I love that Nancy Pelosi embraces her femininity and doesn't push it away. Why can't a woman be smart, powerful and stylish? I don't see why a woman has to cut off that part of herself just because she has authority. Personally, I find it so disappointing when a woman feels like she needs to dress like a man to be taken seriously. That is a very old fashioned way of thinking.
Nancy Pelosi is a “rock star” at her job and she chooses her clothing very carefully. I find it fun to watch her demonstrate her power and excellent taste through her wardrobe. It works for me to hear people remark upon her fashion choices because I think they are an important part of who she is...the most powerful woman in our hemisphere.
2
Completely agree with you! Trump’s too long bright red satin (polyester?) tie says volumes about both his insecurities and his utter lack of any style despite claims of great wealth.
How about when Al Gore got way too carried away obsessing over earth tones?
Gucci shoes on a candidate?
Yes, men have less choices but the signals they are sending are pretty transparent. I loved Hillary, I don’t think it’s an insult to say she defined female presidential hair. And yes, she took pantsuits and owned it.
It doesn’t trivialize a powerful woman like Pelosi, it’s a wonderful statement to young women who still fret over how they look for men, rather than themselves.
1
I have been thinking that Ms Pelosi is very knowledgeable concerning the power off the colors she wears. Now here I'm reading that people have varied opinions on whether or not her style of dress should be noted. Of course it should. For one, the colors she choses help make her always visible in photographs that appear in the press [in color of course]. Pity the poor man who has far more limited choices. Ms. Pelosi is small, so bright colors keep her from being lost in a see of taller people -- men -- and make her instantly recognizable. Not to mention she still looks great in figure-hugging garments. Good for her.
5
I was thrilled to see Ms Pelosi rocking her awesome coat as she walked away from her meeting with Trump. I want one, too! It seems to me that she uses her colourful clothing to signal a tremendous confidence and self assurance, as a woman and as a political leader, and I love that about her. It is one way she projects her "mana". Absolutely you should write about it!
2
I think that she looks terrific. It makes her more noticeable and it does give her power and a sense of energy. It also makes people forget about how old she is. More importantly, it probably makes her feel good.
7
@Liz- CA I think you are absolutely right in saying that we should not overlook the fact that fashion is first and foremost a way of feeling good. This dimension is sadly often forgotten about...
5
Absolutley!! When and why we reached that point in which a woman is judge -often by other women, for enjoying dressing up?
Apparently women who do, are either "shallow" "overdressed" or "eager to please the men out there". Mrs. Pelosi is a great role model and an example of how, intelligence, leadership, ageless beauty and fashion, are not exclusive and actually play an important role in social interaction.
3
Fashion is an important tool of self-expression and it's lots of fun, of course, but fashion is also an incredibly important part of our speech, and it's something that women almost exclusively get to use (excluding Barack Obama's tan suit). People remember the suffragettes and their white clothes, and Hillary Clinton's iconic pantsuits (which I also wrote about: https://www.theodysseyonline.com/hillarys-pant-suits-important), and Melania's "I don't care, do u?" jacket that instantly went viral for the message it sent.
I'm a woman working in a male-dominated field in a male-dominated city, and fashion is something I use so everyone in the room knows that yes, I am a woman, and yes, I am incredibly proud to be a woman working in my position.
5
Read this article right after reading : https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/opinion/brazil-gender-alves.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
("I put my baby daughter in Dinosaur Overalls; Am I an Anarchist") which is about the intense use of pink for girls, blue for boys in todays' culture. (Also of course: girls get unicorns, sparkles, mermaids, and so on; boys get trucks, dinosaurs, race cars)....
Just sort of funny and ironic.
1
I'd like to know where women politicians, women on TV, get their uniform. That is, the single colored, simple sheath dresses, perhaps with jackets. Or, perhaps, pants suits with coordinated tanks. Coverage of Paris/Milan/NY Fashion Weeks is utterly irrelevant to my life. Knowing how to look powerful yet appropriate would be helpful.
5
I'm glad that when the attire of well-dressed women who are tough, intelligent, savvy and articulate are noticed and admired! many of my friends love Nancy Pelosi with or without that stunning orange coat; and we can't wait to get one like it, or to see what she'll wear next!
Similarly, our former First Lady, Michelle Obama was also very much admired for her fashion taste as well as for her originality and her smarts!
Most men's suits are by and large unremarkable, so perhaps that's why little attention is paid to them.
3
As a sixty year old feminist, I dislike the example Pelosi sets not only with her cocktail dress but with her spike heels, her face-lift, and her baby voice. This style of dress, although it may be what she enjoys, is something invented during an age when women had to dress to please men - longer legs, stockings, etc. All the men are in House, meanwhile, are wearing body concealing suits with comfortable shoes.
I think it is equally telling to talk about Trumps absurdly long tie, the de-rigeur wearing of the american flag pin, the ridiculous 'evil twin' setup that Schumer and Pelosi choose for their response to Trumps TV address, Trumps absurd handshake and frog like sitting style, etc. etc. All that young people do these days is selfies and image, but I really am afraid it is a battle that Pelosi specifically is NOT winning. So I say go for it - we need the young to vote democratic, we need absurd tweets that include words like 'tinkle-fight' to be illuminated for what they are, so the Dems can learn and do better!!!.. Oh, and please include Warrens infuriating head bobbing, exacerbated by her Geraldine Ferrara haircut - lets talk about how unattractive she is, how uncharismatic. And how that hurts her chances, despite her policies! Of course it does!
Obama is a charmer, Kennedy and Clinton made people love them. Schumer, Pelosi, DO NOT. Dress, action, tweets, speeches, it all goes together.
@grace thorsen. I am 61 and believe NP should wear what makes her feel good. For me, also a feminist that is a black T-shirt and yoga pants. If she wants to dress like Queen Victoria, so be it.
3
Just because NYT says so (or decides to publish this pablum), doesn't make covering NP's hot pink dress not sexist...or even interesting (no, didn't read the original column, didn't read this follow-up).
Women: let's stop whining. Just live, do, achieve -- and achieve more than the publication of one's nonsense piece in the NYT. Let's all be more Nancy Pelosi and less Vanessa Friedman in our lives.
And, I'm very sad that my beloved NYT has turned into a mix of People, National Inquirer, and -- on a good day -- Home and Garden.
@RS it is not sexist..It is just reality. Trump looks like an overstuffed panda. Pelosi looks like a geisha doll. Don't you think this reveals something about their character..? Trumps ties have been extensively covered. Nancy's pinkccktail dress (she could sub on FOX!!) Clintons white pantsuit, the de rigeur flag pin
that everyone has to wear now, like it is some sort of totem - tell me this has no meaning..
I see Pelosis' pink suit in the context of her immediate words that she wants to work with repubs, who have proved themselves capable of any dirty trick to get tax cuts and government shutdown..I also judge her pink suit as being in accord with her actions to de-flate the climate change committee, by appointing an old guard leader, granting it no subpeona power, and no legislative power - it all says to me nancy is OLD guard, and into protecting power, more important to her than real problems....I am tired of that. We have a very serious fight in climate change, and Nancy's high heels and pink suits and actions all say she is NOT there with me.
@RS it is not sexist..It is just reality. Trump looks like an overstuffed panda. Pelosi looks like a geisha doll. Don't you think this reveals something about their character..? Trumps ties have been extensively covered. Nancy's pinkccktail dress (she could sub on FOX!!) Clintons white pantsuit, the de rigeur flag pin
that everyone has to wear now, like it is some sort of totem - tell me this has meaning..
I see Pelosis' pink suit in the context of her immediate words that she wants to work with repubs, who have proved themselves capable of any dirty trick to get tax cuts and government shutdown..I also judge her pink suit as being in accord with her actions to de-flate the climate change committee, by appointing an old guard leader, granting it no subpeona power, and no legislative power - it all says to me nancy is OLD guard, and into protecting power, more important to her than real problems....I am tired of that. We have a very serious fight in climate change, and Nancy's high heels and pink suits and actions all say she is NOT there with me.
In college I learned that if I wanted to be taken seriously, I had to dress the part. This meant dark suits, muted blouses, and pumps - and while I might be able to get away with a peach colored blouse, anything remotely pink would have a negative impact on my career. Even dresses were frowned upon (this was the 1980s and I was in finance). Only women at the pinnacle of their careers could get away with bright colors and dresses. I see Speaker Pelosi's outfit as a statement that she wields power with complete confidence.
13
@Martha McAfee
What men wear is even more strictly controlled. Women have much more freedom of choice than men do, and yet all one ever hears is complaining. This constant yelling about how one group has more victim clout than another has gotten very old and is almost never actually based on a rational examination of the evidence.
1
A photo of Pelosi in her hot pink suit accompanied the article. I learned my colors about 5 decades ago, so I did not need to be told that she wore a pink suit.
Talk about clothes & fashion when the article is about clothes & fashion. Talk about current events when the article is about current events. Until it’s unremarkable what genitalia a politician has under said clothing, just give the clothing description a rest already.
On the other hand, if some vapid modern day Imelda Marcos is stupid enough to visit the unfortunate wearing a jacket with ‘I don’t care” emblazoned on the back, by all means show the world what a feckless dresser she is.
3
Love this article and its appreciation for Speaker Pelosi’s communications savvy. But I do feel concerned sometimes that women remember the reasons for decorum in government as they gain more power. Dull as they are, business suits are a uniform that signals readiness for the job, high respect for the tasks at end, and a certain surrendering of individuality to a common good (i.e., not causing irrelevant distractions). If women don't want the discussion to be about our clothes, we should adopt work clothes that aren't that interesting in themselves, and clothes that aren’t overly sexualized (too tight dresses, for instance). Nancy Pelosi looked fabulous, bright color, clear lines, a confident, powerful presence in hot pink. Sometimes I think very high heels are rather frivolous, but I know they give women height and presence, even as they introduce an erotic note. (They're all about the tilt of the pelvis.) Whatever your views, we are in a transitional time for culture, and it’s a good time to discuss fashion in every context, and to consider its multi-dimensional meaning. Thanks for this coverage, NYTimes!
7
@Connie Moffit
The idea that 'suits' convey readiness & respect etc for the job is a ridiculous idea. Something from the 50's. And that "high heels' are erotic because they tilt the pelvis, come on next we will say that ''the woman was asking for it because her skirt was above her knees' when she was raped.
Everyone has the right to wear whatever they want, it is their brain that cost not the cloths they wear.
@Connie Moffit wo words, dear 'ti nkle fight' No serious woman can come up with tha t phrase, Her clothes are fro m Mad Men, her style is 'working together' with the GOP who has beate the pants off dem s on every issue for thirty years, with a few short months of triumphs by Obama, quickly overturned by McConells GOP, with the Merick Garland debacle the ong-ong piece de risistance by people who wear suits and comfortable shoes EVERY DAY of their lives.. Nancy and er style are losing. It is aquiesent secretary dress. We need Zena the warrior woman, with her left breast cut off and boots for tromping o ut fires..
@grace thorsen sorry, bad laptop keys, meant to refer to 'tinkle fight" Nancys' timeless phrase and that the GOP has beaten the pants off us for thirty years, including the Merrick Garland debacle. Nancy, the FOX news dressed secretary, wants to 'work with the GOP"..Her clothes say it all. Please cover her ridiculous style of dress - it says everything about her.
As a weekly reader of your column, your request for readers to weigh in on the topic of sexism in politics is relevant and appreciated. ( I am a female NYC sales executive, over 50 , having pivoted from over 20 years as a global fashion executive.)
Ms. Pelosi has broken through the glass ceiling of her own merits- twice, in fact! Twice in fact, over the age of 50! Kudos to her for achieving the highest elected political role in a fiercely divided political system.
Tailored, richly colored Max Mara 'cloth' coat? Positive image-one of the best quality options available globally.
Pink dress- could have been from anyone. Again, a positive image- Ms. Pelosi knows the power of a colorful presence.
Grandchildren surrounding her on her re- confirmation as Speaker of the House? Mindful of her roles as leader, mother, grandmother and wife. She sends a positive, visual message.
She portrays a positive, winning approach, inclusive of the daily maintenance (weight management, hair color, dermatological and dental off-hours) women do not talk about with male peers.
In thinking back to college coursework and political women who have shaped our fashion conscience- traditionally, 1st ladies have had this platform. Mamie Eisenhower: Mamie pink.Jackie Kennedy: Elegance everyday- casual to white tie formal.Nancy Reagan: Reagan red.Michelle Obama: Very well toned arms.
Nancy Pelosi and Christine LaGarde, too, are smart in their non-verbal, visual messaging.
9
You commented on the style & power of a 78 year old American woman. I have no problem with this.
21
@Baby Cobra Amen!
4
The Times policy is to empower women, yet it seems what they wear is of some major significance.
Why doesn’t the Times report on her support of a border wall in the past instead of fashion.
Which is more important.
@Art:
It has been reported on. Also, it was a different time and for a different reason.
3
@Art I see your point, but I guess the idea here is precisely to show that fashion can be a form of power and all the more since it dealt with N. Pelosi's outfit for her first meeting with D. Trump.
2
I dream of a day when the world will no longer tolerate such grotesqueries as chief fashion critics.
6
As an avid reader of your column I would like to thank you for asking your readers to weigh in on this topic. (male, mid-thirties, Europe)
I don’t think it’s sexiest to report on an woman of public interest’s fashion choice. There are many women with great responsabilities in politics and other fields that are never featured in the NYT fashion pages. Mrs Pelosi’s outfits were not reported in this and other newspapers because of her sex but because of her fashion sense.
Still, I did not enjoy the column on Mrs Pelosi very much. As many international readers I have mixed feeling about the US-political undertone that seems to have become de rigueur in all fields of journalism over the last two years. In my opinion the column on Mrs Pelosi had no fashion content (unlike the one on Ivanka T in India for instance). It was an opinion piece on the political celebrity of the moment from a contemporary culture (not a fashion) angle.
I wish there could be more columns like last week’s one on the retrogarde Golden Globes red carpet. I thought that was smart, contextualized fashion commentary.
1
@Sandro M I think it's a very good point and I fully agree with you!
You are actually raising a very interesting point concerning the real function of fashion, which should indeed not always be politicized.
Even though I do believe that fashion can be powerful and convey a message, I am also worried that someday (if it hasn't already...) it will become a political tool, and would thus lose its artistic essence and its artistic power...
Kudos to Vanessa Friedman (as usual) for illuminating in our current milieu one of the most historically utilized expressions humans (and animals) have wielded and continue to wield in order to rapidly, powerfully transmit to others what they offer, and if the viewer is astute, WHAT THEY SEEK.
In my personal and professional life I have seen that color is a crucial, immediate driver of reaction and response--positive, negative, conscious, or subconscious. Even if you disagree with this reality, it is unwise to ignore it or reject it as trivial or as demeaning for you set yourself up to be masterfully manipulated.
Thank you to Ms. Friedman and to the New York Times for bringing this to our attention and for exploring it beyond the surface. Now I must go change my clothes...
4
Fashion is indeed a facet of how we can understand our world’s political systems, but perhaps it is one of the smallest. To talk about fashion is to talk about talking about fashion. Like clothes, it conceals just as much as it reveals.
1
Emerson: the dreams of turtles are about turtles. Someone else: to a carpenter every problem is solved with a hammer. No surprise the style editor see politics through fashion. A useful but limited perspective; or should that be limited but useful?
3
I find it amusing how, in 2019, many feminist critics consider coverage of Pelosi's clothing to be sexist only if there is no corresponding coverage of what male politicians wear. Maybe everything that isn't in tit-for-tat parity isn't actually sexist? Or, put another way, are highly accomplished women still supposed to define their stature in the political world according to what the men are doing?
( That reminds me of a venerable Chinese Vegetarian Restaurant, "Harmony", in Philadelphia, that has been serving wonderful cuisine for decades, but still feels the need to list menu items by meat-referenced names.)
Turning it around, I can easily envision a plethora of scathing opinion articles in the NYT if the commentary was exclusively focused on high-power male politicians' strategic use of tie color, with no mention of what women politicians were wearing, with subtitles like: "How Men Miss the Strategic Power of Women's Wardrobe Choices." But you would not hear any complaint from men about how such coverage trivializes or disempowers them, for the most part. For one thing, they accept that, in the political world, women have this ability to speak through the clothing they wear, and that men don't. For another thing, much more important: they would have already made the decision that they will not be trivialized. I think that Speaker Pelosi makes just that very same decision, every time she gets dressed to lead the House of Representatives.
4
What came to mind for me, as someone who has always been interested in how people express themselves through fashion, is how fearful and constrained men in US political circles are in their sartorial choices. It would appear that these men seriously self-edit so as not to draw what they fear would be negative attention to themselves. However, in the real world I see men who make more interesting choices with their clothes, expressing who they are through pattern, color and cut. Maybe men in politics would like to wear something different but don't know how to go about making a change. (Start with the socks, perhaps?)
Women in politics, who are always judged by what they wear anyway and who also have more choices, as noted by Ms. Friedman, are shaping their own narrative. They can express themselves through their clothes, take back colors and styles for which they have been ridiculed in the past and also show what powerful women can do in politics. I love this column and always read articles written by Vanessa Friedman first when I open up my NYT online.
3
Pelosi is dressing for the camera and she's quite photogenic. She also wanted to stand out - for the camera.
Women dissect each other's fashion choices all the time, in person, whether they know each other or not. I use the third person here because -
I am sick and tired of the never-ending focus on appearance, and I don't care what gender the person is (and there are multiple choices here, of gender).
My husband is extremely fussy about his appearance, as if he's being inspected under a microscope at his job in food service. I mean, he spends so much time on it that I cannot fathom it. And does anybody look at him even, or care?
My son has now inherited this fussiness, and he too seems to think he's being looked at and judged at all times.
Of course both of them are African American so there you go.
I wear what is comfortable and doesn't expose parts of my body I prefer to keep private. Even though I have a public persona and have to present myself with authority in my professional life.
My feet are perfect.
5
After writing my first comment I decided to go through the comment section, and the truth is it was really interesting to see what the arguments were on both "sides".
But I realized that maybe the problem is not about sexism. Indeed, it rather looks like the real controversy comes from fashion itself, or rather about the perception people have of fashion. It seems as though a lot of people tend to consider as a problem the fact that women are judged according to their clothes when men aren't. But actually that comes from the idea we have of fashion. Because after all - what is the problem ? I mean why clothes and fashion have to be seen pejoratively ? Why does it have to be negative to be seen through the way you are dressed ?
Maybe the crux of the matter is not about sexism after all, but rather about the perception people have of fashion.
Obviously it seems negative since it's supposed to deal with appearances, thus giving the impression of something shallow and superficial (I am not saying it isn't true, because we surely have to go beyond that.) but what if we were wrong ? What if fashion was actually the most profound art ever, due to its ability to be at the same time inward and outward ?
In that case, I guess that instead of being seen as sexist, being talked about one's style would turn out to be a huge privilege.
So let's keep in mind that there's nothing intrisically bad about fashion, but rather about the way we tend to perceive it.
3
Fashion choices can send messages. And women and girls are smart enough to figure out those message themselves. We don't need fashion reporters to interpret for us. Or patronizing articles explaining why it needs to be explained to us.
2
@Annie
If fashion doesn't interest you, why read it?
You're pushing a narrative, preaching to your choir.
You write, "The more we recognize the role clothes play..." That is your preference. Start writing about "the role clothes play" in keeping us warm or cool, letting us participate more freely in outdoors and athletic activities, start writing about the practical nature of a good wardrobe, conservatively protecting the plantet by needing to consume less...
Those are newsworthy issues. Washington fashion was epitomized by John McCain's funeral: mostly out of shape white people in impractical clothing for their age. This is power? Only in your narrative...
(don't get me started on the lack of smart footwear on display)
3
@Midway
Yes, the footwear!!! How did stilettos become part of the woman's uniform?
Long, fake, dyed hair. Fake fingernails for crying out loud!
This all started centuries ago, and now it's ingrained in our culture. What women had to wear, the forced conformity.
Stop the focus on appearance. It IS a weapon and people are injured by it. Think of the tendency for people to look away from someone who is disfigured. Think of the discrimination against fat people, unattractive people, and how many studies have shown what a disadvantage they are at in life. It makes me sick.
2
@Midway
@Midway
Yes, the footwear!!! How did stilettos become part of the woman's uniform?
Long, fake, dyed hair. Fake fingernails for crying out loud!
This all started centuries ago, and now it's ingrained in our culture. What women had to wear, the forced conformity.
People, society, top the focus on appearance. It IS a weapon and people are injured by it. Think of the tendency for people to look away from someone who is disfigured. Think of the discrimination against fat people, unattractive people, and how many studies have shown what a disadvantage they are at in life. Think of the 99% who can't afford anything close to the 'fashion' discussed in the NYT.
It makes me sick.
1
I kept thinking of this article when observing the swearing in of the new Republican Florida Governor. One of the female appointments who was sworn into office wore an all white ensemble. The new First Lady of Florida wore an almost carbon copy of the outfit worn by Melania Trump on the President's inauguration - the same coat color, cut and white gloves. Some in the audience wore all red. I told my husband that there are no coincidences.
I'd be less annoyed about yet another female politician being judged and examined under the fashion microscope FIRST if there were anything resembling equal ink/pixels dedicated to Speaker Pelosi's remarkable career and skill at her job.
It's understandable that fashion critics think this is important, and perhaps to their world it is. To the more general political and news consumer, it is at best not terribly important, at worst, more sexist nonsense right up there with "likeablility".
What a spectacular picture — the new female speaker surrounded by children, the future of our country. You go girl.
4
The historians will write about speaker Pelosi and the dramatic will she be elected speaker again in the midst of many denouncements. The republicans practically , well they did actually run against Speaker Pelosi in the midterms and in the 2016 elections. Would she be able to hold on to the gavel? The recent White House meeting on view for all with Pelosi, the President and Schumer. This was about more than her dress or coat and detailing her fashion is reductionist. When out of all of that news we pull out only what she is wearing? Poor timing for a focus on her clothing. I know that very few people in the public eye and or those around them give no thought to what they are wearing or the implications of such. But sometimes we just have to grow-up and move-on. I do not recall what Andrea Markel wore last week or last month or the British Prime Minster because the press did not cover it and it is not a part of the "news" story in either country. Covering the yellow vests protest in France was germane and providing context as one commenter mentioned on the use of fashion and color on movements also news worthy. The "I Don't Care" coat was news. Now is the time to dig deeper and provide more than the obvious. We saw Mike Pence, the Vice President shrink and Nancy Pelosi make her points without taking a "power stance" or get this all while being a woman over 40 …in our society that should be the real headline.
2
@marielle I disagree. Coverage of the speaker should include a brief acknowledgement of her sartorial choice for the occasion. She thinks hard about what to wear, so I want to take her wardrobe into account. Teresa May's clothes choices are under constant, daily scrutiny by British readers of the London Times. How can you not know that her leopard stilettos are beloved by fans and derided by critics? Again, I expect a brief description of the outfit in the context of a full exploration of the event, speech, meeting, vote, policy, etc.
1
Respectfully, commenting on the color or cut of a woman's attire when the same is not done for a man's is sexist. As an example, I scrolled through many articles on President Trump's address from the Oval Office. I could not find one instance where the color of his tie (red, a "power" color) was mentioned. If we are going to examine how we are manipulated by what women were (because that is part of their message), the same should apply to what men wear.
2
@Alice
Why would anyone bother with what Trump is wearing? It's always the same and always Ill fitting. speaker Pelosi's appearance on the other hand added a visual bounce to her incredible handling of the situation. She not only showed her complete control of the situation she looked it. Trump not only after like an empty suit, he looked it.
2
Do you think you could segue into the topic of executive presence? I think it gives the other side of the issue, which is that in corporate America, it’s easier for men to just wear a default suit and automatically appear credible, trustworthy and competent, while women have to make so many decisions about hair, makeup, plastic surgery, jewelry, clothing, shoes and tone of voice because any misstep would be completely distracting from her professional contributions and would instead work against her as a credibility/competence detractor. What women wear matters and we need to learn how to empower ourselves in this area. I feel like we don’t talk about this enough. We look at our politicians on tv and our celebrities on the red carpet but we never think of ourselves as having as much potential for power.
7
Thanks, Ms. Friedman, for defending the interest in and importance of the clothes we - and politicians and celebrities - choose to wear. If anyone is in any doubt about that, you might try reading a wonderful new book, Jefferson on Display, by G.S. Wilson. Through a close examination of portraits of Jefferson, and various letters and papers, it is a scholarly and fascinating study of how Jefferson's own wardrobe reflected his circumstances, as well as the image he wanted to portray. It is no frivolous or sexist examination.
8
@Linda Thomson
You make a great point. It is not problematic that fashion is covered via the lens of fashion, history, or chemistry. We know how many of dyes developed and used in fabrics during Jefferson's time were achieved (think indigo). The coverage and scrutiny of what women wear has zoomed past the point you make...in nearly every article the first papragraph begins with a physical description "elfin features" and then albeit a well written description of the clothing e.g. crisp white blouse, muted tones of blue...there is no counter point for men other than the "Zuckerberg" tee-shirt and the turtleneck worn by the late Steve Jobs but this was more in reaction to these men not wearing traditional suits.
1
Make politicians wear a navy suit and white shirt 99% of the time (which is why Obama’s tan suit made headlines).
If female politicians did the same, then this wouldn’t be an issue.
As it is, when a male politician doesn’t wear a flag lapel pin or wears jeans, people’s heads explode.
5
@MTS
I like this idea of a political uniform. It echoes the purposes of school uniforms, which are to remove visible signs of economic disparity and to promote students' focus on matters of substance. In schools, substance is the material being taught. An analogous focus on matters of government would benefit us all.
We don't judge male politicians on their outfits, but we do judge women on their outfits. That's a clear example of sexism.
8
@Alex
Actually, we may not know we judge men by their outfits, but we do, at least subliminally. Before I knew much about the current president, I had formed a somewhat negative opinion about him, based on his ill-fitting suits (baggy, poorly cut to hide whatever), and on his ridiculously long ties, and of course, on his awful hair.
One of my very first memories of political discussion was one between my parents about Ike vs. Stevenson, after that famous photo of Adlai in "Look," showing a hole in his shoe. My father, a Democrat, was quite put off, saying "a gentleman would take care of his shoes." My mother, also a Dem, replied, "Maybe he's had more on his mind than shoes." They then discussed the two candidates in other terms, but I wonder if my father voted for Ike after all. Just sayin,' we do look at men and make judgments about their apparel and appearance.
3
@Alex
First, who is this WE you are speaking about? The majority of people really, really don't care; I know that I DON'T. I think women who worry about this stuff dress primarily to prevent criticism from other women and fashion-obsessed men.
Second, men wear drab, standardized (uniformed) outfits. Anything else WOULD be judged, which is why they don't vary. Women could do this too, but they don't, for the most part. The savvy ones (like Speaker Pelosi) know that real equality isn't measured by gender-neutral, tit-for-tat parity.
In the getting of power, the powerful agree that any advantage, any "edge" you can gain is good. Fashion is a double-edged sword: do it badly, and it works against you; do it well and it can be a huge advantage. Women can opt for this, but really, men don't have that option. Is that also sexist?
2
@Alex
Remember Trump’s taped tie? Men are less brave with respect to fashion and can default to something pathetically easy and safe from scrutiny. Women have so much more to consider, as others have stated, that clothing can be an opportunity to add to the messaging. It isn’t a double edged sword, one that the Speaker wields well.
As a firm believer in the power of fashion, I was only too delighted to read Vanessa's Friedman column.
Now I think that the stakes of it are actually even wider, for it seems to me that it may as well be a very shrewd response to all fashion skeptics. I can't even count the number of times I've heard things such as 'Are you really serious about your loving fashion...?' or 'Is it that interesting..?'
Well frankly I wish I had read Ms. Friedman's column to reply in the same way she did, because she's right in saying that fashion is definitely a unique tool that can subtly express what's unsayable. I mean why else would famous people, who are constantly under close scrutiny, hire fashion advisers...? Because they know people will talk. Because no matter how hard we try, we can't help but take people at face value. Plus, let's not forget that in many cultures the very purpose of clothes was that of expressing your social status, which proves that the very essence of fashion is all about showing something.
Besides, I think we should bear in mind the context of it all, which is that Ms Pelosi was the very first woman to become House Speaker. And what better way of expressing that momentous fact through fashion, which is one of the very few fields in which women are favored? Let's just make the most of it, and by that I also mean try and decipher the messages expressed through clothes.
As Vanessa Friedman stated, it turns out to be the best tribute we could pay to Ms. Pelosi.
14
In her compelling memoir, Becoming, Michelle Obama writes of coming to the realization that "clothes mattered more to people than anything I had to say." Obama went on to leverage that power, the power of image, to bring attention to the issues that mattered to her. While commenting on their appearance has often been used to demean women and shift the conversation away from their accomplishments, analyzing how women use color as a signifier, how they use fashion to convey and wield their power can yield nuanced insights.
15
Well, you are obviously correct, and stating that fashion is political and should be discussed and analysed as such, is, or should be, banal. I'd suggest that the angry criticisms you and your colleagues receive are worth a discussion in themselves. What kind of understanding of politics and fashion are they actually based on? Some non-gendered abstract process?
What puzzles me is the continued lack of interest in what the academy has to say about the politics of fashion. There is in fact plenty of studies that support your argument. Case in point (note: shameless self-promotion!): https://www.routledge.com/The-International-Politics-of-Fashion-Being-Fab-in-a-Dangerous-World/Behnke/p/book/9781138788985
I think the debate might gain a bit of depth this way.
1
When discussion of fashion precludes talking about what the message of the wearer is, it's a problem. Not every wardrobe choice is a statement about something and yet people are obsessed with it (see Michelle Obama).
As my husband always reminds me, "don't get the outside mixed up with the inside." Words to live by.
7
"To ignore how public figures use what they wear is to ignore one of the ways our own understanding is being manipulated."
This is an important point, and I appreciate the article, which I think could go deeper. As many readers have pointed out, the color & variety of women's professional fashion choices as compared to the men's professional uniform, as well as women's own (generally) higher interest level & awareness of fashion means the subject is entirely appropriate for discussion. This to me is different from the sexist coverage of the past, when the men were covered for the words they said & the actions they took, & women were covered (judged) by their appearance & silence. It doesn't surprise me that many male commenters find the topic boring. That doesn't mean many women won't find it interesting, & I'm sorry that more can't get past the defensive, don't talk about what she's wearing, as if no one saw it. More insight, more understanding, please, not less!
7
I wish Ms. Pelosi's bright pink dress symbolized a move toward a more humane government, ending unjust wars and occupations, fighting for human rights here and around the world, as in the organization Code Pink.
Code Pink has demonstrated against terrible treatment at veteran's hospitals, called out war mongers, and pushed for use of our tax dollars for education and health care instead of endless war.
2
I love everything you write. But perhaps I appreciate most your cogent commentary on the power of clothes and how not paying attention to them is itself a statement. I have always liked Nancy Pelosi’s clothing choices (even if they are a bit staid) but it was only when I read your piece that I appreciated how smart her choices are. Of course I should have. Everything about her is savvy! Thank you. And I eagerly anticipate your newsletter every Friday.
4
Pelosi's husband is the one who buys clothes for her. She doesn't spend much if any time shopping for clothes.
2
All fashion makes a statement, even when it doesn’t. There’s a great exchange in The Devil Wears Prada about the fashion industry’s view of women (and men) who want to believe that their refusal to focus on fashion means that they somehow transcend the rabble’s dimwitted obsession with appearances over substance. Miranda (Meryl Streep) gazes disdainfully at Andrea’s (Andy, Anne Hathaway) plain, unfashionable sweater and proclaims that the industry knows all about the faux intellectual anti-fashion shopper and deliberately markets dowdy merchandise to that segment, knowing that the Andreas of the world will buy it and feel great satisfaction because they will be able to project to observers that they have more important concerns than silly, sexist, superficial, empty dictates of the fashion industry.
6
While I agree that how we dress portrays a certain message about ourselves, I think this is only true when we make a first impression. For those who know the individual (or their politics) well, dress doesn't mean anything. Just because someone dresses all light and ethereal doesn't mean they're a push over just as someone who tries to power dress might not have real power. The image one tries to portray only goes so far and that is the real problem people have when you cover someone's fashion. It's only the exterior and it only matters for a second and it doesn't show anything about the person one way or another. I like fashion and I think most people like to look nice, whatever their definition of nice may be, but it's not going to influence how I view the person especially once I get to know them. Fashion, at the very heart of it all, is superficial and fleeting.
2
As a lawyer in NYC for the last 43 years, I learned the lesson of using clothing to communicate my strength and self-confidence while I remained comfortable. I came to consider every item of my (visible!) outfit from hats, glasses and sunglasses to shoes and stockings. I often got it wrong as a young lawyer. When I started wearing tailored pantsuits in unusual fabrics and styles, I nailed the look. Getting attention in the right way is one of Speaker Pelosi's achievements, and I admire her skill in dressing. More power to her - literally!
11
An outfit is an external representation of a person's self-confidence. Speaker Pelosi is confident in her ability to lead the House and do battle with an intransigent president and ineffectual & weak Senate leader. Her clothing choices accentuate this confidence––she wants to be seen and heard. Trump, on the other hand, dresses as if he is hiding something, with his extra long ties and ill-fitting/over-sized jackets, hoping to get lost in a sea of clothing. As Ms. Friedman wrote, context is everything. There's plenty of context here.
10
If women in the world want to be treated the same as men, they should dress in a parallel fashion: suits, little jewelry, perfume, and hairstyles that do not draw attention. But women are hypocrites. They want the attention traditional femininity provides along with the privileges, while still demanding equality. Well, what about men? What do they get? Men don't have it easy. And without a woman's support, or someone's, it's much harder to do a "man's job." Leadership is demanding, but women would rather grab for themselves what they think is leadership, than accept a supportive role, even though it works. Of course, men brought it on themselves by behaving badly. Now women behave badly. Where are the consequences?
2
Great satire. Could you do the same thing with ties and lapel pins?
1
For goodness sakes, Vanessa Friedman is the fashion director and chief fashion critic of the Times. What else is she going to write about? It's not as if it's a news story focusing on Nancy Pelosi's dress. In as much as the color of the dress is a symbol, it is interesting to some of us to have it analyzed by someone whose work this is.
Given the fact that she has dicussed political men's dressing as well, I say kudos to Vanessa for bringing this to the public eye.
6
Thoughtful response to the critics. Makes total sense.
1
I only wish I could wear a hot pink suit. But--generic guy clothes only. SAD!
1
@jackzfun
There's no law saying men can't dress more colorfully. They just don't. There's no law saying that women can't all dress like beige lemmings. They just don't.
Pelosi and her husband are worth over $200 million dollars. Let her wear whatever she wants. With those Trump tax cuts, she can afford to. Can you imagine how much she would save in taxes if she moved to Florida?
2
Hillary did "between two ferns" before the election and on the show Zack ask her what she is going to wear at the debate and Hillary said there is a double standard because she rather thinks about how to bring the two parties together. So maybe you should listen to Hillary and stop focusing so much on who wears what! I really cannot care less what Nancy Pelosi wore but am disappointed at her not really delivering much in her speech.
2
I completely love reading stories about how clothes impact a situation like this. And I also am interested in the politics and proposals and progress of the issues.
Many of us can keep two thoughts in our head at one time.
6
I wonder how many of the people complaining about coverage of the clothes chosen by female politicians also like and share demeaning photos of our president’s physical appearance and clothing choices. Why do we pause over fashion and other physical characteristics of people with power, other than to pretend that the playing field is more level than it is?
3
Another one sided feminist biased story.
Even when you get it right you get it wrong.
The headline should read as is but also why covering/commenting on a well dressed male pol. is not sexist.
3
"After years of complaining about people focusing on her clothes" [Clinton]
That's the point- don't!
1
To paraphrase MLK, "I have a dream that politicians will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their dresses, but by the content of their platforms."
6
@TRF And, some day, we'll be able to judge their platforms and appreciate their fashion sense. Who knew?
1
@RJM Focus, people, focus!
1
At an age when many women complain that they have become invisible Nancy is anything but. When I first saw the Orange coat I had a very positive reaction. I too am a San Franciscan and I couldn't help but see a bit of a Jacki Kennedy. As for not talking about mens clothing choices What about Barack's Brown suit. It was certainly used as a cudgel for weeks after. And the whole thing about both sides doing it is just hooy. No one when on about Barbra Bush's dumpy Gand Ma look or Nancy Reagans Anorexia
2
Dress is, indeed, a part of everyone's tool kit, and one's choices do send a message. In everyday life, where we're not in the media spotlight, what I wear, to me, says "I'm glad to be here; I'm serious about why I'm here; I respect you" and more. Whether that's work-appropriate wear in the office, church clothing, or in a social situation, what we wear can speak volumes. Far too few people appreciate this or act accordingly.
7
I wonder...if the NY Post--for instance--had derisive things to say about Pelosi's attire, is that OK too?
By the way, I think she looks great in that dress. I admire her boldness. However, I don't think it was helpful to say " a wall is an immorality," though. Several Dem senators voted for walls/fences on the border in 2006, including Obama and Schumer. Sometimes, apparently, walls/fences are helpful on the border. Her rigid statement is not helpful, and paints her own party into a corner.
1
When I saw the photos from the swearing in of this congress, the sheer amount of color was overwhelming and exciting. One of the first things I thought was how I couldn't wait to read the Times Style section as it has an opportunity to cover the true politics of dress. I have always enjoyed it when this section dabs it's toe into this arena. You always make me think about my own choices, and it's amazing to realize that someone is putting a ton of thought and effort into deciding how a public figure appears to the world. Anyone who puts on clothes in the morning knows that clothes are an identity statement, and that statement is SIGNIFICANT when you are a public figure. I can't wait to watch you cover more than just blue suits and ties. Don't let the Re-activists get to you. The clothes are newsworthy, for men and women.
6
What women wear is more interesting than what men wear. More color, more textures, more shapes. Worthy of more coverage than men's wear.
9
How much more time does a woman than a man have to spend getting ready to appear in public? How much more time does a woman have to spend picking out clothes, shopping? How many more clothes does a woman have to pack for a business trip? How much more money does a woman have to spend? The focus on women's appearance, in both public and private life, costs women a great deal--in terms of time, money, focus. The tiny amount of attention spent on men's clothes (and then only a very few men) does not begin to balance the unrelenting attention on every aspect of a woman's appearance (check all the coverage of AOC's lipstick color--something I never noticed til pointed out in numerous press reports). It's time to lessen the time and money pressure on women, and stop focusing on appearance.
18
Your points are true, but perhaps partially miss the point: women, if they have a certain amount of visibility, do have to do these things; but many women actually like it. We would feel constricted and restricted if forced to limit that variety & color of self- expression. Nice to be able to wear comfortable shoes, though.
6
@Chris Commons:
"Have to"? Nobody says they have to do anything. For many of us, fashion is a pleasure. It's a form of art, a means of creative expression. No one says I have to spend time/money on it. I do it because I enjoy it. (And I've had a successful career that's had nothing to do with appearance because most of the time, nobody sees me -- I work in radio.)
12
Yes! Keep the coverage of fashion choices by public officials coming; they are clues into the hearts and minds of our leaders. The length of the President's tie tells us something important about who he is. So does the color of the Speaker's dress, which to my eye is not hot pink....maybe Calypso Coral or Paradise Pink?
4
@HilaryVermilliion.
I think this is an interesting controversy, but Ms. Friedman's retort, is not an interesting answer. This is sad, especially coming from the fashion editor.
There is so much more to this conversation than "I covered men's wear too" and what people wear is inseparable from what they communicate about themselves so it's fair game.
I have yet to read a serious analysis of the blasted coat or dress from Ms. Friedman. I happen to think she is right, it is important, but I have not heard an important discussion from her yet.
I would like to read about the shaping of the image of the powerful woman as women are finally reaching the top tiers of the power structure and what other women can (or maybe shouldn't) emulate in their daily presentations of themselves, especially at work and work related social occasions.
At my job, we're required to wear skirts while the men must wear suits. I fit men in suits. Crawling around on the floor in a skirt at age 60 at the foot of a man. Don't even ask if I feel this is sexist.
From my stand point, talking up a pink dress does not really help. The conservative store whose policy also allows them to not heat enough in the winter and crank the AC in summer so every woman there freezes just loves that dress.
Ms. Friedman from on high: Yes, there is still severe sexism in clothing and you're not helping. Thanks a lot.
11
I always dress for the job at hand, be it roofing my house, reading a bedtime story or slaying dragons.
It's only sexist if it's reported with out context. But sometimes context must be highlighted.
Thanks for the (button to left of center) highlights.
2
At a time when top roles for women in business and politics are few, we should be celebrating role models like Nancy Pelosi for her smarts, confidence, and stylish wardrobe. It’s a very good thing for our girls and young women to see Nancy Pelosi at her swearing in ceremony wearing a fabulous pink dress. Let’s hope they want to emulate her, rather than a celebrity like Kim Kardashian or Cardi B, in some state of undress.
10
I think you are missing the point, or perhaps obscuring it. Women dress to attract men. Women wear makeup to look better and attract men. It is the natural order of things. And, of course, women must, by this logic, dress in a more colorful and attention getting way.
The Speaker of the House may very well wear “hot pink” when out to dinner with friends. It is appropriate for women to “look young and beautiful if you want to be loved.” That is, quite frankly, what makes the world go round.
The more serious business world – the world, by and large – of men, does not rely on color but more on a conservative, quiet look. They are not trying to attract women, or other men, but to get on with the business of the day. If women are to participate in a man’s world, the world of serious politics and serious enterprise, then they should drop the runway look (and the dance videos) and get on with the people’s business.
1
@PoppaeaSabina This could not be further from the truth. If anything, women dress for other women and ::GASP:: for themselves. This entire comment is so saturated in sexism, that it's very clear that you missed the entire message of this article.
14
@PoppaeaSabina Women do not dress to attract men and do not wear makeup to attract men. News flash: women do what they want for themselves; men aren't the center of attention. If you judge someone's ability to do their job by the color of their attire, then you are just a sad, judgmental person. Your comment reeks of sexism and misogyny.
4
@PoppaeaSabina LOL So who do I dress for since I'm a lesbian? Is it still men?
5
If Nancy Pelois had worn something remarkable - say, a ball gown - it would be newsworthy. But she was wearing a perfectly ordinary professional woman's dress.
I don't care what Jeb or Marco wear either unless it's truly newsworthy. Let me know if they show up for work in flannels or a policeman's costume.
8
Yes, clothes matter and much thought is put into the optics. At the Democratic Convention in 1992, when Clinton received the nomination, Bill wore conservative blue, Hillary was in power red, and Chelsea wore angelic white. I feel pretty sure none of that was an accident.
5
It’s not sexist, it just a boring waste of time.
1
We shouldn't care but we do! (like Melania's jacket!!) Pelosi signals thoughtfulness and a willingness to think outside the box in her choices along with a node to tradition -- nothing radical really. but a bit forward in cut and styling. (I think Hillary made bad choices in clothing often and it affected one's perception of her.) Staying away from Nancy Reagan red -- do we now have Pelosi pink?
2
@Make America Sane
It was hard for Hillary to dress because she's short. Bright colors are more eyecatching and imposing, but are harder to pull off. Hillary looked best in some of her black or good outfits. And for those who are about to complain about heightism, I'm 5 feet nothing and know what I'm m talking about.
1
Men’s clothing is described less often than women’s simply because it is so uniform. In fact, it is a kind of uniform. When a male politician strays from the norm in raiment — whether his style is notably sharp or sits at the other, shlumpy end of the scale — that tends to get a mention. I remember reading, over and over again, about Bernie Sanders and his tired, rumpled suits. And then, of course, there are Trump’s Brioni baggies and his goofy hats. But most of the time a man in a suit is a head and hands sticking out of a swathe of black, gray or brown wool. Sometimes there are stripes, if the man is daring. Occasionally, if the fellow is feeling dangerous, there might be (egads!) a pocket square.
Women, in contrast, have the freedom (and many female politicians have the confidence) to don more expressive plumage, when they feel like it. It’s a reportable detail. I love Pelosi all the more for that hot pink dress.
27
Like her or not, it's a fact Ms. Pelosi epitomizes elegance, grace and style. Always perfectly dressed, coifed and fashionable, she exemplifies good taste. Unlike most female notables - be they show hosts, journalists, political or financial pundits, they dress to garner attention, competing with one another for shorter, revealing dresses that distract a lot of viewers who don't tune in because of their I.Q.
15
@November-Rose-59
"political or financial pundits, they dress to garner attention, competing with one another for shorter, revealing dresses that distract a lot of viewers who don't tune in because of their I.Q. "
That's FIX News mandatory job requirement.
They need to make sure their worshipers stay glued watching eye-candies.
4
@November-Rose-59. In general my observation is news people. both newsreaders and consultants wear nice clothing but not ones that attract attention and get many comments from fashion reviewers. I remember Katy Tur said she went to J Crew and bought 7 t-shirts, all the same except a different color to wear.
2
Ms. Friedman,
Looking elegant-men and women-is a sign of sophistication and good self-esteem.
Doesn't mean it have be the latest from Chanel , Hermès, John Lobb , or Kiton.
I rather work in a professional environment where everyone is dressing professional.
Call me an old fashion, but I long for the IBM days when it was mandatory men show up for work in dark suit, white shirt, striped tie, and lace-up shoe black shoe.
7
@MorGan Not only will I call you old-fashioned (as you suggest), but that 1950s IBM uniform you describe is hardly elegant ("Graceful and stylish in appearance or manner," OED) or sophisticated ("Having, revealing, or involving a great deal of worldly experience and knowledge of fashion and culture," OED). Speaker Pelosi on the other hand? Most definitely.
2
There was a fuss when Al Gore started wearing earth tones and blazers. He was trying to be relatable, and it was analyzed in print.
We’ve heard plenty about the tape on the back of you-know-who’s tie, and its extra length. Definitely has meaning.
President Obama wore Dad jeans. That was a fashion story.
What’s-his-name got the famous $400 haircut on board the plane on the tarmac.
W played cowboy with boots and hats, plus: that famous Mission Accomplished flight suit. He was THE MAN.
There’s plenty written about presidential boy’s clothes. No need to whine about VF writing about NP’s dress; they both really know what they’re doing, big time.
17
@Michael c The things you write about were largely not "fashion" but things that were largely distractions like Trump's tie, people just ask themselves "what" like if I was wearing a pair of pants that covered my shoes. The $400 haircut was seen as an extravagant improper behavior that cost the tax payer for delay of the plane. So I am not really in favor of saying anything about people's clothing but its understandable when they are obvious, discussing fashion is totally different in that it normally is just a capitalistic vehicle to make people buy excessively and purchase vastly overpriced clothing.
2
Love your writing and insights, Vanessa. Many women, unlike most men, reject the drab uniform (of course, that speaks volumes in itself) and choose (critical verb) to present themselves in ways that are indeed interesting and signaling. Can we please stop looking at fashion or what-she-wore reporting as a lesser form of criticism, or demeaning or sexist?
9
Baloney. If you discuss what a woman wears in the same context as power, but only about women, you are delegitimizing her work. I've heard these same arguments many times, and they are nothing more than excuses. This publication has a place for fashion. Keep it completely separate as it should be. Stop contributing to the sexist narrative.
22
@Rebeccap
Perfectly stated. Keep it on the fashion pages. Very disappointed that the NYT supports this blather.
2
Unfortunately, while impeccably clad once the mics are on, Mrs Pelosi makes even Steny Hoyer look like John Kennedy.
@CK
So what?
In an earlier comment, the writer stated that they “never once noticed the color of her dress” when Nancy Pelosi was sworn in, and did not think about the “ Center Left orange coat.” This reminds me of the once very popular claim of being “color-blind” when it comes to race. “Noticing” doesn’t just operate at a conscious level; there has been enough psychological research about the power of subliminal messages. I very much appreciate your pieces, Ms. Friedman, about the sometimes subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle influence of politicians’ fashion choices. Please continue your insightful analysis and reporting!
9
Brilliantly true article. Thank you.
4
Men and Women's clothing will be equally newsworthy when female politicians start wearing indistinguishable blue suits with red scarves. Until then, the pink dresses will have our attention.
1
When a woman wears a nice dress, people want to know who she is dressing up for. When a man wears a nice suit, people say, “oh, that’s a successful and handsome man.” They are both dressing up for others to see, but interpreted differently. That’s why you shouldn’t comment.
6
Or maybe that's why deeper commentary is needed.
1
If a female public figure strategically uses fashion to make a point, no one should be surprised when people notice and comment on it. Ruth Bader Ginsburg uses her "dissent collar" and "majority opinion jabot" to cleverly accessorize her black robes. Should we stop remarking on her fashion choices too?
8
If Ms. Pelosi didn't want anyone to comment on her wardrobe, then why does she insist on wearing couture? Google has thousands of images of the House Speaker and in virtually every one of them she has clearly chosen her clothing to send a non-verbal message. Even her fashion-fails, and there are a few of them, still send a studied message for the occasion. Her deportment is newsworthy because she makes it that way.
As emotionally satisfying as it may be to indulge feminist victimhood, I'd point out that no one ever comments on Susan Collins' forgettable wardrobe. They don't comment much on Sen. Feinstein or Sen. Murkowski's either; theirs are not bad, just not varied. However, the press regularly commented on FDR's and JFK's wardrobe; Trump's ties and wigs are media obsessions, and quite a bit of ink was spilled on Paul Ryan's alluring physique.
Let's not forget that Ms. Pelosi is Italian-American. She works hard to "fa una bella figura" - a part of her DNA. I love following Ms. Pelosi - she's one of the nation's greatest politicians: gutsy, smart and stylish.
17
If Bernie Sanders can get the enthusiasm he did 1in 2016, fashion must not be so important after all.
4
When is your comment on menswear? Soon I expect. Because we all know how important this topic is. I like different stories but this wasn’t necessary.
2
" ...as well as about the Casual Friday-ization of the White House under President Barack Obama."
THIS! My husband who works at a bank stopped wearing a tie a few years ago because, "if Obama doesn't have to wear a tie anymore than neither do I."
Thanks Obama. :)
8
The image of Nancy Pelosi holding the gavel appeared on front pages of newspaper and websites around the world. It is entirely appropriate for the NYT to analyse and report on the visuals of that moment, including the clothing Ms Pelosi chose to wear. Many people don't read the story or hear the commentary but they see the picture and the pictures have impact and influence. Ms Pelosi in her hot pink dress surrounded by children created the perfect visual shorthand for a changing of the guard in Congress away from conservative patriarchy of men in suits. Good on her.
19
Not only is it sexist, its reductive - making Ms. Pelosi to be some sort of Barbie doll.
Fact is we don't make the same judgements about mens clothing, and even if we did, like the current White House resident's ill fitting suits and poorly coifed hair, they fall on deaf ears.
But for some reason, critique of a woman fashion choices, no matter how accomplished she may be, seems to either make or break them, which is not the way it should be.
Please, save the fashion critiques for those who only have fashion to cling to.
12
@M.F. It would be one things if the articles were dismissive of Ms. Pelosi because of her fashion choices, but none of the articles in the mainstream press that I read were in any way. In fact they almost universally praised her for using it as a prop exiting a meeting in which she told the president: "Don’t characterize the strength that I bring.”
That phrase got as much, if not more, coverage than her coat.
4
Clinton's clothing choices clearly reflected her poor judgment. Pelosi looks like she knows what she's doing.
5
@Fern I don't know about poor judgment, but Clinton's choices didn't exactly scream high self-esteem.
@Fern
Only if she had had poor judgment.
I don't disagree with any of this article's points about the relevance of fashion to the public perception of a politician, particularly a female one. What irritates me is when journalists use fashion choices as a lazy shorthand for a politician's actions - British newspapers, for example, have only recently stopped using "Theresa May stomping her kitten heels" as a metaphor for the Prime Minister signalling her disapproval. Its fine for cartoonists to do it - all of them show her in leopard-skin kitten heels and statement necklaces - because the message depends on that kind of shorthand (like Barack Obama's big ears), but I just tune out what might otherwise be an astute political article when I see that.
Look at NYS Democratic Leader Andrea Stewart Cousins’ scarves— an elegant political badge if there ever was one.
2
It is extremely sexist! Doesn't matter what she or anything any politician wears as long as its not distracting. Of course if someone wears something that grabs people's attention and takes away from their message that is newsworthy, but also something they should avoid.
3
Fashion exists for one reason only - to make oneself noticed. No other.
So it must be very flattering to Ms. Pelosi that her dress choice evinced so much attention.
So kudos to all you fashion aficionados, and try again people that thought you could dump on her for her choice.. (probably the same people that posted about Occasia-Cotez's teen dance.)
4
Going forward I expect the New York Times to report on the clothes brand and styling of every male politician who gets covered in these pages. Not to provide this coverage would be blatantly sexist.
7
If a woman politician were to wear a frilly cocktail dress to an important meeting, that would be highly unexpected and thus newsworthy. The fact that she wears a typical power outfit in one color versus another is meaningless, for the same reason the color of a man's typical suit and tie is meaningless and not worthy of reporting.
11
On a day when Deb Haaland, Ilhan Omer, Rashida Tlaib — and others — wore clothing meant to send a message, I thought it was no accident that Nancy Pelosi chose to wear pink.
3
Unless you also discuss Chuck Schumer's attire, it's sexist.
5
No doubt my views can be dismissed as what staitsticians call an "outlier," but I could confidently pass a lie detetor test that most of the time I have no memory whatver of what Pelosi, Trump, or any other politican wore. I can hardly remember what I wore yesterday. I don't mean to suggest that people shouldn't care, only that many of us really don't. I'm not proud of that fact. I don't mean to suggest that there's something perverse about people who do. Only that I, and I think many people, really don't. I myself can hardly believe that people don't care about the things I care about either; but it's often the case. I can't say how many peope register the cutlurally crucial choices that people supposdely make. I'm a literature professoer and I myself can't believe how often people don't care about one word over another, but so it is.
Power is crude. Fashiion is subtle. Wake up the real world, not just the world of your own social and professional concerns!
2
Women have so many more fashion choices than men so it's not unbelievable anyone would be contemplating a prominent women's clothes. And most men are entirely too coarse and simple to be taken seriously on the subject, anyway. Women are socially superior to men for many reasons. And since generally women are more sensitive, have more imagination, and are more subtle, style is a thing obviously more tangible and meaningful to a woman. Marking the discussion of a prominent woman's clothes as sexist seems so out of place to me. Are we sexualizing a septuagenarian? Are we suggesting there's no head attached to that outfit? I don't get it.
5
Great article. More power to women.
1
I pay attention to words (and how they are delivered) and actions. I never attention to what he/she may be wearing...and I vote. And btw, I skipped this article proper and went straight to the comments box to post these remarks.
2
Women don't need to be "made up" to be beautiful.
They don't have to dress in expensive clothes to be stylish.
Women don't need to act like men to be powerful.
Here's to the Democratic women of the new House. May they change our politics for the better.
2
Kudos to Nancy - she should be dressing every bit as powerfully as she is. Given her Italian background, style is probably in her genes. As a women of 62, I know the better I dress the better, more confident and powerful I feel. Colors make older women exude youth and show they're not afraid of standing out.
Look at Christine La Garde, Theresa May - they aren't afraid to show power through fashion choices.
My first reaction when I saw Nancy Pelosi was "finally an American with some style!" Queen Elisabeth also wears color so you can't miss her. I'm not sure better fitting suits would make Trump any less cringe worthy, but a stylish choice would make any politician male or female seem less archaic.
I'm not quite sure why some feminists use men and their behavior as a benchmark for how women should behave to be considered powerful equals. How boring would life be if we all went around in sloppy unpressed T-shirts and poor fitting jeans. Power isn't aggressive yelling but intelligent debate leading to decisions that improve all our lives not just the pockets of fellow cronies.
8
Women’s fashion and writing about it is not sexist. I agree that clothes set a tone, and it’s important for other women understand what clothes say about them and their place in the world. It’s also why the stories I read also talked about Rashida Tlaib who wore a traditional Palestinian robe; Ilhab Omar who wore a hajib; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who wore a suffragette-White suit; Deb Haaland who wore traditional American Indian outfit.
It means, for once, that women are free to represent their voice, strength, heritage and creativity through their clothes instead of kowtowing to the male image by wearing dark colors and women’s versions of the male suit. This change is huge! We’ve come a long way baby!
If men want to have more stories about their fashion, read GQ’s stories about hot dressers.. they have a list of the top 50 with men who are not afraid to step out of the box in the clothes they choose. Unfortunately male members of Congress are pretty boring dressers.
4
I would love to read more about why President Trump is always seen wearing that dark overcoat. In the Rose Garden he is generally the only man wearing an outer garment. And who cannot remember the scene he made at the Bush 41 funeral by arriving at his seat wearing that seemingly same coat again and then almost dropped it on the floor?
2
@Richard B
maybe he likes it ?
The greater variety of style choices available to women is a strength in the political arena. Wield it wisely!
1
I applaud your position and your commentary. I am glad that people are paying attention now to what articles are saying about women but I feel that too often people develop a mob mentality about certain subjects and don’t take the time to think for themselves.
I did not like that so many people were criticizing the choice to highlight what she wore in this instance and I am grateful you published a rebuttal
3
As long as we comment on women's clothes, makeup and general appearance, these unimportant things will seem to be important. What are you going to do when, someday, we elect a woman with no sense of style, a face scrubbed of makeup, and frizzy hair that she just doesn't care about taming? Why you'll have to focus on what she thinks, and what she has accomplished and hopes to accomplish. That's why it matters - fashion shouldn't matter at all except for one's individual, private life.
3
I'd suggest that a woman who has no interest in fashion & makes uninteresting choices should not be covered for them, there's nothing to say. If her choices are part of the total package of communication, and say something which have intentional effect, then they can be put in context, and covered.
2
Her choice of style and color also portrays youth and vigor which she pulls off quite well. Today more than ever you see more mature individuals using this to stand out. Some can pull it off and some can't and yes she can.
Thanks for reminding us there should always be time for fun
6
@Tony Wheatley
You hit the nail on the head, Tony. People need to "get a grip". This takes our minds off the bleak visages of Trump and McConnell.
2
More than anything, what I noticed in the proceedings in the House of Representatives was not Pelosi's dress, but upon being elected Speaker, the way she brandished the blessed gavel in the victorious grasp of her strong right arm, displaying her power to the assembled House of Representatives.
That swashbuckling ownership-taking posture spoke volumes about power and who wields it. At that moment, her body language, according to popular culture, said "man," while her dress said "woman," which shows you how bizarre and distorted are our American pop-cultural ideas of "man" and "woman." They got far deeper than that superficial clothing wrap.
2
I've been taking in far less news since November 8, 2016, but my small daily allowance over the past 2 years hasn't uprooted any stories of Paul Ryan's fashion sense, or lack thereof. If Pelosi was an actor or model, sure, image is everything. But as a politician that's attempting to get things done in the boy's club, it's unnecessary and extremely anti-productive.
4
surprising! and thank you. I was ready to be angry and was pleasantly surprised at the thought and nuance you consider when writing about dress. Pelosi has done a great job at choosing clothes that suit her and exude power. thank you for sharing your insight and expanding my view.
Lorri
Cincinnati
3
I am loving Nancy Pelosi's style. She is beautifully dressed at all times. This adds to her dignity and mana.
4
It has long been a man’s world in Washington, where fashion mattered little to nothing. It is not sexist at all to write about the obvious—that a woman in power has to, and has always had to, stand apart from her male colleagues. Fashion is essential in this context, and a woman’s style is how many people will form their impression of her. This is, for better or worse, the way our society works— most likely for the former. Fashion is a powerful weapon in the hands of people who know how to wield it. Pelosi is a master of many things, of which this is far from the least. It is her impeccable style which sets the tone for her awesome mastery of her position.
5
It is not what we wear that is troubling. Look at the street 'fashion' that has individuals (and more often women) wearing jeans with threadbare cloth. What is troubling is that being daring in one's dress (along with other personal portraiture) somehow has become distinguishing viz. "...how you look is part of the message you are communicating." What excellence does the celebrity set communicate in their prized glitter? If it were not for celebrity reporters who make much of the appearance who would mind them? It isn't showing off in hot pink that is troubling. It is the notion that hot pink is taken to validate the social media quips that are billed as 'smarts'.
At the government shutdown protest rally yesterday in DC where a row of tall male politicians and labor leaders were lined up on the speakers’ platform in a row of dark blues and greys, Senator Amy Klobuchar (who is on the shorter side), stood out in a bright green coat. Another female politician (Representative) wore red. Clearly, as there were many national and international news outlets recording the event, this was no accident. I found Senator Klobuchar’s color choice interesting, as it was eye-catching but also gender neutral.
5
I actually recall having read, a couple days ago, a discussion of Netanyahu's blue tie color (it perfectly matched the flags flanking him on either side). It was in an article concerning the recent televised address he made concerning corruption allegations. I appreciate these details.
For those of you doubting that clothing doesn't have subliminal effects on viewers, recall Clinton's pressure on Al Gore to wear less blue suits in the hopes of making him appear less dull.
From a Washington Post article titled "Suits and Substance Tie in Campaign 2000": "But Clinton's advice wasn't sartorial. It was strategic. Philosopher of clothing Anne Hollander suspects the president had in mind the "capital B, capital S" Blue Suit-ness of blue suits--an essence that conveys dullness, convention, safety and, ultimately, boredom."
I'm interested in what fashion can say and do.
3
This is certainly not a trivial topic. Speaking of ties, for example, it seems to me that photos of men around Trump generally reveal that all the men are wearing the same color tie and suit. During debates, apparently a memo goes out about what color tie to wear. What does that say about our culture? What does it mean that women politicians can (or have to) stand outside the code that the men seem to be afraid to violate?
3
I was reading a book on semiotics, the study of sign and symbols, recently and the author mentioned how much of our symbolism is rooted in culture and not any intrinsic meaning. He presented a couple of instances demonstrating that the colors pink and blue once had the opposite associations with gender. His students, he added, were dumbfounded when shown proof. Ads and articles from the turn of the 20th century in the US identify pink as a masculine color, completely inappropriate for women, and blue as the emblem of femininity. One day, the pendulum might swing back and the all attention paid to Pelosi's attire might focus on her need to appear more manly by dressing in hot pink.
1
Remember to mention the cost of sending a message. Those of us in Federal employee households love knowing that her coat cost more than our mortgage, which, thanks to her, we can't pay. It's nice to know she is sitting inside the walls surrounding her home, shopping.
1
Dear Vanessa,
This is an issue in which very few people will agree with.
Yes, talking about a women's choice of clothes may indeed reduce her 'agency' in some peoples minds. However, what if the woman is strategic in her clothing choices? In my opinion, the strategic woman has full 'agency.'
I completely welcome your discussion of clothing, especially when the politicians are women. Because like it or not, one's choice of clothing is a form of communication, regardless of one's gender.
Ms. Friedman makes a good argument here, I think?
Reading about fashion choices, the clothes others people wear can sometimes be both fascinating and enlightening? Not sure she achieves her goal ' how fashion is being used to communicate' by musing as to her 'contexts and subtexts and meanings'. Unless she is able to communicate with the stylists for these people or the people themselves, how is there any certainty about 'why' they choose to wear what they do?
Ms. Pelosi has been around a good while, and from my recollection always has been a 'smart/fashionable' dresser? Could it simply be that she has distinctive taste(s) and that taste represented in her wardrobe is appealing/attractive?
Do we know, in this case or the others (except where we know bc they or their stylists have shared the contexts) that there is really MORE to it? Is there always a back-story? Can some of this (and especially in this case) simply be a matter of that's how she is, that's how she rolls?
To me, as I look through Congress at the women who there are represented, my eyes see clear generational indicators. Women of a certain age (social economic status) seem to dress a certain way, and others another way? Old school (St. Johns) vs. New School (I find what what I like and I wear that).
Has Trump really pushed us to the point where we don't need a basis from which to make claims? Has Ms. Pelosi spoken to these issues re: herself? It matters, no? If so, full steam ahead.
2
Thanks,and please keep up the good work. Women are rather more thoughtful and creative when they dress for an occasion than most men. Accessories define many of our public figures from F.D.R.'s cigarette holder to Queen Elizabeth's handbags. I am all for anything that encourages people to pay attention to what's going on around them
3
I liked your article and I think it’s important to talk about the clothes leaders wear. They say a lot. Nancy Pelosi is admirable and I love to see a super competent woman being super chic and feminine with lots of class. It’s a great role model for professional women and a great inspiration. A fantastic representative of women’s class. Other women, with different styles, can also (and are) great representatives.
4
My professional career spans roughly the same era as that of Nancy Pelosi. Like the Speaker, and indeed most women, I worked in a world of men. And I too used fashion to convey an image. Plus, I loved looking smart and stylish. I dressed "up" but appropriately for meetings and adopted the business casual before it had a name. I'm also short, but because I hate that high-heeled remedy, I opted for style and quality and the blessed low heel.
Our young Congresswoman from New Mexico (our other Congresswoman wore native dress at her swearing in) campaigned wearing her signature bright jacket and beige skirt or pants. Sometimes jeans. She wears her mass of black curls a bit wild. She's a confident young lawyer whose smile flashes in an instant. We can spot her easily even among this most colorful freshmen class ever elected to Congress. Yes, style, as I prefer to call it never goes out of fashion.
28
I enjoy your commentary on the fashion of our politicians; it's not all you write of them it's simply adding "color commentary" which adds interest. What politicians or their spouses wear sets a bar and can make them memorable; especially if the choice is described as being "tone deaf". All of these sidelines lighten the mix and in these difficult times; I am thankful.
7
@MWG
I was sad when Michelle Robinson Obama wore beige or brown when photographed with her husband. It made her fade into the background. She look great in royal blue or fuchsia and so what if she stood out? Now that he's out of office, maybe she'll give up the bland colors...
1
That she has a really appealing fashion sense is one thing. That she is still knocking it down at 78 is another. Both are admirable and relevant. I wish I could say the same about Trump but of course I am not surprised that the opposite is true.
48
You may be overlooking the obvious. In California, it's very common to dress colorfully. Much more so than NYC or DC. It's part of what makes living here quite liberating, and it's hard to set aside once you get used to it.
17
@John Fenno
Substitute "Pacific states" for "California" and it's a true statement. However, Gen X and beyond has a thing for all black (female) and black and navy/blue denim (male) as well.
Nancy Pelosi can wear anything she wants and it's fine with me.
2
As a pastor in a suburban church I dress casually most weekdays, but I spiff it up for Sundays and certain meetings. When I first went to Congress several years ago as an advocate for mental health and suicide prevention, I googled "Nancy Pelosi" to determine what to wear! I think that our attire is a critical component of any message we want to convey, and particularly so when we want to communicate competence and authority.
16
The issue is not your attire, but journalism's right to report it.
Which depends upon whether attire is a significant component of an individual's role or presentation.
I remember taking a course along time ago for lawyers where the seasoned female lawyer made a point of wearing a bright blue dress to ensure that the jury would follow her every movement and word....made sense to me and I thought NP's coat and sunglasses were fabulous....
24
Oh, I get it! You want to educate people on the role clothes play in life so we can't be injured by someone using clothes as a weapon! Thank you! I do worry about guns, nuclear arms, out of control cars but I admit I have spent zero time worrying about garment weaponry. Feeling much more political and life savvy now.
12
@Kimberly Gabriel:
It's clear you totally missed the point.
5
I applaud Ms. Pelosi for showcasing women in power in hot pink - unapologetic about her feminine side, possibly even reveling in it!! We, as a people, need to get used to seeing and accepting all the varied colors and clothing styles around us, especially for women in powerful positions. Women bring something different to the table, and highlighting that through your clothing is a smart move. At the end of the day, its a personal choice and more power to those who are comfortable being daring, and if it makes you feel confident and good about yourself, I say go for it. Thanks for writing this wonderful article to put things in context.
26
When I saw Speaker Pelosi's bright pink dress among all the dark apparel everyone else was wearing, I thought at the time she had made a very smart choice, since she is a key actor in the political arena and should stand out.
In some respects her behavior reminds me of the women doctors I saw at Lahey Clinic in Burlington, MA, who dressed to the nines for work. so people wouldn't try to dismiss them as nurses or aides.
10
@Gene S I thought the stethoscope around the neck does that. Dressing “to the nines” to distinguish yourself from other female clinic staff might give the message to the nurses (the female ones, that is) and aides that only physicians earn enough to dress fancy when what you should be wearing is a lab coat and stethoscope.
2
@Dfkinjer Nurses wear stethoscopes too, for taking blood pressure. The white coat is worn over the dressy clothing.
Social media and the instancy and facility of digital communication in general has enabled people to get angry about something. Well, everything. When I see a response like this (like stories that include "Twitter storm" in the headline), I immediately wonder how many people really care. I, for one, found the story about the coat enlightening as to how Pelosi expresses herself in her appearance. I'm sure a lot more people reacted the way I did than the handful who chose to complain.
16
Follow a simple standard: if a leader’s style falls within the range of what 85% of people have, ignore it. That’s what’s done for men and treating women differently tends to either trivialize them or provides a vector for attacking them that male leaders don’t ever face.
Ms. Clinton is clearly in this category.
Ms. Pelosi is in the 15%. She is very stylish and uses her sense of style to project power. Discussing that is appropriate.
11
It isn't attention to fashion or clothing that's the problem. It's the reality that people pay so much more attention and assign value based in part on women's appearance. Our looks are scrutinized and judgments are influenced. The standard is set by men, and what's attractive to them. Wear high heels, make-up, dye the gray, watch the weight.
20
Thank you for explaining why reporting on fashion, regardless of gender, is pertinent. Appearance is an important aspect of human non-verbal communication, regardless of gender. The hot pink was a smart choice for Mrs. Pelosi. A vibrant, bold, confident look for a woman who is all of those things.
17
I think Speaker Pelosi looks fantastic: Neat, sharp, confident, happy, smart. Interesting to see how she just pops out against the background that was probably intended to show off the blue suits that are so often seen holding the gavel. Good for her!
15
I have gone to Albany a few times as a citizen lobbyist. I remember riding in an elevator in the Legislative Office Building when a legislator teased another one by taking hold of his tie, offering him a small bill and saying "Here. Buy yourself a good tie." Clothes do indeed make the man.
4
No no no no no. You, Vanessa, I'm sorry to say, are part of the problem.
If a highly qualified, highly intelligent, highly dedicated, highly accomplished woman wearing a dark suit, white blouse and navy wool coat stood next to Nancy Pelosi in her bright orange coat or bright pink dress, would it be fair to judge either one as more or less capable?
If one woman wears nail polish and high heels, and another has bare fingernails and flat shoes, should we take one of them more seriously than the other?
Do we judge men by the color of their tie or shirt? Do we even notice?
Some of the most accomplished and effective women I've known pay zero attention to fashion trends. My wife would wear a white turtleneck and khakis every day of the week if she had enough of them - and she's brilliant and creative and runs circles around most women - and men.
Women will never achieve true equality with men until they are viewed strictly in terms of their abilities and accomplishments, as men are.
37
@Dave yes, men judge each other on clothes, especially further up the food chain. Everything you do is watched carefully by successful people when you’re in their environment - they’re looking for the players.
The only thing I really like about Speaker Pelosi is her wardrobe. She projects feminine power, looks confident and is always attractive. I hope that she retires immediately, looking as good as usual. I won’t mention what I hope daily to see about the president.
1
@Dave:
Quote: "Women will never achieve true equality with men until they are viewed strictly in terms of their abilities and accomplishments, as men are."
But men aren't either. Did you even read this column?
4
@Dave
Did you read her column? A white turtleneck and khakis convey just as strong as a message as a pink dress, whether you like it or not.
It's Vanessa's job to explore the semiotics and cultural, social and at times, the political context of the clothes we wear, regardless of whether it's fashionable or not. Clothes always communicate messages whether they're meant to or not.
Nancy Pelosi, in particular, as Vanessa points out, is a politician who has always used clothing as a tool to convey and represent the power she has.
1
Rather than try to justify why it's important to report on clothing choices, how about just give up on reporting on it. It's not important, and as you note, tends to skew toward reporting on women since stories on male choices are often ignored.
Pick a more interesting topic like reportees' voting choices, opinions, or something worthwhile.
15
@KMan Fashion has been important since shortly after we pulled ourselves out of the primal ooze. Getting a Ph.D. in the history of fashion isn't even unusual. All parts of culture have their role in helping to understand how people thought and lived. Someone has to be a primary source for the future, and that's Ms. Givhans. It really is kind of shocking how people don't think how people dress is important.
Rather than try to justify why it's important to report on clothing choices, how about just give up on reporting on it. It's not important, and as you note, tends to skew toward reporting on women since stories on male choices are often ignored.
Pick a more interesting topic like reportees' voting choices, opinions, or something worthwhile.
4
I was taught in Journalism 101 that interviews were about observing as well as taking down the words. Noticing what was on an interviewee's desk and walls, for example, was an important way to communicate a sense of the person to the reader.
A male politician has a standard uniform of dark suit/striped tie/polished shoes. When he departs from that norm--such as Trump wearing a bomber jacket in Iraq or a white MAGA cap on his visit to the border, Barack Obama wearing a tan suit or dad jeans, or George Bush wearing a flight-suit getup for his infamous "Mission Accomplished" pronouncement--there is a man-bites-dog point in reporting on those choices. When a male politician is wearing his regulation uniform, however, it is dog-bites-man to make much mention of it.
Women politicians, however, have a much more varied array of fashion choices, and how they choose tells me a little something about them. Just don't go overboard.
7
Bring it! Smart women (and men) consider how fashion communicates ideas, feelings and beliefs. HRC, Michelle Obama, Pelosi, and now AOC know this so well! They are the celebrities I want my children to look to. Those who seek to influence are keen to how fashion serves them and their interests.
4
I’m glad you see these women as “celebrities.”
And I’m even happier that you want your daughters to focus on female “celebrities.”
Not leaders, not politicians, not professionals, but “celebrities.”
Kinda like the Kardashians & others greatly advancing society in the name of fame, appearance, fortune & commercial influence.
No wonder Trump is President.
1
I’ve spent plenty of time in military uniform where rank and status is a matter of protocol rather than choice. Yet in civilian life I’ve realized how closely our societal norms are strictly reflected throughout the workforce regardless of any military protocol. We all dress the part as the situation requires and I’m on the fence on the debate of neckties vs heels — which is worse? I guess I’ll stick to neckties for now but continue to work on my balance.
3
The hot-power-pink, yes.
The coat, no.
One is clearly an important statement about a women finally getting a turn at the gavel.
The other is just tasteful conservative clothing which speaks for itself, and keeps her warm. Maybe it makes her stand out, but it is not, in itself, any clear statement, and it is wholly irrelevant. Commenting on her clothing in that context demeans her position.
You lose credibility when you stretch this too far. And fashion is on shakey ground already: fashion is nothing if not a way to keep people buying the latest clothing, at unnecessary expense, and it has therefore kept women down for a long time.
5
@MAmom2:
QUOTE: "fashion is nothing if not a way to keep people buying the latest clothing, at unnecessary expense, and it has therefore kept women down for a long time."
This is such nonsense. Human beings, in all societies, all over the world, have been adorning their bodies since time began. It's part of creativity. It's part of communication. It's part of art. It's part of human expression.
If I choose to wear a knock-out 1940s suit by Lilli Ann or a modern gown by Sachin and Babi or a killer pair of heels by Dolce and Gabbana, that's my choice and my joy. Nobody's keeping me down. And if you don't believe me, just ask Iris Apfel.
4
@Lisa Simeone You go girl. But that is not fashion. That is "style." "Fashion," is, by definition, the latest - the practice of buying new because it is new. It is not art. It is copying everyone else, at a price, to show off your ability to do so, as a status symbol. Calling it "art" can be a neat way to cover that. If you are artistic, you make your own clothes. And if you have good taste, you give to charity.
There is plenty of research that shows that women get about 30% more coverage on their clothes, hair, families, etc. This diminishes their substantive value in the eyes of the public at an unconscious level.
My dissertation is on marketing the female politician: an explosion of gender, appearance, and power. My research showed (in a nutshell) that in our society men are treated as subjects and women as objects (objects of attention, attraction or exchange). And when a woman runs for office she is attempting to move from object space to subject space and this creates anxiety in men (and women). So they focus on her appearance to objectify her and push get back into object space.
Appearance is also the lowest common denominator for people, especially ones who don't know much about her (or the party) policy or platform. It's an easy thing to comment about.
Unless, of course, when one comments about it, being cognizant of the the power structures embedded in our society (such as the male gaze) behind it and does not add to it. The coverage of Hillary Clinton's cleavage from 2008 is a prime example of this.
Finally, in all my interviews with several well ranked politicians - not a single one wanted the added scrutiny of what they wore, how they wore their hair, or what bag they are carrying.
23
@Minita Jay
Thanks for your informed and meaningful comment. It showed great insight!
I also think other viewers' comments about the disproportionate attention to women's attire are "right on," as well. Either we should 1) stop commenting routinely on women's attire and equally routinely ignoring men's, 2) comment equally on both, or comment on neither, except when they are unusual and relevant to the situation. I, personally, prefer option 3.
2
@Minita Jay Exactly. Melania wore that "I don't care" jacket because the Trumps are all about image over substance. The meaning was ambiguous because the message didn't matter.
4
I think it's sending the wrong message when the media makes too much of a woman politician's clothing.
We can all see for ourselves whether the woman looks sharp and professional, which for me is number one. I couldn't care less which designer she is wearing, and fail to see any value in critiquing her choice of clothing.
There is a troubling trend in the news media to follow what I call the "Fox news model" of how women should dress. Sleeveless, short, form fitting dresses with low necklines, bare legs and spike heels. I always wonder if the males running the news stations insist on the women dressing this way to attract male viewers, or if the women themselves feel compelled to show themselves off. Either way, it's distracting.
I am more concerned about what is coming out of a woman's mouth than what her body looks like. So for media women and women politicians both I suggest a dark, well-fitting jacket over a colorful top, perhaps some attractive jewelry, and either pants or a skirt, depending what suits your body best. There are endless variations of this style, and it matches the professional attire of the men.
Then do your your very best at your job and show us all what it means to be a strong, professional woman.
4
What's interesting is that professional men can and do exude power without shedding the drab suits they ritually inhabit. Indeed, their garb of office appears to be quite uniform. Women appear to need significant sartorial amendment to do the same, and can scarcely be seen wearing the same outfit as a peer without comment.
6
What is most interesting was that as the days news coverage went on - the color of her dress changed on my tv from hot pink to red. Explain that one.
2
I am a women executive and I don’t care if it’s sexist or not. The fact is that we still live in a sexist society and clothes are one of the tools of power. Why would not use this tool? It’s part of the armor we put on when we go to work. Call me in 100 years when appearance does not matter. Until then..... I will continue to wear the most appropriate uniform for the battle.
10
Frankly I love reading about Nancy Pelosi's outfits. She is a woman of power & dresses powerfully, also tastefully & appropriately. If I have any complaint whatsoever about Madame Speaker's choices--and I know I am going to lose this one--it would be that she respect women's feet & wear flats! But I guess we're just not there yet. In the meantime, the Speaker of the House is my fashion ICON. Love her.
4
I understand why you are doing it, I respect your work, but it just feels tacky. The decisions politicians make are sometimes matters of life and death, even something like this shutdown. Families are going without paychecks. Food is going un-inspected. Assistance for the neediest is in jeopardy. Using it as an opportunity to talk fashion just feels tone-deaf.
I'm glad you liked the burnt orange coat Pelosi wore to her meeting about border funding, but children are dying at the border. Have some perspective.
10
@Murph She actually has done a column on that. You should see what she's written before you tell her she hasn't covered a topic. Not a good luck.
So... where was the fashion coverage of House Speaker Paul Ryan?
Was it irresponsible that there was little or none?
6
@Henry Edward Hardy There was coverage of Trey Gowdy. And she recently covered Trump. So recently, that I think you are not a regular reader, and are just here to pile on.
While at UC Berkeley, I recall Vanessa Friedman’s fashion pieces in Entertainment Weekly, Vogue, et cetera, were often dissected by women professors precisely because her vectors of analysis were achingly regressive.
In the 21st century, where women are still fighting not to be judged by their appearances, reading Friedman’s "critiques" is akin to time-traveling back to the Mad Men era when the color of a secretary's jacket was more important than her competency as a typist.
I recall one woman professor opined that fashion critics act as a direct counterweight against any progressive momentum for societal change and serve to reinforce sexism in our society: “How can we change our society for the better and allow women to be themselves without fear of criticism if such columns tacitly shame them every day?”
Today, Friedman defends “fashion critics.” She informs us they are vital to democracy: To consign fashion critics to the dustbin of history would be “to ignore one of the ways our own understanding is being manipulated [by politicians].” True, but we don’t need “fashion critics” to do this, do we? Political journalists can do this —if warranted — as part of their job description.
In fact, many of the functions which Friedman cites to justify the continued employment of fashion critics can likewise be done by journalists. Hence, any raison d'être for fashion critics is obsolete. They are as obsolete as typesetters, lamplighters, stable grooms, and VCR repairmen.
13
@Sándor I am interested in whether your professors felt this way about all critics -- art critics, book critics, film critics etc: that their jobs should be done by reporters in those or other areas? I define my job as the study/analysis of the role of image in public life. You can call that whatever you want - fashion criticism, cultural opinion -- but appearance has been used as throughout history as a meaningful tool of leaders from Cleopatra to Napoleon, Queen Elizabeth I, Mao and Nelson Mandela (to name a few), and it is an incredibly rich and fascinating subject. From what you have written, it seems like the assumption -- implicit or explicit -- is that fashion is a "woman's" topic, hence to write about it is to shove women into a tiny niche. I am note sure why that should be true, except that it originates in a very limited definition of the term. Also, just FYI, I was a book critic for Entertainment Weekly and largely wrote on the arts for Vogue, so maybe you have me confused with someone else.
20
@Vanessa Friedman
Fashion is not as important as art and books. It just isn't. Am I making a value judgment? You bet I am. Since you are a fashion critic and the New York Times pays you to be one, obviously not every one feels as I do on this issue. But the fact that we're even having this conversation means that I'm not entirely alone in my opinion either.
I'm a 66 year-old woman and I could give a hill of beans what Nancy Pelosi is wearing. Every word written (and read) about female politicians' clothes distracts us from the issues and belittles the wearer. I don't expect you to agree with me, but those are my two cents. And I can tell you that I speak for many of my over 65 year-old female friends as well. We're sick of it.
1
On my monitor the dress looks orange and the coat looks red, so this tells me I should color calibrate it.
3
Dear Ms Friedman, i enjoy your insights, and often think they are right on. But i think you underestimate the effect you have by writing about mostly women in a paper with the stature of the New York Times. In this society, women--especially powerful women--are systematically put down, misjudged, and maligned, and the reality is that what they wear has been used as a pretext to do more of that. The fact is, you don't write much about men--why no column about Donald Trump? His clothes say quite a bit, and yet you haven't commented. It is very easy for you to play into a narrative that undercuts women, and honestly, in this column, it feels like you are rationalizing. BTW, i'm male.
10
@Tony You might enjoy this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/29/fashion/100-days-of-trump-style.html
9
I'd like to know why President Trump wears the same ill-fitting blue suit every single day.
Is he unable to choose clothes to wear? Does he realize how the jacket shoulders flare out when he hugs himself as he so often does?
Oh, he did wear a REALLY big-league over-sized Army camouflage jacket for his trip to Iraq. That was interesting.
9
@Karen Lee
Men don't need to employ looks to display power and authority.
Clothes do matter, especially when people are in the public eye. Clothing choices are part of a language of communication, and I appreciate the analysis. I notice that NYT writers also mention men’s clothing choices in stories, including interviews. All this outrage against your argument seems feminist posturing, not feminist work.
8
I agree with you that there is nothing inherently sexist about considering the meaning of the clothing choices made by politicians. I believe that some of the anger about this cosideration is sexist, however. Attention to fashion has long been considered a feminine interest (considered feminine even when men are the ones with the interest). And subsequently, attention to fashion has been considered shallow and vapid—a trifle. How powerful and important can fashion be if only silly women and feminine men devote their attention and time to it? The truth is, like many traditionally feminine concerns, it’s extremely important and extremely powerful, exerting deep pulls on our conscious and unconscious desires. The hatred of fashion and of those who attend to fashion is a deeply sexist and misogynist impulse, regardless of whom is experiencing the hatred.
3
Women's clothes are far more interesting and much more can be said about them then about a man's traditional suit. To say a man looks awful in his suit and his suit is a mess or ill fitting takes up very little space in a publication, but pages can be filled criticizing a woman's choice of attire; so what do you think is going to be commented on more frequently? And which gender, and we have many to pick from these days, reads the style section regulary?
1
There is a proper context for including notes on wardrobe. That context does not include a major transfer of power (and that's why the NYTimes tweet and story reference got so much negative feedback. The focus was wrong.
It was, however, perfectly acceptable to discuss wardrobe choices in the sidebar article.
2
The real sexism is that women have much greater latitude in their fashion choices, whether in the office or the senate. When the new house convened, it was evident: many female legislators appeared in bright colors -- red, rust, yellow. Some exposed legs or shoulders. No men wore anything but dreary dark suits, no men showed his arms (let alone shoulders). I didn't notice any men in shorts. This inequality must be abolished.
3
Sorry, no sale on that one. Perhaps spend a little more time thinking this through and less on the dress.
3
Of course it's sexist. And whether you are or are not uncomfortable with that makes no difference. The sexist fashion gaze is exerted on all women, not just the speaker of the house.
4
I don't think it's sexist to talk about what she wears in the larger context of her job, which is to be the Speaker of the House, defender of the Constitution and protector of the people. Women are still scrutinized more closely for their appearance and style than men, and if she looked poorly groomed, she'd be judged accordingly. You can certainly argue that women shouldn't be so judged. But right now, I find people do pay more attention to how women look than how men look, and we have to deal with the here and now.
But you know what? Even if talking about Pelosi's clothes IS sexist, I'm not sure I care right now. I'm a huge proponent of good grooming and of people putting effort into making themselves look nice for the benefit of the rest of us. I think Nancy looks great and I appreciate her efforts. She delights my eyes, which sorely need some delight after 2 years of looking at our inappropriately groomed, orange-ish President.
So I say keep the Max Mara and bright colors coming, Speaker Pelosi. We all need some bright and pretty in these dark, ugly times.
6
I'm disappointed by the quality of comments here. Usually NYT readers are more enlightened. There is nothing wrong with commenting ad nauseum on a women's dress. Women have such a range of styles and colors to choose from which men don't. This is exciting to people. It's when this becomes discriminatory that it is a problem. Why can't a women be intelligent and competent in her job, but at the same time use her dress to express frivolity? Women are more privileged in this regard than men, who are required to wear boring suits. But that is the joy in nature, as men and women are different. They are equal, but not identical, biologically, or in fashion.
3
Back in 2000, the corporate media savaged Al Gore in an unprecedented campaign of character assassination. They cut and snipped and pasted facts and twisted, distorted and made things up to fit a preconceived campaign "narrative" that Gore was an untrustworthy, slippery, unlikable liar, while Bush, he of Kennebunkport, Andover, Yale and Harvard and the recent purchaser of a Potemkin ranch for the photo-ops, was an authentic truth-telling cowpoke, with whom one would love to sit down and have a beer. Part of the campaign against Gore included criticizing even his most innocuous choices of clothing, like polo shirts, 3 or 4 button suits (I forget which), wearing a brown suit and cowboy boots, among other things. In contrast, Bush was always wearing stuff like jeans with a ring worn into the back pocket where he supposedly kept his authentic tin of "chaw.' I would hate to see political fashion used again as a ridiculous club with which to beat disfavored candidates.
4
Stop labeling colors. Do we judge the birds and animals for the colors they bring out? Successful women have already made their mark with their intelligence. Colors brighten up the mood, maybe americans should start wearing bright colors, it will help them feel more positive about themselves.
All of Nancy's clothes fall within the range of "acceptable work wear", just as all of Mitch McConnell's clothes do.... I suppose if one of them decided to wear a garbage bag or a bathing suit to work, it'd be newsworthy (i.e. question of mental health issues) but until then, I'm really just interested in what they say....
4
The problem is that writers impose their own opinions as to why women pick their outfits, offering shallow and simplistic theories that most women find insulting. The entire fashion paradigm should be reevaluated—I’m growing tired of reading some 25 year old’s version of outfits worn by mature, powerful and independent women. We know why Nancy picked a pink dress. It’s time to stop the judgement. And I’m not even going to start in on the treatment of the First Lady. Just shameful.
2
What I really want to know are what are Mitch McConnell’s and Chuck Schumer’s fashion brand choices? What shoes do they prefer and why?
Why so much about Pelosi?
8
Women are still judged by how they dress, and I have given up trying to make sense of that. Why a woman who dresses in leotards is said to be empowering women as she plays into a stereotype of women as sex objects makes no sense to me.
As to Speaker Pelosi, I thought her dark glasses were a more powerful statement than her coat, though I liked the coat a lot.
I will pick on the male side of fashion (speaking as a male to whom fashion is unimportant): dark suits and striped ties and flag lapel pins are so unimaginative and drab. I liked seeing President Obama go tieless; it denoted modernity to me. I had to wear suits and ties to work for many years, and found them confining. First thing I'd do on getting to the office I'd take off my jacket; why bother?
No man in politics has the nerve to wear a suit that isn't dark or a tie that isn't striped, or go without a flag lapel pin. That fashion reflects their philosophy: unimaginative, conformist and stale.
Women can wear pink or violet or white; perhaps that reflects freer minds. I hope so. We need fresh ideas in our politics, for the current batch of losers in office are damaging our nation.
Two months ago I was rooting for Speaker Pelosi to not become Speaker; after the last couple of weeks, I have regained my respect, even admiration, for her. Anyone want to help start a Pelosi Fan Club?
4
I find it annoying that what a female politician wears is considered noteworthy from a fashion standpoint. Really? She would be criticized if she wore the “wrong” thing, and, in my opinion, focusing on what she’s wearing trivializes her message. As a woman in my 60’s I have to say I am weary of this attitude. There is no equal silliness related to what the boys are wearing...boxers or briefs? Stop it.
6
Articles about women always lead with descriptions of their clothing. This almost never happens in articles about men. That's why it's sexist. Simple.
3
It is only shallow people who do not judge by appearances. The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible.... Oscar Wilde
10
Fashion is nothing more that a capitalist psychological scheme to get people to buy more clothes and to buy clothes whose expense has absolutely no relation to their worth. Now if someone dresses nicely and then reveals they buy their clothing from a thrift store or Goodwill that is newsworthy and also laudatory.
4
I completely agree with this article. I, a woman who works in an office full of intelligent people am strategic about what I wear in my professional life. When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez revealed her signature lipstick color after her campaign it sold out in minutes. This isn’t because women are shallow, it’s because we see the badassness of red lipstick and hot pink dresses and can use them as a way to send messages to the world. When Melania Trump wore outfits reminiscent of colonial Africa on her trip across the continent, it was offensive. To not acknowledge her safari jane moments would have been wrong. We can’t ignore the messages we are sending, and women have the ability to send stronger messages with this tool than men in politics.
8
Women have historically used clothes to make statements, political or otherwise. Just putting on pants was a political statement. I know because I was an early pioneer in wearing pants to the office. Pelosi did not just chose that dress randomly. Every time I dress for a meeting, I am assessing the message I am sending to the people in the room. I just don't er press coverage for it. Pelosi does the same thing. She is a fashionista, but she is also saying, I am done with the suit. I am going with pink and I still have power!
By the same token, men in politics and business make a different kind of clothing statement. The uniform of suit and tie is intended to send the message they are safe and reliable. If a newly elected male House speaker decided to wear a checked shirt, skinny pants, skinny tie and Nike sneakers, I am pretty sure there would be an article about it because that man did something risky and daring and what was he trying to say? Articles about Bernie Sanders unkempt hair and it-looks-like-he-slept-in-that-suit look abound. Bernie's is signaling whether my suit is pressed and my shirt starched is not as important as economic disparity.
What about the stupid flag pins politicians are required to wear? Failure to wear one got Obama into trouble. Obama wore a tan suit and it made the press (which was ridiculous). I could go on. I think that women are more sensitive and notice the articles on women's clothing but men can be just as scrutinized.
3
When you start chronicling what every male in government, business and at leisure is wearing, come back and talk to me. Otherwise your argument is nonsense.
7
Almost all male politicians wear the same boring dark suits for official business. Comments follow when they don’t. Remember when Obama drew press for his mom jeans.
Most female politicians also wear dark conservative suits and dresses, like attorneys in court. I’ve never seen my Congresswoman wear anything other than boring clothing.
This isn’t sexism. Pelosi is a savvy politician, she knows the bold colors and designer clothing stands out. As House Speaker, it’s probably an intentional display of authority.
6
"We make instant judgments about each other based on image all the time. " Speak for yourself, Ms. Friedman.
55
@TRF You're kidding yourself! Visual cues effect everyone, and it helps to be aware of that.
11
@TRF Yes. I mean, I think most of us, myself included are prone to those instant judgements based on image, but we ought to resist that impulse.
3
It isn't reporting on women's fashion and the associated evaluation of the message behind their choices that is sexist in itself. Rather, it is the disproportionate focus solely on politically involved women's fashion choices.
As a man, I have often wondered why the NyTimes relentlessly evaluates the dress of Melania Trump, Michelle Obama, and Hillary Clinton, while addressing far less space to contemplating their male counterparts. I feel the reason was pretty well summed up in the article, "That being said, in my experience our readers pay much less attention when we write about men and dress." It is about readership! I fully understand newspapers and the media has to make money. But, it seems extremely hypocritical when the NYT consistently runs articles & opinions pieces denouncing misogyny, while essentially being in the business of it.
The solution? Pretty easy, cover the fashion of notable men with the same rigor. I know, I know... It is not as popular, but devolving to the lowest common denominator in viewership is what gave us Fox News.
106
@Alex It's not sexist. Women's fashion choices are reported more because they have an array of colors and styles to choose from, whereas men don't. Their dress is more exciting. No wants to report on boring black and blue men's suits, vs. exciting pink dresses or orange puffy coats, or stilettos and suede wedges..
7
@Alex Why is it scandalous that a newspaper would choose to stop talking about something no one is interested in?
I agree with the author. Men wear suits. Big deal.
3
It’s because women have the luxury of being permitted to express themselves through fashion. Individual expression gets attention, by design. In fashion, men are constrained to narrow expectations; that is, a dull suit. Conformity gets less attention.
2
I don't understand this obsession with what women wear. Why nobody talks about the men's clothing?
25
It's physiologic. In most species, the female attracts mates by making herself attractive. This trait is in our genes and it's expression in the human species is why woman have always been more interested in their appearance than men. Whether one likes it or not, men are attracted to beautiful women, and women are attracted to powerful men, looks aside. @Anabelle
@Anabelle There's a very simple explanation: Men all dress exactly the same way, every one of them, every day.
3
@Anabelle Because it's boring. Men wear more or less the same standard suit uniform each day, with limited color choices and styles.
3
I can’t agree with your argument - that what women wear is newsworthy, so of course you should report on it and analyze their choices. It is because you are going to analyze her choices that Nancy Pelosi has to think strategically about what she wears. Just stop. Save your fashion reporting for celebrities and the fashion elite, please!
113
@Jennifer No, just the opposite. I could not care less about what celebrities who are no more walking billboards for the fashion industry and doing it with clothes none of the rest of us would ever afford or have the money for . . .
No, cover regular people more.
Pelosi is not a celibrity, She is among the most powerful women on the planet. She is a trend setter in how women can wear their power. This is important.
I want to know how I can look more powerful and how I can use it to make my life better with how I present myself. I don't care about the color of the coat or dress, I care about what it says and does. Unfortunately, Ms. Friedman cannot write much beyond the commercial aspects, eg. make money for the fashion industry.
For starters, why not compare the "kept woman wardrobe" of Melina to the woman who stands for herself of Nancy.
7
@Jennifer Actually, I doubt Nancy Pelosi is dressing for the media at all. My guess is dressing for her peers and the electorate: that's her audience. She is showing young girls (like her grandchildren) that they can dress as they want AND be what they want -- they don't need to dress in dark suits like men, which is what women who wanted to break the glass ceiling were told for years. And she is saying the same thing to the rest of the Congresspeople in the room -- as well as the President, whom we know has very specific feelings about dress. She's wearing what she wears not because I or anyone else writes about it, but because it's an effective tool to advance her political agenda. And I think she's a master tactician.
23
@Vanessa Friedman And that is what is wrong with fashion critics - there is history and meaning to dress, and you want it to be only how she looks, as though she is a painting...Nancy dresses like a secretary from the sixties, with a painful eye-lift that as designed to make men think you are as desireable as you were at twenty..She is eighty! She aims to please the GOP she wants toj co-operate with the men, as long as they respect her stockings and heels, her symbols of reverence for the old status quo I think your fashion criticism must include social context, and fashion history, to be meaningful and relevant - and if you can, tie it all to her policy of appeasment (for me, her disinclination to to do anything about climate change) - yes, tie her dress style to her policies.It is all of a piece..
I have no problem with the fashion editor covering anyone’s clothes. Where I have a problem is when fashion coverage leads a news story on the front page about a politician doing her job. If a story belongs on the fashion page, it doesn’t belong on the front page except for the rare occasions when news and fashion intersect. Even then, I don’t recall your coverage of Versace’s murder leading with his ensemble choice for the day.
99
@Patrick Coyne I have been complaining and complaining about front page news worthy articles being buried in the style section for as long as I’ve had this digital subscription.
When one of these stories finally lands on the front page where it belongs how dare you assume the mantle of protecting women?
3
@Dani Weber I’m not clear what your issue with me is. We seem to agree that fashion belongs in the Style section and politics belongs on the front page.
I’m not being a feminist hero by wanting my news stories to be news stories without fashion reviews.
I would like to simply comment on how relevant your articles are for non-fashion-industry people (like me). For many years I have enjoyed reading your insightful commentary on business and politics (and everything else really) through the lens of fashion.
Please don't stop writing.
Thank you,
RP
58
One of the bigger questions is why women are enabled by social mores to have extraordinary expressionary freedom and men are given so few choices. The clothing we wear connotes who we are and even if you do not personally agree with it, others assess you by how you dress.
56
@Marilyn Mitchell
You wrote men are given so few choices. Who is it that's doing the giving? The reality is that men make limited choices. There are many out there.
1
Sorry I don't go along with your story. We can see what Ms Pelosi is wearing. I saw her swearing in and I never once noticed the color of her dress. I was just so happy that she is going to be the Dems leader. Nor did I think about the "Center Left orange coat" until it was mentioned earlier. Yes she is a sharp dresser so are many male politicians. Let's let it go at that.
Vanessa, I'm not sure what your credentials are but if they are writing about politics, you need to transfer to the Lifestyle section.
45
@SKwriter You say you never noticed the color of Ms. Pelosi's dress. Are you sure that's what she wanted? According to the author, the color had significant meaning. I for one find it interesting and I'm a man and I didn't notice before.
5
I find this comment sexist against a professional journalist. For better or worse, clothing speaks, especially for those in the public eye. Asserting that clothing choices are merely fluff for the lifestyle section and unworthy of serious critical attention seems a bit pretentious to me. Check out the work of the amazing scholars like Tanisha Ford on gender, style and social and political change and then see if it’s so easy to write off critical attention to clothing.
3
ok so it's not sexist but then what is it? i started this article hoping to understand. (i'm a hetero guy with an interest in fashion) but i was left without a sense of some guiding philosophy, some motivating principle. gestalt? pragmatic? structuralist? not to sound high falootin because really, i'm no expert in any of these ideas. but then where are you coming from in all this. i followed your links here but it did not advance a particular line of reasoning. it all seemed out of the blue. it's an interesting start but if you are going to continue with this line of reportage i'd like to see you dig deeper.
6
She's a hundred millionaire who owns a lot of very expensive clothes, this is not remarkable. She is to say the least entitled, and entitled to it, though I'd prefer she dressed like 90% of the people she is supposed to represent. She'd alleviate a lot of valid concern if she did. What is remarkable is that hair color, how about a reporter check the salon and let us know about what that costs, I bet it's as much as I can budget for food for a week.
18
@CK
She represents California's 12th congressional district. The dress code there tends to black and informal.
Even though it's one of the richest places in the US, people usually don't dress like it, even in situations where "dressing up" might be the norm (going to the symphony or opera, for example).
I credit her dress to her age and the era that she grew up in more than anything else.
2
Though I have appreciated your efforts, “Male politician wears a subtly different suit and tie” is still unlikely to become an Internet-wide viral sensation. Perhaps sexist, in one way or another, but a fact.
4
@Tim Hunter Not sexist. Women and men are different, and that is not bad; it's biology and evolution.
1
Yes, it was sexist and felt sexist. Because "a coat and a dress" was used to portray a particular narrative (a somewhat biased one) of a woman as to where that's rarely if ever used in regards to a man's attire - especially a politician. Thankfully, the ladies of the Supreme Court wear robes.
42
@Mr. Slater Men and women are different. Why can't people acknowledge that? Women have more fashion choices than men and they are more exciting. Pink skirt or floral dress? Stiletto heels or patent leather flats? Bare legs or black tights? Stud pearl earrings or gold hoops?
1
@Mr. Slater I am so glad you brought up the women of the Supreme Court; that's exactly what I am talking about! The do, indeed, wear robes, and at least one of them, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, also wears, very consciously, elaborate lace jabots and big statement necklaces to assert her own individuality and her femininity; she does it precisely because she wants to use her clothing to make a statement about the fact that a woman can be on the highest court in the land. Those collars and necklaces have become shorthand for her belief system (one she refers to as her "dissent collar") and as a result numerous girls and women who rightfully look to her as a judicial role model have adopted her accessory to demonstrate their own intellectual allegiance. Why would we want to ignore that?
17
@Vanessa Friedman but lease don't forget it is a lacy modest collar - it could be gold, like Rhenquist put on his robe when he became Chief SCOTUS - or she could do pink wool, or a huge white collar and hood, or she could change for every decision...Please try to make your dress comments and imagination vast in scope - in literature it is often the tiniest gesture that conveys the most meaning..Her simple lacy collar is so modest and so constrained, really..
1
The clothing worn by most male representatives tends to fall within a limited range of styles. Obvious differences mostly center around tie selections. How much can be written or said about ties? Women’s clothing options are limitless. Does anyone believe that Speaker Pelosi’s clothing choices are not intentional? Her message is being spoken even before she opens her mouth, just by looking at her. She mixes strong looks with so called feminine colors. This shows her to be just who she is...a woman. A powerful woman!
59
Women establish who they are based on clothing, hair, makeup and other choices. We early LA punks set styles which were radical, but now seen everywhere all the time. We were making a statement, plus having fun!
Wearing white to honor female suffragettes; wearing dark hot pink to own the color often used to diminish us; and wearing a stunning, stylish burnt sienna coat, with off-center closing, hidden buttons and that stunning collar, so appropriate for winter weather with sunglasses (calling Jackie O, Audrey Hepburn and all fashion icons) all send powerful messages.
Not only is Nancy D'Alesandro Pelosi an experienced politician and grandmother, she has style and class! And never afraid to show her femininity.
I LOVE how Ms NDP is crushing it! Her clothes have strong, simple lines with bold, memorable, very flattering colors. I applaud her sense of style. I love that in a time of strange pattern combinations and skewed angles and layers seen on the red carpet and fashion shows, she's sticking to timeless clean lines and again, bold color choices.
To those who spend their time dismissing thoughtful comments about her fashions, and also #AOC, I have a few things to say:
1 -- Get a life
2 -- Study art history. Clothes make the man, right? Well, women have embraced daring and/or set fashions throughout history. Or lack of clothes. Lady Godiva, right?
3 -- I'm 68 + love fashion. Y don't U?
You can please some of the people sometime, but never all the people all the time!
199
@Jenny Lens Well said! Reading through all of these negative posts, I've thought item 1 numerous times.
9
@Jenny Lens
Brilliantly stated @Jenny Lens! The history of fashion is the history of civilization, and Nancy Pelosi is making history and flaunting it. It's a pity that American male politicians long ago decided that a poorly-tailored, oversized bag of a cheap suit was somehow more "democratic" than a well-tailored, well-fitted suit made of good simple cloth. Our founders knew the power of fashion; they wore well-cut suits in a deliberately subdued monochrome palette devoid of fripperies as a way of emphasizing the sobriety of democracy. But they weren't above the occasional "loud" waistcoat or flamboyant shoe buckle either.
9
@Jenny Lens
1. I've had a brilliant life so far
2. I've studied art history
3. I'm 65 and love fashion
and
4. That all being said, focusing on the wrapping instead of what's in the head has always been a way to keep women out of the realms of power. When the NYT fashion editor does a front-page story on the color of the current president's face and/or the art of his combover, then I'll say we've achieved parity of superficiality.
7
This apologia is disingenuous, in my opinion. There is absolutely no question that the frivolous descriptions of style are by and large reserved for women. You can say all you want that it's important for men, too, but you know - you know - that it's not the same. You deligitmize women leaders when you focus on their clothing.
51
Dear NYT. A few articles on men's fashion faux pas are not the same as the bazillion articles on women's fashion stumbles or triumphs. Fashion is awesome, but the glaring lens of the fashion analysis spotlight is ALWAYS on women in the media - be they actresses, performers or politicians or politicians wives. Keep talking about fashion in a general sense and about trends coming up and what works for men and women in various professions, but stop the dissection of what people wear. What matters is what they DO. You are a newspaper, not US weekly.
51
@Sharon Sheppard
What they choose to wear IS part of what they do. Please note comment by Jenny Lens.
3
@B Yeah, no. Ms. Pelosi is a U.S. Congresswoman; what she wears is not part of her job. Do you say the same thing about men?
I think you hit the nail on the head. Clothes are important, and women wear much more interesting clothes than men. Maybe you can start chiding men for wearing dark navy suits, white shirts and black shoes as way to prompt change. The dark suit uniform is boring!
25
Jeff: remember the grief Obama got when he wore a tan suit? Yes, navy is boring, but it keeps the critics at bay.
I agree. Obviously, Nancy Pelosi herself views fashion matters important enough to spend thoughts, time and considerable resources on putting together her outfits. Let us respectfully acknowledge that.
43
As much as one hates to admit it, clothes do convey a message. Speaker Pelosi dresses to convey power, which as the most powerful woman in the country, she needs too. She has to make clear that not only is she a serious person, she is not someone to mess around with. Dumbo Donnie, simply does not know what to make of her or how to deal with being told "no" especially by a woman!
Elizabeth Warren conveys passion and substance in her speeches, and perhaps her casual, dress down look, will help her more win supporters. But imagine her next to a man-in a well tailored suit and sharp tie. She will fade away! I am certain the style of her dress has been discussed with her advisors and she has made a calculated decision to stick with her boring uniform of black pants and brightly colored jackets. She needs to step it up and begin conveying visually the power of her words. Sorry, that is the simple truth of it!
46
@Rachel Yes, and how do I wish Clinton had worn something other than those pantsuits. They made her look like the manager of an Applebees. Nothing wrong with Applebees managers, but a little variance would have helped her improve her image as, well, unimaginative.
5
@Rachel I agree that perhaps some focusing of her appearance might help Warren, but can you already hear the press pointing out every little change she makes, sneering gleefuly? This is the point of why discussion of the pink dress is important. It's not that we talk about it but how. I don't see the how of Ms. Friedman helping anyone.
2
I realize you have your job as fashion editor, but occasional restraint and consideration of context would be good. Here you have an elected representative who happens to be a woman standing up to an irrational leader of the free world. Can't we focus on the content and hold the style commentary for a less serious occasion? By commenting on Representative Pelosi's outfit, you reduce the impact and significance of her actions.
55
@Ken
Your comment of "happens to be a woman" is itself reductive. Pelosi is an important leader and how she chooses to present herself in public matters. I say we acknowledge her choices and furthermore enjoy them.
2
Perhaps not intentionally sexist, but no one covers CongressMEN's choice of clothing in such a manner. Perhaps if we hear in detail about the president's suits, ties, etc., and other male leaders wardrobe details, it wouldn't be an issue. Or of any interest whatsoever.
10
Yes! It all matters: politics is a spectacle even if you don't want to acknowledge it. Everything matters: we are all at the mercy of our unconscious minds. What if Speaker Pelosi had worn a pinstriped suit to receive the gavel? What would THAT have meant? it would have diluted the scene considerably. I'm all for the discussion of "costume" within the context of the ongoing drama. Women cannot afford to vanish into the background: power has a color, a shape, a presence. Color has meaning, voice, subliminal effect. It all matters.
Just what does Trump think he's conveying with those "my tie is bigger than your tie" ties? Whatever it is, we ignore it at our peril. It all matters. So--bravo and carry on.
40
“We are all at the mercy of our unconscious minds” — beautifully said. We do as a society have distinct biases about masculine versus feminine dress. The way to unmake those unconscious biases isn’t to suppress them, it’s to drag them into direct sight! The more we talk about gendered presentation, the better we will all get at drawing distinctions between useful and useless commentary.
Plus, the Times isn’t doing who wore it best — Friedman covers those who are dressing in a way that speaks to our political moment. You’re not listening if didn’t hear what Pelosi was declaring with her sartorial choices!
1
I do wish there were more commentary on men’s clothes. I went into a single brand men’s shoe store and was told five presidents had worn their brand of wingtip dress shoe. That was intriguing, especially since the shoes turned out to be brutally uncomfortable.
14
"The more we recognize the role clothes play in life and politics, the more we are all willing to talk about it, the more we normalize it, the less potential it has as a weapon in any situation."
This is one of the more ridiculous rationalizations I've come across in quite a long time.
We spend precisely ZERO time questioning or analyzing the sartorial choices of men in politics. Unless, of course, it's Barack Obama in a tan suit.
Color me unconvinced by this response.
71
@M Taylor:
Quote: "We spend precisely ZERO time questioning or analyzing the sartorial choices of men in politics."
Hmmm. So you didn't read the column either.
3
@Lisa Simeone How much time was spent on the horror of President Obama wearing a tan suit?
1
@M Taylor
I think far more lines have been produced on Trump's hair, his too long ties, and his ill fitting suits than have been produced on Nancy Pelosi's clothing and hair choices. Apparently you have skipped over all this entirely.
Pelosi has embraced the best of what is associated with women--the importance of family--did you see all those kids on the floor during the swearing in of the new Congress--She remains calm when dealing with the unruly--even if he lives in the White House--She relies on her skills as a mother of five to deal--yes, again--with those unruly scamps--and she dresses in way that celebrates her femininity and her strength. She looked great, powerful and cool, in her sunglasses and orange coat and wore PINK--to be sworn in as speaker. Talk about her clothes all you want. She is a woman and she gets things done. No longer an oxymoron.
85
Dear Vanessa: I completely agree! How to dress as a professional woman is, or should be, a strategic choice. Years ago many professional women (especially lawyers--I know I was one--though never chose that dress code) basically dressed like men in drag--drab suits with skinny little ribbon ties around their necks, as if this would hide the fact that they, are um actually, women. It was pretty universally unflattering. Hillary Clinton chose pants suits as the easiest, path of least resistance, sartorial option--I do not think that it served her much of the time, but presumably she was comfortable and feeling at ease in your clothes is essential for everyone, especially those in public life. Such ease enhances the feeling of personal power and confidence (who doesn't feel a kind of power when you know you look good?). Dressing consistently with who one is is key. Nancy Pelosi knows what suits (so to speak) her. She wears her clothes, they do not wear her. Her strong, terrific choices underscore her message and amplify her words. The message is not to dress like Nancy, but to find that same confidence to choose the right look for yourself.
90
@cdesser Looking like Nancy Pelosi requires a great deal of time and money, not to mention lucky good looks. What about all those women in politics who aren't slim and pretty, who can't afford thousand dollar outfits, or who just don't want to focus all that energy on self-presentation? They pay a big price for the media fetish with women's appearance. Your somewhat snarky remark about Hillary Clinton's pantsuits demonstrates that unpleasant fact.
How about every time the NYT mentions Mitch McConnell you emphasize his chinless unattractiveness? Or Donald Trump's roll of fat and ludicrous coiff?
4
@kb My I was not being snarky about Clinton and evidently you have entirely missed my point . . .
1
@cdesser when did women lawyers wear drab suits? If you mean skirts and jackets, that is a quite different image than a man's suit - it includes stockings, heels, and some jewelry of course..I don't know what universe you lived in..
And I see Nancy as still inhabiting that universe with her sixties secretary look - it is time women started wearing suits and comfortable shoes - and by the way, the first woman I ever saw dressed like that was Martha Stewarts daughter Alexa, a tall blond, and she absolutely killed it!! I think Pelosi is a fossil, and her uplifted face pains me to look at. Her baby voice is bad also..
"I consider it part of my job as The Times’s chief fashion critic to help readers understand how fashion is being used to communicate"
Honestly, I don't know if that's really necessary. I think we're all savvier about interpreting clothing choices (and other choices) than experts may assume. I can look at Pelosi's hot pink dress and think she's intentionally emanating a statement about being a powerful woman. I can look at Bannon's clothing 'choices' and think: slob. And I still do think these kinds of articles are sexist. Although if they remain in the fashion pages and not front page news I guess some people will find it interesting or illuminating.
17
If it is true that it that: “To ignore how public figures use what they wear is to ignore one of the ways our own understanding is being manipulated.” Then why didn’t the Times Tweet about what Paul Ryan wears?
There is a legitimate and interesting agreement here. Writing about fashion and what public figures choose to wear is valid.
However, including the details of Pelosi’s dress in the tweet about her return to the speakership is entirely different and representative of the Times persistent double standards and false equivalencies and persistent lack of context.
19
You are spot on and perfectly right to consider fashion choice as a key element of how public figures project themselves. That it requires “context” indicates an over calibration in trying to view genders in exactly the same way at all times. It also indicates that those offended have warped idea of fashion discussion being only about women. It never was!
5
Of course readers pay less attention when you write about the clothes of male politicians. Because for male politicians, our culture has fairly well-defined conventions as to how they should dress, and politicians tend to stick to that suit-and-tie formula. If a woman attains a position of power, the choices are more varied and less clear, and it often seems that whatever choice she makes is going to be criticized: she’s either too frumpy or too undignified, too feminine or not feminine enough. In the end, it amounts to yet another barrier women have to surmount if they want to be taken seriously in politics and in business.
10
Thanks for making me re-think my immediately negative reaction to comments about Pelosi's coat and pink dress. I think you are right and I am wrong in this instance.
20
@fireweed Happy I could help!
1
I thought Nancy Pelosi's color choice was appropriate. It wasn't red and it wasn't blue. She looked lovely. Fashion writers can comment on men's attire also. Trump, for example, always looks like a schoolboy making his First Communion and wearing a suit for the first time. His jacket is always flapping in the breeze while the other men at the event look neat and tidy. He thinks his long ties make him look slimmer. Wrong! I would have thought his well put together wife would have given him some fashion advice before he left for the inauguration.
19
I couldn't disagree more. There are times and places for such things, but it is precisely in this space that communicating with a laser focus on the substance truly matters. (Time to stop looking at your phone too!)
Could you imagine a first-rate climate scientist presenting crucial facts on the future of our planet, only to be evaluated on whether s/he is wearing a an outfit that exudes power, confidence, and attention to detail? Or, a general discussing a new insurgency worrying about whether her/his outfit matches her/his shoes? I'm less worried about whether you call it sexism (though I am disappointed at the game-playing) and more that you just perpetrate the notion that it's not what women say and do that matters, but how they look. Pelosi is an effective, powerful, and smart national leader, who is there on the merits of her hard work and the relationships she's built, not a movie star or heir to the throne-- and certainly not part of the NY Times' fashion fetish. Leave the style over substance in politics to Mr. Trump.
36
@P. Siegel
This notion that coverage of men and women should be the same can't work. Initially I sought to raise my child without much regard for gender. That child taught me better. Boys and girls are not the same. Women and men are not the same. Each person is deserving of equal opportunity surely. Each person makes choices. No crime in noticing those choices.
@P. Siegel Yes, you get it! It's not about whataboutism at all.
1
@B Raising your kids, of course. But can we consider my example? Can you imagine a (woman or man) chief of police or the head of the EPA being treated the way the Times is treating female members of Congress? Would you want your daughter or son treated that way, were she/he in Congress?
IMHO, it's a mechanism for brushing away content and focusing on style and innuendo-- my point is that in dealing with government or science, that's a strategy for distracting the public from the real, even life-and-death, issues.
I agree that you can dress to project power, or some other message, and that it's okay for media to comment, briefly, on that, in context. My only reservation is that some politicians who are really good at what they do just don't care about fashion and don't want to spend time and energy planning outfits. So, maybe the media shouldn't be a source of pressure on public figures to dress to match the context of each occasion, each message, perfectly. Because of gender roles, women are more likely to feel this pressure than men.
10
An occasional reference to a public figure's attire is one thing, but when female figures' fashion choices are covered much more extensively than male figures', let's not kid ourselves. That says what women wear is a much more important part of their lives than men's attire is of their lives. What does that say about how women should be regarded? Think about it!
32
I love the way Pelosi dresses - elegant, classic, age appropriate. Had a discussion with a friend about the coat that we thought was by Fleurette. We wonder if her clothes are custom made because they fit so beautifully.
We are retired, successful businesswomen and when someone looks really good, it's nice to notice what makes them stand out amongst the commonplace. We also comment on what men are wearing when it's clothing that makes them look wonderful or awful.
Noticing how great a man or woman looks does not diminish their accomplishments.
39
Ms. Pelosi is always very polished and visually strong in her solid, bright colored dresses. It’s a novel way to dress, defining her very clearly in a room full of men in the same suit. Love the color!
22