Look at this photo: does Sophia Loren look like a hoochie?

[golfgal]

While the clothing was more form fitting, it was not as revealing-you don't see thongs hanging out of the back of their pants or bra straps. You don't see bare midriffs either. I remember the HUGE controversy when Cher had a cutout on her evening gown that showed her belly button. THAT was racy back in the early 70's even. If someone wore a sleeveless shirt, it was still a button up shirt with a collar, not a spaghetti strapped tank-top with no bra underneath. You most certainly did NOT see butt cheeks hanging out underneath shorts like you see with the teen girls today.


I remember in 5th grade we went on a field trip to the historical museum in our town. They had dresses from the 1850's on display and boy were people back then TINY!!! They had a pair of gloves that you could try on and I couldn't get them on my hands and I was the smallest girl in the class (short and thin) and these were made for adults. When I was in high school it was VERY unusual to have a girl on a basketball team that was 6' tall or taller, now you see entire starting line-ups where girls are 6' and TALLER. It doesn't take long for body shapes/heights to change.

 

[cm8]

While the clothing was more form fitting, it was not as revealing-you don't see thongs hanging out of the back of their pants or bra straps. You don't see bare midriffs either. I remember the HUGE controversy when Cher had a cutout on her evening gown that showed her belly button. THAT was racy back in the early 70's even. If someone wore a sleeveless shirt, it was still a button up shirt with a collar, not a spaghetti strapped tank-top with no bra underneath. You most certainly did NOT see butt cheeks hanging out underneath shorts like you see with the teen girls today.


I remember in 5th grade we went on a field trip to the historical museum in our town. They had dresses from the 1850's on display and boy were people back then TINY!!! They had a pair of gloves that you could try on and I couldn't get them on my hands and I was the smallest girl in the class (short and thin) and these were made for adults. When I was in high school it was VERY unusual to have a girl on a basketball team that was 6' tall or taller, now you see entire starting line-ups where girls are 6' and TALLER. It doesn't take long for body shapes/heights to change.

I agree

 

[Aisling]

Even flying on a plane was reason to get dress up. You never saw people on planes as casual as you do now.

I remember an episode of I Love Lucy when she had to go downtown and she wanted Ethel to go with her. Ethel had to go change her clothes first because she said "I am NOT going on the subway in my bluejeans!"

 

[3boymthr]

I'm still not sure you are seeing everyday people wearing everyday clothes. Cameras, film and processing were still quite expensive in the 40's and 50's and people didn't just take pictures of themselves on a whim. My guess is that many of your family photographs were taken at a gathering where people were already more dressed up. Think about how people dress in the downtown area of a busy city v/s how they dress back at home.

I think you have a good point about body size and nutrition. Look at North Korean children today compared to their South Korean counterparts. One third of the MK kids suffer from stunted growth from malnutrition while the SK kids do not.

My grandfather was an semi-professional photographer. He mostly took pics for fun but would take the odd paying job (you know those annual photos of the fire department in front of the truck, etc.). He took tons and tons and tons of photos and many many of them were casual photos. We're not talking dozens or hundreds of photos but rather THOUSANDs of photos. They'd have friends over for cards and he'd start posing them in crazy positions, etc. There are pics of the kids playing in the backyard. Photos of the family at the beach, etc. much like you'd see today. My other grandparents OTH had only a book of photos.

 

[IdesOmarch]

A lot of this is probably due to the fact that the TV and movie producers and directors of this day, wanted their actresses to look as sexy as possible, but mini-skirts weren't in yet, so this was the next best thing in being sexy back in this day (tight fitting dresses). I think it was Alfred Hitchcock was one, that never allowed women in his movies unless they had on tall heels. (Now can you guess who my favorite director is?)

 

[Aisling]

I think it was Alfred Hitchcock was one, that never allowed women in his movies unless they had on tall heels. (Now can you guess who my favorite director is?)

Idesie, you're so cute. I'll have you know I can never look at my high heeled shoes again without you coming to mind.

 

[denisem]

As always, I'm late to this rodeo, but have a little something to add.

Google "Sophia Loren Jane Mansfield" and check out a FAMOUS photo from that era. You'll see the difference between sexy and "hootchie".

I was born in 1953, and have family photos of "regular women" wearing form-fitting clothes - maybe the cleavage was reserved for movie stars & special occasions.

However, they wore armored foundations, girdles & stockings, gloves & hats where "coverage" seemed to balance out the (somewhat) tight clothing.

 

[Styx Fan]

I have plenty of pictures of my mom (born in 1932) from the '50's and used to have lots of the clothes. I can say for positive not all of the women back then dressed with that much showing up top My mom would have been mortified, and I would guess so would her friends based on the pictures.

Mom did have some really nice things...I agree they were made better back then and people did dress better on a daily basis. When I was kid in the early '70's it took mom forever to get dressed for the weekly Saturday grocery shopping with Dad. She wore a skirt/dress, did her hair, etc. She was a SAHM so weekdays she was pretty casual, but nothing like I am every day.

I'm not sure she went out without a girdle until the '80's!