Fashion in Politics

An Exploration of the Role of Fashion in Politics and Public Image Construction

Emma Louise Roberts W15010132 DE0929 / Project Research BA (Hons) Fashion Communication Northumbria University

contents 2

Introduction

3

Methodology

4

Chapter One: Macro Themes

10

Chapter Two: Hillary Clinton

12

Chapter Three: Theresa May

14

Chapter Four: Micro Themes

20

Conclusion

22

Reference List

24

Image Reference List

26

Bibliography

introduction

Key words: female politicians, media bias, image construction, public perceptions and communication.

This report will explore the role of fashion within politics, with particular focus on how women in power use fashion to construct their public image. This will be informed by case studies of Hillary Clinton and Theresa May as women in positions of power in two of the most powerful countries in the world. It will also examine the press’ attitudes towards female politicians and the current standards of professional dressing and how it may develop in the future. Other areas of discussion will be the celebritization of politics and how popular television shows featuring political female leads dictate public perceptions of how women in power should look. This report aims to establish how fashion commentary can inform our understanding of politics and the people who lead our society. Currently “academic attention to the question of dress and work and its significance is, for the most part, surprisingly lacking,” (Edwards, 2011) which is disappointing considering how far society has come in integrating women into the workplace as equals.

Although, as this report will demonstrate, female politicians put a great deal of conscious effort into constructing their public image in a way that will appeal to voters, fashion is often dismissed or discussed in a sexualised way by the media outside of specialist fashion publications. As The Guardian wrote, “The problem is not only that clothes matter, but that no one has quite figured out to what degree or how. In the big bang of political warfare, clothes can be highly volatile atoms” (Armstrong, 2016). As “politicians work to inform ‘how audiences experience them and evaluate their performance, authenticity, and political capabilities’” (Warner, 2016) it is the responsibility of the media to pay attention to the care taken in constructing public image and to treat male and female politicians in an equal way. With hope, this report will further discussion surrounding these issues.

2

methodology

The report is supported by fashion and politics books, journals, online articles, magazine articles, radio interviews and online videos. Original research has been conducted in the form of an open question interview with Councillor Nicola Richards (Appendix E) and an interview panel of Undergraduates Chloe Harrison and Lily Fairbairn studying International Relations and Politics BA (Hons) at Northumbria University (Appendix F). The interview panel consisted of an open, free flowing discussion, prompted by four sets of images (Appendix G) in relation to the sartorial style of both real and fictional female politicians. The scope of the original research has been focused on young women in politics as they are conscious and aware of the issues surrounding the representation of women in politics and can offer current opinions and information around the subject. All participants of the original research and the data collected have been protected by Ethical Approval (Appendix A) and Informed Consent (Appendices B, C and D) and treated with full respect.

3

chapter one: macro themes This chapter will examine the macro themes surrounding the relationship between the press and female politicians as well as addressing the current standards for women’s professional dressing and where they originated from.

4

the press It is a well researched fact that women in politics are subject to far more appearance based media coverage than men. Following “an examination of the campaigns and news reports of every female presidential candidate from Victoria Woodhull in 1872 to Hillary Clinton in 2008”, it was revealed that “female candidates were subjected to quadruple the amount of appearance-based coverage in comparison to their male counterparts” (Khan, 2017). If this coverage constituted insightful analysis revealing information about a politician’s values and characteristics, then appearance based coverage would be a non-issue.

However, the reality is that through the language and tone utilised by the press, female politicians are “[reduced] to their physical selves [which] strips an individual of agency and articulates the subject as incapable” (Funk, 2016). This is damaging to the success of female politicians and could be indicative of why women are so underrepresented in the political sphere. A promising sign that women in politics are of increasing interest to the media, Councillor Nicola Richards stated that “recently I was interviewed by BBC Sunday Politics to discuss being a young female Councillor and some of the negativity I’ve experienced around it” (Appendix E).

At the 2015 Correspondents’ Dinner, journalists were made to promise “I solemnly swear not to comment on Hillary Clinton’s appearance, because that is not journalism” (Funk, 2016). Whilst this display of awareness of the issues surrounding the discussion of female politicians is refreshing, it would be more promising to hear of journalists adjusting the way they cover fashion in politics, rather than to disregard it completely and thus signifies the delicateness of what is and is not appropriate to discuss. It is important to remember that although the way women are currently discussed is often objectifying, that there are ways to constructively discuss fashion in relation to politics. It is not valuable journalism to sexualise Clinton, however analysis of her public image within the context of politics is both fashion and political journalism.

Fashion is a viable tool for communicating with the public. Public speeches are carefully edited in anticipation of a politician’s verbal communication to be analysed for hidden meanings. In the same way it is equally valuable to examine the visual and sartorial side of communication, in order to better understand our leaders. Armstrong

5

(2016) in The Telegraph asks, “Will Jeremy Corbyn’s baggy shorts come to be reviewed as a symbol of his integrity in the face of the evil-suited apparatchik? Or what about Obama, widely admired one minute for his skinny cool tailoring, regarded somewhat suspiciously the next. Should the leader of the western world actually look cool?” These connotations are exactly what they intend to communicate. Corbyn is ‘for the people’ and therefore makes efforts to communicate this through his clothing choices. He rides a bicycle to show he is conscious of the environment and wears jumpers knitted by his mum because it is practical and expense-free (BBC Newsnight, 1984) (Figure 1). Both Barack and Michelle Obama have made fashion decisions to appear attractive, professional and high-class to subvert the public’s gaze from their race, a group which continue to face negative discrimination in America. It is about taking considered steps to communicate with an entire country when words are often insufficient. It is vital to take advantage of fashion as a topic which is constantly at the forefront of the public interests; it is a universal, visual language that surpasses spoken word.

female politicians Due to their underrepresentation in politics, women in power are often typecast within the media. As cited by Carlin (2009) “In her book, Men and Women of the Corporation (1977), Kanter identified four common stereotypes of professional women: seductress or sex object, mother, pet, and iron maiden”. This sweeping set of labels stems from the two ways in which some men view women, as mothers and girlfriends/ wives. This theory “assumes that all women are the same and ignores the great diversity among male leaders” (Davidson-Smich, 2011).

No-one has developed a paralleled set of labels for professional men, because they are viewed as more complex and balanced people. The female leader should no longer be a novelty and as it is the new reality of modern politics. Carlin (2009) points out that “it is going to take more than the ‘right’ woman. It is going to take the ‘right’ view of the offices as being gender neutral.” The lack of female leaders is not due to women’s incapabilities or lack of interest in politics, it is that politics has a lack of interest in women and disguises it as a need to wait for the ‘right’ one.

Figure 1. Jeremy Corbyn interview with BBC Newsnight 1984

Smich (2011) writes that “a female chief executive might be a ‘tough’ leader or adopt a ‘soft’ leadership style; she might take on ‘women’s issues’ or she might deliberately avoid these topics; she might be peaceable or she might be warmongering”. These are characteristics that could apply to anyone, in any combination; they are determined by party, personality and background, not gender. As cited by DavidsonSmich (2011) Francis Fukuyama has argued, “A world run by women

6

would follow different rules, it would appear, and it is toward that sort of world that all post-industrial or Western societies are moving. As women gain power in these countries, the latter should become less aggressive, adventurous, competitive and violent.” If we continue to attribute sexist character traits to politicians, then we should consider why we value typically masculine qualities such as aggressiveness, violence and competitiveness over feminine ones. Ultimately, the media is the most powerful force in shaping public option, so if the media stops typecasting women, then these stereotypes may be forgotten and we can discuss male and female politicians equally and without bias.

masculinised dressing The current standards for women’s professional dress are derived from that of men’s. This forms a highly masculinised appearance, which results in a stark contrast to professional women in feminine styles.

Crane defines this masculinised aesthetic as “the alternative style” which “[incorporates items] from mens clothing, such as ties, mens hats, suit jackets, waist coats, and men’s shirts… The style was worn primarily, although not exclusively, by employed women” (Crane, 2000). It is the fear of femininity and emergency development from men’s existing dress codes (as the style was developed during the American Civil War (Crane, 2000)) which lead to this becoming the norm for professional dressing. “The suit jacket had been called ‘the symbol of emancipation’ for woman in the nineteenth century” (Crane, 2000). This style was developed into androgyny by American designers such as Calvin Klein in the 70’s “who, in the face of chaotic reality, mastered the retreat into anonymous, homogeneity” (Arnold, 2011) and “Yves Saint Laurent’s cool adaption of the masculine tuxedo for women in the sophisticated lines of Le Smoking for his pret-a-porter Rive Gauche collection debuted in 1966 and quickly became the epitome of chic for women who wanted to appear glamorous as well as strong and independent” (Arnold, 2011) (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Yves Saint Laurent Le Smoking jacket 1966

Today “women are involved in what is often a wider yet still restricted notion of appropriately ‘formal and feminine’ attire that includes wearing what are clearly women’s - not men’s - suits, adopting skirts or dresses, donning high heels or stylised shoes, and applying at least some makeup” (Edwards, 2011). Now that more women are rising towards positions of power, it is time to explore a new style of professional dressing for women which is not derived from masculinity. This is made difficult, however, by the press and publics continued alienation towards any form of femininity presenting itself within the context of power. Therefore women continue to “[default] to a signature shape of suit, and varying only the colour, [which] is a sartorial tactic that

7

female politicians such as Clinton and Angela Merkel have borrowed – logically – from the men around them” (Armstrong, 2016). Echoing concerns around the display of a female figure, Councillor Nicola Richards said that “I sometimes feel concerned that due to being naturally curvaceous, what would normally be appropriate items of clothing can sometimes look less inappropriate on” (Appendix E).

Perhaps if women appeared as feminine more often, then femininity wouldn’t be so difficult to consume. It is important to note that it is only femininity within the context of politics that is difficult to consume; the public has no issue with femininity in the context of celebrities, as they are highly sexualised through the male gaze and are not in positions of power. Edwards mirrors the confusion of many over “why we continue to stick to such convention so meticulously and with so little sense of compromise” (Edwards, 2011).

It is comforting to know that not all sectors of the press are threatened by powerful women displaying femininity. In a report on a meeting between British Prime Minister Theresa May and Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, Vogue boldly stated “Don’t these women look magnificent? Don’t they, whisper it, look like women, rather than women masquerading as men? Try to take a positive out of this sticky photocall: here are two of the most powerful women in the world, with the confidence to promote their female sovereignty. All power to them” (Pithers, 2017) (Figure 3). Here, Vogue as a fashion publication displays a higher awareness of the issues surrounding sexualisation of politicians than the rest of the press, as the fashion press is used to sartorial commentary without the need for over-sexualisation. Perhaps if all sectors of the media learnt to accept femininity then we would not attribute certain characteristics to men and women so rigidly.

8

Figure 3. Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May Article 50 photocall 2017

9

chapter two: hillary clinton

Figure 4. Hillary Clinton as First Lady in Beijing 1995

Throughout her time as First Lady, U.S Senator from New York and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been subject to a myriad of media coverage. “Both Clinton’s physical appearance and her choice of pantsuits over skirts and dresses were the source of considerable derision” (Carlin, 2009). Accused of never being able to find a sartorial or hair style that suits her, she “has been fending off the critics who have been tearing apart her appearance since her days as

10

First Lady” (Harwood, 2017). Clinton herself observed, “when her memoirs were published in 2014, that they could have been called The Scrunchie Chronicles: 112 Countries And It’s Still All About The Hair” (Armstrong, 2016). Aware that the press and public have held such passionate opinions over her appearance for years, for the 2016 Presidential campaign Clinton made conscious efforts to reestablish her public image.

Having “spent at least $200,000 on new clothes to wear on the campaign trail” (Bourne, 2016), considerable time and money was invested in this new image. Here, clothing plays an important role in politics as a tool for combating press and public perceptions. For Clinton, fashion acted as an opportunity for rebirth, allowing her to move away from negative press attention in the past and allow the focus to shift to her a valid presidential candidate.

Figure 5. Hillary Clinton as First Lady in New Dehli 2009

Figure 6. Hillary Clinton’s clothing rail 2015

Figure 5. Hillary Clinton accepting the Presidential nomination 2016

Clinton’s sartorial efforts are not only a reaction to press attention, but also act as a tool for communicating the main points of her campaign.

Although Clinton was “uninterested in fashion before she came to the White House,” (Douglas, 1998) her sartorial journey in the public eye went through phases with her professional roles. “As first lady, Clinton wore frumpy pastel skirtsuits” (Bourne, 2016) (Figure 4) then as “secretary of state, she attempted a more serious look, wearing pantsuits in a rainbow of colors” (Bourne, 2016) (Figure 5). In 2015, she began “making her first real effort to play the fashion card. She’s upgraded the designers she wears, opting for high-end European labels, and hired a team of image experts” (Bourne, 2016) and embarked upon a classic and symbolic approach to dressing.

To signify this change in direction, her first Instagram post in 2015 just days before her campaign launch, (Figure 6) Clinton posted an image of a clothing rail filled with red, white and blue items exclusively, symbolising her position as a true American patriot and servant to her country. Her use of symbolism through clothing continued from here through to the end of her campaign, as she described on BBC Radio 4, “we had planned for [my acceptance event] to be in our convention center in New York City that actually had a glass ceiling and we had some very smart people figure out how it could look like crashing glass without hurting the ceiling and I was going to wear a white suffragette suit as I had done when I accepted the nomination” (McGregor, 2017) (Figure 7). This reinforces the core message of her campaign, ‘I’m with Her’, as potentially becoming the first female US President. As one of the biggest female icons in politics, Clinton recognises the significance of the role fashion has to play in politics, as a tool for communication with press and voters alike.

11

chapter three: theresa may

Figure 8. Theresa May at Conservative Party Conference 2013 in Vivienne Westwood

Contrastingly to America’s obsession with Clinton’s appearance, MP, Home Secretary and now Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Theresa May is subject to far less appearance based coverage. Whilst her taste in eccentric shoes is often commented upon, the mention of her name in fashion publications in relatively uncommon. Despite the UK’s indifference to her sartorial choices, May “is often compared, rather lazily, to Margaret Thatcher” (Wood, 2017). Speaking to Vogue, “‘There can only ever be one Margaret Thatcher. I’m Theresa May,’ she says, “I do things my way’” (Wood, 2017). As she continues to be widely compared to Thatcher (Donald Trump also once referred to her as ‘my Maggie’ (Wood, 2017)), despite her insistence that she is her own individual, this tired comparison demonstrates the need for more female role models in politics, which should lead to the acceptance of diversity in women’s power dressing.

12

In line with the amount of appearance based coverage surrounding her, May has shown far less of a considered effort to utilise fashion in relation to her political career. Although May does not employ anyone to manage her public image (Wood, 2017), it is not to say that her sartorial choices are completely devoid of purpose. Some aspects of her clothing offer practical advantages. In analysis of her style, Pithers (2017) notices that “edge-to-edge is a deliberate choice for May: without buttons or fastenings, coats hang better, don’t crumple, and neatly skim the silhouette. All of which means they translate better in photographs” as well as “[navy] being softer on the skin and kinder under flashbulbs”.

Furthermore, her clothing often nods towards the country which she leads. She is fond of designer “Daniel Blake, who designs and produces his collections exclusively in London. Faultless Brexiteering uniform” (Pithers, 2017) and has also appeared wearing anarchic British designer Vivienne Westwood, including on the day of her leadership bid (Figure 8). Another central part of May’s wardrobe are her chunky chain necklaces, which Vogue interpreted as a part of her “her ‘strong and stable’ wardrobe” which “frames her face and her policies, wreathing them in brute force” (Pithers, 2017) (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Theresa May outside 10 Downing Street wearing staple chain necklace 2016

Figure 10. Theresa May’s infamous kitten heels

In her Vogue article, Wood describes May using language such as “studiously un­eccentric”, “boring”, “unexcitingly” and “uncharismatic”.

Whilst this may sound like negative commentary, it reveals that May is at the core, a normal British professional woman who dresses as such, but still has her own personal tastes which she allows to show through in her work wardrobe. Although criticised for looking out of place within the rest of her clothes, through her kitten-heels (Figure 10) May demonstrates authenticity and individuality to the public, which is highly valued by voters today (Bourne, 2016). In an interview, Councillor Nicola Richards said that May’s display of personality through fashion is one of the reasons she admires May; “she often channels her personal style through unique and bold jewellery or shoes - while at the same time maintaining a professional appearance” (Appendix E). Speaking of her infamous shoe tastes, May told Vogue “‘It is quite widely known that I like shoes. This is not something that defines me as either a woman or a politician, but it has come to define me in the eyes of the newspapers’” (Pithers, 2017). In spite of her relaxed approach to fashion, May’s sartorial choices are still examined in fashion publications and by the public eye, demonstrating that whether a politician embraces the challenge of fashion as Clinton does, or lets their natural tastes guide their choices as May does, fashion is still of importance to the press and public and meaning will be derived from the appearances of politicians as long as they are in the public eye. In consequence, it is logical for politicians to consider fashion as a part of their image construction, just as they do their verbal communication.

13

chapter four: micro themes This chapter will examine the micro themes surrounding the celebritization of female politicians and how popular culture affects public perceptions of politicians. The chapter will also discuss the place of luxury fashion in women’s professional dressing.

14

celebritization In recent years, the widespread availability and speed of news coverage via the internet has led to the celebritization of politics. This results in an increased interest in politicians as individuals and by proxy, their personal lives and sartorial choices. “[Celebritization] is variously referred to as the ‘personalization’, ‘mediatization’ and ‘celebritization’ of contemporary politics” (Warner, 2016). Whilst the celebritization of politics may seem unproductive, it is important to consider why the public values the personalities of politicians so much. Beauty and fashion bloggers have forged a new form of media advertising through their personal and intimate style of communicating with consumers, which has been so successful due to the consumers placing their trust in the individual, rather than large corporations. Similarly, Bourne notes that “experts caution that voters are ultimately looking for authenticity” as their trust in political parties as a whole have faded “and a politician’s sartorial choices play a key role in shaping that image” (Bourne, 2016).

Within the issue of celebritization lies a choice for politicians. From a certain perspective, the increased exposure offers a chance for politicians to communicate with the public, however some feel it could lead to politicians being taken less seriously. An interview panel member felt that discussion of a politicians clothing “undermines them as politicians” (Appendix F). In either instance, “As campaigns have moved to the online sphere, decentralized political talk on social media has become the norm” (Funk, 2016) and sartorial choices are prominent focal point in celebrity coverage, so under these circumstances politicians have a decision to make in respect to their image construction. They may choose to distance themselves from seemingly frivolous topic of fashion or utilise the attention and use it to their advantage by communicating their individuality through clothing.

Although the discussion of fashion in relation to politics may seem irrelevant, as Cartner-Morely (2016) argues, “When we discuss what politicians wear, we are talking about the same fundamental issues – what are they really like, what would they be like to hang out with – as when we debate which leader we’d go to the pub with.” In this way, the role of fashion in politics is integral in understanding such untouchable public figures. In the future, younger politicians who have grown up in the age of social media may be more inclined to dress with their public image in mind.

15

popular culture Mainstream television has recently seen an influx of series’ featuring female politicians as lead characters, including ‘House of Cards’ (2013), ‘Scandal’ (2012), ‘Veep’ (2012) and ‘Madame Secretary’ (2014). The increase of female politicians represented on screen is indicative of their increasing presence in real politics. In an interview panel, participants discussed their perceptions of female leads in ‘House of Cards’ and ‘Scandal’ as they have had exposure to the series’ as consumers. This combined with their academic knowledge of politics gives an indication of how these representations influence public perceptions of real politicians.

Figure 11. Olivia Pope of ABC’s Scandal 2015

Figure 12. Claire Underwood of Netflix’s House of Cards 2016

The argument for positive influence is that these characters are beginning to normalise women in power to mass audiences, consequently softening the shock of seeing real women as leaders. The styling of such characters are deliberate to communicate themes of power and professionalism, whilst maintaining the women’s natural femininity.

An interview panel participant commented of the lead of ‘Scandal’ that through her bold outfits (Appendix F) “her [Olivia] whole demeanour just exerts power” (Figure 11). As previously discussed, the standards for female power-dressing are currently closely drawn from traditional male codes, however through sharp tailoring and crisp colours, the stylist for ‘Scandal’ has begun to redefine women’s power-dressing. In this way, the role of fashion in politics extends beyond being a tool for politicians, but acts as a signpost for the changes in modern dress codes for women in professional settings.

The argument for negative influence is one that is a common issue with television. That is that the characters set unrealistic standards for real women. Speaking of the leads of ‘Veep’ and ‘House of Cards’ Armstrong (2016) writes that “Both women are terrific ambassadors for female power, what with their mastery of tailored jackets, sexy-but-notcheap-looking pencil skirts and shirts that never get rumpled. They’re also fictional – and caricatures at that” (Figure 12). These sentiments were echoed by the interview panel participants who recognised that “actresses are held to different standards than anyone else” (Appendix F). Today, it is an unspoken requirement of television that “It’s got to be sexy” (Appendix F), which is why it is problematic to position such characters as ideals for female politicians. Despite the issues of unattainability surrounding fictional political figures, one participant

16

commented “I feel that [these outfits are] a continuation of real politicians - like Hillary Clinton but sexy, I can imagine her wearing a lot of these outfits.” However, the choices for modern political role models are few, as Armstrong also notes, “Outside the slightly misleading prism of TV, sartorial role models in the corridors of political power are elusive”. This is perhaps why, when looking to revitalise her image for the 2016 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton hired ‘Scandal’ stylist and ‘VEEP’ make-up artist (Armstrong, 2016). To young female voters, this decision is admirable (both interview panel participants rated the lead of ‘Scandal’ as the most appealing image of professional and political dressing (Appendices H and I)) and demonstrates that whilst attempting to emulate fictional images can be unrealistic, the same sartorial themes can be adapted to suit real women of differing body types and ages.

luxury fashion

A question often asked in relation to politicians sartorial choices is if luxury fashion is appropriate. Some feel that luxury fashion represents the class divide between political leaders and the mass population and that it is inappropriate for politicians to flaunt their wealth when campaigning to represent the public. Hillary Clinton was famously criticised for wearing a $12,495 Armani jacket (Figure 13) and Theresa May was similarly criticised when “for an interview with a British Sunday-newspaper magazine, she wore a pair brown leather trousers worth almost £1000” an issue which the press went on to label as “Trousergate” (Wood, 2017). The counter argument is that political leaders have earned their money and should be able to spend it as they wish. Councillor Nicola Richards argued that “I see no reason why Theresa May should not, or any other female politician for that matter, decide to spend their hard earned money on designer clothes. In fact I believe it makes them appear more human for doing so if anything” (Appendix E). It is no secret that the role of Prime Minister comes with substantial pay, whilst speaking to group of school children, May stated that she earned a £142,000 salary (Wood, 2017). When asked if they felt luxury fashion had a place in politics, interview panel participants said “it’s about modesty” but that the lack of attention given to male politicians wearing designer suits further demonstrates the “double standards” of media bias (Appendix F).

Figure 13. Hillary Clinton wearing Armani 2017

Clearly, in respect for the people they represent, politicians have a duty to demonstrate a degree of restraint in the levels of luxury they present themselves into the public, however it could also be argued that luxury fashion is an investment in a politicians public image and it is also notable that luxury fashion is uniquely positioned to be adaptable to an individual, unlike the high-street. This is extremely valuable to

17

politicians who are attempting to tailor their image. Hillary Clinton has been tied to designers such as Ralph Lauren, a designer who “is an interesting choice for [her] both aesthetically and strategically” as the Bronx born designer is “the stereotypical American success story” (Friedman, 2016). Designer labels tend to embody a particular type of person, and so allegiances with designers can add to the message a politician aims to communicate. It is possible for a politician and a designer to work together to establish meaningful communication and carefully construct public image through tailored clothing. Abedin Huma, Clinton’s Chief of Staff, is exemplary of how a young woman in politics can dress to be seen as powerful, professional and feminine all at once (Figure 14). As cited in Vogue, “I think she is sort of symbolic of what women need clothes for,’ says Joseph Altuzarra, who dressed Abedin in silvery sequins for this year’s Met Gala. ‘She needs clothes to be versatile and look as good at night as they did in the morning.”

(Heller, 2016) Here, her own tastes and the knowledge of a designer work together to tailor a wardrobe that fits her role. As a young woman at the forefront of American politics she is defining a style “that just makes her seem relatable for modern working women, but also just bit untouchable too” (Heller, 2016). As such, whilst luxury fashion can be interpreted as insensitive and un-relatable, the role of fashion as a tool of communication in politics and a turning point in women dress standards remains vital.

18

19

conclusion

This report aimed to begin the discussion of the role of fashion in modern politics and public image construction. It has explored many areas of the issue, and has acknowledged that problems within media commentary of female politicians such as sexualisation, typecasting and discrimination do exist. It has found that current standards of female power dressing are currently highly masculinised and full acceptance of more feminine styles is yet to come. In a case study of Hillary Clinton this report has found that real female politicians do use fashion strategically to influence public perceptions and communicate key political messages. A case study of Prime Minister Theresa May demonstrated that even when sartorial choices are not intended to communicate specific messages, the press and public will still derive meaning where they interpret it. This confirms that fashion plays a key role in public perceptions of politicians, and regardless of an individual politicians feelings towards fashion, clothing is a tool for communication just as speech is. This report also recognises that the celebritization of politics due to social media and public interest in the personalities of politicians has lead to an intensified focus on the appearances and private lives of politicians, resulting in an enhanced importance of image construction through styling. An exploration of popular television series’ that feature female politician leads are normalising the concept of women in power to mass audiences however can set unrealistic image expectations for real politicians. Despite being idealised these images of modern women in politics are helping to set new standards of professional dressing for contemporary women and have even influenced real politicians such as Hillary Clinton. Finally, this report examined both sides of the argument surrounding the place of luxury fashion in a politician’s wardrobe and found that it can play an important role in redefining standards of professional dressing for women.

This report has been supported by insightful original research on young women in politics who are both politically and culturally engaged.

These women and many like them who are pursuing a career in politics deserve an equal playing field upon which to build their futures and should not be deterred by fear of being sexualised or discriminated against by the press due to their gender. It is vital to develop research that further exposes media bias and explores how communication with the public can be achieved through thoughtful sartorial decisions. With hope, this should lead to a political sphere where men and women are considered as equals and the public can understand their leaders as they wish to be perceived.

20

Total word count: 5,330 words Word count excluding referencing and secondary research: 3,975 words

Figure 14. Abedin Huma for American Vogue 2007

21

references

Armstrong, L., 2016. What Hillary Clinton wears does matter - in political warfare clothes can be highly volatile atoms. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: <http://www. telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/what-hillary-clinton-wearsdoes-matter---in-political-warfare-cl/> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Arnold, R., 2001. Fashion, desire and anxiety. London [u.a.]: Tauris.BBC Newsnight, 1984. Jeremy Corbyn Interview. [image] Available at: <https://static.independent.co.uk/ s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/indy100/ bkcfvxKROb/8569-1cxa0a7.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Bourne, L., 2016. The surprising strategy behind Hillary Clinton’s designer wardrobe. [online] New York Post.

Available at: <http://nypost.com/2016/06/05/hillarysextravagant-campaign-wardrobe-costs-at-least-200k/> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Carlin, D. and Winfrey, K., 2009. Have You Come a Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage. Communication Studies, 60(4), pp.326-343.

Cartner-Morley, J., 2016. Hillary Clinton’s wardrobe matters – but not from a fashion perspective. [online] The Guardian.

Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ shortcuts/2016/jun/08/hillary-clinton-wardrobe-mattersbut-not-fashion-perspective> [Accessed 2 Oct. 2017].

Crane, D., 2000. Fashion and its social agendas. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press.

Davidson-Schmich, L., 2011. Gender, Intersectionality, and the Executive Branch: The Case of Angela Merkel. German Politics, 20(3), pp.325-341.

Douglas, A., 1998. The Extraordinary Hillary Clinton. Vogue, pp.231-239.

Edwards, T., 2011. Fashion in focus. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Friedman, V., 2016. Is Ralph Lauren Going to Be Hillary Clinton’s Dresser in Chief?. [online] Nytimes.com.

Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/ fashion/hillary-clinton-ralph-lauren.html> [Accessed 21 Oct. 2017].

22

Funk, M. and Coker, C., 2016. She’s Hot, for a Politician: The Impact of Objectifying Commentary on Perceived Credibility of Female Candidates. Communication Studies, 67(4), pp.455-473.

Harwood, E., 2017. Hillary Clinton Sent an Important Message with Her Latest Pantsuit. [online] Vanity Fair. Available at: <https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/hillary-clintonred-pantsuit> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Harwood, E., 2017. Hillary Clinton’s Post-Election Fashion Choices Signal a Shift in Attitude. [online] Vanity Fair.

Available at: <https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/ hillary-clinton-bold-post-election-style> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Heller, N., 2016. I’m With Her. Vogue, pp.724-729 795-797.

Khan, Z., 2017). Negative Stereotyping of Female Politicians in the Media. [online] International Knowledge Network of Women in Politics. Available at: <http://iknowpolitics. org/en/knowledge-library/opinion-pieces/negativestereotyping-female-politicians-media> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

McGregor, D., 2017. Hillary Clinton. [online] bbc.co.uk Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/ b098bsv4> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].Pithers, E., 2017. Theresa May: Building A Strong And Stable Wardrobe. [online] Vogue.co.uk. Available at: <http://www. vogue.co.uk/gallery/theresa-may-style-analysis> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Pithers, E. 2017. When Theresa Met Nicola: The Seven Things We Learned. [online] Vogue.co.uk. Available at: <http://www. vogue.co.uk/article/theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-article-50meeting> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Warner, H., 2016. First comes love: power couples, celebrity kinship and cultural politics, edited by Shelley Cobb and Neil Ewen, New York, Bloomsbury, 2015, 392 pp., ISBN 978-1-62-892120-5. Celebrity Studies, 7(4).

Wood, G., 2017. May Day. Vogue, pp.204-207 258-260.

Wood, G., 2017. U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May on Leading Britain Post-Brexit. [online] Vogue. Available at: https:// www.vogue.com/article/british-prime-minister-theresamay-interview-brexit-political-views [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

23

image references Figure 1.

BBC Newsnight, 1984. Jeremy Corbyn Interview. [image online] Available at: <https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/ story_medium/public/indy100/bkcfvxKROb/8569-1cxa0a7.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 2.

Yves Saint Laurent, 1966. Le Smoking Jacket. [image online] Available at: <http://www.francescamiranda.com/shopwp/wpcontent/uploads/2014/08/Touche-Eclat-YSL-Tuxedo-image.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 3.

British Vogue, 2017. Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May photocall. [image online] Available at: <https://vg-images.condecdn.net/ image/6W5z3dq4bOV/crop/810> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 4.

Hillary Clinton in Beijing, 1995. [image online] Available at: <http://anotherimg.dazedgroup.netdna-cdn.com/524/azure/ another-prod/360/0/360165.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 5.

Hillary Clinton in New Dehli, 2009. [image online] Available at: <https://hips.hearstapps.com/hbz.h-cdn.co/ assets/15/31/hbz-hillary-clinton-2009-gettyimages-89095991. jpg?crop=1.0xw:1xh;center,top&resize=980:*> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 6.

Clinton, H., 2015. Hillary Clinton’s clothing rail. [image online] Available at: <https://www.instagram.com/ p/3wNnxBEPpX/?taken-by=hillaryclinton> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 7.

Hillary Clinton Democratic Presidential nomination acceptance., 2016. [image online] Available at: <http://cdn-img.instyle.com/ sites/default/files/styles/684xflex/public/1469791609/072916hillary-clinton-lead.jpg?itok=CuFEUM3b> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 8.

Daily Mail, 2013. Theresa May at Conservative Party conference. [image online] Available at: <http://i.dailymail.

24

co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/30/article-2439731-18681E3100000578680_634x1194.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 9.

Daily Mail, 2016. Theresa May outside 10 Downing Street. [image online] Available at: <http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/ 07/31/22/36C1761A00000578-0-image-m-65_1470002395218. jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 10.

Theresa May kitten heels., 2016. [image online] Available at: <https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/v1492111535/ articles/2016/07/12/the-not-so-hidden-meaning-of-theresa-mays-leopard-print-kitten-heels/160711-teeman-theresa-may-tease_ hyliwf.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 11.

ABC Scandal, 2015. [image online] Available at: <https://pbs. twimg.com/media/Cy__2O4VQAEFfxh.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 12.

Netflix House of Cards, 2016. [image online] Available at: <http://cdn-img.instyle.com/sites/default/files/styles/684xflex/ public/images/2017/06/061317-claire-underwood-style-lead. jpg?itok=TkUhVkgY> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 13.

Hillary Clinton Armani jacket., 2016. [image online] Available at: <https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/hillary_clinton. jpg?quality=90&strip=all&strip=all> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Figure 14.

Vogue, 2007. Abedin Huma Hillaryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Secret Weapon. [image online] Available at: <https://assets.vogue.com/ photos/589209b9dec09b1841456266/master/pass/imghumaabedinjpg_113704959343.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

25

bibliography

Abnett, K., 2016. Styling Politicians in the Age of Image Wars. [online] The Business of Fashion. Available at: <https:// www.businessoffashion.com/articles/intelligence/stylingpoliticians-donald-trump-theresa-may-hillary-clinton> [Accessed 21 Oct. 2017].

Anon, 1999. Talking Back: The Hillary Files. Vogue, p.128.

Armstrong, L., 2016. What Hillary Clinton wears does matter - in political warfare clothes can be highly volatile atoms. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: <http://www. telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/what-hillary-clinton-wearsdoes-matter---in-political-warfare-cl/> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Arnold, R., 2001. Fashion, desire and anxiety. London [u.a.]: Tauris.Bahadur, N., 2017. How Male And Female Politicians Are Treated Differently. [online] HuffPost UK. Available at: <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/ women-in-politics-media-coverage_n_3561723.html> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Bates, L., 2017. Sexist coverage of Liz Kendall and female politicians is insidious and demeaning. [online] The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/ lifeandstyle/2015/jul/20/sexist-coverage-liz-kendall-femalepoliticians-damage-voter-perceptions [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

BBC Newsnight, 1984. Jeremy Corbyn Interview. [image] Available at: <https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/ styles/story_medium/public/indy100/bkcfvxKROb/85691cxa0a7.jpg> [Accessed 10 Dec. 2017].

Beaudoux, V., 2017. Five ways the media hurts female politicians — and how journalists everywhere can do better. [online] The Conversation. Available at: <http://theconversation. com/five-ways-the-media-hurts-female-politiciansand-how-journalists-everywhere-can-do-better-70771> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Boicu, R., 2014. Women in Politics (Segolene Royal’s Case). Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 4(1), pp.550565.Bourne, L., 2016. The surprising strategy behind Hillary Clinton’s designer wardrobe. [online] New York Post. Available at: <http://nypost.com/2016/06/05/hillarysextravagant-campaign-wardrobe-costs-at-least-200k/>

26

[Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Carlin, D. and Winfrey, K., 2009. Have You Come a Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage. Communication Studies, 60(4), pp.326-343.

Cartner-Morley, J., 2016. Hillary Clinton’s wardrobe matters – but not from a fashion perspective. [online] The Guardian.

Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ shortcuts/2016/jun/08/hillary-clinton-wardrobe-mattersbut-not-fashion-perspective> [Accessed 2 Oct. 2017].

Craik, J., 2009. Fashion: The Key Concepts. Oxford: Berg.

Crane, D., 2000. Fashion and its social agendas. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press.

Davidson-Schmich, L., 2011. Gender, Intersectionality, and the Executive Branch: The Case of Angela Merkel. German Politics, 20(3), pp.325-341.Diaz, M., 2008. Representing women?. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.

Douglas, A., 1998. The Extraordinary Hillary Clinton. Vogue, pp.231-239.

Edwards, T., 2011. Fashion in focus. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Friedman, V., 2016. Is Ralph Lauren Going to Be Hillary Clinton’s Dresser in Chief?. [online] Nytimes.com.

Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/ fashion/hillary-clinton-ralph-lauren.html> [Accessed 21 Oct. 2017].

Funk, M. and Coker, C., 2016. She’s Hot, for a Politician: The Impact of Objectifying Commentary on Perceived Credibility of Female Candidates. Communication Studies, 67(4), pp.455-473.

Garber, M., 2016. Why the Pantsuit?. [online] The Atlantic.

Available at: <https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/ archive/2016/08/youre-fashionable-enoughhillary/493877/> [Accessed 21 Oct. 2017].

Givhan, R., 2015. Hillary Clinton is owning the joke about her fashion choices — and it’s working. [online] Washington Post. Available at: <https://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2015/06/16/hillaryclinton-is-owning-the-joke-about-her-fashion-choicesand-its-working/?utm_term=.a5cdc96bfb20> [Accessed 21 Oct. 2017].Gold, J., 2015. Women uncovered: gender imbalance in politics and the media. [online] The

27

Institute for Government. Available at: <https://www. instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/women-uncoveredgender-imbalance-politics-and-media> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Harwood, E., 2017. Hillary Clinton Sent an Important Message with Her Latest Pantsuit. [online] Vanity Fair. Available at: <https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/hillary-clintonred-pantsuit> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Harwood, E., 2017. Hillary Clinton’s Post-Election Fashion Choices Signal a Shift in Attitude. [online] Vanity Fair.

Available at: <https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/ hillary-clinton-bold-post-election-style> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Heller, N., 2016. I’m With Her. Vogue, pp.724-729 795-797.

Henig, R. and Henig, S. (2001). Women and political power. London: Routledge.

Hinsliff, G., 2017. Hate is hate – except if you’re targeted for being a woman. [online] The-pool.com. Available at: <https://www.the-pool.com/news-views/opinion/2017/34/ gaby-hinsliff-on-misogyny-as-a-hate-crime> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Jean Roy, N., 2007. Hillary’s Secret Weapom. Vogue, pp.202205 274-275.Khan, Z., 2017). Negative Stereotyping of Female Politicians in the Media. [online] International Knowledge Network of Women in Politics. Available at: <http://iknowpolitics.org/en/knowledge-library/opinionpieces/negative-stereotyping-female-politicians-media> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Leon Talley, A., 2009. Fashion & Features: Power of Change: Leading Lady. Vogue, pp.428-435.Loose Women, 2017. Why Are Female Politicians Still Judged On their Appearance?. [video online] Available at: <https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=ybM_zIBM4cU> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Malkin, B., 2017. Daily Mail ‘Legs-it’ front page criticised as ‘sexist, offensive and moronic’. [online] The Guardian.

Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/ mar/28/daily-mail-legs-it-front-page-sexist> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

McGregor, D., 2017. Hillary Clinton. [online] bbc.co.uk Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/ b098bsv4> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

O’Neill, D. and Savigny, H., 2017. How are female politicians represented in the press? | The Political Studies

28

Association (PSA). [online] Psa.ac.uk. Available at: <https://www.psa.ac.uk/insight-plus/blog/how-are-femalepoliticians-represented-press> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

O’Neill, D. and Savigny, H., 2017. It’s 2014 – yet media and politics is still a man’s game. [online] Newstatesman. com. Available at: <http://www.newstatesman.com/ media/2014/04/it-s-2014-yet-media-and-politics-still-mans-game> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Orlean, S., 2003. Heroines Among Us: Hillary Rodham Clinton. Vogue, pp.276-277 332-333.

Pithers, E., 2017. Theresa May: Building A Strong And Stable Wardrobe. [online] Vogue.co.uk. Available at: <http://www. vogue.co.uk/gallery/theresa-may-style-analysis> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Pithers, E. 2017. When Theresa Met Nicola: The Seven Things We Learned. [online] Vogue.co.uk. Available at: <http://www. vogue.co.uk/article/theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-article-50meeting> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Rai, S., 2008. The gender politics of development. Zubaan.Reed, J., 1993. The First Lady. Vogue, pp.228-233.

Robson, D., 2000. Stereotypes and the female politician: A case study of Senator Barbara Mikulski. Communication Quarterly, 48(3), pp.205-222.

Ross, K., 2002. Women, politics, media. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Ross, K. and Comrie, M. (2012). The rules of the (leadership) game: Gender, politics and news. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 13(8).

Rutter, T., 2016. ‘Social media can be a pretty ugly place if you’re a woman in politics’. [online] The Guardian.

Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/publicleaders-network/2016/oct/21/female-politicians-socialmedia-abuse-european-parliament> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Schneider, M. and Bos, A., 2013. Measuring Stereotypes of Female Politicians. Political Psychology, 35(2), pp.245266.Smith, E., Smith Powers, A. and Suarez, G., 2005. If Bill Clinton Were a Woman: The Effectiveness of Male and Female Politicians’ Account Strategies Following Alleged Transgressions. Political Psychology, 26(1), pp.115-134.

Sollee, K., 2017. 9 Sexist Ways Female Politicians Are Depicted In The Press — And By Their Colleagues. [online] Bustle.

29

com. Available at: <https://www.bustle.com/articles/729249-sexist-ways-female-politicians-are-depicted-in-the-pressand-by-their-colleagues> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Stevens, A., 2007. Women, power and politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Stone, J., 2017. Daily Mail formally reported to press regulator over ‘Theresa May legs’ front page. [online] The Independent. Available at: <http://www. independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/daily-mail-legs-frontpage-theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-ipso-complaint-greenparty-amela-womack-a7653726.html> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Sullivan, R., 2001. Hillary’s Turn. Vogue, pp.492-493 582-583.

The Business of Fashion, 2017. Tim’s Take: Victoria Beckham Autumn/Winter 2017. [video] Available at: <https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=aV8dFj9BOI0> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

The Economist, 2017. How to succeed as a woman in politics. [video] Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=NTTGlUVLesE> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

VICE, 2017. America’s powerful female politicians tell us how they broke the glass ceiling. [video] Available at: <https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=GICS2uUGvTE> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

Van Meter, J., 2009. Her Brilliant Career. Vogue, pp.246-257.

Van Meter, J., 2016. The Race is On. Vogue, pp.498-507.

Warner, H., 2016. First comes love: power couples, celebrity kinship and cultural politics, edited by Shelley Cobb and Neil Ewen, New York, Bloomsbury, 2015, 392 pp., ISBN 978-1-62-892120-5. Celebrity Studies, 7(4).

Wood, G., 2017. May Day. Vogue, pp.204-207 258-260.

Wood, G., 2017. U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May on Leading Britain Post-Brexit. [online] Vogue. Available at: https:// www.vogue.com/article/british-prime-minister-theresamay-interview-brexit-political-views [Accessed 29 Oct. 2017].

30

Emma Louise Roberts W15010132 DE0929 / Project Research BA (Hons) Fashion Communication Northumbria University