FFB: Fashion, Social Class, and the Ethics of Thrifting

For this month's Feminist Fashion Bloggers post, the theme is the intersection of fashion, feminism, and social class. If you're interested, check out the roundup of other posts on this topic. Today, I wanted to bring up a couple of related ethical issues about thrift shopping. You all know my love of thrift stores...the vast majority of my wardrobe is now thrifted (mostly at the dollar-a-pound store). Thrift stores allow me to experiment with my clothing and style choices, let me have a wardrobe I would not have bought new on a grad student budget, make me feel good about being frugal, and satisfy my treasure-hunter mentality. In general, it seems that thrift shopping (at thrift stores, charity shops, garage sales, etc.) is no longer stigmatized...thrift stores are not just frequented by people who can't afford higher-priced clothing and goods, but also by the hipster college students, the environmentalists, the Ebay resellers, and the bargain hunters. However, as the upper/middle classes descend on thrift stores in search of that $3 designer dress, are they (am I) taking away things from those who truly can't afford to shop elsewhere?

Image credit get directly down

This questioning was sparked by a couple of comments I'd read while idly scanning the Yelp reviews for my local Goodwill store. Along a number of comments praising things people had found at the store, or complaining about the raised prices ("$4.99 for a shirt?"), there were a couple of comments that stopped me in my tracks. One reviewer said, "This concludes my last attempt at a Goodwill Store. I love thrift shopping, but this just isn't for me. I can't shop alongside people who really are scraping by and need Goodwill to help them out. I feel so guilty." Another agreed: "[I've] found nice Armani X, Sigrid Olsen, Ann Taylor, Forth & Towne...Prepare to feel like a tool when you take these gems away from folks that deserve a break." In my place of privilege as a grad student (but one given a research assistant stipend) raised in an upper-middle-class household, my fashion consumption at thrift stores extends my fashion options, but isn't a complete necessity. Am I depriving someone who really couldn't afford a pretty dress for work otherwise? I generally don't think I'm doing something wrong in buying something for very cheap, or at least hope my money helps support those less fortunate than I am...but there are still some interesting class-related aspects to thrift-store shopping.

Certainly, more people are needing or choosing to shop at thrift stores these days. A New York Times article from 2008 discussed some of the ways the social classes of thrift store shoppers has been changing due to the recession:

"The Salvation Army said its average thrift-store shopper had traditionally been upper or middle class. Many came to hunt for designer clothing at rock-bottom prices...But thrift store operators say the demographics are changing. People who once shopped daily or multiple times a week for vintage treasures are making fewer trips. For some, thrift-store shopping is no longer a hobby but a necessity."

Additionally, there appears to be a difference in what people in different economic classes buy at thrift stores. A study from BYU looked at thrifting in relationship to class and economic situations...they found that people in the lower and middle classes tended to thrift for things like clothing and electronics, while the upper classes were more likely to thrift for antiques and trinkets. One of the authors of that study (quoted here) said that "...middle class shoppers have begun to see thrift stores as a place to pick up items they need at a reduced price…[during] hard economic times and still maintain their current social standing."

Photo of the dollar-a-pound store I shop at from vanberto

It's also interesting to look at thrift store shopping, especially for clothing, in relationship to feminism. There are a number of good aspects: often more sustainable/environmentally friendly to buy secondhand goods, not directly supporting sweatshop practices, frequently supporting charities, etc. However, thrift stores and their low prices also give me the opportunity to buy into fashion trends, to have an overflowing closet, to be able to wear a variety of "new-to-me" clothing on a fairly regular basis. In this way, am I participating in the gendered expectations that women "need to be" constantly consuming fashion? Even if most items in my closet cost me less than a dollar or two - even if I may not be consuming clothing in the marketed stores, or for the prices that I'm being told I need to spend, I'm still participating in the cycle of "more is better" when it comes to clothing. This is also something where I'm class-privileged -- at thrift stores, I'm able to afford to buy more than just the few pieces of clothing I really need. Am I thus raising the standards and helping make it seem "necessary" for women of all social classes to own a lot of clothing if they want to engage in fashion/style practices?

On another note, something I came across while reading articles for this post -- it appears the stigma of thrift store shopping = poor has still stuck around for longer than I'd thought. Did you know that a government investigation in 2009 found that credit card companies were tracking whether you used your credit card at a thrift store or other bargain store? Or that some companies were using that information to raise your interest rates or even lower your credit score if they saw you shopping at thrift stores? How's that for stereotyping rather than rewarding people for being frugal? (More from an NBC report) (EDIT: there was a law put in place in 2009 that makes these kinds of actions by credit card companies illegal, so hopefully that's limited some of this...)

Anyway. A lot of thoughts... these aspects won't keep me out of my thrift stores, but I've been starting to evaluate my thrifted purchases much more strictly to make sure I really need/want particular pieces, and not let the low prices convince me into buying things that won't have a valued place in my closet or home. Additionally, as I've been doing more home-cleaning, I've been attempting to donate things I'm not using enough in the hope that they'll find a home with someone who will really use them (or at least make some money for charities). What do you all think? Do you have other insights/ideas about class, feminism, and thrift-store fashion?

FFB: Culture Porn's Alexa on Men and Feminism

(Today's post is a guest post from Alexa at Culture Porn. As members of the Feminist Fashion Bloggers, Alexa and I are swapping posts today, both looking at the role of men in feminism. You can find my post on Alexa's blog.)

Hello, my name is Alexa and I write a blog called Culture Porn, which can be found here.

I think it's safe to say that there is one fundamental misconception about feminism. The irritating thing is, this misconception is embedded within the name: feminism. As if the term, and everything that goes with it, can only be applied to the female gender. Now, I am of the belief that the feminist movement will always remain a movement - a group with ideas and opinions contrary to the popular grain - without a male edge. This earth has a lot of males in it, and for people to think that feminism is an exclusively female preoccupation is hindering its ideas and indeed, support.

A lot of feminists neglect the fact that males are perfectly capable of being feminists too. After all, the idea of gender equality cannot be applied to only one gender. And indeed, of the males I asked, every single one of them shunned the idea of feminism. It was only after I rephrased the question; "do you believe in gender equality?" (as opposed to "are you a feminist?") did I get a response. The power of a name eh?

So I suppose, the issue facing feminism right now is how to remove this misconception. Is it just all about a name, or are there other factors at play as to why males tend to refute the fem in feminism? I'm sure there are some men out there who actively reject gender equality due to a number of draconian concepts; a cling to tradition, dominance, social spheres, religion, cultural expectations, taboos. But i'm equally sure that they are a minority. I keep my confidence in the modern, educated male who appreciates the immense value and humanity behind gender equality, even if the name feminism is decidedly 'girly'. Although a revamp of the English dictionary would go a way in helping this, I think trust must be placed in curiosity; that the modern, educated man I previously spoke of will do his research before casting off the title of a feminist.

On a side note, I just want to say that I do not consider women who dislike men as feminists. Equality swings both ways, after all.

(If you like this, go check out Alexa's great blog full of art, feminism and fashion. And check out the other FFB posts in today's roundup!)

FFB: Finance and the Fashion Blogger

Image from peoples50million

The Feminist Fashion Bloggers have now shifted to monthly posts... this month's topic is "Finance, Feminism and the Fashion Blogger," in honor of yesterday, April 12, being Equal Pay Day. This day symbolizes how far women would have to work into 2011 to earn the amount of money that men made in 2010. Clearly, money - earning money and spending money - can be a feminist topic. But how does it relate to fashion? I wanted to look at this topic by focusing on the often-gendered value judgements that are made about shopping and consumption: specifically, the fact that buying/consuming items coded as female is often seen as more negative/unnecessary than buying items coded as male or unisex. I've been thinking a lot recently about why there is still something of a stigma associated with owning a lot of clothes or shoes or beauty products, much more so than for owning, say, many video games or tech gadgets or DVDs.

For an example, let's take shoes. Stereotypically (and I know this is not true of all women!), women love buying shoes, own many pairs of shoes, see tiny differences between pairs of shoes, and spend money "frivolously" on additional unnecessary shoes. Women "waste" money on expensive, fancy, uncomfortable shoes.

Beautiful Shoes by elnajay

So why is there a perceived difference (practically a moral difference!) between a woman who buys a lot of shoes and a man who buys a lot of tech products? Or a woman who buys a lot of tech products? An argument can be made that the difference between shoes/fashion items/beauty products versus other items of consumption is in their inherent utility or lack thereof (in fact, I've had this discussion with my boyfriend). Getting a new computer, or iPhone, or the other latest tech device provides you with additional utility. It's faster, lighter, more powerful than your old devices. It provides you with functionality that you did not have before. If I already have a pair of shoes that are in good shape and comfortable, I'm probably not buying a new pair of shoes because those shoes are in better condition, allow me to walk faster, or are more comfortable than the old shoes. Perhaps they can be worn with different outfits, or are appropriate for different occasions. But more likely, my new pair of shoes is primarily useful for aesthetic reasons... they may not fill a particular need besides my desire to wear beautiful and satisfying shoes.

But why do we argue that purchasing for aesthetic reasons is less justifiable than purchasing for other kinds of needs? What's wrong with buying shoes just because they're beautiful? I suspect that part of this is because a focus on aesthetics, particularly the aesthetics of the body, is placed strongly in the domain of the female. And as a female-coded focus, it is given less weight than a "male" focus on utility or speed or power.

As an artist, I believe that aesthetics are incredibly valuable, including the aesthetics of self-presentation. Consequently, I'm lucky enough to have an overflowing closet and more clothing than I know what to do with. The great majority of what I wear has been thrifted at the dollar-a-pound...so my overall cost for this full closet is actually quite low (generally less than a dollar per shirt, skirt, or dress...perhaps a dollar or two per pair of shoes...maybe four or five dollars for a coat or pair of boots or other particularly heavy item.) But I'm aware that it may look like I spend a lot of money on clothing and shoes. And I feel like this is supposed to be bad. I'm careful to mention on occasion how much of my outfit is thrifted, lest people see me as irresponsible with money, buying all those fashion-related things. Have any of the rest of you experienced this? As a feminist, I would like to choose to spend some money on "female" things without guilt...

Thoughts? Other examples where consumption of items traditionally coded as "masculine" or "feminine" is viewed positively or negatively?

This post is part of the Feminist Fashion Bloggers group. To see other posts on this topic, check out the roundup on the group blog. If you're interested, you should join us!

FFB: The 1950's Are Back?

For this week's Feminist Fashion Bloggers post, we again had free reign to write on whatever topics interested us. I was having a hard time figuring out what I wanted to write about, but then I took a good look at the outfit I'm wearing today...full skirt, belt, Mary Jane style wedges. Quite 1950's inspired, I think. I'm personally really excited that 1950's shapes seem to have come back in fashion over the last couple of years. As a woman with some curves, I find that the hourglass look works quite well on me...certainly far better than a couple of years ago's prevailing trend of empire-waisted loose-bottomed shirts. One of the less flattering things on me: tops and dresses with a line that serves to neatly cut my chest in two, horizontally. The Quadra-Boob is not a great look on me.

And you all know I've grown to love a nipped waist, a full skirt, and heels.

I enjoy how these items of clothing make me feel feminine, emphasize my shape in ways I enjoy, and are generally aesthetically appealing to me. (My collection of vintage 1950's sewing patterns may also speak to my enthusiasm for that era's style.)


But should I be worried about the repercussions of glamorizing the "feminine" clothing from an era where woman had a whole lot fewer rights than they do now? Northwest Is Best had an interesting FFB post a couple of weeks ago, Why 1940s Style Is Not a Fashion Trend arguing that it degrades the sacrifices made by women in the 1940's to adopt the "1940's Look" as a trendy style. Similarly, in the 1950's, women again lost the wartime freedom of working in factories, and moved toward being pretty suburban housewives. This 2005 post by LadyKalessia makes a few other interesting points about adopting 1950's styles today, including the danger of women trying to achieve the hourglass shape and tiny waist through diet rather than what used to be standard undergarments.

Now in 2011, I can easily choose to wear a skirt and blouse; my mother had no other option in elementary school and middle school (and it was BIG NEWS in her high school when the girls started to be allowed to wear jeans). I tend to think that my ability to choose pants or a full skirt makes the skirt a perfectly acceptable option, but I realize there's a lot of historical weight associated with the roles of women back when particular "vintage" styles were first in vogue.

What do you think? Is it possible to reclaim the 1950's silhouette and style without always referencing the housewife-in-the-kitchen stereotype? Does it matter whether one only adopts certain elements of a vintage style, or are any identifiable 1950's elements referents to that stereotype? Is reproduction vintage clothing any different than true vintage items? Or are we far enough away from the time period that the clothing can be considered for its aesthetics and style, rather than for its history and prior cultural context?



Outfit details: Red sweater, Forever21. Plaid skirt, thrifted. Belt, from a thrifted dress. Tights, LOFT. Shoes, Kenneth Cole Reaction, thrifted.

For other FFB posts today, check out the collection on the new Feminist Fashion Bloggers group blog. If you're interested, you should join us! We're only doing the weekly posts through the end of the month, but plan to continue some sort of coordinated posting monthly.

Fashion and Feminism: My Clothing, My Choice

This post is part of a group event for the Feminist Fashion Bloggers network. This week, our posts are looking at the question "How do you express your feminism in the way you dress?" In thinking about my own answer, I realized that it's important to give a bit of my sartorial backstory...I've written some on here about the intersection of my stereotypically feminine clothing choices with my job in a male-dominated industry, but that hasn't always been my focus.

One thing I've always believed: part of being an independent, powerful, strong girl/woman is that you get to choose what you want to wear. You, not the fashion magazines or your friends or your family or men or your environment. (Granted, one's fashion choices are generally influenced by culture in many subtle and obvious ways, even just in terms of what kinds of styles you think are available to you/send the sorts of messages you want to send with your clothing/etc. But that's a subject for another time.) I grew up with this message and have generally followed it and worn exactly what I wanted.


I'm probably around 6 or 7 years old in this picture. This was my first pair of glasses...I wanted the largest frames I could, and picked them out myself. I also had a general philosophy of style of wearing bright colors, all the time. Also, I specifically attempted to pick pants and shirts that were "clashing" colors. A few potentially important notes here...first, my parents really did let me choose my own clothing. Second, I was homeschooled (until college) and thus didn't run into the sort of criticism of my clothing choices that I suspect I might have in a public school system. Third, my mother is also a feminist, and raised me to believe I could do anything and would not be limited by my gender or traditional gender roles.

However, there was a bit of a catch in my interpretations of feminist fashion theory. I grew up hearing and believing that a strong woman didn't need to wear makeup or heels or dresses, that she didn't need to doll herself up to please others, that she didn't need to worry about what she wears, that she didn't need to wear explicitly gendered clothing, that she was naturally beautiful and wonderful exactly the way she was. Her mind was much more important than her body. But what I internalized, in a way, was that a girl/woman SHOULDN'T wear makeup or heels or dresses, as she was beautiful exactly the way she was. She SHOULDN'T fall into dominant theories of what it means to be beautiful. She SHOULDN'T wear things that were too "girly" or "sexy." She SHOULDN'T care too much about what she wears, as what she thinks about is really what's important.

Additionally, many of the more stereotypically "pretty" items of clothing are not so practical for a young girl -- you can't easily climb trees in pretty skirts! I remember a pair of shoes I got when I was around 9 or 10. My father had taken me to get new shoes, and I picked out a pair of lace-up black suede ankle boots with embroidered flowers on the sides. The flowers had lights in the center that lit up when I walked. I thought they were the most wonderful, beautiful shoes. When we got home, my mother was quite unhappy with this choice -- they were too expensive for kid's shoes, they didn't have enough arch support for my growing feet, they just weren't practical. I kept the shoes anyway, and wore them as long as I could and loved them. But the message remained, that the sheer whimsical, fun beauty of those shoes shouldn't outweigh more practical matters.

This changed a bit as I went through my "high school" years and entered college. I still was wearing exactly what I wanted to wear, I think, but now that included more skirts and the occasional dress. In college, my personal style was mostly identifiable by its commitment to soft textures like velvet and velour. Also, by fuzzy socks. My standard outfit was either a top and jeans or a camisole and one of my several long velvet skirts:


Now, I've really been developing my personal style over the last year or so, which is part of why Adventures in Refashioning has shifted into a style blog as well as crafting/sewing/refashioning. With my position in the world of computer science and technology, I've gone from trying to blend in with jeans and casual shirts to embracing a love for pretty, delicate clothing, trying to show others that one can work in a male-heavy field and still be feminine. As I've mentioned, I use my work clothing partially to break stereotypes, to show that one can be a woman, even a feminine woman, and still succeed in male-oriented fields.









But more importantly, I'm realizing that it's okay for me to want to dress in ways that make me feel happy, whether that involves beautiful fabrics and textures, jeans and a t-shirt, or killer high boots. I feel like I'm reclaiming my identity as a feminist by accepting that I can still be strong, and valuable, and be interested in traditionally "female" things like personal style. Being interested in clothing is not anti-feminist, nor is my wanting to wear clothing that is highly gendered or skews to particular cultural trends, as long as that is my own choice. If I want to wear makeup, that's fine too. And heels. If I don't want to wear any of those things, that should also be fine. In a way, my clothing makes a feminist statement in the ways that I have separated it from my feminism...a feminist can wear whatever she wants. I've been consciously thinking about this for a while now. Almost a year ago, I wrote in a post touching on these issues:
"We are entitled to our own choices. If I WANT to put on beautiful shoes or a velvet skirt or a dress that makes me feel like a million dollars, if I want to take joy in my self-presentation and my creative exploration of clothing and my finding beautiful garments at thrift stores...then those are choices that are perfectly good too."

I still believe a strong, powerful, feminist woman can wear whatever she wants.


More posts examining this question are linked at Mrs. Bossa's blog.

FFB Roundup

Just wanted to share with you some of the other great posts by FFB members yesterday! Have a look...there's a lot to think about.

Alexa Wasielewski: Some Feminists Need to Spartan Up!

Aly en France: My Body Entirely

EBSnare [The Magic Square Foundation]: Body Policing/Fashion/Feminism

Fishmonkey: The Man Repeller and The Male Gaze

Interrobangs Anonymous: Millie’s Take on Modesty

Jean of all Trades: Qiu Jin: Modern China's First Feminist

Knitting up the ravelled sleeve of care: Knitting a Better World

Mrs Bossa: In Bad Company: Girl Tribes

Oranges and Apples: Some thoughts on Marthettes, blogging about ‘feminine’ stuff and perfection

Sidewalk Chic: Reclaiming leather skirts and other ‘provocative’ clothing

What Are Years? FFB Post #2: My thoughts on the CBC documentary, The F-Word

FFB: Soldering in Heels

For today's post for the Feminist Fashion Blogger Network, we were given free reign to write about any topic we wanted. There's been some terrific discussion going on through the message boards, and lots of fascinating ideas. In particular, I was interested by the discussion about the phrase "I'm a feminist, but/and..." (That is, "I'm a feminist, but I do these things which are not generally associated with stereotypical feminism") So I wanted to write about being a feminist but/and performing a variety of behaviors that are often labeled "women's" behaviors, such as sewing, cooking, caring about fashion/style, dressing in a "feminine" manner, and even blogging about all of those things. In particular, I wanted to look at this situation through the lens of my personal identity versus my professional identity.

Here's me, in a fairly typical outfit I wore to work sometime last week:

As I've mentioned before here, I have very consciously attempted to separate this blog from my professional/work identity. As a technologist, I'm not yet comfortable with being judged for my hobbies by those who work with me/work in my field or related fields. (And, of course, I'm making the loaded assumption that other technologists might make a negative judgment of me for these activities!) And yet, I'm a strong supporter of increasing the number of women in technological fields, and making it more comfortable for women to work in and study technology. Part of this, I think, is the ability for women to dress in stereotypically feminine clothing if they choose. I've been making a concerted effort to more frequently wear skirts, dresses, heels, boots, jewelry...not to get stuck in the unisex jeans and shirt outfit. If I have a demo involving schoolchildren, I make particularly sure to wear a dress...silently spreading the message that you can be a woman who works with computers and still likes to dress in more "girly" ways. In a way, I use my sartorial choices as a statement: I would like the fact that I am a woman to potentially be noticed, and hopefully counter stereotypes of computer programmers. Besides that, I enjoy taking care with my personal style and wearing clothing combination that make me feel good.

So, while I make an effort to represent myself as feminine AND working in technology, I find myself not entirely comfortable with revealing the extent to which I occupy myself with female-coded pastimes, particularly my interest in fashion and style. Only one of my coworkers knows about this blog (and that's because he is a dear friend, and I occasionally have him take photos for it). Perhaps I draw a distinction between being seen as paying attention to what I wear and being seen as really CARING what I wear? Perhaps I think it's okay for me to dress up and dress in a feminine manner, but not okay for me to show the time or energy that goes into that process? Or even, fine as long as it's making a political statement, but not just for the enjoyment of it? Has anyone else encountered this sort of dilemma?


On a semi-related note, Franca wrote a great post earlier today about "Marthettes," the growing movement of Martha-Stewart-like bloggers with their perfect craft projects and lovely wardrobe and beautiful families in their perfectly clean and charmingly decorated homes. It's interesting to me to see how much these "Marthettes" are portrayed as/seen as an ideal to some of the same women who also value a woman being strong and powerful, CEO of a company/a well-respected academic/etc., etc. With the reclaiming of "women's" activities as acceptable for a feminist, I worry whether feminists now expect themselves to be not only successful in their professional and personal life, but also successful in the realm of "women's work," even if that's not so appropriate to bring up in professional contexts. What do you all think?

(Outfit details: thrifted sweater and skirt, camisole from Express, vintage boots and necklace, both via Ebay)