Yes I am aware that it did not apply to women and children, my point being that despite that, the Ming women's style did not survive into the modern era but still adopted qipao's 斜襟. Evidently our ancestors did not regard it as a serious problem since they adopted it voluntarily, considering that that standing collar was already "Hanfu". I'm only discussing women's, because let's be honest, men's clothing has been constantly bombarded by foreign influence since the Northern and Southern dynasties; Song Dynasty 沈括 said: 中國衣冠，自北齊以來，乃全用胡服. The belief that Qing clothing represents a dramatic imposition of foreign culture is bizarre when the styles have merely cross influenced gradually (portraits of Manchus from the first few generations show that they had no standing collar, but the Han women did, the modern Qipao is a mixture of both and western dresses)
The first woman I posted is the mother of the Taichang emperor, her 对襟 buttons caught my attention,
another Ming dynasty "fashion-forward"?
and the last one is also definitely Ming, and I have some photos of non-imperial family ones as well (Ming), which is why I found it so strange.
Well the whole point I was trying to drive at was that Qing clothing should not be singled out for exclusion as some kind of "foreign" entity; if that were true all the round collar robes (probably uygur in origin), trousers, 曳撒, possibly 褙子 and many others would be out as well. Once I had some Korean trying to tell me that the Official's robes used in Korea, Japan and Vietnam was not from Chinese influence, "because they all came from Central Asia".
, but relative to China they are still rather insignificant, people tend to forget that there was large scale intermingling and even intermarriage (very unusual for a "foreign people") between Han and Jurchens during the Ming Dynasty, and people like Shang Kexi and Geng Zhongming outright crossed the border to offer their services to this people (also very unusual for "barbarians"). 
