âShapewearâ is a branch of the underwear market which focuses on altering the shape of the female body by compressing certain areas and âenhancingâ others. The concept of shapewear throws up a lot of questions around feminism, personal choice, and the idea of the female body needing to be âfixedâ. Here, we take a deeper look at the arguments on both sides.
The Origins of Shapewear
The corset as we think of it today originated in western Europe. In the 1500s, women of the French court embraced the idea of a tight bodice worn beneath clothing, seeing it as âindispensable to the beauty of the female figure,â writes corsetière Carol Stella. By the middle of the 16th century, corsets were commonly worn by European and British women.
From this centuries-old body shaping device evolved the modern shapewear weâre familiar with. Its origin as a method of contorting the female abdomen is problematic, of course. But, with modern societyâs complex ideas around feminism and personal choice, how can we best define the purpose of shapewear?
How Does the Current Market Shape Up?
Whilst we canât ignore shapewearâs problematic origins, many modern day brands cite its applications as those of body positivity, confidence and personal choice.
In 2018, the global shapewear market was valued at ÂŁ1.7 billion, and projected to expand at an annual rate of 7.7% between 2019-25. Research firms have credited the upsurge in the athleisure trend as a key factor in shapewearâs rise, as well as âunderwear as outerwearâ seen across both catwalks and street style â as with 2019âs cycling short trend. Whatâs more, WGSN reports size inclusivity and comfort contribute to shapewear products becoming pieces of fashion in their own right.
Similarly, Market Watch credits celebrity branding, as well as advancements in shapewear design and fabrics. On the whole, market research firms widely predict the shapewear market to grow significantly over the next three years.
Shapewear Brands and Ethics
Whilst leading brands include the iconic Spanx, as well as Triumph and Shapers, a number of young direct-to-consumer brands have recently entered the market. Kim Kardashian Westâs âSkims Solutionwearâ launched in 2019. At the time of writing over half Skimsâ shaping products were sold out or available on a waiting list basis. However, does deeming the collection âsolutionwearâ almost suggest that womenâs bodies sans-shapewear are a âproblemâ to be solved?
In September, West added controversial âwaist trainersâ to her line. Conceptually similar to the corset, doctors have repeatedly noted the adverse health implications associated with waist trainers, which can include blood clots, breathing problems and indigestion. The trainersâ questionable product copy describes an aim to âinstantly erase inchesâ from the wearerâs waist.
Launched in 2014, Heist Studios is a refreshing alternative, that doesnât treat womenâs natural bodies as a problem. Whilst still a shapewear brand, Heistâs mission isnât so much about moulding bodies to match a single ideal, but about âliberating women from disappointing underwear.â Heist believes underwear can be an instrument for progress by offering women an alternative to the uncomfortable underwear weâre used to. Furthermore, the brandâs sustainability initiative, Planet Heist, aims to reduce its environmental impacts, and support workers in its supply chain.
It could be argued that Heist embodies a more feminist approach to shapewear, whilst brands like Skims are counterproductive. But then, who can say what different women are empowered by? Or that Heist isnât essentially the same brand as Skims with different marketing strategies? On the whole, what messages are brands sending by suggesting women need these products before they can feel confident?
Old-Fashioned Attitudes
âWhile shapewear used to be used to compress oneâs body, it is now used to enhance shape and maximise comfort,â argues fashion consultant Ayako Homma, âwomen are dressing for themselves.â Hommaâs point suggests that shapewear, like other traditionally gendered beauty standards, have been reclaimed by women, harnessed for their own empowerment. Really, is choosing to wear a slimming bodysuit or lifting bra any different from choosing to wear a bright lipstick simply because it makes you feel good?
With this in mind, we can question why such controversy still exists around shapewear. Perhaps it largely lies with the sexualised marketing techniques used in the past â an image which the industry is struggling to shake. Wonderbraâs 1994 âHello Boysâ campaign sparked an outcry, as feminists pointed out it catered the male gaze. Long before Wonderbraâs iconic billboards, vintage manufacturers advertised âbelly-flattenersâ and bras to âglorify your figure.â Whilst none of these ads openly discuss the implication of the male gaze, there are certainly undertones of conformity and beauty standards.
Likely set out by male industry executives, these notions are still central to what shapewear is in many peopleâs minds. Despite our modern attitudes to body acceptance, old ideas are still difficult to move past for many consumers.