BBC TV "WDYTYA?" Series 8 Episode #2: Rupert Everett

[LizzieW]

I think Grothenwell might be implying that "dressmaker" could be a euphemism for "lady of the night".

Lizzie

[RJ_Paton]

I think Grothenwell might be implying that "dressmaker" could be a euphemism for "lady of the night".

Lizzie

true, but without evidence it is a slur on the character of the individual concerned and also a poor basis for any investigation.

[Grothenwell]

I think Grothenwell might be implying that "dressmaker" could be a euphemism for "lady of the night".

Lizzie

true, but without evidence it is a slur on the character of the individual concerned and also a poor basis for any investigation.

I wasn't implying that she was a lady of the night, so there was no slur. But if she was I wouldn't say it was a slur, our ancestors did lots of things in order to survive hard times, and I for one would never criticise or slur an individual for what they did in those times.

However as I have discovered on this fine site, "dressmaking" was, as Lizzie says, a euphemism for a trade, one of the oldest in history I am informed, even before the need for dresses.

My question was not directly about Georgina but a general one, are there any studies that tell the ratio and or likelihood? Was it the areas that the "dressmakers" stayed that guided the implication that they told this fib to the census taker? How was it discovered that Dressmaker was the term used and not say Stocking maker?

[RJ_Paton]

My question was not directly about Georgina but a general one, are there any studies that tell the ratio and or likelihood? Was it the areas that the "dressmakers" stayed that guided the implication that they told this fib to the census taker? How was it discovered that Dressmaker was the term used and not say Stocking maker?

Good points and I for one would like to know the origins of this particular euphemism.

Are we simply pandering to the prejudices of Victorian Census Enumerators or is it a later invention ?

It is too easy to jump to conclusions and create completely the wrong picture - which was my difficulty with Rupert Everett.

Although I have no doubts that at least some of the "ladies of the night"  may have been forced into that line of work due to poverty and circumstances there are records of others from privileged backgrounds who chose to be involved in that line of work - were they listed as dressmakers ?

[Trees]

I read somewhere that straw plaiters were often also plying the other trade but like to take the trade as written I have a dozen or so straw plaiters on the tree hope that the majority were"good" girls rather than "god time" girls 
Trees lowering the tone somewhat

[Plummiegirl]

The sad fact is that at this time many women turned to prostitution to keep themselves & their families fed, housed & clothed.

Dressmakers, like milliners (another known trade where they moonlighted on the streets) were so poorly paid that they often had no other option.

They would often work in "dark, dank conditions" at the back of some posh shop, do think "house of elliott" where they looked after their staff!  And their skills in dressmaking would be exploited, and I do say skills as they had to be able  to sew seams etc. perfectly, with small even stitching or it would all be taken apart to be started again.

Taken from 1906: Every Man for Himself! - Maisie Robson   -   
Milliner: 2 years' apprenticeship & no wages paid.  A premium of £10-£20 is ofter required.  Assistants can earn from £10-£30.  This is as the shopkeeper not worker, no mention of them here.

The subject of dressmaking is written about twice firstly as a shop owner (for the middle to upper class woman!) and secondly for the worker where it looks like Maisie thought that it was a good occupation - maybe it was more reputable by 1906.  But even so after a 2 year apprenticeship with pay you could earn up to £2.00 per week.

[Nick29]

I think the simple fact was that women who did resort to prostitution to make a living could not put that down on the census form, so they chose an occupation which didn't involve leaving the house much.  However, to assume that every woman who described themselves as dressmakers were prostitutes is plainly absurd, because before the industrial revolution a substantial part of the clothing industry was done by homeworkers.

[crgh27]

I think the simple fact was that women who did resort to prostitution to make a living could not put that down on the census form, so they chose an occupation which didn't involve leaving the house much.  However, to assume that every woman who described themselves as dressmakers were prostitutes is plainly absurd, because before the industrial revolution a substantial part of the clothing industry was done by homeworkers.

That's a point well made, Nick.  I can recommend the website http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/, which contains all the census reports from 1801.  The General Report from each census breaks down the population by occupation.  Many of the occupations stated by individuals were "standardised" by the enumerators, and then classified by the census clerks according to strict guidelines (they derived a large dictionary of occupations for this purpose).  Very few people working on farms would have called themselves an "ag lab" for instance - this was a term invented for the purpose of the census.  In 1891, over 400,000 women were listed as milliners, dressmakers or staymakers (as well as 4,000 men).  Whilst, I am sure, these terms would have been used euphemistically in some cases, they would have described the woman's occupation correctly in the vast majority of cases.
Going back to the census report, the point was often made in the reports that people exaggerated their occupations.  In one of the reports, for instance, it states that commercial travellers (usually a middle-class occupation) were often no more than hawkers.  I can find no similar suggestion for dressmakers.

[Rena]

There's two households here - one is definitely a brothel and the other is a family house where the head is a washer woman with a school aged daughter and her lodgers are a dressmaker and a prostitute.

Are we saying the second household is denying it's full of prostitutes?

 Andrews Street 1841 census
 MONTAGUE   15       Brothel Keeper        
CUMMINGS Ann 20       Prostitute     
SMITH Jamina    15       Prostitute
COCHRANE Joan 15       Prostitute
MCKENZIE Ann    15       Prostitute
SMITH Jessie    15       Prostitute
=
Blackfriars Wynd 1841
WATSON    Janet    35       Washer Woman    
WATSON    Isabella   12        -       
YULE       Ann       35       Prostitute        
ROSE Margt       25       Dress Maker