I’m almost happy now that Prime Minister Modi wore the controversial `10-lakh monogrammed suit (which was later bought by a diamond merchant from Surat for `4.31 crore in auction) he did for Barack Obama’s visit to India. Because, for once, it was the sartorial choice of a male politician that invited scrutiny and debate. Usually, it’s women who are picked on for their choice of clothes.
Consider what’s happening with Hillary Clinton. This is the first woman to be a presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. She’s been Secretary of State, a Senator, and the first female partner in the third-oldest law firm in the US. And yet, every time she appears in public, it’s her attire that attracts the most attention. As First Lady, she was called dowdy and matronly, and accused of wearing “frumpy pastel skirtsuits”. As Senator and Secretary of State, her monochromatic pantsuits inspired memes. On her campaign trail, when she’s clearly worked hard to please the looks nazis, she’s accused of “spending too much money” on her appearance. After the New York primary, the details about her speech on income inequality were sketchy at best. What everyone had the dope on was her Giorgio Armani tweed jacket.
The scrutiny is the worst for women in public life, never mind that it detracts from their achievements and trivialises the issue of working women. Remember the furore over Angela Merkel’s low-cut gown at the inauguration of an opera house in Oslo? Or, closer home, Sushma Swaraj’s decision to cover her head with a shawl for her meetings with leaders in Iran?
Society conspires to bring even plain-vanilla career girls to heel. Last December, a 27-year-old Londoner was sent home on her first day as a receptionist at PwC for refusing to wear high-heeled shoes. The girl said she believed the company was within its rights to have a dress code but she didn’t think heels—which may look good but take on a toll on the wearer’s spine, hips, knees, ankles and feet—was part of that. Especially when the job entailed escorting visitors from the reception to conference rooms for nine hours, and the male receptionists weren’t wearing any!
Commenting on, and trying to curb women from being the boss of their own bodies and wardrobes, is a global phenomenon. We keep reading about Indian principals forbidding female students from coming to class in jeans. There are people who have it far worse. Last year, Tanzanian president John Magufuli banned miniskirts in the country saying they encourage the spread of HIV/AIDS. Now, a cleric in Iran has said “improper veiling and immodest clothing” by women is causing a river in Iran to dry up. Apparently, his office has received photos of women next to the dry Zayandeh-rud River “pictured as if they are in Europe”. These acts could cause the river to dry up further, he said, and exhorted the Communications Ministry to “discover and suffocate the individuals” encouraging immodesty. Guess looks can kill.
shampa dhar-kamath
shampa@newindianexpress.com