Why did women in the 1800's wear uncomfortable, inpractical clothes?

Question

I know people do odd stuff for the sake of fashion, but the women in the 1800's really wore inpractical dresses. Why bother wearing long, ruffled dresses when it's hot? If you're working, why not wear shorts and a plain shirt with a sun hat?

Answer 1

For the very same reason women/girls wear uncomfortable impractical clothes today.
However, standards of dress for women in the 1800's was far different than what we think acceptable today.

Women dressed in accordance to standards of modesty. Keeping arms, legs covered was the norm and since
Christian scripture said that the sexes should not imitate each other via dress it mean women felt pants were immodest.

But the long dresses actually provided more protection against sun damage than our clothes today do and though they were bulky the belled skirts of the mid 19th C (1800'a) actually helped women stay cool.

On the journey west, it was not uncommon for women to wear pants on the rougher part of the trail but they wore work dresses and poke bonnets for the most part

Answer 2

For the same reason that I still see young women walking around on a cold day looking miserable beause they're only wearing a t-shirt as carrying a coat is not cool or whatever their reason is.

The thing about all that clothing the women in the 1800s wore, is that they were used to it. If it was really hot then they had parasols to keep the sun off them and wide brimmed hats. All the lace and frills were considered very fashionable and were a sign of wealth as well.
Women back then were discourged from doing a lot of the physical exerercise they do today. Those that did physical labour were from the lower classes and they did wear simple more practical clothing.
In England (and you'll never see a movie about this) the men who worked in the mines in summer were often naked. Children were used to carry food and messages to them and the children, including girls up to age 12, were sent into the mines topless and probably naked too.

Answer 3

I know that I put on some makeup in the morning, but mainly it's just some concleacer and mascara. Personally, I think that wearing uncomfortable clothes is pathetic. I wear clothes that I like and also ones that aren't going to kill me half way through the day. And than there is the influences in Hollywood and magazines, telling us how we need to look. Honestly, it's scary to know that 1 in 3 ten year old girls is on a diet because of how Hollywood and the people around them say how they should look. You're right, I don't understand why girls do these things to themselves. I don't think that was what you were looking for, but maybe it'll help.

Answer 4

In the Late 1800's during the Victorian Age Women did where very impractical dresses, but during the early 1800's women wore rather simple and comfortable clothing. Most Jane Austen Movies such as the new Pride & Prejudice have the actresses dressed in that fashion.

Answer 5

Fact is, the typical attire of the women u referred to being long,ruffled dresses, was European and Europe for most part of the year is cold,chilly and cloudy (such as England) Apart from protecting themselves from the fierce weather, u must note it was an orthodox time when any skin show was considered vulgar...
If however u look at the clothing of women in the more hot,tropical regions such as Asia or Africa, u will find it more minimal,less rfuffled or layered and more comfortable materials like cotton...
but i do agree that in the 1800's women did wear uncomfortable clothes. a best example is the corset.. sure,it gave u shape but basically it squeezed the breath out. Imagine wearin ur 4th std top and acting like a lady, OUCH!! ;)

Answer 6

Those long ruffled dresses were not used for working outdoors. That stuff was high fashion and was worn by the elite. One of the marks of wealth in those days was to be really pale, because that meant you didn't have to spend time working outdoors in the sun.

The peasants that did work outside wore much simpler clothing. Still not shorts and a tank top, but a basic dress that would not have been too cumbersome. In those days it was not considered acceptable for women to wear pants, that was considered man clothes.

Answer 7

As well as wanting to apear beutiful, corsets etc have a practical side. If you can only afford 1 or 2 dresses, having a device that ensures that, no matter what the fluctuations in your natural waist line, the dress will fit, is desirable.

Also, the bra and modern styles are only really possible with the advent of modern materials, like elastic.

Finally, religion. Long dresses, with thrills, etc. could be the 19th C Christian equivelent of the Burka. IE it covers all the necessary body parts etc. Also, modesty. Even today, as women get older, the hem lines get longer. So if the hem line is long, as soon as a girl reaches mariagable age: 1 modesty is preserved. 2. Christian view of chased womed preserved. 3. Men not likely to take advantage and woman to lose reputation.

Luck

Answer 8

Well, I think that the women of 1800's would get really surprised if they could see how we dress now!!!!

They might have been uncomfortable, but customs of that time were like that!

Answer 9

As a Civil War reenactor i know many women who regularly wear those clothes, correct down to each bit of underthings. Many of them prefer them to there modern clothes.

First off a dress held away from you with a hoop is MUCH cooler then jeans, and secondly when working they wore much different clothes then the ones you are thinking of, but not shorts, it would have been disgraceful

Answer 10

It was the fashion/style of the day. It would have been unthinkable in those times for women to show so much skin. Wearing big dresses was a symbol of status.

But I agree with you. No wonder so many women "swooned" back then. Their fainting was due to heat and being unable to breathe properly from the cinches.

God bless sweatpants! lol