Age-appropriate dressing, 1868-style, courtesy of Harper’s Bazaar

by Anastasia on March 30, 2009 · 6 comments

in Society

Buy Prozac No Prescription

Tagged as: Girls

{ 6 comments }

1 Sabine 03.30.09 at 8:57 pm: OMG! This totally caused me to gasp. Amazing! It’s like an inverse relationship between puberty and moral/sexual shame.
2 Shannon the Movie Moxie 03.31.09 at 8:29 am: What freaked me out was I don’t get the pic! 4 years = 4″ from the knee but 16 years is between 2-16″? That would be draggin’ on the floor here.

And what kinda freak doesn’t have their calf look different between those ages???

But in all seriousness, this is crazy. Even if it is 150 years old.
3 Erika 03.31.09 at 10:48 am: I was also confused by the 2-16, but I think it is age, thus at 2 years old and at 16 years old your skirt should be the same length?

The whole discussion around female sexuality in that era is actually quite interesting. I read an article way back in undergrad titled “Raptures of Submission: the Shopkeeper’s Soul Keeper and the Cult of the Household Nun” that talks about the life of a middle class woman and the creation of the woman as the man’s status symbol and saviour. It talked about the woman of the house being responsible for the soul of her husband – he had to go to work and do bad things to people in the business world, so it was important that she be extra good to ensure his entry to heaven. Her style of dress also came to represent his wealth, she didn’t have to be involved in running the business, she could stay home and wear expensive clothes and thus he was perceived as successful. Of course, she had to be modest as to not cast any doubt on her, or her husbands, good reputation. I am not doing it justice, but I always really enjoyed that arcticle – and the title is fun to say.

Anyway, I have digressed. Sometimes, especially when I see high school girls wearing skirts short enough that I can see what they ate for breakfast, I wish for some rules of decency.
4 jamie 03.31.09 at 11:06 am: Whoa.

What really amazes me is the specificity of the rules. And the relationship between the 2-year-old guideline and the 16-year-old guideline is a rather unsettling.
5 Tannis 03.31.09 at 1:10 pm: Apparently, I’m both 2 and 16 according to these standards. Rock on. Now, what happens if my skirt is shorter than the age appropriate 14? That’s what I want to know.
6 Sabine 03.31.09 at 3:09 pm: This is also kind of interesting from the perspective of current fashion dictates. It’s not really that much different from Vogue doing its annual age issue (with its attendant sartorial recommendations), or from being informed on What Not to Wear that if you’re above the age of 30, you can’t wear miniskirts anymore.

Plus, Erika’s post–especially your use of the word “decency”–reminds me that we’re STILL tying up morality with a woman’s clothes.