Was Victorian modesty a myth? Fashion history mythbusting with sunscreen and school dress codes
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2023
- 🔎👒 Download June's Journey for free here: woo.ga/qqdx9s Thanks to June's Journey for sponsoring this video. What would the modest, prudish Victorians think about the school uniform debate? Uncovered table legs? What about sunscreen? School dress codes? It's not what we've been taught : time to bust some weird Victorian myths with fashion history.
The history we've been taught emphasizes Victorian values as being buttoned-up. While the Victorians etiquette was strict compared to modern or even 20th century vintage modest outfits . . . modesty in Victorian fashion is not what you think! Contrary to popular belief, Victorian morals did not require table legs to be covered for the sake of modesty. But when it comes to how Victorian modesty did actually work, there's a surprisingly sensible aspect to Victorian era fashion's dress code, and thee's a lot modern school dress codes could learn from it rather than clutching pearls over historical myths. Historical accuracy in Victorian fashion does call for modest high collars and long sleeves . . . in place of sunscreen! No one had invented sun block in the 19th century, and wearing clothes in place of sunblock was the best they could do. But this didn't stop the Victorians wearing low necklines and bare arms in the evening when SPF wasn't necessary.
What does Victorian modesty have to do with the school uniform debate, though? Here's my historical style theory : the Victorians had a far healthier attitude about modest childrens' clothes than school dresscodes do! To Victorian era society, it wasn't unusual or immodest to see childrens' ankles, legs, or arms even when it would be provocative for adults to dress that way. Menawhile, outfits for school dress codes today treat the bodies of LITERAL CHILDREN as though they're inherently provocative! I think we should listen to the Victorians when it comes to the school dress code debate and whether children should be dress coded out of getting a good education. I'm lucky that I never ended up breaking my school's dress code, but that's because they didn't care what my outfits for school were. Seriously, when the Victorians have a healthier attitude towards modesty than modern-day school dress codes, it's a sign they need to reconsider their choices.
Join my Patreon for behind-the-scenes updates, pattern diagrams, research lists, monthly video chats, and more! / snappydragonstudios
Or, you can buy me some Ko-Fi : ko-fi.com/snappydragon
Follow me on IG for more stitchy business : @missSnappyDragon
For business inquiries, send an e-mail to : SnappyDragon at TBHonestSocial dot Com
I do not take personal costume/sewing or research commissions.
Want to send me letters? Send mail to PO Box 11573, Oakland CA, 94611! Letters and cards only please 💚 - Jak na to + styl
🔎👒 Download June's Journey for free here: woo.ga/qqdx9s
In one of the Little House spin off books about Laura’s daughter Rose, Rose asks her mom how babies are made. A scandalized Laura refuses to answer. When I was the book’s target age, I took this as proof of Victorian prudishness. Now I wonder why the author thought an adolescent raised on a farm wouldn’t know about reproduction.
Many kids raised on farms never made that connection, though. An ex-Amish CZcamsr I follow said that kids were taught nothing about human reproduction, and were chastised for even wondering aloud whether humans copulated and gave birth the way farm animals do.
My dad grew up on a farm and in high school would get into fights if someone said his mother wasn't a virgin. Three kids yet somehow had never had sex XD
My grandmother grew up on a farm (Mid 20th century) but by various pieces of information and adults refusal to speak directly about human reproduction picked up the impression that because God made humans in his image they were better/ different to mere animals. Apparently her older (married) sister told her the facts of life the day before her wedding.
@@genera1013 My grandmother got pregnant when my dad was a teenager, and he beat up a classmate who made a risqué comment about it!
Wasn’t Laura the author of those books?
I think a lot of Victorian children's fashion choices were about practicality. Kids run around and play. If you put them in full length skirts, the kids would constantly be tripping on them and dragging the hems through the mud. Also, there is no way you are going to get a five year old to sit still long enough for an elaborate pinned updo. High necklines are scratchy and tight and kids would constantly be tugging at them.
Absolutely! Imagine trying to get mud and dirt out of long hemlines in the days before modern laundering technology . . .
Not only this, but kids grow FAST. If the dress starts at mid calf, no one I'd going to bat an eye if it's just below the knee 2 months later and knee length in another 3 or 4 as it's all still in an acceptable range. If your dress HAS to cover the ankles, the dress is going to be VERY obviously too short very quickly and kids grow so fast.
@@esthermeyerhoff4113Victorian kids clothes were often designed with tucks that would be let out as the child grew. It helped buffer the cost of the clothes a bit to allow them to wear a piece a little longer.
Like someone said, kids grow, kids get filthy, kids trash clothes. Also girls and boys dressed identically up to age… I can’t remember. All kids wore dresses for all kinds practical reasons least of which was toilet training.
@@rjohnson1690 I believe girls and boys were dressed the same until age 2!
As a kid I heard Victorians covered their table legs and was very confused because my grandma had knitted little socks for our chairs, so I assumed it was just those to make it easier to drag the table around. This is the first time I've realized they weren't table socks.
i would LOVE if that's the real reason. so practical!
My aunt has also knitted socks for her chairs so that the legs don't scratch the floor.
I was also told that this was why there were socks on the furniture! Practical if you didn't have a maid to help you move the chairs/tables/etc across your nice hardwood floor.
But most importantly, people need to know there's a crochet pattern to crochet little kitty paws for your furnitures !
@@solanelukoperse5815 That is ridiculously important! Thank you! Do you have a place I can find it easily by chance?
You mentioned school dress code.
My high school: "Skirts may be worn 2 inches above the knee, but all shorts must be 2 inches below the knee."
Then 16 year old me trying to figure out how someone decided bending over in shorts was more revealing than bending over in a mini skirt.
😵💫 So bizarre.
Gosh, I would've loved to have the option of shorts, although trousers would've been evem better! Pleated-style knee-high skirts were NOT fun in our windy NZ winters, esp. every time you went around a classroom block corner and met a massive gust... 😰
I seem to remember back in high school, that skorts were banned (the furor this caused may have led to an update allowing them the next year).
Reminds me of my High School dress code that banned ripped jeans with holes above the knee but allowed shorts that stopped above the knee as long as the person wearing them could let their arms loosely and touch the bottom! Also teachers were amazingly bad at having any consistency with this rule (there were some that thought the rule was BS while others would duct tape the holes above the knee)
At my highschool, dress code was applied in direct proportion to one's bra size, and/or the closeness of one's skin tone to pantone 727 vs 732. Oddly enough queerness was not generally a factor but given that the vast majority of the student body fell outside the hetero cis model, I choose to believe the teachers couldn't be bothered with that level of effort.
I couldn't wear tanktops in my school because apparently shoulders kept the girls distracted.
Somehow the arms, calves and hands didn't...
Oh, girls wore shorts a palm long and bitched about the ac. Boys, of course, couldn't wear the same tight lycra shorts.
I had a school uniform in high school. It was a rare case of girls being allowed to show more skin than guys. The girls uniform was a kilt (had to be no more than a few inches above the knee, though girls constantly rolled theirs up to make them shorter), knee socks, and a shapeless blouse or polo shirt (that actually was form fitting). The guys wore military inspired clothes, long wool pants and a button up shirt (short sleeves in summer).
For my class's senior prank, we swapped uniforms. Considering the average teenage guy is significantly taller than the average teenage girl, let's just say a lot of pasty hairy man thighs were on display that day and I saw way more of my classmates' boxers than I ever wanted to.
Oh this is HILARIOUS.
😂😂😂❤
I remember reading a YA novel (Obnoxious Jerks) about a high school all male prank club that had a school dress code that allowed skirts below the knee but not shorts, so the club members did a prank/protest one extremely hot year where they all showed up in skirts, carefully making sure they ended below the knee, until the school changed the dress code to allow shorts (which did not specify length and boys no longer sweltered in their pants and the girls got to show more leg than was previously allowed)
Actually, that's the norm. Not the particular, but girls are usually allowed to show more skin.
I went to a boy's school with a school uniform requirement (ages 11 to 18) - the two junior years were required to wear shorts, even in winter. And this is in England, which is further North than any of the 48 contiguous States
The big scandal around the Madame X portrait was that she was originally painted with one spaghetti strap falling off her shoulder, which obviously was considered highly suggestive. The artist changed it to the current position after public outcry.
Tangentially related to this: victorians didn't believe in highly gendered clothing for young children. All kids wore dresses, usually white, until age 5ish, for the practical reason that it is much easier to change a diaper when lifting a skirt than having to remove trousers, and if your barely potty-trained 4 year old has an accident, white clothes can have the heck boiled out of them until the stains come out. I deeply wish this was still a thing, as my spouse is terrible at fastening onsie snaps.
Yup! A lot of the pictures of very young children I came across, the gender was kind of uncertain. I use non-gendered language whenever I can, but for this it was especially accurate because even the Victorian assigned gender role could go either way.
@@SnappyDragon I feel like the victorians would be horrified by the very concept of those awful "mommy's little heartbreaker"/ "Daddy says I can't date til I'm thirty" shirts.
@@kellyburds2991as they should!
Even until the 1950s, babies normally wore baby dresses regardless of gender. I look frequently at vintage layette patterns, and most of them are dresses and gowns, until you begin to see bubbles around 6-9 months, and then bobby suits with short pants in the toddler age.
@@kellyburds2991I mean, I’m not even Victorian and _I’m_ horrified by those.
When I was 13 or so I was forced to wear a borrowed t-shirt for gym class, because my top SPECIFICALLY MADE FOR EXERCISE looked like it showed my bra straps. It didn't, it just had piping along the armholes, but it could "distract the boys" so I had to wear something else. I have never been more furious with a teacher. 🤬
UUUUGH that's beyond absurd.
Thank you for addressing the dress code issues. When my daughter was in Kindergarten she wore a really cute sun dress for picture day. Ankle length with spaghetti straps in navy gingham, I mean sublet adorable. No body bat an eye over it. In fact several teachers told me about how cute she looked and loved her dress and did I make it. No I got this one in clearance at the old navy outlet. Fast forward six months and its spring in Vegas and the weather is pushing 90 again. My daughter wanted to wear a different dress with 1 inch straps. When I picked her up, she was in tears and wearing a T-shirt over her dress. Turns out they changed the dress code to no bare shoulders because it's too sexual. She's not yet 7! She was shamed for wearing this dress and never wore it again. Ironically this didn't apply to boys. So many things that were wrong with that school, but that's irrelevant. Lets just say for the last day of school she dressed in a cami and skort that was just a little too short for the current dress code. Which now stated not only no bare shoulders but girls couldn't wear anything above the knee. Since we were moving we gave the school and their dress code a great big f you. Anyways thanks for this enlightening video. I had wondered where the limb myth came from. My favorite myth will always be the ankles and the corset being an instrument of torture a close second.
Ridiculous dress coding of young children didn’t exist when I was a kid in the ‘50s and ‘60s! From everything I’ve read, in recent decades, it’s due to the influence of conservative Christians, particularly fundamentalists and Mormons.
I'm so sorry she had to deal with that!
Anyone that considers a kindergartner’s shoulders “too sexual” needs to be on a registry and required to keep away from schools. So gross
@marinavoss106 That reminds me of a CBLDF story about this man who was making trouble for comic shops in his area. He was upset over sexualization of children in anime and manga. I thought, "Well, he has a point, even if his solution and methods are wrong." Then they said he the series he was focused on was Pokémon, and showed examples of the art he was enraged at. Then I thought, "Someone needs to ban _him_ from being around kids, not anime."
It's the way that skin = sexuality that just strikes me as alien. It just divorces people from their own bodies, and makes little children into sex objects. I know there's creeps and oddballs out there, but no more than there ever has been. I'm sorry about your little one, she must have been distraught!
FYI, in the UK, 'rubbers' is still an innocuous word. It's what we use in place of 'eraser'.
I bet that makes for some fun misunderstandings!
@@SnappyDragon Yeah, my mum tells this story of being on this Oracle training course in the 90s, where half the class were Dutch (American English) and the rest were British. And were very confused when the Dutch cracked up laughing because the female instructor asked if anyone had seen the rubber (for the whiteboard).
@@SnappyDragon When I was at school, 80s, we had a kid called Johnny. Someone in class, totally normal, asked in a loud voice, "Pass the rubber Johnny!" We all cracked up!
I think about when I learned the double meaning of thong.
I rejoined primary school from a rather sheltered homeschooling right at the age when all our male co-students seemed to find the rubber/eraser double entendre endlessly repeatable & hilarious, and of course had no idea at all what they were going on about 🤦🏻♀️ Couple that with being an insatiable bookworm (& therefore having a very different vocab in general from all my contemporaries) and it was a pretty rough year of transition, I must say... 😣 Although perhaps it did help cement my later fascination with sociolinguistics!
Yep. When I was 11, 12, and 13 years old, I was constantly being told by my girl scout troop leader to cover up more and berated for being inappropriate when I merely had the misfortune of developing very early and happening to get very large breasts really quickly. Yes, I was wearing lower cut shirts (I also remember the time my mother refused to let me get a high neckline t shirt because the daisies across the chest happened to go across my breasts, aged 11) but she couldn't think of any reason besides "Sarah is choosing to be deliberately sexual", as opposed to, "Sarah wears low cut shirts because they have the least interaction with her breasts and therefore have less fit issues, as she struggles to find clothing that makes her feel comfortable in her own body as it changes so drastically with no context or guidance because she's so much earlier than all the other girls, and also earlier than the adults were back when they were girls, and the adults paradoxically treating her as both a child when she needs to be treated as an adult (she's too young for this to be happening so we just ignore it and make no effort to find developmentally appropriate guides to what's happening with her body and how she should handle it, or, you know, teach her how to clothes-shop in ways that help her understand fit and style so she can find clothing that makes her feel comfortable with her weird, changing body while also satisfying the needs of modesty) and treating her like an adult when she should be treated like a child (maybe you could be able to understand body dysphoria in a child and help her shop appropriately if you don't approach clothes shopping through a primary lens of "MODESTY COVER IT ALL UP OH MY PEARLS BODIES EXIST). I was 11, I was NOT trying to be sexual, I WAS 11. I had body dysphoria from being a literal child in a body with big breasts and gradually widening hips, all while having no guidance on how to handle it because this modesty culture made the adults around me incapable of conceiving of the existence of this as a THING, let alone a problem. I was punished for misbehavior and disobedience, rather than being helped with a problem. Because how could there possibly be adverse mental effects when a literal child has no help with abnormal puberty???? I mean, come on, the bigger the boobs the bigger the slut, amirite??? Even when those those big boobs are on the body of an 11 year old, rite, rite????
I feel for you 😢 What awful ways to treat a child, and as you note, guaranteed to cause mental scarring that takes a long time to overcome...
I developed early & larger too, and still struggle with being comfortable with that, largely due to those early experiences?
Despite larger breasts supposedly being more attractive, what they tend to attract IMO is mostly unwanted attention, criticism, and discomfort... And that false correlation of bigger boobs = looser morals is one that still persists SO strongly in our society.
Tends to have a disproportionate (no pun intended) impact on both femmes of colour and people with more body fat? Which is not good. But extrapolating all that societal misconception onto kids & blaming them for how their bodies develop is even worse...
I'm just a guy chipping in, and while I can empathize only in the sense of having had my own 'body issues' and problems around self - esteem and bullying, I certainly sympathise, and can somewhat understand what you went through at least inasmuch as _my_ late and profoundly missed wife was, I don't know what term to use, 'full - figured', and was also an early developer. It's true that there was a lot of 'other sh1+' going on in her childhood and early adolescence, but the fact of her having substantial breasts quite young, and, more particularly, people's reactions to them, be they adults or simply her schoolmates (children don't exist in a vacuum, after all, and instinctively pick up on prevailing attitudes), all of this affected her deeply - so much so that it was a long time before she could even sleep with me (in whatever sense) without wearing a T~Shirt or slip or something of that nature and without having the light off. I actually didn't get how deep it went though until I found her sat on the side of the bathtub in my mother's house, tears running down her face, the water long gone cold, having gotten herself all worked up about her 'weird - shaped' l8oobs, that 'I couldn't possibly _really_ like'..! Fwiw, while I was aware that she had _something_ of a complex, I had no idea _at all_ that that last part could've been a worry for her; I had always considered Txxxx to be at least a division above me in the looks dept. (and being that dangerous breed, a straight bloke, without wishing in any way to objectify her, I rather _liked_ that she had large breasts; and hips, for that matter). I was deeply struck by the incident, and felt so badly for her, and it never left me. Needless to say, the damage laid down in her adolescence/puberty (I have a tendency to mix up the two terms) was of course constantly reinforced in adulthood by the usual jackasses and gobdaws, typically your 'guys on scaffolding' types; I don't even mean the usual "Nice †¡†s, Chicken!' comments - while remarks like that might be made with the knowledge that they will embarrass the recipient, they arren't usually made with the intention to _humiliate,_ being essentially complementary, at least in terms of intent, if not reception -- and I feel comfortable in saying that (again, with the disclaimer that I am a bloke) because these type of guys, when they _do_ want to insult, and inflict emotional damage, they tend not to be the sort to hold back, and don't leave much room for misapprehension!
Unfortunately towards the end of her life, Txxxx went through long periods of not leaving the house, for a lot of complex and intersecting reasons; but her lack of comfort in her own body, something deeply impressed upon her for most of her life because of the snide, judgemental, tactless, ignorant, and just plain hurtful words and behaviour of idiots and worse, sure didn't help.
It's actually after slipping my mind how you ended your comment, and I can't refer back without losing mine (theoretically I could 'cut & paste', back it up, etc, etc, but I would almost definitely 'naus it up'!) But I do so hope that you have learned to be more comfortable in your own skin and have come to realise - not just intellectually, but in your gut, that all those issues you had, they were all about other fools and _their_ hang - ups, and were only about you in as much as these idiots had knocked your thinking out of whack. I expect and hope that in your mind it now goes without saying you are a deeply worthwhile person, irrespective of your appearance and figure, but with regard to the latter, fwiw, I don't know what you actually look like [EDIT at time of writing I had not 'checked out' your thumbnail photo, but I see nothing to destabilise my thesis] and I apologize if I'm overstepping my boundaries, and it may be that such things are now entirely 'beside the point' to you -- but I daresay you are highly attractive, physically, to many, indeed most, straight men who have their head screwed on right!
(In terms of your personality too, I'm sure, but I'm already 'deep in the weeds!' HaHa!)
@@richiehoyt8487 I'm so sorry your wife had to go through that. It sounds terribly debilitating (which I can say from other, unrelated issues, that I understand).
I had an easier time thankfully once I got to be about 13 or 14, because that's when the other girls started catching up with me, and I was less out-of-place, and the adults started to know "what to do" with me, like, I became less of an anomaly in everybody's eyes. Though it does always stick in my mind this one time when I was 14, and I was still wearing the low cut shirts, (and the girl scout leader still chided me, but there was less need to as we were doing fewer activities by that age where it "mattered") (also, still never felt quite right, but that's also because, looking back, nobody knew how to properly fit me for a bra nor honestly could they have even found a bra in my size because I have a quite, again, "abnormal" small ribcage and large bust, and even now the awareness of the existence of different proportions is pretty lacking, let alone the mid/late 2000s. I didn't get properly fit and put in my actual size until 2015, and I had to go to New York to the store that supplies the undergarments for Broadway.)
Anyway, the moment that sticks out in my mind from when I was 14, still wearing those low-cut tops, I still remember the specific outfit, actually, one of those lace-lined camis that's starting to come back into fashion, with a semi-fitted red and grey striped, low cut sweater over top. Me and some of my classmates in the music school I went to were waiting outside the classroom waiting for the last class to end so we could go in and get our stuff to leave, and I forget the conversation that precipitated it, but one of the seniors told me that the stretch marks on my boobs were disgusting and I should cover up. (I basically went from normal 10 year old to, essentially this 30J cup I have now, over the span of a single weekend when I was 11, so yeah, naturally my skin couldn't quite handle it) I was definitely self conscious for a while, though not really anymore.
You can always count on Conservatives to do the worst possible thing.
Here's a fun fact, tattoos were so normalised during the Victorian era that the some of British, European and Russian royals were as tattooed as sailors, including the woman. It's just incredibly hard to tell who had them because they didn't show up on early photographs.
the REAL reason Victorian clothes covered so much : to hide the tattoos
@@SnappyDragonwell duh. Gotta protect that ink from the damaging effects of the sun. 😉😉
Now I picture two Victorian era royals having a duel and ripping off all their layers in one move to reveal their tattoos, Kiryu-style.
I heard even Sissi got an anchor tattoo XD
@@novaspree66 But Sissi was unique, and one shouldn't equate Victorian England with Franz Josephian (now there's a mouthful) Austria-Hungary as they were very much Apples and Oranges.
I am not convinced that we can really extrapolate Victorian society's attitudes towards children's sexuality (or its lack) from art or adverts alone; these are the kind of things that are harder to find in pictorial record, as they are cultural mores understood and passed along orally rather than set down in writing somewhere.
For example, in Mexico, children's fashion in the late 1960s/early 1970s was also at least as, if not more, skimpier than most of the contemporary adult fashion, and yet, young girls were told to "be modest" (meaning behavior--keep away from boys, do not hug adult men, do not be alone somewhere with older boys or men you don't know, don't let boys or men touch you, and so on) right after their first period (in some cases, as young as 10), or the moment any hint of breast appeared.
The undercurrent was a mix of old-fashioned Catholic puritanism and "men are dangerous to you/can't control their sexual urges, and this is how you keep yourself safe from them--and if something happens to you, then it's your fault for not being careful enough".
I do wish, however, that society would get on with the program and let children be children, and that people who sexualize children--either for profit or to commit abuse themselves--were all punished, and far harsher, and much sooner, than they are.
ETA: I do love these videos, you always make us think and help us look at things differently.
Oh I absolutely don't doubt that childrens' behavior was policed in unhealthy ways! I just wanted to point out the contrast between our attitudes towards childrens' clothes vs. attitudes about childrens' clothes in the past.
Being a European, I have always had the notion that Victorians (and all people from the past), when it came to clothing, based their choices on aesthetics/practicality rather than anything else. Perhaps this view of Victorians is mainly an American view? When I was in the US (total of 11+ years), I was often struck by misplaced interest in nudity. For instance, in many European countries, small children are often seen naked on beaches whereas in the US, where I was, that was forbidden - my mother (French) commented that only sick minds would focus on children's attire on a beach. Another, was a discussion I had with a lady about sculptures depicting nude people outside a capitol building. She started going on about all this 'pornography' so I felt the urge to help her understand the difference between nudity and pornography (focusing on the former rather than the latter). I have never come across such bizarre attitudes towards nudity in Europe. This might be changing, however, with the influence of American media and religious fanaticism.
Yeah, I think a lot of the American notion of the (British) Victorians as being especially buttoned-up and prudish was misdirection, or to make Americans feel better about how we're often the actual prudish ones. There's a book on my reading list called "Inventing The Victorians" about this that I'm really excited to get to.
It might be worth reading up on the Puritans. They were incredibly prudish and are responsible for a lot of our unhealthy baggage in America.
In middleschool, I was almost bullied by SPECIFICALLY my women teachers, because of cleavage. I had just hit puberty, I genuinely was just wearing clothes. I never wore low cut things. It doesn't help that, yes, I was/am above average chest size. But it was so bad I wore hoodies and sweaters year round. In Georgia. I just hated my body so much from how focused those women were on me and how they seemed to want to shame me for my body. Me. A child.
Side note: I saw girls wear EXTREMELY low cuts but they were flat chested so the teachers never said anything. And that's when I realized they were just targeting me specifically. I'm 25 and only in recent years have gotten over hating my own chest.
Public school is a crapshoot of really wonderful, gifted teachers, and vile, bullying bitches who should never have been allowed to “teach” in a classroom! And everything in between!
I bet some of those teachers stuffed socks into their bras to look womanly! Jealous cows!
It's sad that it took you so long to accept your body due to all that trauma but I'm glad you feel better in your body now ❤
I attended a private high school for a couple years that had a very detailed dress code that mostly penalized girls, and prohibited any gender-diverse clothing (girls could wear pants, since that's generally socially acceptable, but boys were absolutely not allowed to wear dresses, earrings, etc.). It wasn't great. It still makes me angry, honestly. The dress code for the public middle school my kid will be at next year is essentially "wear clothing, don't deliberately expose underwear, butts, or pectorals/breasts, and don't wear clothing with weapons or derogatory language printed on it" which is a lot easier to follow and to understand as wearing what's appropriate for the context.
I remember my secondary school dress code was just one bullet point: no hats or sunglasses indoors. (religious head coverings exempt)
The dress code at my public schools was similar! I was very lucky in that respect.
According to my high school dress code, crossdressing was acceptable, as it should be. Wearing do rags earned an angry rant from the principal, over loudspeaker.
The school I worked at girls' uniform only included skirts and dresses except on in the days that sport was timetabled when it was ok to wear tracksuits all day. After my child finished year 12 there they finally decided to allow girls to wear trousers as part of the uniform... but when I asked if that meant boys would be allowed to wear skirts, I was met with a deafening silence. (Big Melbourne Jewish Day School if you're wondering.)
I was talking with someone recently who said their kids high school dress code was "if it was inappropriate for a teacher to wear it, it is inappropriate for a student to wear it". I can't decide if that is well-meaning, but badly worded, or intentionally subjective so they can implement it however they want.
The _Portrait of Madame X_ originally had one of those bejewelled straps slipping off her shoulder, which probably contributed to the scandal.
Came to say the same about the strap which was painted over to make it more ‘appropriate’
Oooh, did not know that!
I was coming here to say that, too, but I’m glad I read the comments first. It’s a fascinating and charismatic painting, one of my favourites!
I came here to say this, too!
One more hand up for person who was going to comment on the strap being originally painted off the shoulder…
Damn, I've never been a first like to a video, last time I was this early, the sunblock didn't exist yet.
I wish we still stuck with the idea that children's bodies, even displayed more than in the "modest" standard for adult, are just neutral, normal and shouldn't be sexualized, because those are children and children shouldn't be viewed as sexual, ever. That would be very helpful for me in middle and high school, since I can't even count how many times I was reprimanded for clothing [similar or even more covering than those of my peers], just because of my body shape. After a while, I realized, that being cooked alive and unable to focus on any lessons, bothered me way more than any possible comment from teachers. There's something deeply creepy about adults deliberating on how many buttons can a student have unbuttoned in the shirt depending on their chest size -- why not just *not* stare at teens and kids chests, please?
Yeah there is something extreeeemely creep-apologist about insisting that students need to dress a certain way to avoid "distracting" their teachers. Adults who can't handle themselves like, well, adults, have no business being around children.
Fantastic comment here, thanks for sharing your experience
@@SnappyDragon
When our children (1) were younger both my wife and were extremely upset/disgusted with clothing designed for young girls that made them look like street walkers. We were not prudes. We were pretty open with our kids about life. I think part of the issue with children's clothing is the designers may not be parents at all. Children are not "little adults". Let them enjoy their childhood.
School uniforms. I look at them as a way to potentially save money and eliminate at least some of the envy or showing off clothes wise in a school environment.
I always thought that was a lie pushed by weirdos.
There's a huge difference between a BARE leg/ankle, and an ankle/calf in a boot, though.
You’ve said so many thoroughly sound things in such a short time! Too many people nowadays view the world through smut-coloured spectacles. Skin does not equal sexual activity.
Most of the rants I hear from parents shopping in the girl section is only partially motivated by “too much skin” and mostly “this isn’t practical children’s clothing!” Whether it’s sitting on hot playground equipment or just having some covering to a shoulder tiny shorts and strappy tops just aren’t practical for most of the activities young children are doing (and their utter aversion to sunscreen). Like here’s an example, kid one, boys section never once was his diaper visible below the hemline of his shorts. Kid two, constant issues with even empty diapers not being fully covered. Having your shoulders mostly covered and a good chunk of your thighs wrapped in fabric is just practical and allows a kid to move through the world with the freedom they should have, not freedom from creepy people but freedom to play and explore their world without fiddling with their clothing, freedom from having to consider wether or not they can sit or kneel somewhere without being uncomfortable or tearing up their outfit.
I feel like it makes the dress codes even more awful given how hard it can be to find clothes that fit them!
@@SnappyDragon absolutely! I saw some school administrator just complaining about kids showing up in crop tops….I welcome her to find a wardrobe worth of options that aren’t cropped in the juniors section these days
Right?! Girls' shorts are for some reason 10-20 cm shorter than boys' shorts at MINIMUM, regardless of age. And then they're punished for wearing shorts that short. As a teen on the heavier side i would PINE for knee-length shorts, but the boys cut wouldn't fit and the girls' cuts would show my actual underwear. Make it make sense!
@@IloveHobbits1995 Yup. When I was younger I literally cut up some old jeans to make shorts long enough to not get dress coded because it wasn’t fashionable/ stores didn’t sell it. Thank god long shorts are trendy now, at least for adult women.
@liav4102 I always had THE WORST time finding shorts as a tween and teen. I have very long legs which made the 2-3inch inseam that was in fashion at the time look borderline inappropriate on me. When I found 4inch inseam shorts at JCPenney my mom bought every color and I cycled through them until they wore out
As someone who had their bra snapped on MORE than one occasion, and when -I- turned around and confronted said strap-snappers, then got in trouble for it... I feel the rant so much. Even my then-5-now-6-year-old has had run ins with her school's administration because of her clothes. She picks out what she's comfortable in, don't shame her for it and give her hang-ups like I have.
School dress codes still seem so weird to me, and I don't think I've ever encountered them. As long as your clothes didn't have hateful text on them, I think most things were fine. Teenagers exploring their preferences for clothing and sexuality through clothing is something that is a normal part of development, and I would rather have part of that take place in a school environment than on late-night gatherings with no adults in sight.
In the late ‘60s, we fought hard for liberalized dress codes that let us wear jeans to school-and trousers for girls! Strictures against long hair for boys and facial hair also went away. (But we’re in godless New England.)
Far out, y'all had trousers for girls in the '60s?? Our college uniform didn't let trousers or shorts for girls in until the end of the 1990s! (just after I left, alas 😭) Which was particularly ridiculous because there was zero rule against us being bifurcated on any mufti day, when we wore our own clothes to school?? 🤦🏻♀️
maybe that explains why my school's dress codes were so permissive-- I grew up in suburban MA.
@queenmotherhane4374 : I graduated from high school in Illinois in 1971. Our dress code opened up to allow girls to wear trousers in December 1970. I spent my last semester EXCLUSIVELY wearing jeans! I had always been envious of my California girl cousins who were wearing shorts to school in the mid 60s
@@annbrookens945 Our dress code got liberated in January 1970. I was SO much more comfortable wearing jeans and sneakers to school-and got the best grades of my life.
We didn't have a dress code at our school growing up, and my sister still got in trouble for wearing clothes that was too revealing.... but only from one male teacher. We need to teach adults not to sexualize children, not shame and punish kids because teachers and supposed "responsible adults" can't keep their mind out of the gutter.
I really do think schools ought to be minding how often teachers are dress-coding students and what for. Would likely reveal a lot of patterns.
Snappy, I would really like to know why schools DON'T notice who and how often those teachers post dress code infractions!
The issue with JSS portrait of Madame X was (from what I've learned, at least) to do with the fact that in the original, one of her straps was slipping off - which suggested wantonness, or the act of undressing. Hence why it was then repainted with the strap in the upright position.
Additionally on the matter of context! There is records of women hiking their skirts up to avoid them getting dirty, going into the sea to forrage for food? Sweeping a muddy area? The garments get lifted out of the way because cleaning is a chore and often legs are on show in the process! It's one of those occasions of this is not a sexual situation, it is clearly a person just trying to keep her skirts clean
Absolutely! I do know that this could result in stigma further back than the 19th century-- laundresses in the Medieval era were looked down on because their work involved baring their arms and legs. I don't think all of that stigma would have persisted into the Victorian era, but some of it might have.
My grandfather was born in 1900 I have seen pictures of him a toddler wearing a fetching dress and long hair in ringlets . I have been told he looked cute wearing pink too just like all the boys wore😅 and the local rowing club were proud to wear their pink uniforms to sporting events in France where they won a medal.😮 little girls proudly wore blue after all it was the colour worn by the Virgin Mary . I wonder when the mixup happened ? I enjoyed your video . I felt inspired to add a bit more detail about children. Pink was a male colour because it was expensive to make red dye so they used the dye until it became pink and blue was cheaper and easier to make for the girls if i remember what I read so long ago🌟🍀🌟🖖🖖🖖🌟🍀🌟👍👍👍🌟🍀🌟🇨🇦🌺🌷🌺🇨🇦👋🏻🧓🏻🤚🏻
I remember reading somewhere that women and girls wore blue because it was considered a more delicate, feminine color that pink which was seen as just a pale red and thus a stronger, more manly color.
@@threadsandpurrs good morning Stephanie , I wonder if we read the same book or article. I remember the connection for blues being related to the artistic tradition that Mary be painted wearing blue . I just asked my echo dot if red dye was an expensive dye to make and no it’s a dye that cane be made from flowers like roses and poppies. Her answer when I asked about red and pink was pink is a shade of red and that men wore red because of the connection with the blood of Jesus. When you think of military uniforms back in the day Red was a favourite colour. That makes me wonder if red wool hid blood stains. Or if the colour was chosen to identify your comrades in a battle . Blue uniforms are hard to see at night was one of the reasons my echo dot gave for napoleon’s armies officer wearing blue they also saw it as a comforting colour I wonder if that relates to both of our recollections a delicate colour worn by a source of comfort their mothers and mother Mary.. I appreciate your comment thank you I think I will do some research in the significance of red and blue in heraldry next 👍👍👍🌟🖖🖖🖖💃🏻🧍♀️funny I love to wear purple red and blue mixed together. 🤷🏼♀️🙋🏼♀️💁♀️
@@lindagates9150 The red of English military uniforms was made from cochineal (insects) and fairly expensive, but produced an intense scarlet that lasted. Other shades of red were much cheaper to produce, I’m sure. And it wasn’t to hide blood, but to make them visible to their commanders on the smoke filled battlefield prior to the 1890s.
I suspect the changeover may be from the 1920s, when you start to see the female singer in those red dresses.
@@highlorddarkstar I have been reading an online article in the Smithsonian magazine about baby clothes it’s very interesting pink was considered a colour that was to harsh for girls to wear. The switch for babies was made in the 1940.s I had assumed that it was much earlier by the time I was born pink was the established colour . I knew about the beetles but listened to my echo dot and didn’t ask more quest. Good night thank you for sharing your knowledge . Good night. 🤦♀️👍👍👍💐🖖🖖🖖👋🏻🧓🏻🤚🏻
It’s not entirely clear when the changeover came about, but it’s theorized it happened because it became fashionable to dress young boys in blue sailor suits, and the color soon came to be associated with boys instead. The changeover seems to have been complete by roughly the 1940s.
One of my brother's dates to his senior prom wore a relatively short red slip dress -- my mom described it as "entirely appropriate, and it looked good on her" -- and a significant number of students circulated a petition saying that her dress had ruined prom for them. I don't think the school did anything about the petition, but it was quite a thing. (For context, this was in the mid-1990s, in rural middle-of-the-east-coast U.S.)
Imagine being at prom and having nothing better to do than get annoyed at someone else's dress!
@@SnappyDragonwell, what else were we supposed to do 😂. ( talking smack about each other's dresses was half the fun of prom) our year was the first to be allowed to have it off campus so ALL the teachers and school board members showed up.
I think I spent the one prom I went to sitting outside the ballroom with my friends, discussing what parts of the MIT campus we had or had not climbed yet 🤣
Great take! 20 years out of school and I *still* get angry when I think about dress codes that unfairly target girls. Of course, women's behavior and mere existence has always been under a microscope in our society but ANYWAY thanks for providing context to these issues!
I love this ongoing series of 'woman from history (usually Victorian) learns of new thing (ie. sunblock and overlocking sewing machines) and immediately steals it. Most historically accurate thing I've seen imo🤣
It's so much fun to film!
If vikings had access to spandex, raids would look like an Abba concert
Even the “only for the husband” portrait could be a little tongue in cheek. That specific portrait of Sissi was copied a bazillion times apparently ^^
in the book "gigi" (that is the book that eventually became the movie) there is a discussion that the young girl is talking to her grandmother, that she would like to wear longer skirts...
and g mom says no! you would look too old: you are still a child.
One year when I was in high school, part of our assigned reading was set just after Queen Victoria's death (Falling Angels by Tracy Chevalier, I have overall positive memories of it) and I remember there being a whole section about it being deeply scandalous that one character's mother's calves showed when she rode a bicycle, can't remember if she had pants on or a skirt or split skirt. I wasn't into dress history then, much less that time period, but I remember having a moment of "I've ridden a bike in a calf length skirt and that's still challenging. Did they want her to crash?" (Also at a separate time this teacher called attention to the fact that I was "the only one in the room who fit into a 1960s high school dress code" like it was something to be proud of. I said they'd probably like me just fine until I opened my mouth, which is true because I've always been loud about finding things unfair. Having been on the receiving end of this at least once, thankfully she found it funny).
On a separate note this made me want to reread the Betsy-Tacy books because the section about children's clothes reminded me both about Samantha from American Girl but also the scene where Betsy if finally old enough to wear long skirts and pin up her hair and she makes a big deal out of being "Elizabeth" now because "Betsy" is a childish name. If I remember this book right, she goes back to being Betsy like a week later because she realizes being an adult kind of sucks even if she likes the glamour of long skirts and pinned up hair.
Fun Fact: I don’t know if someone already said this, but Madame X was repainted. She originally had one strap “off the shoulder” it was the focus point of the scandal.
Thank you for this, years ago i had to hold back from arguing with a ballet director giving advice on costumes for The Nutcracker (it was mostly younger dancers and a few of us didn't fit available dresses), saying how "they were all modest and wore high necklines" when it's a Christmas party, inside, and i had an entire book of images from Godey's Lady's Book. She was the founder of the studio and her word was law so i dropped it, but it still bugs me.
(Oh, and having to cover up could also be for staying warm during the end of the little ice age!)
And yeah it's frustrating that teen girls struggle with dress codes and bra straps are gonna strap but I'll argue that there are still some styles that aren't appropriate for younger teens like Juicy Couture pants with JUICY across the butts aren't really something tweens should be wearing. Or showing off bellybutton rings on display at school. Sure wear what you want and people need to stop sexualizing teen girls but there really are some styles from thr y2k era that can't be revived without recognizing they were considered mature then (it's been a recent annoyance of mine idk)
In the early 1900s, in an industrial town in the UK, a teenaged girl got on the tram. She'd read in a fashion magazine, that the latest thing in Parisienne fashion was to turn up the hem of your skirt so that the tops of your boots were visible standing up, she took a seat on the tram, but the conductor was NOT happy. He yelled at my Great-Grandma (for it was she!) "I'm not having any of your sort on my tram, you hussy!" and he made her get off at the next stop!
I don't think that he'd have seen any Hunting Habits deep in the industrial midlands of the UK. Great Grandma did however join the Suffragettes shortly after that.
It may also have been something to do with context and intent-- wearing Proper Dress For Hunting is one thing, but *turning up your skirt just to show your boots* is another.
12:15 my understanding is that a lot of the scandal was because originally, the right spaghetti strap was painted having fallen off of the shoulder, which was suggestive, which prompted the painter to repaint it back on the shoulder as the picture shown.
This. It was not so much the bare arms and décolletage, but the suggestion that the dress was slipping off that was the cause of the outrage.
As a Boston/Salem tour guide, minor correction -- Puritans weren't prudes. They were actually progressive for their time, even in by witch trial hysteria standards. The reason people associate Puritans with prudishness is because Puritan (antonym of Hedonist) is a slur people started to apply to this group of people and the name stuck.
If you're looking for video ideas, why Puritan/Pilgrim fashion was the way it was is definitely something you should check out. :D
16:31 agree. As a mum of a little girl (almost 5) I have to deal with my ex (her DAD!!!) insisting that some clothing is “too adult” because it “shows too much”. She’s a BABY. No amount of skin is sexual for her. She’s a BABY.
I do my best to counter his attitude and stop her from internalizing it.
Sounds like it's a good thing this guy is your ex!
@@SnappyDragon there are a LOT of reasons it’s good he’s my ex. But yeah it’s definitely one of them. He’s so conservative and very much still stuck in the “blame the woman for the man’s wandering gaze” 💩
But I’m determined to raise a fierce little feminist who takes no crap.
I always love it when you bust myths like this
around 16:12 is interesting bc i grew up (england) w a similar mindset and i think it still exists now? it was fine for kids to run around naked at the beach or pool or in the garden bc it didnt count since they were kids and i was usually naked all of the summer😭 ive only really seen the ‘shes too young for that’ mindset in american medias and stuff
Yeah, America likes to tell itself that everyone is *more* prudish than us because it's the only way we can feel good about being *more* prudish than everyone else . . .
Ahhhh yes; a little righteously indignant Vi is just what this Friday needed. Preach!
Also: yay for the return of sassy pajama Vi! 😘
I do enjoy going on a good tirade 💚
I appreciate you talking about the child standards. I’m continually frustrated with the school system supporting these old and sexist standards. I have 5 kids and my 2nd is my only daughter. She’s in middle school and we still have to be so careful when buying her clothes. I’m so sick of it. I grew up in an ultra conservative religious cult and feel like I’ll never stop having to fight this. My boys don’t have to care about dress code because no matter what they say about it being for everyone…it’s not. It’s just for girls. But trust me when I say that she knows how much me and her dad disapprove of the school on this.
Erika
It's good that she has supportive parents!
I went to public school in a northern, snowy state in the US, in the 1970s. The dress code for the bottom half was pretty straightforward -- shorts or short skirts were fine until 6th grade. Miniskirts weren't in fashion, so there wasn't much fuss about those, but shorts weren't allowed for anyone from grades 7 to 12 except for sports. And except in the final week of the school year, oddly enough, when they'd let you show up in your bathing suit if you wanted to.
Tops were more complicated, given the 1970s propensity to invent things that were sort of shirts and sort of not. Making a halter top out of a necklace and a scarf was not unheard of. But it was frowned on except for that final week of the year, and it was too cold to wear anything like that for most of the year anyway.
yeah, if you're gonna have a dress code making it "dress for the weather" seems like the best you could do.
Evening gowns with slit sides on the skirt, letting a leg peek out on occasion, and deep/open backs, is even today -- well, partially it's the glamour and prestige of an expensive evening gown, but those still feel much more provocative than, say, a bikini. And heck, there's a world of difference between going to the beach in a bikini and being seen in underwear -- even when they're the exact same cut.
Uh, I think I lost my point somewhere. Something about context matters?
Context absolutely matters! I think with the evening gowns, it's all about intention. Swimsuits often don't cover legs for the sake of convenience, but a slit in an evening gown is there *specifically* to show off leg.
Your opening conversation brought back to me a vivid memory of an 8 year old me staying with my grandma for the summer and a visit from her mother 😂. I was headed outside to play in a pair of knee length shorts and great grandma nearly flipped out because my grandma was letting me go outside in underwear 🤣. Grandma hustled me out the door and I don’t know how the conversation progressed from there but very soon after (maybe even the next day), she gave me a patchwork double knit maxi skirt😂. I loved that thing and wore it constantly for the rest of the summer. And … there were no more protests from great grandma over me going outside in my underwear
At least the alternate clothing was something you liked! Sounds like a good skirt.
Lol oh it was a hideous thing but I was 8 and it was my first ever long skirt🤣
However one thing people have always loved is a reason to disapprove of each other.❤
I wonder if the reason children's clothing was cut with short sleeves and skirts to save fabric on clothing that would be grown out of in a matter of months?
That said, it's disturbing when the past where child labor laws were still a dream had a better view of children's bodies than today!!!
and also because kids were far more likely to be running about or sitting on the floor than adults, i'm sure.
@@blumoon187 That too!!
I can imagine shorter skirts and sleeves stayed cleaner.
Children's skirts often had tucks sewn around the hems that could be let down as the child grew.
Ooo, your dress code rant makes me want to also rant. My senior year I got yelled at by…you know? I honestly don’t know what her job title was- she was just an older woman who patrolled the hallways. Anyway, I was wearing a sundress- it fell below my knees, the straps were two inches wide, the front wasn’t low cut at all. The back was slightly low, but above my bra. No bra was visible. She told me I had to cover up. I asked what, specifically, was in violation of the dress code. She sputtered, then said it was “too much sundress! If I see you again and you’re not covered, it’s insubordination!” I didn’t have anything to put on over it, so I just dodged her after my next class.
However, on a more positive note, I had a kid sitting behind me in history class Sophomore year snap my bra strap. Before I could even say a word to him, my (male) history teacher leapt up, told the kid to get into the hallway NOW, then absolutely reamed him out about how that is NEVER acceptable.
"too much sundress"??? what?!
@@SnappyDragon Yeah, I don’t even know. I was so confused. 20 years later and I’m still salty about it. 😆
I thought the furniture leg covers were to help will sliding and to prevent dings. Also good for scrap busting and that little extra piece of trim floating around 😄. Had to explain to my dad how tin type photos represented colors and that no, great-great-great-grandpa did not have dark hair, it's Dutch Blond.
💜
I was trying to look up if any of them actually *existed*, and I couldn't find any records or extants! So, possibly if they were used, but it seems like if so they weren't common.
Yeah, I haven't seen any thing other than satire/fictional stories. Typically only full tablecloths or doilies for the tops are described or pictured. @@SnappyDragon
On a related modsety note, as near as I can tell, it was not until the 20th century that people really started to get fussed about visible undergarments. I know I've seen Victorian era portraits of women of all ages and marital status doing heavy labor clearly stripped down to a visible corest and chemese with skirt (sometimes tucked up for freedom of movement depending on the activity). Go back farther in history and you see undergarments (usually shirts or shifts) specifically decorated because they were intended to show.
Honestly that piano leg thing sonds more like a jab at restrictive girls' school culture than anything lol
(Now, whether said jab was based on reality or on sexism....)
I don't have a favourite myth but this might make you smile: here when some schools tried to ban girls from wearing short skirts... boys started showing up in them. Solidarity.
(Unfortunately now they're trying to come after skirts that are too LONG for reasons that could never ever have to do with racism (cough))
It's entirely possible it was! 19th century writers were very much not above making up or exaggerating "real" experiences when they wanted to make a point.
I love hearing stories of solidarity like that! Skirts of all lengths for all :D
Wait why are they banning long skirts??!
I don't know the particulars of OP's situation, but my guess would be Islamaphobia? Preventing people who want to dress modestly and/or wear non-Western cultural styles from doing so.
Basically in Victorian times a suntan was related to females who worked outdoors helping with farm work, were as 'Ladies' sat in doors or it the shade of trees and we're entertained by reading, sewing,painting and other hobbies
I can't tell you how much I appreciate it finally being said. The modern take on dress codes are seriously messed up sometimes. I'm also very relieved to hear that the table leg thing was actually just a myth. XD
See Marie Antionette's Chemise A La Reine, A gown so shocking, it caused a scandal!
A royal posing in such _extremely_ informal dress, as if she was inviting the viewer into her personal sitting room!
I think I have read too that Victorian parents often had more than a bit of anxiety over their teen daughters’ skirt length and exactly what was appropriate when. Have her in shorter skirts too lomg and it became inappropriate as she clearly was not a little girl anymore, lengthen her skirts too early and it was ‘too grown up’.
I wonder! I've seen a few sources indicating what skirt length was considered appropriate for what age, but it may have been one of those things that was simply Understood by living in that society.
I bet lots of teen girls argued with their mothers about wanting to put their hair up in fancier styles, though!
@@SnappyDragon from what I read, as with mourning the conventions could vary by location, etc so it wasnt always so cut and dried. Not to mention, there have always been early and late bloomers.
Great analysis, it's always good to have ✨context✨ and ✨nuance✨
The two things most essential to correctly understanding history, and which seem to get most rapidly lost along the way!!
the part about girls skirts getting longer reminded me of a line in Anne of green Gables? either that or one of the spin offs. it was referring to one of the girls who was living away from the town to go to school as "wearing her shirts as long as her mother would let her, and even pining up her hair when she was not home" or something similar.
I'd also assume low cut/short/ short sleeved children's clothes' would use less fabric for somethin they were going to grow out of and provide them with more freedom of movement, cause you know children.
Doesn't surprise me! The social forces that make teenagers want to seem "grown up" aren't new.
Incredible content as always!! Thanks for your thorough analysis :)
Wonderful video! I'd like to hear more topics from you that you're so passionate about :) The comparison from historic to 21st century was excellent!
Thank you for linking June's Journey! I keep hearing about it on my podcast feeds, but I can never figure out how to find it, and not just some discussion board about it.
You are so eloquent! This was outstanding! Thank you!
I just love your logic and straightforwardness. I don’t normally like sarcasm, but you do it in such a way that it doesn’t hurt individuals who didn’t ask for it. And we still don’t see individual names… Just types of people. I appreciate you.
I always learn something when I come here. The longer I watch history/costuming videos of all sorts of makers, the more I realize how hard it is as a job. Thank you for doing the work.
My school didn't allow shorts, sleeveless or "spaghetti strap" tops, crop tops, ripped jeans, high heeled shoes, and "non-natural" hair colors. But only if you were (or perceived as) a girl. Boys could wear shorts and not get im trouble. They could wear muscle tees. They could wear sleeveless tops cut so low, their damn n*pples were showing. But girls? If your pants ended more than an inch over your knees, you were likely in trouble. My daughter is 7 and they still ask girls to wear knee length pants. Even in 90+ degrees. Ugh
This enrages me! These rules didn’t exist (at least in my region) fifty years ago.
Such an infuriating double standard!
Oh my gosh, Vi, this was wonderful!! I genuinely learned so much!! Thank you so much for all that you do, lovely dragon! 💚
🐉💚
For context My father was born about WW2 and lived in nyc. I always found it weird he had swimming as a gym class (In Maryland in the 70-80’s there were no pools in school for me) but all the boys swam naked. That always made me flabbergasted. I figured it was more a “no wet trunks in a locker for weeks” thing than a bodies are just bodies thing. But who knows , as boys always were allowed to swim nude for most of American history (swimming in swimming holes, lakes, ponds etc).
"No wet trunks moldy-ing up the lockers" was one reason. Another was that wool swimsuits would clog up a pool filter in no time.
I've heard that attitude was pretty common much further back in history-- nudity in mens-only spaces was considered totally unremarkable.
Thanks for this super neat video!
Time to grab the popcorn, another V rant dropped!!
That said, I love your rants and you always make such good points. 💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜
I feel bad for the masculine presenting people in workplaces with business or even business casual dress codes who are never allowed to wear shorts regardless of the weather because it would be seen as unprofessional even if they are a dressier style of shorts while their feminine presenting colleagues can wear both pants and a variety of lengths and styles of skirts and dresses without any objections to their fashion choices.
Oof, yeah! And then the office AC gets set at a temperature comfortable for people with testosterone, in suits, and everyone else freezes. Just let them wear shorts and short sleeves and we'll all be more comfortable-- and better for the environment, to boot.
@@SnappyDragon I completely agree. I see no reason why a nice pair of khaki shorts is considered less professional than a knee length skirt. And yes, the office buildings are often freezing especially in the summer.
I just absolutly love you and your videos. You are so very correct.😊
I'm super lucky my second high school didn't have much of a dress code. The rule was if it was below freezing out you had to wear not sandles and not shorts, because you had to walk outside to get from the dorms to the school building
In the Neolithic when I was growing up, it was the girls who snapped each other's straps, aiming for a snap so hard it stung. I'm sure it happened, but I don't recall any of the boys in my classes snapping bras. This isn't to say, of course, that they weren't little *******s in other ways!
Context is always critical. My sister is a nurse. The student nurses at her hospital are required to wear white scrubs to distinguish them from non-students. She has been shocked at the number of conversations she's had to have about not wearing black lace thongs or undies with bright red hearts under their work pants.
Oof, yeah. I always wear shorts under my dresses when I go dancing, and a particular light pink linen dress always needs beige shorts under it rather than my usual black ones.
The Year of Our Calendar! I love it. I will be saying this from now on.
I think the table leg thing is a much more practical thing that spontaneously developed and was probably intermittently utilized for various reasons with little to do with modesty.
It has long been a thing to pad a furniture leg or corner as a disability accommodation. If you frequently bump into it or are prone to easily bruising (like with clotting or connective tissue conditions). I heard the quotation of the piano teacher and it reminded me that a person's delicate nature' could refer to their health and infirmity. Remember this was an era that had the upper classes glamorizing tuberculosis symptoms in women because it increased their 'delicate natures.'
My great grandmother had little padded covers for several furniture pieces she frequently interacted with for this reason, and many years later, I find myself working on padding out the legs of my desk and a few other things for my own safety because I inherited the same genetic condition she had which makes us prone to a certain degree of clumsiness and excessive bruising. The materials are different and I care less about the aesthetic looks (I literally just cut pool noodles to fit and slide them on) but it is the same effect.
Conversely, as fashions changed and with certain types of dress ornamentation, a little sleeve on an ornate table leg for a gathering could prevent damage to the gowns by forming a barrier that prevents snags.
This is in addition to the concept of putting socks on furniture pieces that were frequently moved around as an early variation on the skids or glides we use on modern furniture.
Thanks for the informative rant!
15:38 ohmygod this is so TRUE. my high school did have the classical 'dress code happy teacher' and he was always ready to code my asian classmates for wearing crop tops *eugh* but honestly im lucky because ive very rarely been in an environment where these kinds of discussions even pop up in the first place since. if anything its only been the classical 'who's she trying to impress now that she's oLD' or 'she looks so plastic and fake now shes done surgery' brand of (internalised) mysoginy targeted at older women (looking at /You/ mother dearest) so it hasn't been on the forefront of my mind ergo never made the connection.
the sexualisation of young chidren and teens is a really complex topic i can't really comment on but thank you for bringing up the issue. i really enjoyed seeing your mythbusting in action! your recent interview was also an absolute joy to watch! sorry for not being super present on the comment section but hey, better late than never! XD
The section about kids made me question how American that view is. I've lived in three European countries. If a kid is visibly prepubescent, most people are at most gonna roll their eyes and go "children, amiright?" if Junior(ina) comes zipping through the living room naked for reasons only apparent to them, or decide to jump through a sprinkler au naturel. Heck, I've seen kids as old as three in public in only a diaper, if the weather allowed. It's thirty degrees out, you're both visibly exhausted, if this is how they are able to take the bus without either of you having a meltdown today, we are all Team No Screaming On The Commute Home.
The only real comments about children's fashion from onlookers tend to either be weather-related (e.g. "Why is that ten-year-old in just a T-shirt when it's snowing out?"), or come from older people who genuinely believe that you not only can dress a child in something uncomfortable they do not want to wear, and expect the entire outfit to look as pristine come bedtime as it did at breakfast, but should actually do that. The length of clothes is not really commented on, except in the sense of... Kids getting sunburned, or falling over and hurting themselves.
I had high school dress codes in all three countires. In two schools, they were mostly a thing enforced if someone was a genuine distraction or provocation--as in, several students had to be inconvenienced--before any member of staff would do anything. Kids were trusted to dress appropriately, and did so without too much jostling.
In the other, a catholic school, we had very girl coded things in the dress code ("all changes in hair color must be subtle or gradual", "no unnatural colors of nail varnish or lipstick", "clothing must come to the knee, and cover shoulders to the joint, the entire chest, bellybutton, and all undergarments") but they caught out the boys more so than the girls, mostly because the girls were willing to negotiate ("I'll dye my hair in three to four stages", "it was for a concert that ran rather late, I'll get the green off my nails tonight, ma'am", "Oh, I forgot, let me throw on my hoodie") whereas the boys took it as a personal attack that they could not dye their hair fire engine red, show up with black nail polish and lipstick, or wear only very short soccer shorts and absolutely nothing else. It's still not fair or always sensible, but all schools I went to put the most value on that a student understood why the rule was there (cohesion, mostly), and willing to stick to the spirit of it.
It does seem to be a more American attitude-- yet another case of the US telling themsevles something is universal when it's really not.
I’ve always read lots of Victorian-era novels by people like Louisa May Alcott and Elizabeth Gaskell, so I got lots of reliable information about clothing and customs of that era, as these authors reflected their reality.
I seem to recall a book written by a religious authority back in the mid 20th century pointing out, quite sensibly, that it's kind of racist to assume the Victorians were more chaste than e.g. Pacific Islanders of that period just because the former happened to be wearing more clothes than the latter.
Great video. I never thought Victorians were that fragile in their sensibilities. The Queen herself had passages in her diary praising her husband’s body, and had portraits of short sleeved dresses in her youth.
There is still an extremely prudish undercurrent in the US that does so much harm, that I had the displeasure of being raised in. Projection of of lust into children rather than accepting responsibility for one’s feelings, victims being blamed for rape, and dehumanizing Muslim women for choosing to wear a “subjugated” outfit. Purity and “modesty” culture creates more perversion and unhealthy self image than porn, Hollywood, or non-Christians do, but a lot of Americans aren’t ready to have this conversation yet.
My mom still tells stories from her childhood, when she was allowed to just run around naked. It was just what kids did where she lived at the time. Apparently she was very upset the day she got old enough for people to start telling her she had to put clothes on 😂
Brilliant, as always!
As someone from Central Europe I grew up around attitudes towards modesty of children’s clothing way more similar to the ones of Victorians
Oh, school dress codes. Now there are some memories I would prefer remain buried!
When I was in high school (seven years ago), I went to a uniformed school from ages 13 to 18. It wasn't a private school - uniforms are the norm in my country - but our school was notorious for pretending it was more elite and poncey than it really was. We had uniform inspections twice a week, Tuesdays and Fridays at first bell, 8:30am on the dot. They would line us up in class rows, alphabetized by last name, and check to make sure we were following dress code.
Boys, they checked that their hair was not touching their collars or eyebrows (no long hair allowed); that their shirts were tucked in properly; that their belts and shoes were the right colour (black leather, to be clean and polished); and if they were wearing shorts, that their socks were held just below the knee with regulation garters (white elastic).
Girls, they checked that our hair ties were either school colours or the colour of our natural hair and was kept off our faces (if you had bangs, they must be straight across, not angled, and had to be minimum 2cm long but no longer the top of the eyebrow. If you did have angled bangs or were trying to grow your bangs out, they had to be pinned back off the face with bobby pins of your natural hair colour in such a way that it wasn't easily visible you had bangs); that we wore no makeup, not even tinted moisturizer (they carried a packet of baby wipes to make any girl they suspected wipe their face clean); that we had no nail polish on, not even clear/colourless (they had nail polish remover in the head office, so you would be hauled out of line and made to clean your nails with the head of house watching); that if we wore earrings, we had only 1 pair round studs in silver or gold, no more than 0.5cm diameter, only in the centre lower lobe (girls' earrings were the only jewellery allowed at all, though boys and girls could wear a plain watch on the left wrist); that our top buttons were done up; that we weren't wearing a bra in a colour that showed through our thin white-striped blouses; that we weren't wearing a "non-regulation" undershirt (white or nude only, and not visible at our necklines or sleeves); that our shirts were properly tucked in; if we were wearing the short skirts, that our skirts came down to no more than 2 inches above our knees nor 2 inches below (if they suspected it was too short or too long, they made us kneel on the concrete outside while they measured with a little ruler); if we were wearing the long skirts, that it hit between our ankle bone and the top of our shoe and that we had no "non-regulation" warm layers on underneath (they would make us hike our skirts up to our thighs to check for thermal leggings and the like); that we were wearing the correct colour/length/style/material socks/tights (if socks with the short skirt, white cotton, exactly one fold, elastic so they stayed high enough to cover the ankle bone but no higher; if socks with the long skirt, navy blue, no fold, elasticated enough to stay up within 2cm below the crease of the knee, no sock garters, not thin enough to see skin colour beneath when stretched; tights, navy blue, 40+ denier nylon in summer, wool in winter, no runs or ladders or holes, not even small holes where the skirts would cover; yes, they checked); and that our polished, black-leather lace-up shoes had heels no less than 1 cm nor more than 2 cm high (that little ruler again).
If you were found to be in contempt of any of the above rules (or any of the other ones I can't remember), it was an instant afterschool detention minimum. If it was something you could fix at school (wiping off makeup or nail polish, removing non-regulation earrings, etc) but you flat refused, you were sent home and suspended until you complied. If you broke a regulation that you couldn't fix at school (visible bra colour, skirt hemmed too short, etc), you were either given principal's detention or sent home and suspended until you complied. If you came back to school without having fixed the offending garment but it wasn't too "serious" an offence, it was a detention both at lunch and afterschool for every single day for up to a week. If the regulation broken was "serious" enough (usually meaning something obvious at a glance, like dyed hair) or you hadn't fixed it after a week of warning, you would be given principal's detention (spend the entire day, including morning tea and lunch, alone with the principal - or if he was busy, with one of the vice principals - doing your class work in his office) to continue indefinitely until you complied.
If you couldn't stay afterschool for detention because you relied on the bus or had afterschool commitments (including school co-curriculars)? Tough. You should have thought of that before breaking the rules. Hope you like your 10km walk home hauling a bag that's bigger than you are. If you couldn't sew to hem your skirt at a different length? Tough. You're a girl; you should know how (though they didn't offer any home ec classes, only metal and woodwork). If you bought the wrong shoes by mistake or tore a hole in your expensive wool tights and couldn't afford new ones? Tough. You should have known better / been more careful. If you had a skin condition or sensory processing condition and couldn't tolerate the wool skirts or nylon tights? Tough. No exceptions. Hope you get used to freezing and itching for five years. If you had an unfortunate home dye job and your hair was supposed to be blonde and came out yellow? Tough. You shouldn't have been dying your hair anyway; it's not allowed. Shave it off or get it professionally fixed or consider yourself suspended until you do. Wear a school jacket or scarf or hat inside? It's not that cold, the teacher giving you detention is only in a puffer jacket, a beanie, and two layers of gloves, and they can only barely see their breath in the unheated prefab classroom, you're fine, you're just being a baby / whiny / rude / rebellious / copping an attitude. (I got in trouble for not doing my work a couple times, but I physically couldn't hold a pen anymore; I have circulation issues, and my fingers were swollen purple-white and numb in the cold. I only learned years later that it was actually illegal to keep us in classrooms at that extreme a temperature.) Get caught breaking a rule outside school grounds on your way to or from school by a teacher driving past on their way home? They would pull over and give you a detention right there on the sidewalk. You're "bringing down the school's reputation with your laziness / slovenliness / pointless rebellion".
There was also a racial element to dress code rules. If you insisted on dying your hair, you could only dye it colours that it could potentially grow naturally. This meant, in essence, that only the white students could dye their hair, but Asian, Indian, Black, Indigenous, or other students with typically black hair couldn't, because colours like blonde or red wouldn't be "natural" on them.
Apparently, things have changed a lot now. It was so normalized when I was there that no one even really thought to mention it, but the wonderful Gen Zs who followed us recognized that it was not okay and raised hell. Enough parental complaints later got the dress code inspections loosened somewhat. There are still parents who complain that uniform requirements are too slack and students are in for a "rude wakeup call" when we need to wear uniforms for work in the "real world" and society is degrading due to the belligerence of youth, but hey, at least girls aren't made to pull their skirts up in front of 500+ other students and male teachers don't check our bra colours anymore.
Loved the "Gimmee" on the sunblock. So accurate
That was a great way to introduce a sponsor
"I have some feelings, and they require a great deal of very specific and derisive words to express."
Love it
I do wonder if the "piano pants" story was at all related to the woman's occupation. I've heard a lot of stuff about teachers in that period having ridiculous requirements placed upon them, and she might have thought that being over-the-top prudish would help her stay employed.
Unrelated to the video, I want to wish V the best for this upcoming holiday season.
Thank you! 💚
Bravo! Amazing information, amazing content. My wife and daughter did not have to think too much about what they wore. My wife went through a few phases based on our Messianic Jewish identity and desire to honor Jews with stricter understanding -- again the modesty was mostly for ladies, but I also tend to wear pants, at least partial sleeves.
the high school i went to had one dress code, definitely the most vague one too; "No inappropriate dress." So basically, it was up for interpretation of the teachers. Did not work at all.
I am mildly disappointed that the table leg explanation didn't end up being that someone back then was just so horny for tables it got around, but I can keep that in my head for my own amusement.
I'm sure someone was, it just didn't end up being the source of the myth 🤣
We use little shoes on our table legs and chair legs so they don't scratch the hardwood floor. You can easily google a crochet pattern for them (crochet table leg covers) 😊
So very true 8:01. People are very consistent about being strange.
My elementary school dress code: shorts fall past your finger tips!
Tiny me: crying in dressing rooms and constantly dragging my shorts as low as theyd go in class cuz i have long limbs and shorts in the early 2000s didnt come in just-above-the-knee
YUUUUP.
Thanks so much for this balanced and nuanced myth busting. And for considering people outside the European diaspora, which is uncommon in historical fashion.
Regarding piano legs with little trousers, there's a letter reproduced in "Inside the Victorian Home" (2004) where an American woman visiting London commented that there was drapery all over a drawing room, and the only item undecorated item was the fire poker which looked, "very nude."
Ahahahah that's hilarious! My guess is that's commentary on the overdecorated nature of the room?
@@SnappyDragon yep! Here's the quote in full.
"One of the drawing-rooms was 'draped' in a way that was quite painfully aesthetic, considering the paucity of the draperies. The flower-pots were draped, and the lamps; there were draperies round the piano-legs, and round the clock; and where there wer not draperies there were bows, all of the same scanty description. The only thing that had not made an effort to clothe itself in the room was the poker, and by contrast it looked very nude."
Duncan, Sarah Jeanette. An American Girl in London. London: Chatto & Windus, 1891. p. 53
I'm too busy basking in how wonderful and 100% on point this is to write a coherent comment.
*bask*
🥰