Hillary Clinton\'s Armani jacket
Zeenat Khan from Maryland, USA | Sunday, 12 June 2016
Whether it is a first-world or a third-world country, women in general face sexism on a daily basis. In the western world, some people say feminism is no longer needed as sexism doesn't happen anymore. Nothing could be further from the truth. It happens in the form of instances of harassment, stereotypical comments that are aimed at women's looks, physical features and their choice of clothing. Such intentional abuse and belittlement occur in order to make women feel shamed, weak, inferior and unsafe. Along with everyone else, social media plays along in labelling women with derogatory comments instead of making them feel normal and ubiquitous part in our society. In fighting gender-based discrimination, no woman is safe in the face of such vicious scrutiny.
Whether women are on the street, at work or giving a speech, they are evaluated by men and sometimes by other women and cannot escape criticism. Often our clothing choices make us vulnerable to harassment, especially if we are wearing revealing clothes or designer outfits. We become subject of others' opinions and that often compromises our comfort level.
It seems women simply cannot spurt reproach from the people around them - not even powerful women like Hillary Rodham Clinton. On June 06, Hillary became a subject of major media sensation over her Giorgio Armani jacket that she had donned at the New York primary. Reportedly, the suit costs $12,495. Later it was revealed that the same jacket was on sale for 7K. Be that as it may, it is quite a lot for a jacket. In the USA, some people who are below poverty line make less than 12K per year. This particular Italian jacket of Hillary has caused an uproar because she wore it at an event to talk about inequality, how to create jobs and raising minimum wage for everyday Americans.
The New York Post reported that her jacket was a part of a new style overhaul to boost her confidence and make her look more stylish as a Democratic presidential nominee. People on social media were slamming her as a hypocrite who is out-of-touch with reality. An intense media buzz was generated because many had felt that Clinton had shown poor judgement in wearing her Armani suit at an event where she was talking about 'inequality' between American people.
Either it was a gross oversight on the part of her stylist or Hillary simply didn't care what she was wearing as long as she looked nice and presidential in her jacket. Perhaps her team didn't weigh carefully the glaring contrast the suit represents especially when her agenda was to opine on inequality. Or her image advisers must have felt that the Armani jacket was appropriate and necessary to wear on her home turf to make her look bold who simply oozes confidence. But within hours, her suit became the subject of negative talk and no one really took the time to read what she had to say about inequality per se.
The Clintons are independently wealthy people who like to show off. For the record, Hillary Clinton is worth $31.3 million in personal wealth. What better ways to flaunt one's wealth but to display their designer outfits? As a former First Lady, Hillary was known for wearing famous American designer labels like Ralph Lauren, Oscar de la Renta and Carolina Herrera who had brought glamour back to the White House. Such designers had gained access to the most famous and powerful women in America by creating an impressionable style for them and their creations do not come cheap. Their couture dresses cost many thousands of dollars. Like many other First Ladies, Hillary had sought out eye-catching designer clothes made by these versatile designers who were responsible about the way the public saw Hillary Clinton. During Hillary's White House years, they most definitely had helped to reshape her public image - once known for wearing baggy men's sweaters and headband hairdo while Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas. So it is not surprising that today as an esteemed woman of taste, Hillary has kept up with her sense of style even on the campaign trail. Clinton perhaps now believes that in order to play the part, one has to look the part.
Putting Hillary Clinton aside for a minute - what about Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee? How often do we see his wardrobe choice being discussed in the media? When it comes to choosing the right clothes, Donald wears the most expensive designer Italian suits made by Brioni. An average price for such suits is $7,000 which excludes the shirt, the tie and other designer accessories. Donald has his own clothing line at the American semi-upscale department- store chain called Macy's where an average DT dress shirt costs $69.50. Donald never wears his own brand because supposedly Macy's caters to American middle class families.
During Hillary Clinton's presidential bid in 2008, she also took a lot of flak for wearing her infamous bright-coloured matronly pantsuits. No matter how she dresses, people seem to grumble and roll their eyes and she ends up being an object of sexist rub.
As an unwritten rule, women are frowned upon if they are too feminine, too modest or too stylish. Powerful women like Hillary Clinton are called harsh, aggressive or even 'bitchy' when they start to assert themselves. The same qualities in men are considered necessary to be competent.
When women like Hillary are fighting against gender-based inequality - their clothing must not define them. They should be judged on the basis of their intellect and what they are doing in order to make society a place where women can feel safe to fight alongside men in making significant contributions. This is a fight women have been fighting since the 1960s and it is nowhere near done. When the feminist struggle is in its fourth stage, women are well aware that they still do not have all the menfolk in their corner to fight against gender-based discrimination and inequality.
As champion of such causes, if one picks and can afford to wear expensive clothing then it should be their prerogative. Not every politician in America believes in being modest and wearing clothes off the rack of a department store.
This reminds me of the stark contrast in the personal style of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and West Bengal's Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee. I have always admired PM's graceful style and the exquisitely designed saris she often wears when meeting the heads of states or during her state visits. In difference, Mamata wears simple cotton borderless tater sari which gives her a didi look and nonetheless she is adored by millions.
In the midst of all the chaos about Hillary wearing a designer number, a very important milestone has taken a backseat that for the very first time in American history, a female has the magic number of delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination for the upcoming presidential race. Isn't it about time to leave women alone and not criticise them because of the outfit they wear? Can't we just be gracious and say, 'let's hear what she has to say?'
Hillary Clinton's wardrobe shouldn't judge her viability as the next US president - her policies should. Let's see if she can inspire the voters from all corners and whether she can dispel her typical image as a candidate for the older white women. With a racist like Donald Trump as an opponent, in November, Hillary might very well show that an ultimate feminist can be the next US president after all.
The writer is a fiction writer and a columnist.