Fascinating stuff! Something that occurred to me in my first quick reading (I'm in the middle of working on posting my books out!), that I don't *think* you mention, is this: I remember either someone suggesting this to me, or this occurring to me (can't remember which) : that "loose women" might also refer to the kind of woman who wears her hair loose or uncovered. I know that in Irish, British, French society up until the 1950s, repectable adult women would never be seen in public with their hair unbound - ie, not in a bun or chignon or more elaborate coiffure of plaits and loops, etc, and in exterior settings would be almost invariably wearing a hat ; in earlier Irish society (and I believe in Medieval/Early Modern British and French as well), "loose" hair was strongly associated with either a girl-child, a very low-class person, an "uncivilised" person, or indeed a forest-dweller, nymph, or Fae. It is significant too that both mermaids and some "Washer at the Ford" type Beann Sidhe-figures would be combing their loose hair, and even sometimes using the comb as a sharp weapon ; "loose" or "unbound" hair was also associated with private and intimate moments in the bedchamber, at her toilette, or with carnal relations, and therefore prostitutes ... I'm not 100% sure of all of this, but I think I've read/thought about it and it seems to make sense .... What do you say?
(funnily enough, an old girlfriend of mine - the same Margaret I just mentioned on your other post! - used to talk about having loose flying hair being something she was reproached for by her mother and grandmother, which they said was not respectable, indeed was "streelish", the mark of a "streel" or harridan, a "sluttish" woman in the older sense of unkempt and tousled/messy ... I love the word. Waterford archaic slang, apparently; probably from Irish. I should check)
I hadn't considered this angle at all, but I think it's a valid layer to the associations, and maybe they were drawing upon the much earlier usages and etymologies for the word "loose". But conventions that call for bound or covered hair certainly go back very, very far into the past.
Something that comes to my mind when thinking about the loose hair was just how radical the flappers were by bobbing their locks: they rejected the binary of bound/unbound. Then the hideous hairsetting of the next five decades (the poodle dos that the oldest generation of women still wear) continued the rejection of the loose/bound dichotomy because - I think - these women were really, really averse to being categorized in the old ways. Even though these hairdos were considered frumpy in the 80s (that's what the Golden Girls all wore, as "typical" elder women).
Until there was eventually a full reversal of signification so that short hair was considered the respectable choice instead of the radical one.
For example, a certain elder relative (born maybe 1937) always said that long hair is an "old woman" style, and he imagined the old women wearing it in elaborate twisted updos (Victorian/Edwardian style) rather than loose n' easy. For him, short hair that was set in rollers and maybe held up a bit with pins was eternally modern. (Oddly, he didn't seem to be thinking about the hippies at all, or considering whether or not they were modern. Maybe he never knew any.) His preference wasn't for the recent wave of pixie cuts, which I think he wasn't alive to witness, but Betty Crocker style. He never quit saying rude things about my wavy, disorganized hair, both to me directly and about me in others' presence, and he was horrified by the idea that my mom might grow her hair out, but since she's also from the same generation it was the farthest thing from her intentions. She has been wearing a longish pixie since the 1960s.
By contrast, cutting one's hair short was also, in some cultures, such as where I live in Czechia, considered the only decent choice upon either marriage, motherhood, or reaching age 30 because it was considered desexualizing. Older women, until recently, would relentlessly criticize any woman who had passed these milestones and continued to wear her hair long, because it looked like she wasn't sufficiently committed to her roles as wife and mother - and she might even be out looking to seduce a new lover. (And yes, my mother-in-law was on my case about my hair when I had my first child at age 29.) One still sees articles aimed at middle-aged women here that tell them that they don't need to conform to these outdated prejudices.
Unlike my MIL, the other guy didn't think my long hair was an attempt at selling mutton as lamb. On the contrary, he thought it was old-fashioned and the "mess" of it offended him. He likely didn't perceive it as an advertisement of sexual availability either, because it either signified "old lady." Maybe he saw it as an affront to my family's honor because I was degrading the value of what they "own" by being - in his view - a slob. Who knows? He was obsessed enough to mention it maybe every other day when I was visiting. What both relatives had in common was the idea that they could shame me into conforming with their views, and the notion that these views remained commonly held and therefore relevant to one's social positioning among peers. None of these are happy memories, but I guess everyone suffers one way or another for their style.
Fascinating stuff! Something that occurred to me in my first quick reading (I'm in the middle of working on posting my books out!), that I don't *think* you mention, is this: I remember either someone suggesting this to me, or this occurring to me (can't remember which) : that "loose women" might also refer to the kind of woman who wears her hair loose or uncovered. I know that in Irish, British, French society up until the 1950s, repectable adult women would never be seen in public with their hair unbound - ie, not in a bun or chignon or more elaborate coiffure of plaits and loops, etc, and in exterior settings would be almost invariably wearing a hat ; in earlier Irish society (and I believe in Medieval/Early Modern British and French as well), "loose" hair was strongly associated with either a girl-child, a very low-class person, an "uncivilised" person, or indeed a forest-dweller, nymph, or Fae. It is significant too that both mermaids and some "Washer at the Ford" type Beann Sidhe-figures would be combing their loose hair, and even sometimes using the comb as a sharp weapon ; "loose" or "unbound" hair was also associated with private and intimate moments in the bedchamber, at her toilette, or with carnal relations, and therefore prostitutes ... I'm not 100% sure of all of this, but I think I've read/thought about it and it seems to make sense .... What do you say?
(funnily enough, an old girlfriend of mine - the same Margaret I just mentioned on your other post! - used to talk about having loose flying hair being something she was reproached for by her mother and grandmother, which they said was not respectable, indeed was "streelish", the mark of a "streel" or harridan, a "sluttish" woman in the older sense of unkempt and tousled/messy ... I love the word. Waterford archaic slang, apparently; probably from Irish. I should check)
...
Yes indeed, it is the case!
DEFINITION FROM TEANGLANN.IE
Focloir Gaeilge-Bearla, O Donaill 1977
https://www.teanglann.ie/en/fgb/sraoilleach
sraoilleach1, f. (gs. -llí). Straggling growth (of seaweed, etc.).
sraoilleach2, a1. Ragged, tattered; trailing, bedraggled; slatternly, sluttish. Duine ~, slovenly person. Éadach ~, tattered clothing. Cleití ~a, bedraggled feathers. Téada ~a, trailing ropes. Scamall ~, ragged cloud. Siúl ~, slouching gait.
I hadn't considered this angle at all, but I think it's a valid layer to the associations, and maybe they were drawing upon the much earlier usages and etymologies for the word "loose". But conventions that call for bound or covered hair certainly go back very, very far into the past.
Something that comes to my mind when thinking about the loose hair was just how radical the flappers were by bobbing their locks: they rejected the binary of bound/unbound. Then the hideous hairsetting of the next five decades (the poodle dos that the oldest generation of women still wear) continued the rejection of the loose/bound dichotomy because - I think - these women were really, really averse to being categorized in the old ways. Even though these hairdos were considered frumpy in the 80s (that's what the Golden Girls all wore, as "typical" elder women).
Until there was eventually a full reversal of signification so that short hair was considered the respectable choice instead of the radical one.
For example, a certain elder relative (born maybe 1937) always said that long hair is an "old woman" style, and he imagined the old women wearing it in elaborate twisted updos (Victorian/Edwardian style) rather than loose n' easy. For him, short hair that was set in rollers and maybe held up a bit with pins was eternally modern. (Oddly, he didn't seem to be thinking about the hippies at all, or considering whether or not they were modern. Maybe he never knew any.) His preference wasn't for the recent wave of pixie cuts, which I think he wasn't alive to witness, but Betty Crocker style. He never quit saying rude things about my wavy, disorganized hair, both to me directly and about me in others' presence, and he was horrified by the idea that my mom might grow her hair out, but since she's also from the same generation it was the farthest thing from her intentions. She has been wearing a longish pixie since the 1960s.
By contrast, cutting one's hair short was also, in some cultures, such as where I live in Czechia, considered the only decent choice upon either marriage, motherhood, or reaching age 30 because it was considered desexualizing. Older women, until recently, would relentlessly criticize any woman who had passed these milestones and continued to wear her hair long, because it looked like she wasn't sufficiently committed to her roles as wife and mother - and she might even be out looking to seduce a new lover. (And yes, my mother-in-law was on my case about my hair when I had my first child at age 29.) One still sees articles aimed at middle-aged women here that tell them that they don't need to conform to these outdated prejudices.
Unlike my MIL, the other guy didn't think my long hair was an attempt at selling mutton as lamb. On the contrary, he thought it was old-fashioned and the "mess" of it offended him. He likely didn't perceive it as an advertisement of sexual availability either, because it either signified "old lady." Maybe he saw it as an affront to my family's honor because I was degrading the value of what they "own" by being - in his view - a slob. Who knows? He was obsessed enough to mention it maybe every other day when I was visiting. What both relatives had in common was the idea that they could shame me into conforming with their views, and the notion that these views remained commonly held and therefore relevant to one's social positioning among peers. None of these are happy memories, but I guess everyone suffers one way or another for their style.