Why are Female Politicians So Criticized for What They Wear?

START
body

Since women have been allowed to partake in the political system, they have been condemned for their dress. Being too feminine, too formal, and too colorful are just a few of the negative comments that, despite our evolution as a society, continue to dominate the commentary surrounding women in power. While recent time has been marked by decreased critiques of style decisions, as history has proved, the boldness of making a fashion statement is often met with bad press. As we enter an era of unprecedented representation, lest we forget that the media’s emphasis on female political fashion did not develop out of admiration.

Women have long been denounced for what they wear on the political stage. Evidence of this scrutiny dates back to 1917 when Jeannette Rankin, the first female member of Congress, took office. A nationally-recognized newspaper described the civil servant as “thoroughly feminine,” noting her fondness for French heels and moving pictures. Although a seemingly harmless description, it was characteristic of the coverage awarded to women politicians during the time—an analysis of clothing rather than a record of meaningful contributions. Whether disguised as a form of flattery or a more straightforward assessment, the press’ fashion focus is often a means to discredit women in powerful positions.

Female politicians of the last decade, thanks to the prevalence of social media and non-stop news, have faced a similar affliction. The question arises then for Vice President-elect Kamala Harris who has, thus far, appeared to bypass the nitpicking of fashion faults by the media and the public—will she be subjected to the same judgement as those before her? Aside from her historical entrance to the stage as the first female, first Black, and first South Asian vice president-elect, during which she flaunted a white Carolina Herrera pantsuit and pussy bow blouse in suffragette white, there hasn’t been much shock derived from her style choices. She has been publicly praised for her grounded sense of style. Much of her campaign attire consisted of unpretentious tailored pantsuits, a no-nonsense getup perhaps perfected during her time as an attorney. Harris’ favoring of casual footwear like All Star Chuck Taylors also reads that, despite her powerful position, she is down to earth. But as the political figure and champion of cause-oriented style positions herself permanently in the limelight, she will undoubtedly amass the usual following of admirers and adversaries.

Among the many female political figures to define their tenure through unwavering advocacy and style, former First Lady Michelle Obama’s fashion choices were both complemented and criticized. For her first official photo, the attorney and author’s decision to sport a sleeveless black dress was branded disrespectful, and the dress itself informal and off-season. Even after being relieved of her role, Obama received backlash for her love of luxury fashion. In 2018, she sported a pair of glittering Balenciaga boots on her book tour for bestselling memoir Becoming, a move considered controversial because of the footwear’s hefty price tag and flashy appearance. Nonetheless, she shunned the entitlement of the public to scrutinize her purchasing habits, voicing to co-host Sarah Jessica Parker “now, I’m free to do whatever.”

Hillary Clinton’s spectrum of vibrant pantsuits was mocked by Project Runway’s Tim Gunn in 2011, who hinted that the figure must be questioning her gender because she adopted pants as part of her political uniform. The comment echoed an unspoken rule that persisted until the 1990s, which discouraged women from wearing the customarily masculine article on the Senate floor.

Criticisms of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can be likened to those faced by women in the past, specifically those in the early 1900s, who utilized fashion to garner attention and gain respect while striking for worker’s rights. As the youngest woman to be elected to Congress and a third-generation Bronxite, she is often harped on for her fashion choices being out of character—as if people expect her to wear her struggles on her sleeve rather than dress to the standard her position awards. In 2018, pundit Eddie Scarry tweeted a photo of the young congresswoman, which had been taken without her knowledge, to share with followers that her “jacket and coat don’t look like a girl who struggles.” Attempts to undermine Ocasio-Cortez have continued in recent time. In February, she wore a sequined number for an appearance on “The View” that was labeled a “luxe designer dress” by a New York City tabloid on Twitter. With followers rushing to her defense, Ocasio-Cortez quickly downed negative opinions of her outfit choice. The dress, which had ironically been marked down at the time of the interview, was a relatively inexpensive piece from her rented, borrowed, and thrifted wardrobe. Most recently, the progressive’s gracing of a magazine cover amassed a number of deprecatory responses on social media which centered on the couture clothing that was featured.

As these cases illustrate, people often overlook the complexity of dressing female political figures. Yes, Ocasio-Cortez was wearing an expensive suit for a magazine shoot. But can we also call attention to the congresswoman’s support of a designer of color from her congressional district? And the common assumption within the fashion industry that clothes worn by subjects of editorial shoots are borrowed, not owned. It is the surface-level assumptions that prevent us from celebrating powerful women and seeing that we too, are contributing to a longstanding culture which seeks to delegitimize them.

Clothing worn by these political figures is much more than their high price tag and questionable stylishness. A significant, and perhaps subconscious, component of female political dress is color. Color defines movements, signals voters, and pays homage to historical significances. Baby pink or “millennial pink” reemerged as a symbol of fourth wave feminism in 2016. And white is worn as a tribute to suffragettes. The trend, at the time of its fruition in the early 20th century, was driven by the idea that white would make photographs more prominent in print. Today, wearing white is not only a means to achieve a similar effect on screen, but a declaration of solidarity and the ongoing fight for women’s rights. Harris’ white pantsuit, worn during her acceptance speech last week, was a continuation of the tribute that has been adopted by Ocasio-Cortez, Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and other female lawmakers throughout history. The hard work of all the women who have preceded Harris was materialized in her wardrobe for the milestone moment, which occurred during the 100th anniversary of the first election with women’s suffrage.

Women have long combatted patriarchal pressures through fashion. As a means to reinforce their call for equality and activism, it is no surprise that the abundance of articles female politicians have available to them are interpreted as threats. Not to imply that talk of what women in power are wearing isn’t welcomed. There is still space for positivity, and conversations around ill-timed and culturally-insensitive clothing decisions, as the fight for equality also means holding all politicians accountable. Regardless if female political figures choose to blend in or boast their sense of style, the underlying issue they face is a disproportionate subjection to criticism for what they wear. When it comes to dress code, it may seem like women can never win. But for women in politics, fashion is a tool worth taking advantage of.

END

prev link: https://www.crfashionbook.com/culture/a34634960/female-politicians-criticized/
createdAt:Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:31:58 +0000
displayType:Long Form Article
section:Culture