Photo Courtesy of Unsplash.
I’m not positive about the specifics of what president-elect Joe Biden wore during his acceptance speech ceremony. From what I could see by zooming in on pictures, it looked like he wore a navy and white pinstriped suit with a sky blue tie. What I do know for sure, is that Jill Biden’s dress sold out within hours of the speech, and that media companies were gushing over the pantsuit vice president-elect Kamala Harris wore. I know this because when you look up Biden’s attire on Google, the top results all highlight the price, color, and brand of Dr. Biden’s dress and the statement Harris made with her pantsuit. But, why?
In a New York Times article written by Vanessa Friedman, a fashion critic, the subheading stated: “This wasn’t about fashion, it was about politics, past and future.” But for something not about fashion, the color and make of the pantsuit seemed oddly important. According to Friedman’s article, the white pantsuit and large white “pussy-bow” are celebrated symbols of the many fights and losses of the women’s rights movement. While the article was supposedly not about fashion, but rather the strong feminist declaration Harris made through her clothing choice, only the women’s clothes were commented on. Why is it not important for Biden to consider the meaning of his clothing, too?
I have two main problems with Friedman’s article and the many articles like it. The first is the unnecessary focus on women’s clothing rather than men’s. The suit has always been a symbol of male power, and has, in the modern world, been adopted by women to better navigate the societal complexities of women’s clothing in politics. In 1917, Jeannette Rankin was the first woman to be elected to Congress. She had been elected to the U.S House of Representatives in 1916 and would be elected again in 1940. Despite her obvious qualifications and her swift rise to power, her shattering of societal barriers brought a flood of questions about what she could possibly wear as a woman that would denote her power. A Washington Post article, titled “‘I’m no lady. I’m a member of Congress’: The first woman who roared into the House,” confirms that before Rankin was even able to convey any of her political ideas or make her mark by changing legislation, she was scrutinized over her appearance. Though there was no explicit rule against women wearing pants in politics, it was largely frowned upon and so women wore dark-colored, modest dresses in order to blend in with the male-dominant field. This sexist trend has not ended. Modern female politicians’ clothing has continuously been talked about in the media. When a politician is elected, the only focus of the public’s commentary should be her policies.
The other problem I have with these articles is their focus on the color white as a “feminist color.” In the early 1900s, as women were lobbying for the right to vote, there were two colors that became widely associated with the women’s suffrage movement. Gold, or yellow, was supposed to represent the sunflowers of Kansas where Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton conducted the majority of their campaigning, while white was meant to represent purity and virtue. While the gold/yellow color evolved throughout history, becoming green and then purple, etc. the white color is still a staple. Why are politicians still trying to use white to portray women’s empowerment? The correlation with white and purity was used by priestesses in ancient Egypt and Rome as symbols of purity. From there, with the birth of Christianity, the white lily is often associated with the Virgin Mary, pushing the correlation that sex means impurity. Even more so, in the Middle Ages and Renaissance period, a white unicorn was used to symbolize chastity. Purity, or impurity, and chastity seem like outdated ideals that women should move past as the women’s empowerment initiative continues to fight for equal rights, and battle all the new struggles that are born as society progresses.
White has been a color that represents the oppressive ideology that women need to be “pure” in order to be virtuous or powerful. It seems high time that politicians stop using white to commemorate anything relating to women’s empowerment, and begin focusing on the policies and political actions of the politician herself.•
