Fast forward seventeen years ago when in 1997, Princeton University English Professor Elaine Showalter confided in a written entry “My
passion for fashion can sometimes seem a shameful secret life".
Suddenly
after her words were given immortal publicity in fashion bible, Vogue, through numerous criticisms: "Surely she must have
better things to do", said a colleague. Whilst
it may be the general consensus that fashion, like so many other things
associated primarily with women, is usually dismissed as trivial, it is quite
the contrary. In actual fact, fashion recognisably shapes how we’re perceived by others,
especially on the levels of gender, class and race. Acknowledging this especially in psychology terms, how we’re read determines how we are treated, especially in the
workforce—whether we are hired, promoted and respected, and how well we are
paid. Whilst it is pretty shocking and overpowering a statement to make, the
most ordinary and intimate of acts, getting dressed, really has political and
economic consequences.
If
feminists ignore fashion, in actual fact we are relinquishing our power to
influence it. Fortunately, history has shown that feminists can, instead,
harness fashion and use it for political purposes.
This
was dubbed so as when the rhetoric of equality fell on deaf ears, suffragists
in the late 19th and early 20th centuries made quite literal fashion
statements. Green, white and violet jewellery was a favoured suffragist
accessory, but not because of any aesthetic imperative: The first letters of
each colour— G, W, V—was shorthand for 'Give Women Votes.' Who said accessories
can't make a powerful statement eh?
Another
example is that an entire century later, in the 1980s, women appropriated men’s
styles of dress in an attempt to access the social and economic capital that
lay on the other side of the within-reach glass ceiling. So-called career women
practiced power dressing, wearing tailored skirt suits with huge shoulder pads,
approximating the style and silhouette of the professional male executive.
Figureheads of this power dressing that we recognise in the media includes characters from Dynasty and Dallas, actress Joan Collins and ex Prime Minster Margaret Thatcher.
Yet
such adaptations of men’s fashion and styles are noticeably and rarely without
small feminine touches. Sociologist Jan Felshin coined the term feminine
apologetic to describe how the pearls or ruffles on a woman’s professional
attire serve as disclaimers: I may be powerful but I’m not masculine. Or
(gasp!) a lesbian.
The
fact that even the most politically and culturally commanding women must walk a
razor’s edge between looking powerful and still appearing “appropriately
feminine” underscores visual theorist John Berger’s concise description of
mainstream society: “Men act and women appear.” In other words, men are
judged by their deeds; women, by their looks. Whilst it is a sad fact this is
the case, it must be stressed that fashion is something to be enjoyed and a
woman has her own opinion on what she feels good in so dear god, throw
away the rule book of ‘what’s in’.
If we
look across the pond, in U.S. politics, Hillary Clinton has experienced the
entire damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t double bind for strong women. If
she wears a power pantsuit, it’s a “desexualized uniform,” but if she
shows a hint of cleavage—as she famously did in
2007—it can ignite a media firestorm that eclipses her political
platform. Heck, should we dare reveal a bit of skin nature has endowed us women
for it, must our careers unjustly suffer the consequences?!
While
all women’s fashion choices are more carefully policed than men’s, women of
color endure heightened scrutiny. Racist stereotypes that cast some women of
colour unfairly serve women poorly in the workplace. Professional women of colour
thus consciously and unconsciously fashion themselves in ways that attempt to
diminish their racial difference. One Asian woman interviewed by sociologist Rose Weitz for the academic journal Gender
& Society admitted that she permed her hair for work “because she felt that
she looked ‘too Asian’ with her naturally straight hair.” A black woman
interviewed for the book Shifting:
The Double Lives of Black Women in America explains that “she
never goes into an interview or a new job experience without first
straightening her hair. …‘I don’t want to be prejudged.’”
Whilst I disagree with the idea of attempting to break away from your natural features due fear of looking ‘too’ like your ethnicity , I’m preaching the ‘natural is beautiful’ tag, I recommend you read the lyrics of this song very carefully by India Arie, who as previously mentioned in my blog has captured my thoughts perfectly. (Ignore the spelling mistakes on this video, I couldn't find a perfectly spelt one!)
Whilst I disagree with the idea of attempting to break away from your natural features due fear of looking ‘too’ like your ethnicity , I’m preaching the ‘natural is beautiful’ tag, I recommend you read the lyrics of this song very carefully by India Arie, who as previously mentioned in my blog has captured my thoughts perfectly. (Ignore the spelling mistakes on this video, I couldn't find a perfectly spelt one!)
If we
look away from the workplace, in everyday life, fashion policing of women is
also racially stratified. Women of colour who wear “ethnic dress” are often
read as traditional, unmodern and, in some instances, conservative. When
similar garments are worn by white women, thus dubbing the term fashion
cultural appropriation, they signify global cosmopolitanism, a multicultural
coolness. Is that fair?
If
fashion has been used to introduce new ways of expressing womanhood, it has
also been a tether that keeps women’s social, economic and political
opportunities permanently attached to their appearances. At a time when
makeover reality TV shows such as Gok Wan ‘How To Look Good Naked’ suggest that
self-reinvention is not only desirable but almost required, and the
ubiquity of social media encourages everyone to develop a “personal brand,” the
pressure on women to be fashionable has never been more pervasive.
If
fashion has been used to introduce new ways of expressing womanhood, it has
also been a tether that keeps women’s social, economic and political
opportunities permanently attached to their appearances. At a time when
makeover reality TV shows such as Gok Wan ‘How To Look Good Naked’ suggest that
self-reinvention is not only desirable but almost required, and the
ubiquity of social media encourages everyone to develop a “personal brand,” the
pressure on women to be fashionable has never been more pervasive.
Even
as the Internet has intensified the desire to be fashion-forward, it has also
given outsiders unprecedented influence on the industry. There are many cases
of when bloggers go viral and they are closely followed by fashion movers and
shakers. This is extremely important as when you submerge yourself in the
stratosphere of the fashion blog world, today’s fashion blogs celebrate an
array of non-normatively raced, gendered, sexed and sized bodies which challenge
the prevailing messages of gender, beauty and style.
Bloggers are using their online
voice to speak out against offensive fashion and beauty products that critique
a women’s body including the campaign against Urban Outfitters. Urban
Outfitters were heavily reprimanded for selling t-shirts glamourising
depression and anorexia with slogans entailing ‘Eat Less’ and plastering
repeated bold prints of ‘Depression’ . Urban Outfitters should not have been
promoting social stigma for depression and anorexia by making it a catchphrase
but they justly came under fire by being inundated with complaints, anger and
anti-UO campaigns via social media. Personally, I don’t purchase anything from
Urban Outfitters as a result of their actions as I found it incredibly wrong,
sick and unjust that they attempted to glamorise illnesses in the name of
fashion. This was just a classic case when an individual or company attempt to
further the boundaries of ethical fashion.
A
blog-initiated campaign in 2010 convinced the cosmetics company MAC
and the Rodarte design team to abandon their collection of nail polish and
lipstick with names such as “Ghost Town,” “Factory” and “Juarez” which
referenced the Mexican border town notorious for the serial murders of women
working in local factories. Similar online campaigns have also been waged
against designers and magazines use black-facing and yellow-facing, as well as
against retailers like Abercrombie & Fitch and American Apparel that
perpetuate racist, sexist and size-ist beauty ideals.
In the age of interactive
social media, consumers now have a recognised say in the fashion establishment; we
should continue to speak up, write up and listen up. Wearing fashion does
not have to mean that we allow it to wear us down.
I love your post and it is truly refreshing to read such a analytic and socially aware blog post. As you quoted Elaine Showalter, I find myself in the same position so very often, as I usually see many bloggers who are just trying to sell a product without having their critical point of view.
ReplyDeleteHey Katarina! Thank you for taking the time to read it :-) I know what you mean by that, in fact that is why I refuse to read a majority of blogs just because of the way they 'review' things, there is no personal opinion, just vague, ambiguous phrases like 'wonderful', 'amazing'...hopefully they'll be inspired to inject a bit of personality into them ;-) Let's hope so!
Delete