#knock the 1920s off its pedestal of alleged sartorial liberation

[marzipanandminutiae]

except quite a bit in that comment is also ahistorical, but in a different way

the narrative of "1920s clothing and beauty standards liberated women from Evil Bad Corsets and Victorian Clothing!!!"- popular as it was even in the literal era -is massively oversimplified

first of all: the 1920s silhouette and even hairstyles were NOT a sharp departure from everything that had come before. fashion was already trending in that direction before the decade started

1917, Delineator magazine

May 1918, same magazine

November 1919, same magazine

lower waistlines. looser fits. bob-shaped updos or outright bobs. "short" skirts- important to note that most skirts of the 1920s never actually got shorter than calf-length, no matter how commentators hand-wrung over them at the time. you see some LOW-knee-length hems at the end of the decade...right before they went back to high ankle for the 1930s. proto-20s styles dominated in the latter part of the era that women were supposedly "reacting against" during the 20s

as for body liberation, while much is made of corsetry and the casting-off thereof...guys, they were still wearing corsets. corsets that were arguably void of any practical function but shapewear (unlike Victorian examples, which provided bust and back support)

1920

Delineator ad, May 1925

Modart corset ad, also 1925

“Most young girls and practically all women need some sort of figure control . . . . Not all women need corsets. Women with young slender figures find that the corselet, which is a combination brassiere and hip-confiner, is sufficient.” -Evelyn Dodge, 1925, writing for- again -the Delineator. it was a popular magazine, as you can tell

hardly Perfect Liberation And Freedom to be wearing, basically, a Kim K waist cincher as everyday attire. to be honest, as someone who has worn 19th-century-style corsets, I can't imagine sweating your brains out in an elastic sausage casing would be cause to "breathe a sigh of relief"

especially because some women also bound their breasts, something we now know can cause actual injury if done incorrectly or for too long:

1925 ad for a "corsette" promising to "flatten the lines of the body"

and in terms of freedom of movement. listen, there are things you can't do comfortably in a Victorian corset, but there are definitely things you can't do comfortably in an elastic girdle and possibly also a chest-binder). and for the record, I can polka so enthusiastically that I get airborne in full 1860s eveningwear. corset included

this isn't to say that women at the time didn't feel some sense of liberation with 1920s fashion when contrasted with the styles of, say, 10 years earlier (or clothing they themselves had no lived experience of wearing but had to guess at the comfort of, if they were young enough to have been mere children at the turn of the 20th century- and like, of COURSE it looks uncomfortable; it's utterly foreign to your experience as an adult). nor that earlier eras were bastions of comfort and body positivity, because like. come on. obviously it was Complicated back then, too. and the original post is still not correct either

but we have GOT to stop this narrative that the "liberation" of women's bodies in the 1920s was absolute, objective fact. it diminishes the accomplishments and agency of women who came before and it just...doesn't reflect the reality of the situation

The fact that thinness came in vogue (as seen in popular culture, magazines, fashion models, etc.) in the 1920s when women got the right to vote is telling. We got real, tangible power and then were told to be thin to achieve beauty, and sickly thin too. The kind of thin with no muscles, no power. It is not surprising to me that our beauty standards keep women physically weaker, physically starving, and mentally exhausted. The beauty standard is nothing more than a tool to keep women weak, docile, poor, and too tired to act.