Some tidbits from the Arizona Daily Star June 7, 1916, beginning with an opinion:
STANDARDIZING CLOTHES
That the women of America shall standardize their street dress was proposed and discussed as a serious measure in the convention of the General Federation of Women's clubs. The arguments were all favorable.
Miss Helen I. Johnson of Chicago, chairman of the committee on dress, stated that after studying the matter for years, she had become convinces that a standardized street dress for women, corresponding to the sack suit of the men, would not only make the American woman more dignified in dress and deportment but would cut her dressmaking bills in two.
Mrs. Thomas Edison and Mrs. Robert J. Burdette also spoke for a conventional standard.
Usually when any such reform has come into discussion, the manufacturers of women's wear have been against it. This time, says Miss Johnson, she consulted many and all were in favor of the plan. The fact is that although the woman would spend far less for her street clothes, the manufacturer would not lose. At present by far the greatest expense connected with the making of clothing is the mad search for novelty— the greatest loss is from styles which do not "take." All this excess work, worry and loss would be eliminated. Makers of men's wear find no difficulty in showing a profit.
The fact that a standardized costume had been adopted would not bar out individuality. In fact, with the element of kaleidoscopic style taken away, a woman would have far more chance to exercise her own taste in color, fabric and adaptation to her own person than is now the case. And the manufacturer, like any craftsman who is worth his salt, would far rather use his skill in making garments of good texture and durable quality than in turning out the shoddy, hastily-made stuff which covers half the women on the street today.
Any demand which requires artificial stimulation is also artificial in its profits. A steady demand through the year for a staple line of suits would remove most of the difficulties which turn the manufacturer's hair gray, would stabilize the earnings of the garment workers, would make life easier for the women who buy and wear the clothes, and would fill our streets with women clothed with richness and dignity.
While readers are thinking of women's clothing, perhaps they might like this advertisement:
In all fairness to men, there is also an advertisement for union suits. Frankly, how can one imagine wearing this under a suit in the Tucson summer?
