Aesthetics on the Subject of Clothing

Esteban, Fermin, Layug, Ramento, Ramirez, Rodelas, Tornea

Clothing is a part of our practical and daily lives, much like any other. Yet, we find ways to

channel our expression through such and to convey messages like so (A blunt example could be a

statement shirt). More often than not, the wrong interpretation may come across those who hold on

toxic societal beliefs. These assumptions are not necessarily true, but are believed to be since it is a

mindset shared by many.

A study that was conducted by Johnson and Workman (1992), classified clothing as either

provocative or non-provocative. Provocative clothing would be described as a low cut blouse, a skirt that

is above the knew, dark hose and high-heeled shoes, while non-provocative clothing would be the exact

opposite of what was stated, such as a high cut blouse, a skirt that is below the knee, nude-colored hose

and moderately heeled shoes. This is disregarding the behavior of the subject. Thus, the default

situation is that the person is merely a passerby, and that consent is subject to their clothing.

Based on the results of the experiment, the third hypothesis is supported since the subjects

assigned more blame to a victim wearing revealing (or provocative, rather) clothing. This finding

assumes the inference that clothing is a key factor in assuring safety and security to the victim, and that

to wear less revealing or provocative clothing would decrease the likelihood of sexual crimes

committed.

Yet another research done by Richards, Rollerson, and Phillips (1991) is against this assumption.

It suggests that men ought to target submissive women, and that this is determined by their clothing as
well. Submissive women are described as those who wear the opposite, which are clothing that conceal

their bodies, those that are not revealing.

The multitude of results and ideas presented proves that the perception lies on the perpetrator,

rather than the victim. As women of this society, we disagree with a number of articles written about

such issue. First and foremost, women, or victims in general, are never and should never be blamed in

such instances, rather it should be the crime-doers that should be held responsible for their malicious

actions and that consequences should be applied. If we were to look at the research, women who wear

both revealing and non-revealing clothes experience such sexual advances despite how much skin is

shown, thus making arguments such as “if women wear revealing clothes then they are inviting sexual

advances” not plausible. We strongly advocate that women should never fear to wear what they please

in expense for their safety, as everyone should feel free and comfortable to express themselves in what

they wear.

Moreover, it should be these men who should be the main target of anti-rape and anti-sexual

assault campaigns and should be of priority to educate them to not commit such indecency to other

human beings, rather than the victims being scolded or blamed for “showing too much skin”. The

amount of skin we show in what we choose to wear does not equate to our sexual desires, and even so,

consent should always be present, whether a woman is wearing shorts or wearing jeans. The fact that

many women and young girls have been scared to go to public places such as malls, restaurants, and

even on the streets, regardless of what they are wearing, alone in fear of sexual harassment is a pity and

is proof of how misogynistic our society is and how it has such weak support and protection for the

rights of women, say, for simply feeling safe enough to be able to wear whatever they wanted to

wherever they go.

 We hope we can voice out our advocacy and change how society views these women and

victims of sexual crimes induced by clothing. It is time to stop blaming both women and sexual assault

victims for the things they simply choose to do for themselves, which we should keep in mind, are things

that do not bring any kind of harm or offense to anyone, and start holding assaulters who are fully

capable of controlling whatever “urge” or act that they do rightfully accountable for the fear they create

and harm they commit against these victims.

References

1. Johnson, K. K. P., & Workman, J. E. (1994). Blaming the victim: Attributions

concerning sexual harassment based on clothing, just-world belief, and sex of subject.

Home Economics Research Journal, 22(4), 382–400. doi:10.1177/0046777494224002

2. Moor, A. (2010). She dresses to attract, he perceives seduction: A gender gap

in attribution of intent to women’s revealing style of dress and its relation to blaming

the victims of sexual violence. Journal of International Women's Studies, 11(4), 115-127.

Retrieved from http://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol11/iss4/8

3. Montemurro, B., & Gillen, M. M. (2013). How clothes make the woman

immoral. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 31(3), 167–181.

doi:10.1177/0887302x13493128