Cleavage

[Paisley]

Consideration of other's reactions, how refreshing

LD

Yes. Dressing to please yourself only is overrated at the FL.

 

[Laura Chase]

I have small children so for me I want to set a good example and try to keep the "girls" covered

I certainly do respect your views, but for me, things would look at bit different, and even though I would rather butt out of this thread, I feel there is a need to express a variety of opinions here. So this is certainly not just to oppose you, because I really do respect that this is your take on things. But:

It's difficult for me to understand why my breasts have to be covered in order to set a good example for my children (I don't have any, but I do have nieces and nephews who are just as dear to me). I think I can be a perfecly good role model even with clevage, or even with bare breasts, or hell, even naked.

 

[Lareesie Ladavi]

I certainly do respect your views, but for me, things would look at bit different, and even though I would rather butt out of this thread, I feel there is a need to express a variety of opinions here. So this is certainly not just to oppose you, because I really do respect that this is your take on things. But:

It's difficult for me to understand why my breasts have to be covered in order to set a good example for my children (I don't have any, but I do have nieces and nephews who are just as dear to me). I think I can be a perfecly good role model even with clevage, or even with bare breasts, or hell, even naked.

Well said.

I have a 14-year old son and I know I am the best mom I can be. IN recent years, on the weekends he knows I go out with his father and yes, I will wear things that are somewhat revealing at times. He may not like what I wear, I don't know...But aren't all kids embarrassed by what their parents wear anyway? I remember the "cool" factor, when I was his age. In the same respect, I'm not walking my son to school dressed like this, either.

My husband seems to like the crazy things I invent to wear. [huh]
In all honesty, I look at it as a creative outlet for myself. I love to wear different things...from vintage to vinyl. I like to feel sexy sometimes. If that means cleavage, so be it. On the flip side, turtlenecks can be sexy (especially on men ), but I get tired of dressing corporate all the time.

There all sorts of ways that I'm considerate to others. If my only problem is how I dress for cocktail hour, than I'd say I'm doing pretty good.

All in all, I think it breaks down to "to each their own".

 

[Lady Day]

Gee, I wonder what happened to this?

Ive wanted to do this thread for a while, because I do think it needs discussion. I know I can count on you ladies for enlightened and vigorous talk.

Now I know that standards of modesty have loosened over the decades, but what Im finding in todays world is not only have stilettos found their way into business and casual attire, but serious cleavage as well! I find it distracting seeing a woman in a lovely tailored business type suit at 11 in the morning showing cleavage down to her ribcage. I always assumed cleavage was left for after 5.

On the beach, sure, going to the opera, perhaps, but making a run to the grocery or hardware store, nah.

I dont want this to be a thread about how I hate modern dress, thats not the intent. What Im looking for is a culmination of thoughts on addressing cleavage in your vintage wear and how, if you go to a formal event do you show cleavage, or go backless, which Ive always felt was the cleavage of yesteryear

Id LOVE for ladies who have any vintage etiquette guidelines on the topic to post them, please! Any crazy 'contraptions' of the vintage era as well.

LD

Because now that we've gotten all of the fluff out of the way, I say lets have some real discussion. Because I still believe we can!

 

[Viola]

What Jane is displaying is beyond cleavage. I mean, I was wondering what sort of occasion would that be suitable for!? Posing for a men's magazine would sure do. Or maybe it's a mammary competition and Sofia wasn't told. Either way is not that funny and I can see why Sofia pulls that face. What is even less funny is that she's the one getting the blame, judging by some reactions on this forum.

Now I had a boss who used to wear extremely revealing camisole tops at work and it was because she was an aggressive person who dressed in an aggressive manner. It was hard enough to deal with her personality let alone her tits.

But whether is a projection of someone's personality, confidence or insecurity, bad taste or ignorance of dress codes or of what suits one and what doesn't, I still don't want to have to deal with people's bosoms out on display no matter what, the same way I don't want to have to deal with guys whose trousers are half way down their legs so one can truly appreciate their buttocks or maybe the print of what should be their intimate wear! Sorry, but that puts me, the viewer, in the uncomfortable position of having to see what I don't want to! And the only way one can escape that this days is by staying at home all the time and making sure the television is not on and they don't approach any windows!

In Jane's case, maybe it was just a "faux pas" that accomplished what it was meant to and even more since it gets us talking even after decades -
it's all ok if it's just a publicity stunt, I think I've seen implied. But is it really? Is it all all right if it is just for the publicity, ultimately just for the money? I suppose it is why nowadays we are not shocked to see people selling their cancer stories to tabloids!

And I have to say I'm bored stiff with all this pretense of political correctness which says it is ok for one to display whatever they want but not for the other to flutter an expression, let alone express an opinion. Or if one does dare to commit such a thing, it's got to be sugared to death so it can be swallowed. No thanks. I might next time take the advice of smiling and ignoring altogether. At the end of the day it's a survivor' rule.

So... who makes the rules on what is appropriate? Are ladies still allowed to wear pants?

 

[ScotchWhisky]

I seem to have a similar problem to many women here: I have a Veronica Lake body (literally! 4'11", 34-23-34) and it's hard to find bras that offer support without creating at least a modest cleavage. Sometimes that shows even in vintage or vintage-inspired looks.

I work from home, but I do go to school, and my rule of thumb there is that I don't want to make others uncomfortable or distracted - we are there to learn, after all. However, sometimes a little cleavage shows at the neckline of a wrap dress. It's still pretty modest, and I find that everyone can "talk to my face," so to speak, so I think that is not a problem.

I guess my question in the context of the original intent of this tread is this: how can we argue that cleavage is improper but bullet bras, super-tight sweaters, pencil skirts fitted across the hips, bum and thighs or going braless? All of these styles were designed with sexuality in mind and they're all authentic vintage looks. I believe it was Jean Harlow who used to rub her nipples with ice before photoshoots to make them hard so they would show through her slinky silk gowns. That, to me, is more overtly sexual than a hint of cleavage.

As for going backless - I would love to, for an evening function! However, due to the size of my breasts, going braless is not an option, so I would have to find an accommodating undergarment. I think that a dress that is low-cut in the back is more unexpected, unconventional and sexy than a plunging neckline.

 

[LaMedicine]

Id LOVE for ladies who have any vintage etiquette guidelines on the topic to post them, please! Any crazy 'contraptions' of the vintage era as well.

LD

A lot of what's being said here is most likely in accordance with the amount of permissibility/non-permissibility that the particular person grew up with. At least, that's what's at the base of all the arguments seems to be to me, especially when the opinions veer to whether "I" would or not, which, obviously will end up in "to each her own".

That said. I grew up an embassy brat from the mid '50s to mid '60s. Even though I wan't personally given the guidelines myself, I know that the dress code guidelines for official diplomatic functions that my mother was given from our Ministry of Foreign Affairs when my father was posted in Ankara, Turkey from '55-'59, and in Washingto DC from '61-'65, for western clothes, essentially boiled down to, "after 5:00PM/sundown, the neckline and hemline go down, the sleeves and gloves go up." The diplomatic dress codes are basically conservertive, and were in accordance with the European courts' (as there still are many European countries headed by kings/queens) protocol. Our years in Washington DC weren't as strict as far as I remember, but I think it's more due to the fact that Americans in general were less exacting about how to dress on specific formal occasions than to the fact that it was the '60s that some of you seem to want to blame the decline of *dressing properly* on.

Here are some '50s diplomatic cleavage pics that were taken in our Ankara years. Many official functions had professonal photographers taking various snap shots and portraits, as touting your own camera would have been a very serious breach of protocol.

 

[jac]

The Answer

What's Sofia doing?
Looking for the Candid Camera to peek out of Jayne's cleavage!
It's obvious she's never before seen a female-female impersonator. Up till then there was only one working definition of overexposure.

It seems obvious that Ms. Mansfield was positioned to show-up Sofia, a publicity ploy.

I personally never thought of Mansfield as attractive. Liz Taylor, Helen Mirren, Yvonne DeCarlo, those were, and are attractive actresses. None of them are particularly oversized. They don't have to be.

Makes me think of the old hotrod racer adage; Run whatcha Brung!

 

[cherry lips]

LaMedicine, thank you for posting those rules and pics! :eusa_clap
I agree with Laura Chase here. To me it sounds like a contradiction since a woman breast feeds her children, so her breasts shouldn't be taboo to them. But that was just my personal reaction, I don't judge people who cover up, choose not to breast feed, etc. I love you all (and your girls) !

I certainly do respect your views, but for me, things would look at bit different, and even though I would rather butt out of this thread, I feel there is a need to express a variety of opinions here. So this is certainly not just to oppose you, because I really do respect that this is your take on things. But:

It's difficult for me to understand why my breasts have to be covered in order to set a good example for my children (I don't have any, but I do have nieces and nephews who are just as dear to me). I think I can be a perfecly good role model even with clevage, or even with bare breasts, or hell, even naked.

As for the whole "talk to the face" issue, I' don't have that problem. A quick glance downwards sure, but my commanding presence and witty tongue would never let it linger. When I was a teenager I would have felt self-conscious and upset, but nowadays I have trouble not intimidating people with my intelligence and persona (when all I want is l'amour physique)!

 

[crazydaisy]

Ha ha, cherry lips, you're a sweet and funny lady! Couldn't help but smile when reading your post...

 

[Paisley]

I guess my question in the context of the original intent of this tread is this: how can we argue that cleavage is improper but bullet bras, super-tight sweaters, pencil skirts fitted across the hips, bum and thighs or going braless [isn't]?

I don't think anyone is arguing that a plunging neckline is the only improper look for certain occasions. I recently read about the sweater crisis when women started working in factories during WWII. First they said it was a safety problem because the sweater could get caught in machinery. Then they said it was a moral problem because sweaters were too tight.

Regardless of what you're wearing, the look test (as in, what kind of looks are you getting from people) is probably a good gauge.

 

[Lady Day]

Thank you, LaMedicine for the historical info.

LD

 

[Miss Sis]

Since this is meant to be a discussion regarding some historical info on the subject, I'm surprised no mention has been made regarding the impact of the Hays Code in 1930 for the film industry.

This code covered many things that weren't allowed to be shown on screen, including 'indecent' dresses etc. on women. Costumers, then designers, reacted by covering the decolletage - then cutting the back as low as possible. The back became the 'new' errogenous zone. Slashes or slits that exposed a glimpse of uncorsetted/brassiered back became all the rage. Waists returned to their natural position and became tighter, partly to make backless designs possible.

Other designs of the period of the early - mid 30s often covered the decolletage area with gauzy or sheer materials. This is not to say the designs weren't revealing in other ways (by being cut on the bias, for example, so as to cling to the body) but cleavage as we would understand it in a modern sense was not generally shown.

I'm sure somewhere there would be a picture to disagree with the above but most people would not have wished to expose themselves in what would have been thought an unseemly or imodest way.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I seem to have a similar problem to many women here: I have a Veronica Lake body (literally! 4'11", 34-23-34) and it's hard to find bras that offer support without creating at least a modest cleavage. Sometimes that shows even in vintage or vintage-inspired looks.

That's a very good point -- there's a real structural difference in the sort of underwear worn before the "cleavage era" from the sort worn since. Prior to the fifties, the full-coverage bra was essentially universal, and many of them covered as high as the base of the breastbone. The average woman's undergarments simply didn't allow for exposure of the tops or sides of the breasts -- you might see a little indentation at the top of the bra on a large-bosomed woman, but it wouldn't be emphasized, and more likely the underwear would have been designed to conceal it.

The breasts also weren't pushed together to emphasize cleavage. The dominant silhouette from the late thirties into the forties emphasized the *separation* of the breasts, and underwear was designed with that in mind, rather than pushing them together in the way that's popular now.

That's not to say that special-purpose low-cut underwear didn't exist, but it wasn't easy to find and it wasn't worn by most women.

 

[skinnychik]

That's a good point. I was thinking of my bras designed from 1940s patterns and they're SOOO full coverage. They don't make cleavage; they separate. But I can only wear those with my 40s designed tops because all of my modern twinsets are too low-cut. Even shirtdresses stop the buttons just a few inches above the navel, it seems. That leaves us vintage-inspired dressers to compensate with cami tops, safety pins, and scarves in order to look more authentic.

 

[Caity Lynn]

I'm just going to pop in with a comment about the backs being shown.
I think a persons back can be really sexy, if I had a nice one, I'd show it. I think it's classier than cleavage, but it's simply my opinion.

[huh]

I once let someone who dressed in a way that attracted attention (SHORT shorts, LOW tops, TIGHT everything) Make me feel slutty for wanting to wear a low back dress,:eusa_doh: now, I could care less and still think low back dresses are beautiful.

 

[Miss Caroline]

I like boobies. While I wouldn't walk around in a low cut top during the day I don't see what's wrong with a little cleavage come the evening.
Although we all like and wear vintage/retro fashion, the truth is is that such things are acceptable these days. Fact. And although that shouldn't give todays society permission to throw morals and decency to the wind (which it mostly does) i don't think anyone would think Jaynes dress improper in 2009. b'jeesus, look at the stuff Paris Hilton wears?!

I personally find the shape a bullet bra gives under a high necked garment more suggestive than a v-neck.

Plus, I suffer from a short waist and a larger (although not so large after weightloss) chest and I find high necks make me look something akin to the michelin man. I have never or ever will wear a turtle neck. It's cut is quite possibly the most unflattering style to me in the world.
I like to wear something more fitted up top and then soft flowing and femenine on the bottom half. Not much one for trousers and capri's.

I live by the rule of lower neckline, lower hemline or higher neckline, higher hemline.
Never both. Boobs or legs.
I mostly opt for boobs as I prefer full skirts.
Ladies, breast, is best. However, One must always leave something to the imagination. ;-)

 

[anabolina]

I have been reading this thread and have been giving my response a great deal of thought, cleavage is a very subjective item. Each one of us has a different way of looking at an item of clothing being worn and deciding if it shows to much cleavage or not and what would look good on us ( individually), there are times when I see women down the street who I think should not have worn a certain blouse,dress because it shows a bit of cleavage but they may think that I look frumpy.

I had a very large bust, but I was lucky enough to get it reduced, so I now can wear dress's and shirts that I would never have dreamt wearing before, but I think very carefully on what I pick. I have small children so for me I want to set a good example and try to keep the "girls" covered, or if there is a small amount of cleavage showing I make sure it is in the appropriate time slot and at the appropriate event/function, I also try to think how my husband would feel when there are other men staring at my chest.

ITA Kyda, modesty is good (IMHO obviously). Congrats on your surgery. I have 2 sisters who have really large chests and all the aches pains, and stares that go with it. Not a problem for me. I like tops/dresses that reveal the collarbone, but aren't too low. This means a well buttoned cardigan is SO helpful since it can be difficult to find not-too-low stuff in stores and I hate resewing stuff, so tend to leave the dresses that are too low as-is and use a cardigan.

 

[Anachronism]

I think a woman's natural body has to be taken into account when judging cleavage. I know a girl who is about my size, but has breasts abotu 5x bigger than mine. Her trying hard to NOT show cleavage ends up looking like me trying to show a TON.

I think that if a woman's body naturally shows cleavage when she's wearing normal clothes, that's generally ok. She shouldn't have to go to great lengths to hide her body. A little bit of boob can be feminine. Wearing a push up bra and undoing the top 5 buttons on your shirt, however, is trashy.

So i guess it's about intent and the amount of effort put into the cleavage.

Stay Classy

 

[Lady Day]

Since this is meant to be a discussion regarding some historical info on the subject, I'm surprised no mention has been made regarding the impact of the Hays Code in 1930 for the film industry.

Now that you mention it, I was wondering about that too! lol
The Hays Code was a 'moral compass' for early film/TV. Its amazing when you read it, how to the wayside it is today.

Other designs of the period of the early - mid 30s often covered the decolletage area with gauzy or sheer materials. This is not to say the designs weren't revealing in other ways (by being cut on the bias, for example, so as to cling to the body) but cleavage as we would understand it in a modern sense was not generally shown.

I'm sure somewhere there would be a picture to disagree with the above but most people would not have wished to expose themselves in what would have been thought an unseemly or imodest way.

I have found, in my hunting for clothes, that hte 30s were very silk and sheer heavy, as you have said. Perhaps this is a result, as has been mentioned in other threads, the idea that 30s clothing was very event specific, compared to later decades.

The 40s were stiffer more versatile fabrics. Women were working, taking on traditional male roles. Then in the 50s we reverted back to the over feminine, almost a caricature concept of the female form, and cleavage thrived.

LD