Comments on: Lipstick Feminism and Dressing The Part

By: Myriam

Myriam — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:53:20 +0000

While I agree that it’s sad that women feel the need to beautify themselves in order to be accepted as valued members of society, I am less comfortable with the sweat-shop line of the argument. After all, women who work in sweatshops have little alternative, unless you count things such as prostitution. I’d hate to see well-meaning sites like this push women out of the fryingpan and into the fire by advocating an embargo on sweatshop merchandise.
Furthermore, those who work for international corporations in sweatshops often do so as those same sweatshops offer better wages and conditions than local manufacturing and other fields of work avaliable to them. Sweatshops are the symptom, not the cause, of terrible poverty.

By: Suzanne

Suzanne — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:00:53 +0000

I agree that etsy is a good option…I love clothes, but don’t follow the merry-go -round that is fashion. I like to take inspiration from different eras; I suppose I often dress a little theatrically! (I’m an artist/performer)
I also shop in second hand shops (you call them thrift in U.S? I’m Irish).
I am trying not to support stores that use sweatshops, though it is hard when you’re poor.
Funnily enough, I rebelled against learning how to use a sewing machine in school, as at the time it was only the girls learnt, and though misguided in ways, I felt this was unjust.
And yet now I’m learning to use one again! For: use in my artworks, adjusting things, and for changing items in a creative way…though I’m still at the stage of sometimes impatience *sigh*

By: Friday feminist linkage at Hoyden About Town

Friday feminist linkage at Hoyden About Town — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:49:41 +0000

[...] Lipstick Feminism and Dressing The Part (from Feministe by Renee) – how the arguments between utility feminists and lipstick feminists about feminine clothing and feminism tend to overlook the exploitation of poor women in sweatshops that lies under every clothing choice any of us make. [...]

By: Linkage extravaganza; I’m playing catch up! « Small-Town Elitist

Linkage extravaganza; I’m playing catch up! « Small-Town Elitist — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:35:18 +0000

[...] a thoughtful post at Feministe urging lipstick feminists to be conscious of where we get our clothing, accessories, [...]

By: tonisjadine

tonisjadine — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:41:45 +0000

Etsy.com is pretty awesome – particularly for the plus-sized lady. If you’re willing to have a few, kinda pricy clothes that are great rather than a bunch of cheap stuff that’s okay, I’d suggest them. I just got a new pair of perfectly fitting jeans based on a great (discontinued) pair that were probably made in a sweatshop for less than a new, less awesome pair would have cost me (kind of convoluted, but I hope you see what I’m saying). Between that and a decent tailor, I think I’m set (and not supporting evil corporations).

By: antichristine

antichristine — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:46:27 +0000

Class is a part of attractiveness, and therefore a part of “feminine wiles”.

The more money you make (or have access to), the more attractive you are as a mate, and it IS a competition, so there is a demand for articles that mark your class status. When this demand is reflected in attire, we get the entire fashion industry. :p

The feminine-wiles-as-weapon argument is just as valid as the non-participatory one. Each has its merits and drawbacks. But let’s not forget that we are all living under the umbrella of our respective empires, some of which affords us the ability to legislate feminist/egalitarian values into laws. In other words, we all eat what comes out of the slaughterhouse, but some eat less than others.

The power that comes with the umbrella means that we don’t have to think about where that power comes from, or how it is made. We tend to take it for granted. Problem is, few of us are in positions to change the habits of millions of people without lots of money. Where will that money come from? The actual money will be reciepts for gold, silver, or oil that the US has in reserve. Which means that by using currency, we are using the ill-gotten gains of policies we criticize.

It is a complex problem, but here is how we can address the oppression of women in the context you mentioned:

The survivalist:
only homespun.
live on boats in international waters and fish for sustainance
revel in your righteousness and sacrifice

The Infiltrator:
use feminine wiles and massive intellect to muscle into high powered positions
try hard not to forget where you come from
pass legislation requiring all companies that sell goods in us to pay the US minimum wage to all workers globally
revel in your genius and vision

By: octogalore

octogalore — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:22:02 +0000

Rosa — re your first point. I have a friend who owns a company specializing in this kind of clothing and aimed at a female market. Problem is, her prices (which she says are competitive, I admit I have not done much market research) are prohibitive, and therefore the demographic of her buyers is a very privileged one which excludes many women.

Regarding second hand stores like Goodwill, that’s a good idea, but for professional women whose bread and butter depends on a certain look, it’s not always doable.

While your point is well taken about focusing on female-centric products, I think the goal of feminism is treat men and women equally, which would include calling out consuming behaviors of men and women equally. As I said in the first para, this doesn’t invalidate what I believe (to repeat myself) to be a novel and interesting way to recenter the discussion.

By: Rosa

Rosa — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:35:15 +0000

octogalore, preferentially buying union-made, or fair trade, clothing is amplifying the agency of the women working in those fields. It’s a pretty basic form of solidarity action, requested by various women-led groups and unions.

And buying clothing that was made by labor in especially oppressive conditions (such as unpaid overtime, military/paramilitary union busting, forced birth control or abortion, child labor) amplifies the economic power of the oppressors.

We’re looking at women’s clothing because we’re women, and Renee was responding to ongoing discussions about women’s adornment in various feminst blogs.

By: iwiwus

iwiwus — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:12:09 +0000

I just thought it should be pointed out that second-hand stores like Goodwill are not completely free of problems. Such places receive more clothes than they can sell, so they give it to wholesalers to sell in other countries. The clothing industries in these places are often devastated by such sales. Here's an article in the Washington Post about it.

By: octogalore

octogalore — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:52:00 +0000

Some interesting and unique points here that help recenter the debate.

This remind me a bit of the sex work example. Just like with clothing, investing in porn, especially of certain varieties, helps keep thriving a market in which some of the workers are oppressed.

I have seen those arguments on rad fem websites, but not on liberal or non-radfem third wave feminist websites. The prevailing wisdom on the latter (which I agree with) seems to be that we cannot assume women do not have agency, and the root of the problem is global poverty and lack of adequate options. I think that wisdom applies here as well.

It troubles me a bit that we are more comfortable asking consumers to “examine” when they are predominantly women.