Sitting outside the ICU in a hospital had me talking to the young security guard on duty there. Her job primarily was to ensure that impatient attendants of the patients do not unnecessarily enter ICU, and when they do go, they wear the proper attire. Sharing her life story and challenges, she mentioned the discomfort of wearing tight-fitting shirts and pants. She spoke how she wore a sari or a suit from home and changed in the hospital for her duty. She felt shy socially and found the uniform uncomfortable.
As she showed me her beautiful pictures in saris, I wondered about the need for a uniform. I realised that a uniform is indeed required in her role, for she needs to stand out as hospital staff just like nurses and doctors. People should be able to reach out to her when they need clarifications, information and directions. But does her uniform have to be uncomfortable for her? Not really. She is not really expected to jump or run around to save lives.
When and where and why did we decide that tight-fitting synthetic uniforms, absolutely unfit for our weather, must be worn by people in service industries? Why do women have to wear men’s clothing irrespective of their comfort levels? If you say it helps you being agile, then please tell me if you can run more comfortably in a well fitted ladies’ suit or ill-fitting tight pants that makes you conscious because you are not used to wearing it.
When it comes to women in roles that were traditionally done by men like security guards or soldiers, a serious rethinking is required on this matter. Combat roles may require a certain level of fitness and uniforms fitting for the role. For someone who just needs to visibly stand out in a crowd as a service provider, can we have uniforms that they can comfortably live in for 8-12 hours of their working life everyday? It literally means most of their waking lives.
The same question stands for airline crew, where if female members wear uncomfortable clothes they would not be able to help in emergency situations. However, what astonishes me the most is the necktie worn by almost all school-going children across the country. No one has been able to answer about its purpose and need. It looks smart is the best I have got. All l remember is the irritation it caused in hot summers.
The history of school uniforms goes back to medieval England, when elite schools wanted their students to stand out; it later became a norm. In India, we were told that uniforms bring equality, as the rich and the poor wearing the same uniform cannot be discriminated against. Over time, they have become the brand identity for most schools. Also, does discrimination not start at the school gate itself? The schools that the elites go to and the ones the poor go to rarely converge. So what purpose is the uniform serving? Is it one of those colonial hangovers that we have not had the time to review?
Vintage images from around the turn of the 20th century show schoolgirls in saris with long-sleeve blouses. From my childhood, I remember many schools having salwar-kameez as the uniform for girls, but then most had shorts or pants for boys and skirts for girls in a chosen colour.
From a business perspective, the school uniform economy in India is anywhere upwards of `10,000 crore a year, not counting exports. Will this business lose if we do away with uniforms is difficult to say, as something else would be worn to schools. Maybe the predictable business would go away as it would get distributed among different generic categories of clothing.
There are professions we clearly identify with uniform—army, police, postman, doctor, transport staff. For them, the uniform is an identity. An army uniform immediately invokes respect and trust. In the pre-internet era, a postman walking to your home evoked emotions of anxiety ranging from romance to fear. A policeman knocking on your door worries you, but comforts you when in a public chaos. Then there are professions where uniforms are not prescribed, but follow an unwritten norm. A sales person will invariably wear formals. You can identify them in a crowd. Spiritual seekers have their own norms of dressing up that clearly portrays them apart from the worldly society.
ALSO READ | The disproportionate influence of Bollywood
My question is not as much about need for uniform as about the suitability of the uniforms chosen for the climate and culture of the land. Should the uniform not be casual enough to be comfortable for day-long wear? Should we not ensure cotton or natural fabrics that breathe? When it comes to women in service industries, or maybe even men, can they be given a choice of attire? Let them choose a sari or suit, pyjamas or pants as long as they use distinct markers—say, a defined colour or design that helps them stand out.
So apart from the professions that strictly require a particular uniform for their roles, can we have broader guidelines for uniforms instead of rigid norms? It’s not difficult to achieve if we give it a thought. A good example would be sports teams. They wear uniforms to create a sense of belongingness with their fans while also creating a distinct brand identity on the field. Their uniforms though are not cast in stone—they change with every event. So uniforms designed for comfort, weather and gender diversity, shall we say?
(Anuradha Goyal is an author and founder of IndiTales. Follow her on X.com @anuradhagoyal)