Wow. SO not a fan of Bratz, but this --

I have never had trouble finding clothes that COVER ME, bending or standing, and I can shop at Old Navy for them. It creeps me out that repressive pseudo-religious "values" can be used as a marketing tool.{I fully support providing Muslim or Jewish peoples chic clothing options that fit a religious or cultural differences, but to market modesty as a brand to American women...? What, we now have to BUY it, we can't just have it on our own?)

Why am I surprised? 'Christian values' have been prostituted in politics for years.

Ugh.

Great post. I think there are corresponding though different men's movements that warrant similar attention - but for various reasons critiques of female submission have made more progress than critiques of male dominance have (us mens' fault for that probably). I had no idea about this movement and appreciate your blogging about it. Good for you taking risks by making statements like these on your blog about marketing too. One more reason I've been finding this one of my favorite reads online lately.

Fundamentalism is (thankfully) just one of many smaller lifestyle niches in American society - and once any niche gets big enough it makes economic sense to market to it.

At a guess, selling modest clothing as part of a socially conservative/religious lifestyle will be good for business in the first stage of growth but the companies will have to abandon or play down the message as they get larger - for the simple fact that extreme social conservatism is (again, thankfully) only appealing to a small segment of the population, whilst quite a significant number of women just want non-revealing but stylish clothing.

This is no different than something like Hot Topic which markets to young girls who want to "make a statement", except in this case the statement is of modesty and traditional values - in the beginning they'll sell to the "hardcore" to build a following, then water down the message to appeal to the masses.

I gues I don't get the creepy or scary part of this marketing trend. If some girls want classy, modest clothing to wear, why not sell that clothing to them?

Hi Sherry. I don't think I ever used the words "creepy" or "scary" in the post -- just that these brands were started with the intent of promoting a particular religious point of view and agenda around why women and girls should dress modestly, and that they are part of a larger "modesty movement."

I found the LA Times piece totally slanted. Have you read Shalit's books? I'm almost done her latest book, Girls Gone Mild, and there's only one chapter about modesty. The rest is about a different set of roles models than those we always hear about. Shouldn't you read Shalit's books before deciding whether or not you have the willies about the stuff she purportedly talks about? Even if I don't agree with a lot of what she says, she makes some very good points.

It's easy to dismiss others out of hand, but shouldn't those who want to dress modestly, or have personal dignity, be allowed to do so? Who says they're imposing their way on others?

And to the commentator who says "but to market modesty as a brand to American women...? What, we now have to BUY it, we can't just have it on our own?)", well, no, you don't have to buy anything. That's the beauty of being a consumer. You choose. No one's forcing you do buy anything. Just because companies market thong underwear for my six year old daughter doesn't mean that I'm going to buy them for her, now does it?

"I don't think I ever used the words "creepy" or "scary""

Well, you did say, "gives me the willies" . . . what's the difference? Nevertheless, your intent is clear, given your association of wanting to dress modestly with some "organized movement" or "promoting a particular religious point of view."

The fact that there is some overlap between, say, people who feel like abortion may have moral implications and people who aren't keen on teenage booty cleavage doesn't mean that modesty is ominous. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and I think that fundamentalists have it right about modesty.

Hi Ned. We obviously have very different politics, which is fine. Ypulse welcomes commenters of all stripes. What gave me "the willies" was the movement itself (which we obviously disagree on), and fashion brands inspired by religion and designed to promote a certain agenda, not any individual person's desire to dress modestly.

Hi Joan. I said in the post that I had not read Shalit's books and was responding to the article and the websites mentioned in the article, which was an opinion piece.

And just as I said to Ned, I support anyone wanting to dress however they want. I was merely questioning the "movement" behind dressing this way and the religious inspiration behind some of the brands.

Crack kill! I mean, really. I like this modesty movement. Just don't think about the so-called fundamentalist overtones. Modesty and abstinence shouldn't be held in derision. It should be respected. It takes a lot more self-control and use of your mind than just letting yourself do whatever. It's the same with modesty. It requires a higher degree of creativity to look attractive and stylish and still be modest.