"Kindwear" | Dressing with Personal Care & Kindness in Mind

---

For decades, mainstream fitness culture has prescribed a single pathway to well-being: gear up, slim down, show up.

This messaging is often wrapped in tight-fitting, performance-branded activewear—compressive leggings, sculpting bras, and “second skin” materials that claim to support your body while silently demanding it change.

But for many women, the physical discomfort of these garments isn’t just an aesthetic inconvenience—it’s a physiological and psychological stressor.

This season, a quieter revolution is underway.

Call it soft resistance, dressing for your nervous system, and reclaiming YOUR comfort.

It starts with choosing not to suffer for your own health.

The Problem Isn’t You. It’s the Pressure.

Women’s relationship with fitness is historically intertwined with appearance-based goals: smaller waistlines, tighter glutes, “toned” arms. The fitness industry—worth over $87 billion globally—relies on this pressure, and by extension, on clothing that frames the body as a project. Studies show that tight-fitting workout clothes can increase body surveillance, especially among women.

This term—“body surveillance”—refers to the chronic self-monitoring of appearance, often linked to anxiety, disordered eating, and poor body image. According to a 2021 study published in the Journal of Eating Disorders, women who wear form-fitting exercise clothes report higher levels of self-consciousness during physical activity, leading to decreased motivation and poorer outcomes over time.

Even beyond psychology, the physical body reacts to compression. Research from the Journal of Sports Science & Medicine has shown that while compression garments can slightly improve circulation during elite training, they can also elevate heat stress, limit breathing in the abdominal region, and reduce proprioception (your ability to sense your own movement). For neuro divergent individuals or those with trauma histories, these constraints can further dysregulate the nervous system.

So why do we keep wearing them?

Cortisol Doesn’t Care If You’re Wearing the “Right” Set

Let’s talk biology for a moment.

When your brain detects stress—whether from physical discomfort, judgmental stares, or a hyper-competitive gym atmosphere—it triggers the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. This pathway releases cortisol, the body’s primary stress hormone.

Cortisol is not inherently bad, but chronically elevated levels have been linked to everything from belly fat retention to menstrual irregularities and immune suppression. Wearing clothes that restrict breath, activate social comparison, or induce constant self-monitoring can trigger this response—turning what’s supposed to be self-care into a hormonal battleground.

It’s no coincidence that many women report feeling drained, not invigorated, after trips to the gym. If getting dressed feels like preparation for war—tight seams, visible panty lines, the weight of performativity—you’re not entering a restorative space. You’re entering survival mode.

What If Your Clothes Regulated You Instead?

Now imagine this: You wake up sluggish. You reach for an old, breathable tee. Not because it’s flattering—because it lets you breathe. The waistband of your sweats doesn’t dig. Your shoes—wide-toed, dad-coded, resilient—give your joints permission to spread out. You don’t know if you’ll stretch or walk or just sit on a bench under sunlight, but your body feels safe enough to try. This isn’t laziness. This is nervous system-informed fitness.

In somatic psychology, we refer to this as regulation: the ability of your body to stay within its window of tolerance—neither hyper-aroused (anxiety, panic) nor hypo-aroused (shutdown, numbness). Clothing, especially for trauma survivors or those with sensory sensitivities, plays a vital role in regulation.

A 2019 article in Frontiers in Psychology outlines how external stimuli like fabric pressure, breath restriction, and thermal discomfort can alter vagal tone—your body’s primary mechanism for regulating heart rate, digestion, and emotional resilience.

In plain terms?

The wrong clothes can stress you out. The right ones can calm you down.

The Antidote Isn’t New. It’s Yours.

This shift toward comfortable movement clothing isn’t about aesthetics—it’s about autonomy. It reclaims the gym—not as a showcase for your most “put-together” self—but as a space for nervous system literacy, sustainable energy, and internal permission. And here’s the kicker: you probably already own the wardrobe for it. The grey sweatpants that don’t judge.

The oversized tee you inherited from your sister. The sneakers you bought secondhand for $25. These pieces don’t scream performance—they whisper presence. This kind of dressing rejects the logic of overconsumption that the wellness industry thrives on. You don’t need a new set in every colorway.

You don’t need to drop $140 on leggings to deserve movement. In fact, many of the best pieces for your body are already in your drawer—or someone else’s donation bin.

Thrifting becomes less about trend-chasing and more about tactile intelligence: How does it feel on the skin? Can I move without adjusting? Does this item remind my body that it’s safe to expand? Vintage fleece, secondhand hoodies, loose joggers, decade-old New Balances, etc.

They’re psychologically sound choices for those seeking movement without mental friction.

This Isn’t Minimalism. It’s Mindfulness.

In rejecting the overengineered fitness uniform, you’re not renouncing beauty or function. You’re simply choosing not to be tricked into believing that visibility equals validity.

You’re choosing: – Support over sculpting – Breathability over branding – Regulation over restriction – Self-trust over surveillance This spring, let your wardrobe lead with intelligence, not impulse. Reclaim your soft, borrowed layers. Wear your old clothes like new medicine.

Let movement be guided not by aesthetics, but by sensation. Listen for the moment when your body says, thank you for letting me be. And let that be enough.

References:

Tiggemann, M., & Zaccardo, M. (2015). “‘Exercise to be fit, not skinny’: The effect of fitspiration imagery on women’s body image.” Body Image, 15, 61-67.

Menzel, J. E., & Levine, M. P. (2011). “Embodiment and eating disorders: A contemporary model of a biopsychosocial contribution.” Eating Disorders, 19(2), 113–136.

Porges, S. W. (2011). The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions, Attachment, Communication, and Self-Regulation.

Thompson, J. K., & Stice, E. (2001). “Thin-ideal internalization: Mounting evidence for a new risk factor for body-image disturbance and eating pathology.” Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 181–183.

White, R. G., & Van Der Boor, C. (2020). “Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on mental health and well-being in the general population.” The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(11), 939–940.