow.When not engaged in swimming it can be utilised as a marquee or kiddy’s water slide.
Hey, that culotte swimmer is kinda hot.
Dan, you have lust in your heart.
Leaving that much to the imagination can’t be good for you.
Western feminists get upset that somehow the muslim sisters are being suppressed. They think we have some serious problems of our own with our emphasis on the body beautiful. Personally, sometimes I think patriarchy expresses itself differently in different contexts. Suppression in the Muslim world turns its janus face in the west and here the male gaze, rather than suppressing, strips the female body and drives impossible media images of what women should be. Its all a crock. There, here. Patriarchy is wiley and morphs according to the culture. In the West, i think of women with “labia” issues here getting them cut up to meet an asthetic principle, oh geez. Or those extreme makeover shows where everyone ends up looking like a drag queen. And the abhorrence of fat, as if it is some alien spawn growing on the female body. I think muslim dress is something for muslim women to address. Lets fix our own mysoginy before we worry about beachwear.
As for the Christian wear, well hell, Handmaids Tale by Atwood here we come eh?…..Hello my name is Offred and I want the red one…..
The first thought I had was what a way to drown the kids and then I thought what a way to cover up my extreme lumpiness but they’re a bit expensive so I’ll go with Phil’s suggestion because I look really good in basic black plastic.
Shaun: I don’t have seductive ankles – can I safely wear these stunning outfits?
I thought the Islamic costumes were rather nicer than the Christian ones, myself. Funky designs on the front and all, and I have to admit my hair getting in my face while ocean swimming always annoys me, and fashion dictates you can’t wear a bathing cap at the beach. Maybe harder to swim in, though (not that I think most of the people who’d wear these are really swimming, as opposed to paddling)? Also, shouldn’t we all be wearing such things in order to avoid skin cancer?
Me too, Christine. And I agree with Catnip – the designers obviously took a leaf out of Attwood’s book.
She was afraid to come out of the locker
She was as nervous as she could be
She was afraid to come out of the locker
She was afraid that somebody would see
One, two, three, four, tell the people what she wore
It was an itsy, bitsy, teenie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
That she wore for the first time today
An itsy, bitsy, teentie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
So in the locker she wanted to stay
Two, three, four, stick around we’ll tell you more
She was afraid to come out in the open
And so a blanket around she wore
She was afraid to come out in the open
And so she sat bundled up on the shore
Two, three, four, tell the people what she wore
It was an itsy, bitsy, teenie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
That she wore for the first time today
An itsy, bitsy, teentie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
So in the blanket she wanted to stay
Two, three, four, stick around we’ll tell you more
Now she is afraid to come out of the water
And I wonder what she’s gonna do
Now she is afraid to come out of the water
And the poor little girl’s turning blue
Two, three, four, tell the people what she wore
It was an itsy, bitsy, teenie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
That she wore for the first time today
An itsy, bitsy, teentie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini
So in the water she wanted to stay
(From the locker to the blanket)
(From the blanket to the shore)
(From the shore to the water)
Yes, there isn’t any more
- words and music: Paul Vance and Lee Pockriss
All this talk of misogyny. There is no real comparison between how many (not all) women are treated in Muslim society and in Western/Jewish/Christian society. You may come up with obscure quasi-Christian sects who practice FGM or other exceptions – but they ARE exceptions. Whereas FGM, polygamy, educational discrimination, physical abuse etc are relatively common (though not universal) in the Muslim world.
And to the extent that women are victims of “fashion”, there is a huge difference between the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds. In the non-Muslim world the sisters are pretty much doing it to themselves. Most men frankly couldn’t give a damn about underweight, stretched-skin dolly birds – so don’t blame men for the self inflicted injuries that women inflict on themselves. In the west men have largely relinquished reproductive and economic control over women – all that remains is for the women to take responsibility for their situation.
As for “reproductive rights and affirmative action”, women pretty much have control over their reproductive rights, and affirmative action was always a complete and counter productive crock. Comparing these to the issues faced by many Muslim women is a bit like weeping over one’s cracked fingernails in the midst of a train smash.
But don’t get me started……
And where’s the wholesome swimwear for men, I cry!
“self inflicted injuries that women inflict on themselves”
Preview is my friend
If most men don’t care about underweight dolly-birds, why do so many men continue to buy the porn and raunchmags and movies that star such women? Why aren’t men writing to the publishers and saying “give us real curvy women with real tits not plastic ones”? The market seems to be failing rather spectacularly to reflect your assertion that most men don’t actually like skinny sexbots with boob jobs.
Of course, what the skinny sexbots do represent that comes with a lot of societal approval is women engaged in unhealthy disciplines involving a great deal of effort, self-control and self-stifling in order to be “fashionable”. And the male purchaser approval of all that effort put into self-mutilation, starvation and self-negation appears to outweigh their, according to you, actual physical preferences, doesn’t it?
There must be a word to describe an attitude whereby large numbers of men encourage large numbers of women to engage in peculiar practises that men don’t actually care about except for the fact that they keep those women more worried about those peculiar practises than they are about other matters. Even though the men aren’t thinking too much about the process whereby their approval perpetuates and facilitates the peculiar practises, they notice that the women engaged in the peculiar practises are more malleable, and they definitely like that.
What might that word be?
Interesting use of the word “encourage” Tigtog. Not “require, “mandate” or “force”? Why would that be? Because as I said above, the sisters are doing it to themselves – and the few men that are encouraging them are probably clothes designers.
I would submit that even “encourage” is too strong a word, and stand by my view that men prefer a well built 12-14 to an anorexic 8-10. Last time I looked at a porn magazine, the women were generally well-built young things – certainly not the victims of starvation diets etc.
There must be a word for an attitude where women self abuse and mutilate, and blame men for the behaviour. What would that word be I wonder?
PeterTB, I don’t argue that women living under oppressive Islamic regimes have it worse — a lot worse — than I, and many women in the west, do.
Oddly enough, untouchables working in the brickmaking factories of Calcutta have it much worse than workers do in Australia, and yet whenever we discuss the issues of working people in our country, we don’t get some useful person popping up and going “this is utter bs workers in Australia can’t possibly be exploited! Look at how bad workers in Calcutta have it! Therefore all issues workers have in Australia are brought upon themselves and so we needn’t think or do anything about it!”
Which is, of course, utter bollocks. Exploitation, sexism, degredation — these things can occur in any society, anywhere in the world. And they do. That’s not to say that some people don’t suffer much more than others, and we women in the West do well to remember our hard-won freedoms were the product of much struggle by our foremothers. But that doesn’t mean we should just shut up about the issues facing us, now.
And seeking out paralells between women is also important, and understanding the WHY behind why women’s appearance is controlled and regulated and dictated in virtually every society on earth is also very important.
PeterTB, I bet you’re one of those super-strongwilled individuals who is utterly unaffected by advertising of any kind, too.
How strange that people in the business of selling things believe advertising is absolutely essential to their profitability, when obviously all anyone has to do to avoid buying things one doesn’t really need is simply display a bit of backbone and ignore the damn ads.
Good for you!
“well built young things” “men prefer” “last time I looked at a porn magazine”
It is driven by what you prefer and that is the point – “men prefer” – one of the aims of feminism is to expose “what men prefer” as the driving principle behind the media images circulating – that is the male gaze that I speak of which regulates acceptable constructs of the female body – “those well built (tits) young things (girls not women) – these are media images which are allowed to circulate because you and your “preferences” are reflected in the pornos you look at and your consumerist gaze drives it. “ooh I like mine with a bit more meat”, “ooh give me tits and ass any day over stick insects” oh puleez, retire from your very own striptease of preferences gracefully while you still have time.
BLOCKQUOTE TAGS EDITED BY MODERATOR FOR CLARITY
How offensive to refer to young female models as “things”. This is part of the problem – they are “things” not women, not even people. They are something less than human? How patronising.
BTW as some-one who has been obese and is now a size 10-12, I can tell you that, from my experience, size does matter – and many many men do prefer the stick-figures, but only as long as they also have big tits. If you don’t believe me have a look at the personal columns and the number of men who specify “slim” for more anecdotal evidence.
PeterTB, is not society’s traditional view of gender roles one of forceful men and malleable women? Haven’t men who married non-malleable women faced the opprobrium of their own gender as being hen-pecked, be-shrewed, proven less than real men? Aren’t openly non-malleable women less likely to find a male partner?
Hasn’t one of the ways women packaged themselves for the traditional marriage market, in nearly every culture in the world, been a fetishised display of discomfort for the purpose of proving general malleability? Even in “advanced” countries the vestiges of this traditional gender divide are obvious simply by contrasting male and female clothing conventions.
I’ll believe misogyny has disappeared when fetishised female discomfort is not bestselling high and street fashion. I’ll believe it’s disappeared when corporate male bosses don’t insist that their female employees wear makeup, hosiery and high heels in their workplace dress standards: when being just clean/neat/tidy (like the male employees) is not considered “unfeminine”.
I’ll believe misogyny is all women’s fault when I no longer hear the same men who make the most merciless mock of women as slaves to fashion also make the most spiteful remarks about women who gain weight, all the while homosocially boasting to each other over the fellatio skills of their trophy girlfriends.
In a society where most people in both genders are gatekeeping the forceful:malleable gender divide as the pair-bonding norm, and discomfort fetishing is the major marker of malleability, it’s not fair to say that women are only doing it to themselves. Male expectations are at fault, and in a society where men still earn/own more, that tips the balance further. It should be noted that lots of men suffer needlessly from the forceful:malleable role demands as well.
(Usual caveats about generalisations of gender roles/expectations not applying to all individuals of the most closely associated sex apply)
We should probably all (men and women) be wearing swimsuits that covered us up that much on the beach. Especially in Australia. That sun’ll kill ya, ya know!
oh my lord those are the daggiest things i’ve ever seen
I completely agree with Christine that the Muslim ones were a lot better looking. And I liked St Catnip’s comment very much too.
Funkypaws covering the skin is a good idea, but these things are primarily intended to completely disappear the contours of the body…
Were traditional gender roles strengthened or weakened by the demise of the “modesty panel” from men’s swim trunks?
I’m surprised that WholesomeWear has neglected to extend its corporate “ministry” to the return of that late lamented accoutrement.
On the other hand, you can take these things too far. What if WholesomeWear decided that nothing less than a slab of masonite would suffice for a man’s modesty panel? Would a thoroughly rigid modesty panel constitute genuine modesty or masculinist braggadocio?
BTW WholesomeWear’s gear looks a lot like schoolgirls’ tunics …
… mmm, schoolgirls’ tunics …
Is that a modesty panel in your trunks, or are you just glad to see me?
I presume you would agree that Western women are more free now than in the 50s say? So men could presumably dictate women’s fashions more then than now? So why was the ideal 50s woman a more healthy build than a noughties woman? Bring back the Marilyn look I say!
Actually, it’s always women and fashion designers that set the fashion trends, regardless of what men want. A lot more basic forces are at work than those of the market too. It’s about women competing for men with imperfect knowledge of what men actually want and appreciate. Currently, the knowledge is imperfect because (I hope) insuffucient time has passed since the feministas destroyed the previous constructs, for the new model to stabilise. We’ll see.
As to my preferences and expectations – I don’t have to defend them – they just are, and they have served me and my female friends pretty well over the years. We all have preferences and expectations, male and female, and I see no evidence that the male P’n'Es drive the advertising agenda more than the female P’n'Es. If anybody can link to a good study of comparative male and female P’n'Es I would be interested, in the meantime, claims that men are somehow controlling Western women in the fashion stakes fall into the BS conspiracy basket, and are probably driven by the need for a few women not to take responsibility for their actions and decisions.
I don’t think any women in my circle fall into that category.
all anyone has to do to avoid buying things one doesn’t really need is simply display a bit of backbone and ignore the damn ads
That’s right – and apply some common sense. There are signs that women’s clothing is becoming more practical, but I acknowledge that it’s easier for guys because they essentially don’t really give a damn about how they or their mates look – with some exceptions obviously. I have never, repeat never found myself in a conversation of blokes discussing the appearance of other blokes. I believe this kind of conversation has been known in female circles however. Go figger as they say.
“Hasn’t one of the ways women packaged themselves for the traditional marriage market, in nearly every culture in the world, been a fetishised display of discomfort for the purpose of proving general malleability?
Maybe – but my point is that Western women don’t have to any more – they just choose to.
“all the while homosocially boasting to each other over the fellatio skills of their trophy girlfriends.
I guess there are men like that – just as there are their female equivalents. Have nothing to do with either group I say.
My own (highly personal) theory is that what men are typically looking for in women is youthfulness and health, as they always have. Currently, the image that signifies those qualities tends to be slim. At various times in the past, looking well-fed signified health and the preference was for a fuller figure.
While women have a distinct preference for a certain male body type – mesomorphic (exemplified by that Jake fellow in the celebrity iceskating who is subjected to more drool per minute from the commentators and spectators than any comparable female in recent memory) – it tends to run second to signifiers of economic and social success. These signifiers are marketed every bit as hard as female body ideals, and young males go to extraordinary lengths to attain them. Increasingly, body ideals are part of the package (if you’ll pardon the expression).
Laura’s on the money here, I think:
PeterTB, you’re making me think. Thanks.
It’s not a conspiracy, it’s a culture : a culture of hierarchical display.
Fashion is one of the industries which acts as a vehicle for conspicuous consumption. The higher one is in the hierarchy, the more one accumulates luxuries to display wealth/power/influence. Highly decorative non-productive women are merely one aspect of the hierarchical display.
The form of the hierarchical sexbot display is driven by the commoners – the change from strong tanned peasants to pale factory workers and clerks to flabby keyboard jockeys has driven the change in what’s popular in trophy femmes – because the magnates want their sex trophies, like their car/house/boat trophies, to look as different from the common herd as possible.
The fashion designers make clothes to highlight the trophy femme distinction (19thC pale heaving bosom/20thC tanned beach babe/21stC boob implants, chiselled abs and boy bottom) as much as possible, and the herd hustles to imitate the wealthy as everybody tries to avoid looking “common”.
Without the sexist nature of hierarchical trophy femme display, the whole phenomenon of other women putting themselves through immense timestealing discomfort to look as much like rich old bastard’s trophy femmes as possible would not arise. And the way that women are considered largely worthless at the top of the magnate heap except for their decorative qualities (including hostess skills) is where the fundamental misogyny lies.
And to wrench the thread-jacking back somewhat on topic, I do rather admire the fashion iconoclasm of the modesty swimwear idea at the same time I deplore the fundamentalist misogyny behind their idea of why they should cover up their womanly parts.
But tigtog, an action is the opposite of iconoclastic if it serves to reify orthodoxy.
Fashion isn’t the target of WholesomeWear. WholesomeWear Inc. is positioning itself as a Flagship of the Righteous in the Culture War against the Myrmidons of the Wrongteous.
The subtext of their pitch is: “Prove you’re not going to hell. Wear WholesomeWear.”
I thought of that myself as I ran off to buy milk, Katz..
In fact, the positioning of WholesomeWear as a visual point of difference from other “immodest” women reinforces my argument about how men at the top of their subculture hierarchy (in this case their particular cult) use costume as one way to display their status by how different their wives and daughters are from women lower in the hierarchy and also women outside the hierarchy.
“Prove you’re not going to hell. Wear WholesomeWear.�
I love it, Katz. You should do their PR!
But I’m bad to the bone.
Would that be an issue?
I would have thought that would be a plus, really. I’m sure they don’t really give a shit if their PR people go to hell, as long you make help them
make lots of moneymake people feel really really guilty.Why do you have a problem with my preferences Catnip? Everyone has them – you included. Get over it.
“one of the aims of feminism is to expose “what men preferâ€? as the driving principle behind the media images circulating – that is the male gaze that I speak of which regulates acceptable constructs of the female body”
If this is true then it pretty much says that feminism is wasting its time. As I have suggested above, fashion is not about what men want, but rather about what women want to see about themselves. And certainly the days are long gone when men controlled women’s media. Have you seen what women’s magazines are printing these days? Do any of them have male editorial staff? (here I have to admit to reading New Idea recently – but only for the pictures)
tigtog may be closer to the truth with her heirarchical display thesis above which meshes somewhat with Bismarck’s theory.
Anyway, what does it matter what blokes think? Just shrug it off and get on. I thought you gals had learnt to “just say no”.
Which part of that don’t you understand?
The part I dont get is your persistent blindness to your own sexism in terms of your textual semantics and signifying practices which more than display the ordering principles of the patriarchy in the West to which you belong and as practiced by you, who is not prepared to look back over your posts and unravel the embedded discourse of female objectification.
What part of that dont you get little man?
oh and in regards to your next post TB, brilliant as it will be, I must defer to Sebastion from Little Britain, who would say most definitely “wha-eva”.
“ordering principles of the patriarchy”
“It’s not my fault. It’s them blokes doing it to me. I’m not responsible for my own situation.”
Take control of your life and stop blaming others.
“female objectification”
Like it or not Catnip, we are all objects – including sexually. We cannot escape our sexual nature, and we all act to attract mates to maximise the chances of viable offspring.
If I looked at women only as sex objects, then you would have legitimate cause for complaint, but I don’t, so you don’t.
“which more than display”
Speaking of semantics, how can you “more than display” anything?
All I know is my boobs aren’t big enough to satisfy many boys, but my hips are too big. And I’ve only got one leg. Whatever. Get over it, lads. Get back on topic, please.
As the old saying goes…anything more than a
flipperhand-full is a waste.What makes me most sad about these alleged bathers is that they totally put visuals ahead of function. The underlying message is that considerations coming from the spectacle presented by a woman or girl being active in a public place overrules considerations attached to whatever it is she’s actually doing.
I think *that* is deeply unwholesome.
There’s no way you could defend the practicality of such togs for swimming in. Short of the early nineteenth century “bathing machines” popular at seaside resorts, no swimming costume ever invented could be more restrictive of the kind of movements swimming involves. I have to conclude that these people consider swimming basically immodest / unwholesome. The site talks about “playing in the water”, not swimming.
I’m having trouble expressing myself, and it’s probably a bit pointless anyway, since everyone seems to agree that this is a travesty and a very sad bit of retrogressiveness.
Actually these muslim swimsuits are getting really popular. Just back from an evening in the pool – with my muslim sisters. No-one drowned (lol) and they ARE completely practical to swim in.
If I want to cover up when I swim – thats my choice. My body is my own – unlike Christian culture where women cover up for prayer as a result of man’s superiority (1st Corinthians 11). We cover cos we have a strong sense of personal identity and pride in our bodies – and chose not to share it with the world. Truth is – more and more muslims nowadays are CHOSING to cover. – COVERING UP IS NOT OPPRESSION