Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. International Journal of Fashion Studies
  4. Volume 12, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2051-7106
  • E-ISSN: 2051-7114

Abstract

As pregnant women are faced with consumptive pressures, the cultural practice of wearing used garments from a previous pregnancy creates a meaningful alternative that circulates outside of the economic fashion system and increasingly within it. This study explores how garments become assembled with mothers and children to create carework that is then carried from one pregnancy to the next. Five pregnant women in the United States between 20 and 30 weeks gestation were recruited to wear a previously worn maternity garment and record their reflections throughout growth. From this research, we find that maternity garments become entangled with mothers, foetus, partners, extended family members, friends and other non-human bodies. Affective traces were present in each garment, acting as intimate reminders of the kinship between gestational experiences. Physical signs of wear, such as holes, fabric stretch and aromas of breast milk, remind mothers of other pregnant narratives. Findings indicate that the liveliness of maternity garments imbues support during the pregnancy period, providing further context to conceptualize the and potentials of material culture.

© 2025 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00124_1
2025-04-04
2025-05-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Appelgren, S. and Bohlin, A. (2015), ‘Growing in motion: The circulation of used things on second-hand markets’, Culture Unbound, 7:1, pp. 143–68, https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.1571143.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Associated Press (2021), ‘A pandemic clothing purge is on as normal life resumes in U.S’, New York Post, 7 July, https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/a-pandemic-clothing-purge-is-on-as-normal-life-resumes-in-us/. Accessed 15 October 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey, R. (1992), ‘Clothes encounters of the gynecological kind’, in R. Barnes and J. B. Eicher (eds), Dress and Gender: Making and Meaning, Oxford: Berg Publishing, pp. 248–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Barad, K. (2007), Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartlett, R. (2012), ‘Modifying the diary interview method to research the lives of people with dementia’, Qualitative Health Research, 22:12, pp. 1717–26, https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312462240.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bennett, J. (2004), ‘The force of things: Steps toward an ecology of matter’, Political  Theory, 32:3, pp. 347–72, https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591703260853.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bobby, C. R. (2016), ‘Sample size for qualitative research’, Qualitative Market Research, 19:4, pp. 426–32, https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-06-2016-0053.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Cassidy, T. D. and Bennett, H. R. (2012), ‘The rise of vintage fashion and the vintage consumer’, Fashion Practice, 4:2, pp. 239–61, https://doi.org/10.2752/175693812x13403765252424.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Douglas, M. (1966), Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Earle, S. (2003), ‘“Bumps and boobs”: Fatness and women’s experiences of pregnancy’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 26:3, pp. 245–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-5395(03)00054-2.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Entwistle, J. (2001), ‘The dressed body’, in J. Entwistle and E. Wilson (eds), Body Dressing, Oxford: Berg Publishing, pp. 33–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Entwistle, J. and Townsend, K. (2020), ‘On fashioning anatomy’, in K. Townsend, R. Solomon and A. Briggs-Goode (eds), Crafting Anatomies: Archives, Dialogues, Fabrications, London: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 289–304.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Filippello, R. and Parkins, I. (eds) (2023), Fashion and Feeling: The Affective Politics of Dress, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Fisk, C. (2019), ‘Looking for maternity: Dress collections and embodied knowledge’, Fashion Theory, 23:3, pp. 401–39, https://doi.org/10.1080/1362704x.2019.1603871.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Garland, S. (2024), ‘Out of time: Constant change, maternity dressing, and pregnancy in lockdown’, in L. Snelgrove (ed.), Fashion and Motherhood: Image, Material, Identity, London: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 193–210.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gibbs, A. (2010), ‘After affect’, in M. Gregg and G. J. Seigworth (eds), The Affect Theory Reader, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 186–205.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Greer, R. W. (1988), ‘Apparel buying practices of pregnant women and their reported satisfaction with available maternity wear’, Ph.D. dissertation, Texas Woman’s University, Anna Arbor, MI: UMI Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gregg, M. and Seigworth, G. J. (eds) (2010), The Affect Theory Reader, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gregson, N. and Beale, V. (2004), ‘Wardrobe matter: The sorting, displacement and circulation of women’s clothing’, Geoforum, 35:6, pp. 689–700, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.03.014.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gregson, N. and Crewe, L. (2003), Second-Hand Cultures, Oxford: Berg Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Haraway, D. J. (2003), The Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People, and Significant Otherness, Chicago, IL: Prickly Paradigm Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hwang, C., McCoy, L. and Shaw, M. R. (2022), ‘Redesigning maternity hospital gowns’, Fashion Practice, 14:1, pp. 79–98, https://doi.org/10.1080/17569370.2020.1794317.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jones, A. M. and Alberti, B. (2013), ‘Archaeology and interpretation’, in B. Alberti, A. M. Jones and J. Pollard (eds), Archaeology after Interpretation: Returning Materials to Archaeological Theory, London: Routledge, pp. 15–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kestenbaum, R. (2018), ‘Secondhand clothes are a threat and an opportunity’, Forbes, 3 April, https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardkestenbaum/2018/04/03/secondhand-clothes-are-a-threat-and-an-opportunity/#5696d2f46fdd. Accessed 9 April 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Knudsen, B. T. and Stage, C. (2015), Affective Methodologies: Developing Cultural Research Strategies for the Study of Affect, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Lange, A. (2021), ‘Foreword’, in M. M. Fisher and A. Winick (eds), Designing Motherhood: Things that Make and Break Our Births, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 10–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Lebese, R. T., Mothiba, T. M., Mulaudzi, M. T., Mashau, N. S. and Makhado, L. (2022), ‘Rite of passage: An African indigenous knowledge perspective’, in F. M. Mulaudzi and R. T. Lebese (eds), Working with Indigenous Knowledge: Strategies for Health Professionals, Cape Town: AOSIS Publishing, pp. 51–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Leeds Matthews, A. (2023), ‘Fertility rates dip, people are having babies later: The state of birth rates in the US’, CNN, 1 June, https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/31/health/fertility-rates-still-down-after-pandemic-rebound-dg/index.html. Accessed 8 October 2023.
  29. Lewis, S. (2018), ‘Cyborg uterine geography: Complicating “care” and social reproduction’, Dialogues in Human Geography, 8:3, pp. 300–16, https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820618804625.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, J. (2021), ‘Cloaking the pregnancy: Scientific uncertainty and gendered burden among middle-class mothers in urban China’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 46:1, pp. 3–28, https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919900542.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Longhurst, R. (2001), Bodies: Exploring Fluid Boundaries, London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Longhurst, R. (2005), ‘(Ad)dressing pregnant bodies in New Zealand: Clothing, fashion, subjectivities and spatialities’, Gender, Place & Culture, 12:4, pp. 433–46, https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690500356842.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Lupton, D. (2019), ‘Toward a more-than-human analysis of digital health: Inspirations from feminist new materialism’, Qualitative Health Research, 29:14, pp. 1998–2009, https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319833368.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lupton, D. (2020), ‘Australian women’s use of health and fitness apps and wearable devices: A feminist new materialism analysis’, Feminist Media Studies, 20:7, pp. 983–98, https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1637916.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Massumi, B. (2003), ‘The archive of experience’, in J. Brouwer and A. Mulder (eds), Information is Alive: Art and Theory on Archiving and Retrieving Data, Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, pp. 142–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. ‘maternity’ (2024), Merriam-Webster, Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/maternity. Accessed 27 August 2024.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. ‘maternity clothes’ (2024), Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, Oxford: Oxford University Press, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/maternity?q=Maternity. Accessed 27 August 2024.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. McIntyre, M. P. (2021), ‘Shame, blame, and passion: Affects of (un)sustainable wardrobes’, Fashion Theory, 25:6, pp. 735–55, https://doi.org/10.1080/1362704X.2019.1676506.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Millar Fisher, M. and Winick, A. (2021), Designing Motherhood: Things That Make and Break Our Births, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Morris, C. (2023), ‘Global market for secondhand clothes is set to nearly double by 2027’, Fortune, 6 April, https://fortune.com/2023/04/06/secondhand-clothes-market-set-to-double-by-2027/. Accessed 20 November 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. O’Donohoe, S., Hogg, M., Maclaran, P., Martens, L. and Stevens, L. (2014), Motherhoods, Markets and Consumption: The Making of Mothers in Contemporary Western Cultures, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ogle, J. P., Tyner, K. E. and Schofield-Tomschin, S. (2013), ‘The role of maternity dress consumption in shaping the self and identity during the liminal transition of pregnancy’, Journal of Consumer Culture, 13:2, pp. 119–39, https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540513480161.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Park, H. and Lee, J. (2007), ‘Study on features that pregnant women find important and desirable when choosing maternity wear: Focused on British pregnant women in London’, Archives of Design Research, 20:2, pp. 41–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Poli, D. D. (1988), Maternity Fashion, Modena: Zanfi Editori.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Rathinamoorthy, R. (2019), ‘Circular fashion’, in S. S. Muthu (ed.), Circular Economy in Textiles and Apparel: Process, Manufacturing, and Design, Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, pp. 13–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Rozin, P. and Fallon, A. E. (1987), ‘A perspective on disgust’, Psychological Review, 94:1, pp. 23–41, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.1.23.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Ruggerone, L. (2017), ‘The feeling of being dressed: Affect studies and the clothed body’, Fashion Theory, 21:5, pp. 573–93, https://doi.org/10.1080/1362704x.2016.1253302.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Sampson, E. (2020), Worn: Footwear, Attachment and the Affects of Wear, London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Sherlock, A. (2022), ‘Worn: Footwear, Attachment and the Affects of Wear by Ellen Sampson’, book review, Fashion Theory, 26:1, pp. 137–44, https://doi.org/10.1080/1362704X.2021.1935494.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sherman, G. L. (2021), ‘Well-being at the crossroads of the unconscious, preconscious, and reason in higher education’, International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 18:1, pp. 58–74, https://doi.org/10.1002/aps.1674.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Slater, A., Atkin, S. and Kealy-Morris, E. (2023), Memories of Dress: Recollections of Material Identities, New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Stern, D. N. (2010), Forms of Vitality: Exploring Dynamic Experience in Psychology, the Arts, Psychotherapy, and Development, New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Thompson, C. J. and Hirschman, E. C. (1995), ‘Understanding the socialized body: A poststructuralist analysis of consumers’ self-conceptions, body images, and self-care practices’, Journal of Consumer Research, 22:2, pp. 139–53, https://doi.org/10.1086/209441.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Tyler, I. (2011), ‘Pregnant beauty: Maternal femininities under neoliberalism’, in R. Gill and C. Scharff (eds), New Femininities: Postfeminism, Neoliberalism, and Subjectivity, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 44–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Vänskä, A. (2018), ‘How to do humans with fashion: Towards a posthuman critique of fashion’, International Journal of Fashion Studies, 5:1, pp. 15–31, https://doi.org/10.1386/infs.5.1.15_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Verma, M. (2021), ‘Sari’, in M. M. Fisher and A. Winick (eds), Designing Motherhood: Things that Make and Break Our Births, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 107–08.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Vogt, W. P. (1999), Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology: A Nontechnical Guide for the Social Sciences, London: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. The VOICE Group (2014), ‘Pregnancy, privacy, and personhood in the consumer socialization of expectant mothers’, in S. O’Donohoe, M. Hogg, P. Maclaran, L. Martens and L. Stevens (eds), Motherhoods, Markets and Consumption: The Making of Mothers in Contemporary Western Cultures, New York: Routledge, pp. 235–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Waight, E. and Boyer, K. (2018), ‘The role of the non-human in relations of care: Baby things’, Cultural Geographies, 25:3, pp. 459–72, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474018758480.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Watson, B., Broadbent, J., Skouteris, H. and Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2016), ‘A qualitative exploration of body image experiences of women progressing through pregnancy’, Women and Birth, 29:1, pp. 72–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2015.08.007.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Yuting, S. and Nor, Z. D. B. M. (2024), ‘A study on the impact of environmental awareness on sustainable consumption behavior in maternity wear’, KnE Engineering, 6:1, pp. 1–9, https://doi.org/10.18502/keg.v6i1.15343.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Snelgrove, L. (2024), Fashion and Motherhood: Image, Material, Identity, New York: Bloomsbury Publishing Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00124_1
Loading
Clothing as embodied gestation: The affects of re-worn maternity wear
International Journal of Fashion Studies 12, 43 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1386/infs_00124_1
/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00124_1
/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00124_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): affect; assemblage; carework; embodiment; kinship; pregnancy; second-hand; traces

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test