Follow Up: Feminism and the Slave Leia Costume

So, I wrote a post for FFB a while back on why I won't be making the Slave Leia costume.  Not long after that, I suddenly found myself being asked about it more often.  And it wasn't by people who read the post, I guess I just started doing more events, and as a non-slave Leia, and one who could carry off the costume, I get asked a lot why I'm not doing it.

I've been impressed, for the most part, with the acceptance of my views on this one.  The reaction I get the most is, "Wow, you've really thought this through.  I don't think most people think about it that much."  And it's true, they don't.  And especially now that convention season is upon us, lots of Slave Leias will be coming out of the woodwork.  It's a costume anyone with enough money and comfort with one's own body can do- $300 for the hard parts, and the sewing is minimal.  And it's a big attention-getter at cons.  Everybody loves Princess Leia, but you'll get a lot more fanboys stopping you if you're dressed in the metal bikini.

This leads me to two interesting stories from Wizard World Anaheim.  Sunday, I dressed in the classic dress with the hair buns.

Fantastically fun and comfortable costume.  Absolutely love it.  I can't believe it took me this long to do it.  Anyway, I was sitting at the Rebel Legion table, minding the shop, when a random guy walked by and asked me, "Why aren't you wearing the metal bikini?"  Without a missing a beat, I looked up at him and replied, "It was a traumatic experience."  He just stopped in his tracks, looked confused for a moment, and then said, "Yeah... I guess it would be, wouldn't it?"

Second, I was wandering around Artist Alley, checking out the various booths, when someone in a Power Girl costume stopped me to tell me how awesome she thought it was that I was wearing the classic Leia and not the slave Leia.  Apparently Saturday's Leia got a similar comment from someone.  I guess it shows considerable hope that the fully clothed Leias are being applauded for it.  I did joke with one of my friends, after she texted me about the Slave Leia booth at Wonder Con, about starting a Fully Clothed Leia booth at cons.  Maybe there's an actual market for such a thing.  Who knows?

In any case, interesting all around.  I am heartened to know that when my position is explained to people, I'm not dismissed as an angry feminist.  The worst I've gotten is someone who insisted that my willingness to make one skin-baring costume but not another was based on a subtle difference, but even so, 'subtle' does not mean 'unimportant.'  I do think context matters, and I will take the time to explain that to anyone who has a problem with my choices.  So far, understanding has been had on all sides, so I think only good things can come of it.

FFB: Dress Like a Feminist

I'll be honest, this was a hard question for me.  I've considered myself a feminist since high school, but only recently started putting a concentrated effort into my wardrobe.  I knew what I liked, and I knew what fit, and I learned what didn't work for me, but I paid minimal attention to what was 'in style.'

 My choices in fashion have ranged from boring to interesting to questionable.  I went through a really heavily hippie phase in college when the swap boxes roamed free and I could unload all the clothes I didn't wear in exchange for someone else's unwanted clothes.  I cut up my t-shirts and tied them back together, I wore wrap skirts and ran barefoot across the lawn, I mixed colours in ways my mother deemed unadvisable, but at the end of the day I always got to choose.  I remember one time I wore an outfit my older sister (who is not really that interested in feminism) thought was outrageous.  It wasn't, not really, but it was different.  I took a nice dress and layered it over some nice pants, and used a costume belt to tie the whole thing up.  She outright told me that "Mom will never let you out of the house like that."  Well, my mom is only a little more traditional than I am, so she definitely did let me out of the house exactly like that.  She recognized that, even though my choices were different, they were my choices to make.  This was true of my clothing, my college choice, and pretty much everything in my life.

I suppose what it all boils down to is that feminism is the idea that women have the right to choose their paths, their lives, their dreams, their friends, and even their clothes.  And in that sense, I take that freedom and run with it.  I take bits and pieces of clothing and mix them around in whatever way I think looks interesting.  Sometimes this means wearing silly t-shirts, and sometimes this means wearing really nicely designed dresses. 

Truth is, anyone can be a feminist, so a feminist can look like anyone.  The important thing is that nobody else gets to decide what you wear.

FFB: Feminism and the Slave Leia Costume

I’ve only been doing this blog for a short time, and it’s already clear to anyone who’s kept up with it that I am an unabashed nerd.  The kind that runs around in costumes.

Now, there are a lot of stereotypes that surround the costuming community.  Costumers are overweight and socially awkward.  Costumers do what they do to escape their own miserable reality.  Costumers never get laid. That’s all much more than I have any intention of addressing here.  What I’m here to talk about today is how my feminism affects my costuming habits.

I’m a small, brown-haired, relatively pretty young woman.  In the general sense, this makes me a great Princess Leia.  I’ve been wearing her Ceremonial gown from the end of A New Hope for years, and pretty soon I’ll have finished the Senatorial gown (aka the classic white dress with the cinnamon bun hair).  And Leia is a totally kickass character, so I can get on board with this.  There is one Leia costume, however, I will never make.

I’ll warn you, this might get a little ranty.  Disclaimers first, though: I have nothing against anyone who chooses to make the costume and wear it.  I can no sooner force anyone out of the metal bikini than anyone can force me into it.

Shortly before my college graduation in 2007, someone posted a short article on TheForce.Net reminding people to tune into a show discussion the question “Slave Leia Costumes: Art or Objectification?”  Having very nearly completed my studies at the extremely feminist-friendly Oberlin College, by then I had plenty of thoughts on the matter as soon as the question was posed.  There’s no discussion on the article itself, but there was discussion on the Angels of Iego costuming forums.  Sadly, I can’t link you to the original debate because someone hacked the forums and everyone’s old posts were nuked.  Suffice to say, opinions were split on the matter.

I fell strongly into the camp that said, “Well, of course it’s objectification.”  I mean, this doesn’t mean you can’t wear it, but you do have to accept that, as a consequence of wearing the costume, you will be objectified.  It’s possible that four years in the computer science department had jaded me, but I knew exactly what most guys were thinking when they saw the costume.  I knew it because half the time they forgot I was in the room and failed to filter their comments.  

And even more than that, it’s objectification in universe.  Leia isn’t shown to wear that costume because she has a particular bondage kink.  She doesn’t put it on willingly, nor does she show any indication that she likes wearing such things as a matter of course.  The entire reason she is wearing that bikini is because she was Jabba the Hutt’s prisoner, and he was all too happy to find such a way to humiliate the Rebel Princess.  The chain around her neck is used to force her closer to him, even when it’s clear she’d rather be anywhere else.  It’s a deliberate attempt to strip her of her dignity.

I will grant that she did turn it around and use the chain to choke him to death, but that doesn’t make it an empowering costume.  It makes Leia an empowered character who is better than that costume.

My opinion, of course, was met with much criticism.  Most notably was with the owner of Leia’s Metal Bikini, a website that features photos of women wearing the Slave Leia costume.  It’s run by a man who goes by the name Jamin.  He insisted that it wasn’t objectification on any levels, and seemed to think it was insulting to the fine ladies on his site that I thought so (at least, this is the impression I have in my memory).  Which I found particularly hilarious coming from him.  Now, I can’t find the original graphic I complained about, but he hasn’t disappointed me.  Back in 2007, it was time for Star Wars: Celebration IV, and there was to be a Slave Leia photo shoot.  It was advertised using a photo with text over it.  The photo was of three Slave Leias, cropped from their necks down to their knees.

Excuse my caps, but NOT SUBTLE AT ALL, PEOPLE.

Though I can’t find that particular graphic anymore, the header image from his website is just as bad:

In the interest of fairness, I’ll give you his reasoning.  He said he knew the ladies in question and didn’t want to use their likeness without their permission.  I guess it’s okay to plaster the mostly naked bodies of women around the internet as long as you don’t show their faces?  Also, he knows these ladies, and writing e-mails to ask for permission is hard.

And it’s not just him. I single him out because he owns the prominent Slave Leia costuming site and calls himself “Slavemaster,” but he’s hardly alone.  There was a G4TV Slave Leia car wash about a year ago, which I almost participated in as a regular Leia.  They’d simply advertised it as a “Star Wars Charity Car Wash,” and I was all gung ho to show up as Leia until it was moved to the weekend of a college reunion.

I’ll be honest: had I gone, I would have walked out. G4 isn’t known for its feminist ideals, so I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised.

For me, what I wear when I’m out as a costumer has an even greater impact than the clothes I choose to wear at work.  I work in a cave.  But when I'm out in costume, I'm surrounded by people.  Some of them very young people, who I don't want to give the impression that Leia was okay with being dressed up like a dancing girl.  As a woman in costuming, particularly in a franchise that is often perceived as being "for boys," I am in a unique position to encourage the younger nerd girls that yeah, it's okay to love Star Wars.  There are girls who are awesome in the franchise, and we're not just there to be eye candy.

I commend you if you made it all the way through that.  If any of you who made it this far have any opinions on the matter, I’d love to hear them.  Is there a context in which this costume isn’t objectification?  Would you be willing to wear it?

Feminist Fashion Blogs: Elizabeth Smith Miller, Feminist Fashion Icon

Today I am talking about pants.  Or, more specifically, bloomers.  Even more specifically Elizabeth Smith Miller and her band of "Bloomer Girls."

Scandalous!  Or so it was thought for a long time.  The motivation of Elizabeth Smith Miller's outfit is not entirely clear- she said it was because she would get frustrated trying to garden in long skirts (and really, who can dispute a valid point like that?), but it's also speculated she was inspired by the spas at the the Oneida utopian community near her father's house, where such outfits were worn frequently.  In any case, this all became a big thing when she convinced a few of her friends- Amelia Bloomer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and eventually Susan B. Anthony to wear this sort of dress.

There were many names suggested for the garment.  "Freedom dress" was the one advocated by women's rights activists, but "bloomers" is the name that stuck.  It's generally speculated that this is because Bloomer was a known newspaper editor.  It also has a much better ring to it, in my humble opinion.

In any case, such outfits had been worn privately for years in spas and utopian communities, but when Bloomer, Stanton, and Miller wore them publicly, it created quite the stir.  After all, women wearing pants could only lead to the decline of masculinity: "these ladies assert their claim to rights, which we of bifurcated raiment are charged with usurping. This claim conflicts with, and if secured, will tend to diminish the rights of masculine mankind...he must be blind who does not perceive...a storm that shall eventually rob manhood of all it’s grand prerogatives." That's straight out of the New York Times in 1852.

Whatever 'grand prerogatives' mankind had in 1852 that it lost as a result of our gall to wear pants, I'm pretty sure they've survived pretty well without them.

Of course, the women who chose to wear bloomers suffered for those choices, and in a fashion that is completely typical for the media, they discovered that their mode of dress was drawing attention away from issues they deemed more important, such as education, employment, and suffrage.  They slowly phased the bloomers out of their everyday wardrobes, but by that time the bloomers had become a staple item among bicyclists.  Once World War I rolled around and women took civilian jobs that had once belonged to men, they started wearing trousers, and once that happened, pants for women were here to stay.

Even though I'm mildly disappointed to read that they gave up on the fashion instead of sticking to their guns, I think it was a smart decision to focus on things that mattered a lot more in the short run, and let the fashion sort itself out over the long haul.  Future generations got to enjoy pants and voting, which are both things I enjoy very much.

Here's to the women who gave us pants.  I'd climb fewer trees without them.

EDIT: Credit where credit is due- I got most of my information from this article, which is a more thorough and academic version of what you just read here.  It's fascinating reading and I want to find the book she cites at the bottom, "Pantaloons and Power: A Nineteenth-Century Dress Reform in the United States," by Gayle V. Fischer.  There's all kinds of things that could be said about pants and gender dynamics in the US over history, but that is a project for someone less sleep deprived than I am. :)