AMY writes:

I have been enjoying your blog for nearly two years now and have been enjoying a look down “blog memory lane” while perusing your archives. The wisdom contained in your archives is immense and your perspective both refreshing and fascinating. Several afternoons a week I sit at my computer with a cup of tea and a treat to enjoy while soaking in the latest commentary on The Thinking Housewife.

With your wisdom and decades of housewifery experience in mind, I was curious to see if you might ever consider sharing your thoughts on the ideal wardrobe for the housewife. The ready-to-wear clothing of today is dismal at best. Often ugly, unfeminine, and overly casual such clothing hardly seems the appropriate attire of a woman seeking to impart a love for beauty, order and the higher things of life to her young children or for the wife so invested in tending to a marriage and pleasing her husband with a fresh and lovely appearance. How ought the young housewives of today go about in dressing themselves to bring dignity and grace to an occupation so often looked on poorly in society today? The yoga pants and jeans and tee shirts that have become the standard stay-at-home mommy wardrobe hardly seems appropriate for the important tasks performed by the housewife.

Laura writes:

Thank you for writing. And for your kind words.

You have basically answered your own question, but let me add a few thoughts, which are in basic agreement with what you have said.

Clothing is an expression of ideas, a form of communication that conveys certain transcendent principles. Clothes that are modest show a respect for intimacy and love. Clothes that are richly colored or patterned show our delight in nature, in its variety and fecundity. Clothes that honor sexual difference reinforce the principles of femininity and masculinity. Clothes that require care and attention show the measure of our regard for others.

A woman’s skirts express her tenderness and delight in children, who bury their heads in its folds.

Clothes affect the way we stand, move and walk – and all these convey a state of mind. In Linda Lichter’s book Social Graces, she discusses the difference in sensibility between the Victorians and moderns. She writes:

In the modern era, our problematic relationship with clothing reflects a contradiction of contemporary sensibilities — we use our clothes to express ourselves, but we balk if others use them to judge the self we choose to express.

The Victorians, however, were untroubled by such contradictions. Their consensus on morals and manners extended to the meaning of the wrappings in which they chose to show themselves.

Western women dress in ugly, unfeminine clothes that are anti-social. They show off the body, physical fitness and inconspicuous wealth. What principles do they convey? A belief in equality; an anti-snobbery that is its own form of snobbery and a regard for sex as the first and foremost form of communication. I prefer to think of these clothes as an impediment to joy and affection since they draw our mnd away from the whole person before us.

It’s not that we can’t afford better than this. There are African and Southeast Asian women who dress in bright print dresses or saris, showing an awareness of feminine distinctiveness that we have lost, and yet they are much poorer. They are modest and, by their own cultural standards, pretty. They are not hampered in the performance of arduous physical tasks by dresses and skirts.

Feminism has promoted ugliness. It has made everywoman a harried, mindless consumer of junk.  She dresses androgynously or with an exaggerated femininity that is heavily sexualized. Many men find this unattractive, but somehow the message has not gotten out to most women.  Prettiness, to the feminist mind, is evil subjugation precisely because men like it. The corporate suit with the plunging neckline is okay because it’s not pretty, but it is a come-on.

In building a counter-revolutionary wardrobe, I suggest first buying one pretty dress that can be worn for everyday use. From there, I recommend these basic guidelines.

A housewife should dress with feminine dignity. She has an important job and should show her pride in it by dressing well. She is in charge of a small corporation and her underlings will respect her more if she dresses with a sense of dignity rather than in childish play clothes. Athletic clothes suggest she is just another playmate.

A housewife should dress with modesty. Her chest, her shoulders, and her legs above the knees should be clothed and her clothing should not be ultra-tight or clingy.  Modesty, as the psychologist Rudolf Allers said, protects intimacy.

A housewife should dress practically. Prints are preferable to solid-colored clothing. A homemaker who does not have servants is splattered and stained all day long. Solid colored clothing, such as that offered by L.L. Bean or Land’s End, shows dirt right away.

A housewife should dress with the desire to ornament. Like the eaves or gables of a Victorian house, she can be a rebuttal to modern ugliness, to the hideous monotony of highways, big boxes,  ticky-tacky buildings and industrial pizza. Ornamentation is impractical.  Beauty is non-utilitarian. Color, gayety and patterned textiles are beautiful. The clothing from retailers such as Land’s End, the Gap, and Talbots is bland. In other catalogues specifically geared for modesty, many clothes are frumpy and dull. Some definition in feminine form is not immodest.  

At Home Living, Lydia Sherman writes:

It is in my opinion really dull for a child to look at jeans all day in this world. If you’ve seen one pair of jeans, you’ve seen the lot of them. And, jeans are so unimaginative. They do not come in the pretty cotton prints that you see in skirts and dresses… We are not living in such a rough world that jeans are required. Most women live in beautiful homes with conveniences and comforts that even the Victorian women did not have, and yet, they wear jeans, as though they are going to dig ditches all day.

A housewife should dress frugally. Unless she is wealthy, her clothing can’t be expensive. A small number of outfits worn over and over again makes sense. One doesn’t need a lot. Obviously, sewing one’s own clothes can make all of the above more economical and offer far greater choice. 

I wish I could offer some links to some good retailers of women’s clothes but I know of very few I can wholeheartedly recommend. I sift through the stores and find virtually no place that routinely offers the sort of clothing I discuss. Lydia Sherman recommends Hawaiian dresses such as the ones I have included at the top and bottom of this page, both of which I like even though they are short-sleeved. Colleen Hammond, author of the book Dressing with Dignity,writes about dress at her website. Lydia Sherman has many posts on why women should aspire to dress well at home. Mrs.Sherman writes:

There is no denying that women are more nervous, burdened and upset than ever, these days. Part of it I think, is due to the frustration of finding clothing that fits them properly or is modest enough and pretty enough to wear. I’ve seen women leaving dress shops in tears because the clothing was so awful.

In William Butler Yeats’s poem “Adam’s Curse,” there is a beautiful woman who says:

To be born woman is to know
— although they do not talk of it at school —
That we must labor to be beautiful.

All women are beautiful in some way, and all women have to work to bring out their natural features. Refinement is unnatural. Prettiness creates an aura. Why else have some of the greatest painters taken for their subject matter something so mundane and yet so suggestive: a woman in a pretty dress? 

                                                                       — Comments —

A.M. writes:

Perhaps you were thinking of something along the lines of Lily Pulitzer? Unfortunately, their wares are hideously expensive.

As a man, I feel there’s nothing more comely than a bright sundress. The blandness of which you speak pervades men’s clothing as well, and for the same reasons I surmise, a blindness to craftsmanship and beauty, and a disappearing sense of decorum.

Laura writes:

The dresses in Lily Pulitzer’s collection above are too short, but I like their prints and colors. Yes, they are expensive.

Here’s a decent dress from Garnet Hill on sale for $29.00. It will show dirt quickly, and the gardener/cook/child management expert does get dirty. But an apron solves that problem. 

 Karen I. writes:

Your Catholic readers might find this interesting. I found it on several websites. 

Standards of Modesty in Dress

Imprimatur dated Sept. 24, 1956

“A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper.”

The Cardinal Vicar of Pius XII

Laura writes:

The dresses I have pictured here appear to violate those standards. However, none of them would be harmed by being a little higher at the neck, having longer sleeves or, in the case of the last dress, being longer. These Hawaiian dresses can be work with a light sweater.

Laura adds:

By way of contrast, here is a shockingly ugly collection of pricey dresses by Liberty of London, once known for its beautiful fabrics. It includes the dress below for £145. This is worse than a prison jumper.

Another bad trend in women’s fashion is yoga clothing, which is unflattering, expensive, childish and immodest. It’s undignified for a woman who is taking care of children. She isn’t a child too.

Melissa writes:

There are a few designers making really nice 50s-styled dresses, but they are really too expensive for everyday use. I suggest searching on etsy.com vintage for polka dot and plaid dresses. You’ll find so many lovely dresses that have stood the test of time. If they have a few mild stains, well, then it won’t matter if you have a few more. I really like the pseudo-Victorian/pionner-era “prairie style” dresses such as those made by Gunne Sax in the 70s or this one:

And this one:

Laura writes:

I’ve struck out at Etsy before but maybe I haven’t tried hard enough. Here’s something I really like on Etsy even though it is sleeveless. You could wear a light sweater on the arms. It’s $48.

Jenny writes:

I know the styles in Old Pueblo Trader are primarily shown on more mature ladies, but they are really very pretty. How I’d love a few to wear to church. I’ve never ordered from the catalog, though, so I have no idea about the quality. As a housewife with a little boy, I find longer dresses to be the easiest to wear and accomplish all I need to in a day. With a longer hem, I can do most anything (housework, gardening) with complete modesty and sit down on the floor or outside with my little boy, also with complete modesty. I’ve always worn an apron, too. Clothes really do last longer that way, and children love hiding between them and the dress. My little boy would do this all the time. So sweet! I urge anyone considering wearing a dress around the house to opt for a well below the knee length hem; otherwise, one might feel a bit exposed.

I’ve found all my dresses at thrift stores and insist on breathable fabric. There is nothing worse than a synthetic fabric, especially when working around the house or playing with children. Sewing is a valuable skill, too, when thrift treasures are not to be found.

Ladies, don’t settle for drab and dreary if pretty floral prints are what you desire. Be confident enough to embrace your own style. You’ll be so happy you did.

Lydia Sherman writes:

Hawaiian Libertarian had a post up two years ago about modern femininity, in which he showed the contrast between today’s clothes for women and the traditional mu’umu’u (pronounced moo-ooh, moo-ooh). It is a pity that the picture of the ‘mu’umu’u has been removed, because the sight of it made a great point without description: it was a beautiful garment which announced femininty while covering privacy.

Jeanette V. writes:

This is the dress that I have been buying over the past five years, this style is flattering to all figures it is comfortable and the dress has *pockets*. Best of all it is not to expensive. I got a lot of compliments from this last purchase.

This is another place to get modest clothing but these are not inexpensive.

Please follow and like us: