Hubbry Logo
BloomersBloomersMain
Open search
Bloomers
Community hub
Bloomers
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Bloomers
Bloomers
from Wikipedia
Bloomers
1850s' fashion bloomers
TypeUnderwear
A pair of bloomers, 1981

Bloomers, also called the bloomer, the Turkish dress, the American dress, or simply reform dress, are divided women's garments for the lower body. They were developed in the 19th century as a healthful and comfortable alternative to the heavy, constricting dresses worn by American women. They take their name from their best-known advocate, the women's rights activist Amelia Bloomer.

The name "bloomers" was derogatory and was not used by the women who wore them, who referred to their clothes as the "Reform Costume" or the "American Dress."[1]: 128–129 

Fashion bloomers (skirted)

[edit]
1851 caricature of fashion bloomers

Bloomers were an innovation of readers of the Water-Cure Journal, a popular health periodical that in October 1849 began urging women to develop a style of dress that was not so harmful to their health as the existing fashion. It also represented an unrestricted movement, unlike previous women's fashions of the time, that allowed for greater freedom—both metaphorical and physical—within the public sphere.[2] The fashionable dress of that time consisted of a skirt that dragged several inches on the floor, worn over layers of starched petticoats stiffened with straw or horsehair sewn into the hems. In addition to the heavy skirts, prevailing fashion called for a "long waist" effect, achieved with a whale-bone-fitted corset.[3]

Women responded with a variety of costumes, many inspired by the pantaloons of Turkey, and all including some form of pants. By the summer of 1850, various versions of a short skirt and trousers, or "Turkish dress", were being worn by readers of the Water-Cure Journal as well as women patients at the nation's health resorts. After wearing the style in private, some began wearing it in public. In the winter and spring of 1851, newspapers across the country carried startled sightings of the dresses.[4]

The wearing of bloomers—a woman wearing pants, a men's garment—was a question of power. The symbolism of bloomers was enormous. Men felt threatened by them, and sometimes disparaged women wearing them as "Amazons" or "male impersonators".[5]: 128–129 

Bloomer craze of 1851

[edit]
In a reversal of gender roles, a "bloomer" asks her fiancé's shocked father for consent to marry his son: satirical cartoon from 1852

In February 1851, Elizabeth Smith Miller of Peterboro, New York, wore the "Turkish dress"[6] to the Seneca Falls, New York, home of Amelia Bloomer and her temperance journal, The Lily. The next month, Bloomer announced to her readers that she had adopted the dress and, in response to many inquiries, printed a description of her dress and instructions on how to make it. Her circulation rose from 500 to 3,000.[5]: 138  By June, many newspapers had dubbed it the "Bloomer dress".[7]

During the summer of 1851, the nation was seized by a "bloomer craze". Health reformer Mary Gove Nichols drafted a Declaration of Independence from the Despotism of Parisian Fashion and gathered signatures to it at lectures on woman's dress.[8] Managers of the textile mills in Lowell, Massachusetts, gave a banquet for any of their female workers who adopted the safer dress before July 4.[9] In Toledo, Ohio, 60 women turned out in Turkish costume at one of the city's grandest social events.[10] Bloomer balls and bloomer picnics were held; dress reform societies and bloomer institutes were formed.[11] A grand festival in favor of the costume was held at New York City's Broadway Tabernacle in September.[12] In August, a woman who had spent six months sailing from Philadelphia around the Horn to California with the reform dress packed in her trunk disembarked to find that the dress had preceded her and was being displayed in the window of a San Francisco dress shop.[13]

Bloomers in London

[edit]

Interest in the bloomers was also sparked in England when Hannah Tracy Cutler and other women delegates wore the new dress to an International Peace Congress in London.[14] Many newspaper reports were dedicated to the controversy the outfit caused. One prominent figure who began to lecture about the bloomers in London and beyond was Caroline Dexter.[15] When she and her husband later emigrated to Australia, she continued to advocate for dress reform. Although few women are known to have worn the bloomers in Australia, Dexter's continued support led to controversy in The Sydney Morning Herald.[16]

Women's rights

[edit]
Bloomer Costume (Robert Chambers, The Book of Days, 1864)[17]

The Bloomer became a symbol of women's rights in the early 1850s. The same women—Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucy Stone, and Susan B. Anthony—who adopted the new form of dress also advocated women's right to vote. These women preferred to call their new style the "freedom dress", a two-piece outfit similar to the shalwar kameez of Central and South Asia.[18][19] Crowds gathered to not only hear these women's radical words, but also to see their "scandalous" mode of dress. After three years, however, fearing that the new dress was drawing attention away from the suffragist cause, many of these women returned to corsets, long skirts, and more conventional forms of dress. In similar suit, the Dress Reform Association which was formed in 1856 called the outfit the "American costume" and focused on its health benefits rather than its political symbolism. Following the American Civil War, interest in the Bloomer costume waned almost completely until its resurgence in the 1890s.[20]

In the 1850s, the "bloomer" was a physical and metaphorical representation of feminist reform. This garment originated in late 1849 for the purpose of developing a style of dress for women that was less harmful to their health. Because it was less restricting than the previous attire, the bloomer provided more physical freedom for women. Being a completely new and distinctively different form of dress, the bloomer garment also provided women with a metaphorical freedom, in the sense that it gave women not only more diverse dress options, but also the opportunity and power to choose their type of garment.

Some individuals at the time even argued that the Bloomer dress should be adopted for moral reasons. A reporter noted that a group of "very intelligent appearing, lady-like women" met in Milford, Massachusetts in July 1852. The purpose of this meeting was to consider the propriety of adopting bloomers. The women unanimously passed a resolution approving the costume, declaring existing fashion to be consistent with "moral evils" and arguing that the bloomer would facilitate women's efforts to engage in good works."[21]

And now I'm dressed like a little girl, in a dress both loose and short,
Oh with what freedom I can sing, and walk all 'round about!
And when I get a little strength, some work I think I can do,
'Twill give me health and comfort, and make me useful too.

— The Sibyl magazine, April 15, 1859[22]

Feminists, such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and many others, essentially claimed that women who took on the "feminist dress" look without being fully knowledgeable of all the accompanying issues were imposters. They were concerned that individuals could demonstrate reform without actually being an expert in the issues. In the Sibyl poem, the feeling and element of reform was demonstrated through simplicity and the subtle appreciation of this small step in women's fashion in parallel to a small step for women in general. During the 1850s, feminist reformers were fighting numerous battles to bring about change and further equality to women everywhere. Feminists believed that it was more important to focus on the issues, and that giving in to fashionable trends was exactly what they were battling against. However, the simple change in popular dress symbolically furthered women's liberation.

Opposition to Bloomer dress

[edit]

Bloomer's promotion of the style as a freedom dress rather than as a health dress did nothing to recommend it to the orthodox clergy and other critics of the woman's rights movement, who denounced the wearing of pants by women as a usurpation of male authority.[23] Associating it with the woman's rights movement, the New York Sunday Mercury published a woodcarving representing the woman's rights convention held in Akron, Ohio, in May 1851. It depicted every woman in coat, breeches, and high boots, sitting cross-legged and smoking cigars, when in truth not a bloomer was present.[24] Some young women were denied church membership for wearing the dress.[25] Public meetings were called to put down the fad, and the very same newspapers that had previously praised the dress began ridiculing and condemning "Bloomerism". In August 1851, Harper's Monthly reprinted a cartoon and article from a London newspaper ridiculing the American dress, one month after it had printed a sketch of the "Oriental Costume" and pronounced it tasteful, elegant, and graceful.

Bloomers in the West

[edit]

Lucy Stone, one of America's most famous orators in the woman's rights movement during the 1850s, helped popularize the dress by wearing it as she addressed immense audiences in over twenty states, the District of Columbia, and Ontario between 1851 and 1855. She had begun wearing the dress as a health measure while recuperating from typhoid fever during the winter of 1850–51, and she wore it exclusively for three years.[26] In 1856 a National Dress Reform Association organized[27] and one of its officers, Dr. Lydia Sayer Hasbrouck, who had worn the dress since 1849, established a journal, The Sibyl, as the society's organ. From July 1856 through June 1864, that paper carried news of dress reform to subscribers from New England to California and published the names of nearly a thousand women who sent in their names as wearers of the reform dress.[28] A letter-writer from Iowa said it was especially suited for life on the prairie and reported that many women from various parts of the state wore it all the time. Readers from Illinois, Arkansas, Michigan, Wisconsin, Kansas, Nebraska, Dakota, and Oregon attested to its popularity among Western women.[29] In 1860, an English traveler reported meeting a bloomer wearer in Laramie, Wyoming, and a traveler to Pike's Peak reported that "the bloomer costume is considerably in vogue and appears peculiarly adapted to overland travel".[30]

Civil War nurses and the bloomer

[edit]

When Dorothea Dix was appointed superintendent of army nurses in June 1861, she issued a statement banning the bloomer from army hospitals and requiring women to abandon it before entering nursing service. But as Western communities organized battalions of soldiers, they also formed corps of volunteer nurses to accompany them, and many of these nurses adopted the reform dress for field service. All members of one such corps, organized by Dr. Fedelia Harris Reid of Berlin, Wisconsin, and called the "Wisconsin Florence Nightengale Union", wore the bloomer not only in the field, but also while caring for patients at a military hospital in St. Louis. Four bloomer wearers were among the nurses who accompanied Minnesota's First Regiment.[31] Dr. Mary E. Walker, who earned the Congressional Medal of Honor for her medical services during the Civil War, wore the reform dress while working in a military hospital in Washington, D.C., as well as for field work. As she accompanied troops in the South, she wrote to the Sibyl that New Orleans women of wealth and standing had worn it to Haiti and Cuba.[32] The dress was still being worn by members of the utopian Oneida Community in 1867[33] but gradually it was abandoned by all but a very few stalwart wearers willing to defy society's mores.

Bloomers and bicycles

[edit]

In 1893, the Woman's Congress of the World's Columbian Exposition revived interest in the bloomer as an aid in improving women's health through physical exercise. Their session on women's dress opened with Lucy Stone reminiscing about the bloomer movement of the 1850s; her extolling the bloomer as the "cleanest, neatest, most comfortable and most sensible garment" she had ever worn; and young women modeling different versions of the dress.[34] The following year Annie "Londonderry" Cohen Kopchovsky donned the bloomer during her famous bicycle trip around the world, and an updated version of the bloomer soon became the standard "bicycle dress" for women during the bicycle craze of the 1890s.[35]

In 1909, fashion designer Paul Poiret attempted to popularize harem pants worn below a long flaring tunic, but this attempted revival of fashion bloomers under another name did not catch on.

Athletic bloomers (unskirted)

[edit]

19th and 20th centuries

[edit]

During the late 19th century, athletic bloomers (also known as "rationals" or "knickerbockers") were skirtless baggy knee-length trousers, fastened to the leg a little below the knees; at that time, they were worn by women only in a few narrow contexts of athletic activity, such as bicycle-riding, gymnastics, and sports other than tennis (see 1890s in fashion). Bloomers were usually worn with stockings and after 1910 often with a sailor middy blouse.

Bloomers became shorter by the late 1920s. In the 1930s, when it became respectable for women to wear pants and shorts in a wider range of circumstances, styles imitating men's shorts were favored, and bloomers tended to become less common. However, baggy knee-length gym shorts fastened at or above the knees continued to be worn by girls in school physical education classes through to the 1950s in some areas. Some schools in New York City and Sydney still wore them as part of their uniforms into the 1980s. In Japan their use persisted into the early 2000s.[36]

The Bloomington, Illinois, entry in the Three-I League of minor league baseball, despite being an all-male team, was tagged with the nickname "Bloomers" for several decades in the early 1900s.

Bloomers in Japan

[edit]

Known as buruma (ブルマ), also burumā (ブルマー), bloomers were introduced in Japan as women's clothing for physical education in 1903.[37] After the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, in response to the styles worn by the foreign women athletes, a newer style of bloomers, pittari, which fit the body closer, similar to volleyball uniforms, became commonplace. Around the mid-1990s, however, schools and individuals began to choose sports shorts instead, citing modesty concerns.[38] Some people are interested in bloomers in clothing fetish context.[39]

[edit]

Undergarments

[edit]

Women's baggy underpants fastened to just below or above the knee are also known as "bloomers" (or as "knickers" or "directoire knickers"). They were most popular from the 1910s to the 1930s but continued to be worn by older women for several decades thereafter. The term bloomers was then often used interchangeably with the pantalettes worn by women and girls in the early 19th century and the open-leg knee-length drawers of the mid 19th and early 20th centuries. Now, bloomers often refers to any women's frilled or layered lace lower body undergarment, irrespective of length.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Bloomers were bifurcated undergarments consisting of loose trousers gathered at the ankles and worn under a knee-length skirt, designed to provide women with greater mobility and reduced physical burden compared to traditional Victorian attire burdened by heavy petticoats and restrictive corsets. The style originated in early 1851 when Elizabeth Smith Miller introduced it publicly in , as a practical alternative weighing far less than the typical 15-pound dresses of the era, which often exacerbated health issues through overheating and organ compression. and Amelia Jenks Bloomer soon adopted the outfit, with Bloomer promoting it extensively in her temperance and newspaper, The Lily, leading to a surge in circulation from 500 to 4,000 copies monthly. As a cornerstone of the 19th-century dress reform movement, bloomers symbolized challenges to conventional gender norms in and aligned with broader advocacy for and health, though they provoked widespread ridicule through satirical cartoons and public harassment, causing many proponents to abandon the style by the late 1850s to focus on political goals. Despite their brief prominence as outerwear, bloomers influenced subsequent rational dress innovations, including athletic and costumes in the 1890s that facilitated women's participation in physical activities previously hindered by cumbersome skirts.

Origins

Invention and Early Design

Elizabeth Smith Miller, a advocate and cousin of , is credited with devising the early bloomer costume in early 1851 while gardening in Peterboro, New York, where she grew frustrated with the cumbersome weight and restrictiveness of traditional long and petticoats that dragged in the dirt and mud. Her innovation consisted of a shortened reaching to just below the , paired with loose-fitting pantaloons—full gathered tightly at the ankles—allowing greater mobility and reducing the overall fabric burden from up to 30 pounds of layered undergarments to a more manageable few pounds. The design drew partial inspiration from depictions of Turkish or "oriental" women's attire in Western and illustrations, which featured as a of exotic practicality, though adapted it for Western sensibilities by emphasizing functionality over cultural mimicry. Early versions used sturdy fabrics such as or for durability in daily activities, with the sewn to resemble bifurcated underdrawers rather than men's pants, maintaining a feminine under the to mitigate perceptions of . This configuration addressed immediate physical complaints like overheating and restricted locomotion, rooted in empirical observations of women's labor rather than abstract . Initial adoption remained limited to reform-minded circles in , where demonstrated the outfit's utility in household and outdoor tasks, predating widespread promotion and without reliance on unverified health claims at the invention stage. Variations in early prototypes included adjustable waistbands and optional for secure fit, reflecting iterative experimentation based on wearer's feedback rather than standardized patterns.

Promotion by Amelia Bloomer

, editor of the women's newspaper The Lily from 1849 to 1853, initially encountered the bloomer costume—a knee-length paired with loose, ankle-gathered —through local discussions in . In February 1851, she critiqued a Seneca County Courier editorial in The Lily for endorsing dress reform while opposing broader , marking her entry into the topic. By April 1851, influenced by Elizabeth Smith Miller's design and Elizabeth Cady Stanton's encouragement, Bloomer adopted the costume herself and promoted it prominently in The Lily, including a self-portrait and descriptions of its construction for practicality and health benefits over heavy, restrictive skirts. This advocacy expanded The Lily's focus from temperance to dress reform, boosting monthly circulation from 500 to 4,000 copies as readers sent hundreds of inquiries for patterns and endorsements. Bloomer wore the outfit publicly starting in 1851, including during her facilitation of Stanton's meeting with in May of that year, and defended it in The Lily against widespread ridicule from cartoons and critics who deemed it immodest. She lectured on its merits during travels in 1853, arguing it alleviated physical burdens like dragging hems and corset-induced health issues, though she later viewed the controversy as diverting attention from . Despite not inventing the style, her persistent editorial and personal endorsement cemented its association with her name, sparking a national "Bloomer craze" among reformers.

Dress Reform Advocacy

The 1851 Craze and Initial Popularity

Elizabeth Smith Miller introduced the bloomer costume in early 1851, shortening her skirts and adding Turkish-style pantaloons for greater comfort while gardening in Geneva, New York. This design, consisting of a knee-length skirt over loose trousers gathered at the ankles, was soon shared with Elizabeth Cady Stanton during a visit to Seneca Falls. Amelia Bloomer, editor of the temperance and women's rights newspaper The Lily, adopted and promoted the outfit in its April 1851 issue, providing descriptions and patterns that sparked widespread interest. The promotion led to a rapid surge in popularity, with The Lily's circulation increasing from 500 to 4,000 subscribers monthly as readers requested patterns in the hundreds. By June 1851, newspapers dubbed it the "Bloomer dress," and during the summer, the nation experienced a "bloomer craze," with women in cities like New York and , adopting it, including factory workers and health reform adherents. Prominent suffragists such as Stanton and wore it publicly starting in May 1851, linking the garment to broader dress reform and efforts. Media coverage amplified the trend, featuring both endorsements from outlets like the Syracuse Standard and satirical depictions, though adoption remained concentrated among a minority of reformers rather than the general populace. The initial enthusiasm highlighted demands for practical attire but was short-lived, as public harassment and shifting priorities toward diminished its wear by the mid-1850s. Advocates of the bloomer costume in the mid-19th century emphasized its practicality as a response to the encumbrances of traditional women's attire, which often featured multiple heavy petticoats totaling up to 15 pounds and long skirts that dragged through streets, collecting dirt and absorbing moisture in wet conditions. Elizabeth Smith Miller, who devised the garment in 1851 near Geneva, New York, cited frustration with these issues during everyday tasks such as gardening or climbing stairs while carrying a child, proposing a knee-length skirt over loose trousers to enable freer movement without exposure. This design facilitated safer navigation of obstacles, reduced the risk of tripping or entanglement in machinery, and supported practical activities like travel, as evidenced by reports of women adopting it for crossings such as the Isthmus of Panama in 1853. Health arguments intertwined with these practical advantages, positing that bloomers alleviated physical burdens imposed by restrictive fashions, including overheating, impaired respiration from layered fabrics, and organ compression from corsets reinforced with whalebone stays. Reformers like , who popularized the costume through her publication The Lily starting in 1851, argued it promoted better circulation and posture by distributing weight more evenly and eliminating excessive layers, thereby reducing strain on the body and enabling exercise that was otherwise hindered. described donning the outfit as akin to a prisoner freed from "his ," underscoring the perceived liberation from health-damaging constraints, while contemporaries linked dragging skirts to risks from street debris. These claims gained traction amid growing 19th-century interest in women's physical well-being, with physicians occasionally endorsing lighter attire to mitigate issues like those exacerbated during . Later extensions of dress reform, such as those by the in the 1880s, reinforced these linkages by advocating garments that ensured "" and avoided "pressure over any part of the body" or unnecessary weight beyond what warmth required, building on bloomer precedents to critique corsetry's role in purported diseases. Such arguments framed rational dress not merely as convenient but as a corrective to attire that reformers viewed as causally detrimental to vitality, though empirical validation remained largely observational rather than systematically tested in the era.

Reception and Controversies

Conservative and Societal Opposition

Conservative opposition to the bloomer costume centered on its perceived violation of traditional gender distinctions and feminine propriety. Critics argued that the bifurcated garments blurred the lines between male and female attire, rendering women "unsexed" or "semi-men" and threatening the established social order of for the sexes. This view held that such dress reform undermined male authority and familial roles, with men fearing a loss of control over women's public behavior. Religious leaders amplified these concerns by invoking biblical prohibitions against . Clergymen frequently cited :5, which states, "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God," to condemn bloomers as a direct defiance of divine ordinance. For instance, Talmage of Syracuse explicitly forbade his congregation from adopting the costume, interpreting it as a renunciation of God-ordained roles. Societal backlash included widespread ridicule and harassment, which isolated wearers and pressured abandonment of the garment. Women like faced jeering crowds and boys yelling in mockery during public appearances in Seneca Falls circa 1851, while endured rude stares and taunts such as "There comes my Bloomer!" in Albany on February 16, 1854. British periodical Punch derided the attire as a "shemale " emblematic of "female radicalisms" in 1851, reflecting broader press scorn that associated bloomers with deviance, including and demands for voting rights. Such vitriol extended to personal exclusion, with Stanton's father barring the costume from his home, her sons avoiding her in public, and her husband's political prospects damaged by Democratic voter backlash. Even some reformers critiqued the costume's aesthetics and origins, with abolitionist noting in 1853 that had it originated from a milliner rather than practical necessity, it might have been embraced, but its association with women's daily duties instead "shocked the taste." This convergence of conservative, religious, and social pressures ultimately led proponents like Stanton, , and to relinquish the outfit by 1859, prioritizing advocacy over dress reform to evade further reputational harm to the broader movement.

Criticisms of Immodesty and Gender Role Disruption

Critics of the bloomer costume in the 1850s frequently condemned it as immodest, arguing that trousers for women violated traditional standards of feminine propriety and biblical prohibitions against . Reverend T. De Witt Talmage of , explicitly forbade the garment in his congregation, citing Deuteronomy 22:5, which states, "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man." Religious leaders broadly viewed bloomers as unfeminine and immoral, leading churches to deny membership to women who adopted the style and prompting public meetings to denounce it as a moral crisis. Such opposition reflected concerns that the costume exposed women's forms in ways deemed indecent compared to voluminous skirts, despite the bloomers being covered by a knee-length dress. The adoption of bloomers was also lambasted for disrupting established gender roles by blurring distinctions between male and female attire, potentially inverting social hierarchies. Satirical cartoons, such as the circa 1851 "Bloomerism in Practice," depicted women in bloomers as domineering figures—exemplified by "Mrs. Turkey" assertively resting her arm on a subjugated, sewing "Mr. Turkey"—while men appeared emasculated and confined to domestic tasks, signaling fears of familial and societal upheaval. Publications like the New York Times in 1852 warned men to prepare for assuming "domestic duties" and ruling "in the nursery," portraying bloomers as an insidious step toward role reversal and the erosion of male authority. Conservative commentators linked the costume to broader radicalism, including socialism, asserting it threatened the traditional American family structure by fostering women's independence and appropriating masculine privileges. Even some reform advocates, such as abolitionist , urged women to abandon bloomers by 1853, arguing the controversy overshadowed substantive issues like and temperance, thereby amplifying perceptions of disruption. Women wearing the outfit endured widespread , including verbal ridicule and physical assaults like mud-pelting, which underscored societal insistence on rigid norms. These criticisms contributed to the rapid decline of bloomers' popularity by the late 1850s, as wearers faced ostracism that reinforced the era's cult of domesticity emphasizing female submissiveness and piety.

Practical Adaptations

Use in Cycling and Mobility

In the late and , the advent of the , with its chain-driven rear wheel and diamond-shaped frame, made feasible for women, but long often entangled in the wheels or chains, posing safety risks and restricting pedaling efficiency. Bloomers, revived from mid-19th-century dress reform efforts, emerged as a practical solution, consisting of loose, knee-length gathered at the ankles and typically worn under a shorter or to facilitate mounting, dismounting, and sustained riding without exposure or hindrance. By the mid-1890s, bloomer suits gained traction among female cyclists, enabling adoption of lighter "men's" s over cumbersome drop-frame models designed for wear, which weighed up to 50 pounds more and limited speed and maneuverability. This attire not only reduced accident risks—such as ignition from contact with bicycle lamps—but also promoted endurance rides, with women logging distances previously impractical in restrictive dresses. Cycling clubs and manufacturers marketed bloomers explicitly for this purpose, with patents filed for variants like reinforced seams and elastic waists to enhance durability and fit during motion. Beyond bicycles, bloomers improved general mobility in urban and rural settings, allowing strides unencumbered by dragging hems that collected mud or tripped wearers on uneven paths, a common issue with 1850s-era gowns weighing 20-30 pounds when wet. advocates, including physicians, endorsed them for preventing circulatory issues from tight corsets and heavy fabrics, citing improved posture and reduced during walking or light labor. Adoption remained limited outside enthusiasts due to , yet it marked a causal shift toward functional clothing, influencing later rational dress movements by demonstrating empirical benefits in and .

Application in Nursing and Wartime

During the American Civil War (1861–1865), bloomers and similar practical trousers gained limited adoption among some women serving in nursing and medical capacities, despite official resistance, due to their utility in demanding field conditions. Long skirts posed significant hazards in hospitals and battlefields, including entanglement in equipment, contamination from blood and mud, and fire risks near open flames used for sterilization; trousers allowed for freer movement and better hygiene while tending wounded soldiers. Union Army Superintendent of Nurses Dorothea Dix explicitly banned bloomers from hospitals upon her 1861 appointment, enforcing plain, dark dresses without hoop-skirts to maintain decorum, yet enforcement varied in remote or chaotic settings. Contract surgeon Dr. Mary Edwards Walker defied such restrictions, wearing a reform-style uniform of loose trousers—resembling bloomers—paired with a knee-length skirt or jacket throughout her service, which included frontline surgeries after battles like Bull Run in 1861. Walker, who received the Medal of Honor in 1865 (revoked in 1917 and posthumously restored in 1977), argued that such attire promoted physical health and efficiency, aligning with broader 19th-century dress reform principles she championed pre- and post-war. This wartime application underscored bloomers' role in enabling women's expanded contributions to medical care, though widespread use remained constrained by societal norms and military oversight; isolated instances persisted into later conflicts, but evidence diminishes beyond the Civil War era.

Athletic Developments

19th and Early 20th Century Sports Wear

In the late 19th century, bloomers were adapted for women's athletic activities to enable freer movement during and sports, replacing the restrictive long skirts and petticoats of conventional dress. This shift addressed practical needs for mobility in emerging team sports and exercises, with bloomers typically consisting of loose knee-length paired with tunics or blouses. A key example occurred at , where physical education director Senda Berenson introduced modified rules for on March 22, 1893, pitting freshmen against sophomores; participants wore bloomers to avoid the hazards of full skirts during play. By 1902, the class of 1902 basketball team routinely used athletic bloomers, which reached mid-calf and allowed for running and jumping without entanglement. Such adoption extended to other U.S. colleges and schools, where bloomers became standard undergarments for gymnasium classes and court sports from the 1890s onward, often covered by shorter skirts for modesty. Into the early , bloomers persisted as practical sportswear for and , with institutions promoting them for benefits like improved posture and reduced strain. In , early 20th-century gymnasts, such as those training at Stockholm's Gymnastic Central around 1900–1910, wore similar divided garments for apparatus work and exercises, reflecting parallel reforms in female physical training. By the , variations shortened to knickerbockers emerged in and , though full bloomers remained common in educational settings until mid-century transitions to modern shorts.

Bloomers in Japanese Physical Education

Bloomers, known as burumā (ブルマー) in Japanese, were introduced to women's physical education during the Taishō era (1912–1926) by educator Akuri Inokuchi, who drew inspiration from the athletic uniforms observed at Smith College in the United States. The adoption reflected broader efforts to modernize female schooling and promote physical fitness amid Western influences on Japanese education post-Meiji Restoration. Initially designed as loose, mid-thigh chōchin burumā with elasticized legs resembling puffed lanterns, they offered improved mobility over traditional kimono or skirts for gymnastics and calisthenics, becoming standard in school curricula by the early Shōwa era (1926–1989). The style evolved in the mid-1960s toward tighter pittari burumā, which hugged the body and exposed more thigh, gaining widespread use after the Japanese women's volleyball team's gold medal win at the 1964 Tokyo Olympics—where athletes wore somewhat similar bottoms—and further popularized by the volleyball manga Atakku Nanbā Wan (1968–1970). Affordable synthetic fabrics like nylon facilitated this shift, aligning with national emphasis on sports for youth development and health. Throughout the postwar period, burumā paired with short-sleeved blouses formed the core of girls' physical education uniforms in junior and senior high schools, supporting activities from track events to team sports while symbolizing discipline and uniformity in segregated classes. However, issues such as chafing, exposure risks (e.g., "hamipan" wedgies revealing underwear), and growing self-consciousness among students emerged as drawbacks. By the early 1990s, amid rising co-educational practices and gender equity pushes, burumā faced criticism for immodesty and vulnerability to harassment, prompting protests like the 1993 incident at a Japanese school in Singapore and policy changes at institutions such as Koshigaya Minami High School that year. Most schools phased them out by 2002, replacing with longer unisex shorts to address comfort, equality, and safety concerns while maintaining functionality in physical education.

Undergarments and Modern Evolution

Transition to Drawers and Pantaloons

In the wake of the bloomer costume's rejection as public attire by the late 1850s, its bifurcated trouser component—loose and gathered at the ankles or knees—transitioned into private undergarments, reinforcing and evolving existing styles like drawers and pantaloons for everyday modesty and mobility. The original bloomers, promoted by Amelia Bloomer from 1849 onward, featured closed-crotch designs that contrasted with the split-crotch construction of prior undergarments, addressing perceived indecency in traditional forms while prioritizing practicality over multiple petticoats. This influence prompted gradual refinements in underclothing, as women retained the health and ease benefits amid societal pushback against visible trousers. Drawers, which emerged in the as baggy, waist-laced garments extending below the knees with open legs for access, increasingly incorporated bloomer-like looseness and for by the 1840s and 1850s. By 1876, a pivotal shift occurred when drawer legs merged into fully closed knickers with side hip openings, reducing vulnerability to drafts and enhancing coverage in line with bloomer advocacy for rational dress. Materials diversified to include , , and , with scarlet variants favored for warmth; these closed styles marked a departure from open pantaloons, prioritizing and containment during the Victorian era's expansive crinolines. Pantaloons, adopted in the early 1800s as flesh-toned, ankle-length adaptations of men's under sheer Empire-line gowns, served initial modesty needs but shortened to knee-length by mid-century, blending with —loose under-crinoline protections from the inspired by Dutch settler styles. The bloomer movement's emphasis on reduced layers accelerated this convergence, as pantaloons' fuller narrowed into gathered, lace-trimmed drawers that echoed the reform garment's form without public controversy. By the Edwardian period around 1905, these evolved into finer or knickers, often combined with camisoles into one-piece "combinations" from , signaling a modern undergarment era where bloomer practicality had normalized bifurcated lowers beneath rising hemlines.

Contemporary Revivals and Phasing Out

In the early , bloomers largely phased out of widespread use in Western and athletics as societal norms evolved toward shorter hemlines and less voluminous undergarments. By the , flapper-era styles emphasized slim silhouettes and knee-length skirts, supplanting bloomers' practical role in mobility and sports; and teams transitioned to simpler or tunics by the 1930s, reflecting broader acceptance of exposed legs in activewear. This decline aligned with technological advances in textiles, such as elastic fabrics, which enabled more fitted alternatives without the need for bloomers' gathered design. Contemporary revivals emerged in the , repositioning bloomers as a nostalgic yet subversive statement rather than functional attire. In spring 2024 collections, designers like incorporated bloomer-inspired pantaloon pants with bohemian flair, blending historical volume with modern breathable fabrics for summer staples. By 2025, the trend gained traction in , with influencers pairing cropped bloomers with sporty tops and , emphasizing comfort and gender-neutral styling over 19th-century reform ideals. Retailers reported increased demand for these items as versatile shorts or skirts, often in lightweight or , though their prominence remains seasonal and niche, vulnerable to shifting preferences. Despite these revivals, bloomers have not reattained mainstream utility, persisting instead as a high-fashion or vintage accessory amid preferences for and . Fashion analysts note that while 2025 saw peak visibility in editorials and — with sales spikes in bloomer from like —their adoption is limited by perceptions of bulkiness in everyday contexts, echoing historical critiques of immodesty. Full-scale phasing out in modern iterations appears unlikely without sustained cultural shifts, but their cyclical nature suggests potential ebb following the 2020s hype.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.