1
FASHION: FRAMING MORAL GUIDELINES
Shreya Jain
Integrative Seminar 2: Fashion
May 9th 2014
2
Introduction
Is fashion immoral? What even raises this question? Fashion works with the body, the
body being the source of sexuality. Therefore, if there is any animosity related to
fashion it is usually directed towards sexuality because it is considered immoral. This
gets further complicated because some may or some may not agree to sexuality and
the body being immoral. This stems from the fact that universal agreement on what is
moral and immoral doesn’t exist.1 Fashion may push the boundaries of what is
considered acceptable by society but that doesn’t make it immoral.
The boundaries that define “right” and “wrong” are subject to change and can’t be
defined. What can be defined are the words morality and immorality and what they
really mean. This may sound boring and encyclopedic but in fact is really interesting.
Morality is fundamentally something that humans made up. It is a guidance that
humans set for themselves. Each person strives to stay in the boundaries of what they
consider moral by never doing what they consider immoral. Some may argue and say
that the bible or their respective religion is the source of what sets the “right”
boundaries but that is a completely different argument that I will go into later. Would
all this suggest that morality and immorality are a hoax? Going back to encyclopedic
definitions, there are two ways to define morality- normative and descriptive.2 The
descriptive definition of morality is one in which the ‘most important code of
conduct’ is accepted and followed by all of a society or group. The normative sense of
the word follows the norm, in which the moral code of conduct isn’t a strictly defined
path to follow. The descriptive meaning is made up just to define morality but the
1
Gert, Bernard, "The Definition of Morality.
2
Ibid.
3
normative meaning takes place in our modern life. The normative sense of the word is
connected to media, as media plays a big part in influencing it.
Media and Morality Today
It is important to form an understanding of the moral boundaries in today’s age and
what affects it. Janet M. Cramer insists that there is a decline in the ‘disciplinary
powers of the school, church and even the family’, which brings in the influence of
popular culture in the arena.3 The norms or the real life situation of how people define
morality emerges from their opinions formed by media. Media is everywhere and one
cannot completely escape from its reach. Now some can argue that media doesn’t
influence people’s morals but just mirrors what is actually going on in society.
According to Dr. Lauhona Ganguly, media does take from society and ‘engages with
them… reflects them which amplifies them… (and) brings them into attention’.4 This
means that media chooses to expand on social matters. For example, this lead to
issues such as homosexuality that were once less acceptable or considered immoral to
become the norm.
Media chooses to “amplify” certain traits in society and this leads to changing
viewpoints. How does this happen exactly? What media does is, it provides us with a
means of escape or as Ronald C. Tamborini puts it that media entertainment causes
the viewer to experience ‘emotion of elevation’5. Something that provides this
Cramer, Janet M, “Discourses of Sexual Morality in Sex and the City and Queer as
Folk”, page 409
3
4
Ganguly, Lauhona. Personal Interview. (13 April, 2014.)
5
Tamborini, Ronald C, “The Experience of Elevation”. page 93
4
“elevation” is considered enjoyable and causes people to want to experience it more.
The association of happiness and greater exposure of such media will lead a person to
be persuaded and influenced by it. One thing to focus on is the sexual morality
portrayed in movies or television shows. By sexual morality I mean the beliefs or
boundaries of what is considered acceptable or unacceptable in relation to something
sexual. For example, in the television show ‘Game of Thrones’, “engaging” with
prostitutes is accepted by society unlike most of society today. Cramer’s diminishing
belief in the traditional disciplinary institutions made her look at popular television
shows such as “Sex and the City”. This show portrays the life of four women having
sexual adventures as fun and basically favorable. In Cramer’s opinion something that
seems to give pleasure will make it more desirable and make people their ‘own moral
authority rather than conforming to the overarching, universal codes of conduct’.6
(Add Foucault’s Victorian Repressive hypothesis?) This is similar to Tamborini’s
theory of the experience of elevation. I mean to focus on the sexual aspect because
this article is eventually about fashion, which I regurgitate works with the body,
which is the origin of sexuality.
Feelings linked to Body and Sexuality in Relation to Morals
The human body is associated with these sexual moral guidelines put forth by society
and media. The body like I said is the source of sexuality. How so? The obvious
reasons are that the body is what a person can be attracted to; it is what reacts to being
sexually aroused and is also the vessel through which the sexual acts are performed.
These reasons are common knowledge and these connections can be drawn by
anyone. But what is interesting is that this connection is deeply rooted in a person’s
Cramer, Janet M, “Discourses of Sexual Morality in Sex and the City and Queer as
Folk”. page 411
6
5
subconscious mind too. Martin S. Weinberg and Colin J. Williams conducted a
research on 184 heterosexual students at a Midwestern State University. 7 The point
of the study was to look at how one responds to feelings of ease or unease one
associates with their nude body. They found that people with greater comfort with
their body had a more ‘expansive perspective on sexuality’.8 . This shows that a
person subconsciously relates their body with sexuality. It also means that a
progressive person with an open mind towards sexuality would be more at ease with
their bare body. The article quotes that ‘…embarrassment about one's nudity entails
bodily reactions as well as social conventions and moral judgment’. 9 This emphasizes
that the subconscious link pertains to morality.
To simplify, a person’s shame/embarrassment related to their naked body comes from
their moral beliefs. On the other hand, comfort comes from the clothed body. Sylvia
H. Bliss claims to recognize the “true” meaning of clothing. According to her, the
invention of clothing created the feelings of shame and modesty towards the nude
body.10 Clothing was created as a need to protect the body from harsh weather
conditions and slowly lead to becoming the norm.11 People got used having their
bodies covered, which caused them to start feeling shame due to its exposure. This
goes against the entire notion that clothing was created to make us feel emotional
ease. It basically means that clothing itself created the need for it by generating
7
Martin S. Weinberg and Colin J. Williams, “Bare Bodies”. 47-67
8
Ibid. page 54
9
Ibid. page 49
10
Bliss, Sylvia H, “The Significance of Clothes,”. page 218
11
Ibid.
6
feelings of shame and taboo in relation to the nude body. This would also mean that
clothing is the reason this moral standard to cover our bodies was created. Can
something that set a moral standard be immoral? Fashion makes new clothing for
every season and redefines the moral standards in a way. Designers go in their own
direction according to their aesthetic and in the process redefine morality.
The Moral Rights of Fashion and Fashion Designers
At this point, I want to critically examine the boundaries of morality pushed in
fashion. Rebecca Arnol expresses how the body would be portrayed as having a
highly eroticized role. She also states that, ‘the boundaries of acceptability have been
routinely stretched’ in fashion, especially in the last three decades of the last
century’12. First, I want to argue that it makes sense for fashion to push moral
boundaries. Another interesting point made by the article was that every generation of
people working in field of fashion must ‘renegotiate the relationship between body,
style and morality’.13 This suggests that fashion always pushes the norm of society
and how every designer and stylist must work out how they want to redefine the
boundaries of morality in their work. The second argument I want to make comes
directly from the quote, that each designer and stylist chooses to work in a certain
way and that doesn’t make his or her work immoral.
Now, I want to exaggerate on my stated arguments. My first arguments pertained to
fashion setting moral standards. I already introduced the idea that clothing created
moral standards. According to me, fashion being a generator of clothes is the modern
12
Arnol, Rebecca, “The Brutalized Body,”. page 81
13
Ibid.
7
setter of those standards. This modern setter of certain moral standards has not only
the right but also the reasons to push norms, and to create a new sense of what is
normal. In favor for my second argument, designers are required to choose what
boundary they want to push and redefine. Doing so doesn’t make fashion immoral but
something that facilitates change. The choice that designers make, as put by Catherine
Wilson, comes from their own ‘particular quirk or idiosyncrasy’14. She also makes
another point that when designers work they all have a type of woman in their mind
they design their clothes for. These factors that determine their designs also shapes
their definition of sexuality and morality. Fashion is becoming a big part in
influencing normative morality.
The Relevance of Fashion as a New Moral Guide
Fashion and Media has become the new setter of moral standards, leaving behind
other institutions such as religion. Religion is no longer the prominent moral figure.
According to Kenneth Thompson and Anita Sharma this has made sociology of
religion less significant which left ‘sociologists… to focus on topical issues of
conflict over moral values’15 such as media. I came across many articles of how
media influences morality and hardly any that are influenced by fashion. The ones
related to morality in fashion had little to do with fashion being a rightful setter of
moral limitations. There is a need for more research in these areas. The limit of what
14
Wilson, Catherine, "FASHION: Sex in the Wardrobe when Coco Chanel…”.
15
Thompson and Anita Sharma, “Secularization, Moral Regulation and the Mass
Media” Page 436
8
is considered acceptable further dwindles due to the loss of strict guidelines put forth
by religion. Thomson and Sharma also state that due to this, ‘there are only fragments
of a conceptual scheme and no rational way of securing moral agreement’16. Due to
the loss of a clear stance of morality, we must turn to the chaos of media and fashion
for explanations.
Case Study: Victorian Corsets vs. Fetish Corsets
The point of this case study is to look at my research in a narrow focus by examining
a particular garment. I am observing the Victorian corsets in comparison with the
fetish ones to see their evolvement and how their portrayal in fashion has affected the
norms of society. There is also a distinct difference between the two types of corsetsone was considered pure and the other impure. This can be a bit vague but I will delve
into it further.
The ideal woman during the Victorian Era was pure, modest and silent, similar to
their underclothing. In Figure
117 we see a Victorian woman
posing in front of a mirror,
dressed in her underclothing.
Two women peep through the
keyhole in order to find out the
secret of her perfect figure. As
seen in the image, the corsets
16
Ibid. page 435
‘The Secret Out At Last’.
American Trade Card (ca. 1882)
17
Figure 1- The Secret Out At Last--- Why Mrs. Brown Has Such a
Perfect Figure.
9
would be white in color due to the belief that the cloth that touched the skin
must ‘conform with the purity of the mind’18. This purity of the mind refers to the
clean and non-sexual intentions women would wear corsets with. The woman
seems to be keeping the fact that she wore a corset a secret because Victorian
women would never acknowledge their use of corsets. Only later in the
Nineteenth Century this “modesty” of Victorian women be tagged as a ‘moral
hypocrisy’.19 Their etiquettes dictated that ‘such devices of a wholly private
nature should (not) be made public…
(and) it was hoped (that men) would not
suspect the existence of either the
restraint or its need’20. On the other
hand, corsets today are marketed to
woman in open, through media! The
sexual nature of these corsets is a
comfortable topic of discussion now and
Figure 221 probably comes from an
advertisement. This transition of a
subject to go from taboo to normal is one
such example of the changing moral
18
Figure 2- Modern Lingerie Ad Resembling
Victorian Portrait.
Cunnington, C. Willett, “Chapter I: Introduction” page 20
19Steele,
Valerie, “Fashion and Eroticism”. 98
20
Cunnington, C. Willett, “Chapter I: Introduction” page 20
21
Fontanel, Beatrice. ‘Support and Seduction’. Page 144
10
standards in society facilitated through fashion. There was also a transition in
the design aspect of corsets.
The difference of design between the Victorian corset and Fetish corset is very
evident. The Victorian corsets being the epitome of “pure” were worn as a tool
for attracting men sexually,
and wasn’t fetishist. Sexual
fetishism is directed towards
an object. Unlike the 18th
century corsets that were
plain and only had the
purpose of making the body
attractive, fetish corsets not
only make the body more
sexual but also are
themselves sexual. This
made (some) people fixate
on them, and was considered
“impure” due to its raw
Figure 3- Sado-Masochism, a fetish being protrayed in
Fashion.
sexuality. The right Victorian
woman would wear a “white
satin corset, never a colored corset” to in order to ‘please gentlemen’.22 As seen
in Figure 323, the use of rubber and leather over lace and satin is one thing that is
22
Steele, Valerie, “Fashion and Eroticism”. 188-189
11
consistent with unconventional sexual activities. The design can also be
different and expose more of the body or have bandage like strips that
correspond to bondage. Designers took the device used only as means to attract
men and made it into something brutally sexual and almost sadistic. The idea of
this type of fashion is to take the accepted and create something absurd that
enables gasps from viewers. The best designers in fashion are known for the
shock and awe they have received from viewers.
Conclusion
Fashion, as I have repeatedly stated, is a means to create and expand what is
socially acceptable. Some may or may not like that power it has on people’s belief
regarding society but there will always be something that will sway a persons or
society’s beliefs. According to me, fashion has become a part of media that
influences morality and holds the right to do so.
There is no universal definition on what is moral and immoral but there are
norms, norms that are followed by society. Society’s norm dictates that rape is
clearly immoral, charity is clearly moral and homosexuality is ambiguous. In the
same way, when fashion’s morals come into question there are two different
answers. My point of view is that fashion isn’t unethical. This doesn’t necessarily
mean that I am suggesting it is highly ethical since the definitions of morality and
immorality aren’t fully defined. What is evident is that designers are supposed to
push the boundaries of normal. This doesn’t make fashion amoral either as that
is in their job description. In fact, the feelings associated with shame came after
23
Edelkoort, Lidewij, “Fetishism in Fashion”. Page 14
12
the creation of clothing. This proves that exposing the body that is linked to
sexuality isn’t immoral but an ancient norm. Also, clothing gave birth to new
norms, which means that clothing has been establishing new social boundaries
since its invention.
I conclude, that fashion isn’t an unethical practice but a part of media with the
means and right to establish and influence social norms.
13
Bibliography
1. Gert, Bernard, "The Definition of Morality," in The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, ed. by Edward N. Zalta. (Fall 2012 Edition)
2. Cramer, Janet M, “Discourses of Sexual Morality in Sex and the City and
Queer as Folk”, in Journal of Popular Culture, Vol. 40, No. 3. (Bowling
Green: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.,2007) page 409-432
3. Ganguly, Lauhona. Personal Interview. (13 April, 2014.)
4. Tamborini, Ronald C, “The Experience of Elevation: The Responses to Media
Portrayal of Moral Beauty,” in Media And The Moral Mind. (Florence:
Routledge, 2012) page 93-108
5. Martin S. Weinberg and Colin J. Williams, “Bare Bodies: Nudity, Gender, and
the Looking Glass Body;” in Sociological Forum, Vol. 25, No. 1. (Wiley,
2010) 47-67
6. Bliss, Sylvia H, “The Significance of Clothes,” in The American Journal of
Psychology , Vol. 27, No. 2. (Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1916) page
217-226
7. Arnol, Rebecca, “The Brutalized Body,” in Fashion, Desire and Anxiety:
Image and Morality in the 20th Century. (Newark: Rutgers University Press,
2001) page 80-92
8. Wilson, Catherine, "FASHION: Sex in the Wardrobe when Coco Chanel First
Banished Corsets in Favour of Comfort, She Argued that Women Know Best
what Women Want." (The Guardian. Jan 14, 1994.)
9. Thompson and Anita Sharma, “Secularization, Moral Regulation and the Mass
Media” in The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Sep., 1998) Page
434-455
10. ‘The Secret Out At Last’. American Trade Card (ca. 1882) for the
Adjustable Duplex Corset
11. Cunnington, C. Willett, “Chapter I: Introduction” in English Women’s
Clothing in the Nineteenth Century. (Dover Publications, 1990) page 1-25
12. Fontanel, Beatrice, Support and Seduction: A History of Bras and Corsets.
(New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001) page 144
13. Steele, Valerie, “Fashion and Eroticism: Ideals of Feminine Beauty from the
Victorian Era Through the Jazz Age”. (Oxford University Press, 1985)
14
14. Edelkoort, Lidewij, “Fetishism in Fashion”. (Frame Publishers, 2013) page 14