Spotlight on Kamala Harris’s clothing

(New York) “Describing a woman’s appearance should NOT be done under ANY circumstances. Ever. Ever again.”


The day after Kamala Harris’ speech at the Democratic convention in Chicago, a reader of The Press criticized a description of the Democratic presidential candidate’s attire in the newspaper’s report. She was not the only one to be outraged.

But is describing Kamala Harris’s appearance really an old sexist reflex that should be banned? Not if we judge by the avalanche of comments published in the American media on the outfits of the vice president and the other women who paraded on the stage of the United Center last week.

Fashion critics from leading newspapers such as the New York TimesTHE Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times dissected each day what Jill Biden, Michelle Obama, Gretchen Whitmer and Kamala Harris were wearing. The latter appeared before Democratic delegates and dignitaries twice instead of once, on Monday and Thursday, in different outfits that were decoded and commented on.

It was not just about describing the cut, color or brand of the clothes, but also about interpreting the message they sent to the public on a political or cultural level.

Here’s how Rachel Tashjian, fashion critic at Washington Postdescribed the new deal: “This is a time for Americans to abandon an outdated conversation about how we view women. We no longer look at their clothes to see if they can do the job. There are so many other reasons to care about what a person wears. Today, we can look to Harris for a new definition, a new vision of power.”

Hillary Clinton and the 2016 Democratic Convention

It was probably inevitable that the rise of a woman to the top of a presidential ticket would force this new perspective. In 2016, Hillary Clinton showed up at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia wearing a white suit. All observers had noted the link between this color and the suffragette movement that had adopted it at the beginning of the 20th century.e century as a symbol of the struggle for women’s suffrage.

PHOTO RICKY CARIOTI, THE WASHINGTON POST ARCHIVES

Hillary Clinton at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia, 2016

During her speech, Hillary Clinton herself spoke about what her candidacy represented in the fight for women’s equality.

“Tonight, we took an important step forward in our nation’s march toward a more perfect union,” she said as she became the first woman to accept the nomination of a major American party for president.

“I’m happy for grandmothers, granddaughters and everyone in between,” she added.

In her speech at the Democratic convention in Chicago, Kamala Harris refused to hint at the history she might make on November 5 as a black woman. But in the stands at the United Center, hundreds of delegates were dressed in white, the color worn by several women who had preceded the vice president at the microphone during the week, including Ashley Biden, Joe Biden’s daughter, Deb Haaland, Secretary of the Interior, and Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan.

PHOTO SAUL LOEB, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE ARCHIVES

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer at the Democratic convention in Chicago last Thursday

While glossing over the historic nature of her candidacy, Harris also distanced herself as far as possible from the color of the suffragettes. She gave the most important speech of her life wearing a dark navy pantsuit, “the color of the commander in chief,” commented Vanessa Friedman, a critic of the New York Timeswho is interested in fashion “as an expression of political, social and cultural identity at a specific moment,” according to her bio.

Other critics said Harris’ outfit conveyed a message of power, competence, excellence, like the dark navy suit a presidential candidate would wear in similar circumstances.

But didn’t Kamala Harris risk alienating some of her compatriots by wearing a pantsuit designed by a French brand, in this case Chloé? The question matters to some American designers, who rely on major political or cultural figures to promote their labels. But it’s rarely asked—if ever—about Donald Trump, who has a weakness for suits by the Italian brand Brioni, or Barack Obama, who showed up on stage at the United Center last Tuesday night in a custom-made Armani suit.

The Democratic presidential candidate still expressed her patriotism by pinning an American flag to the lapel of her jacket.

“A beige suit!”

Of course, this interest in Kamala Harris’s outfits sometimes veers into the ridiculous. For example, the vice president made a surprise appearance on stage at the United Center during the first night of the Democratic convention, wearing a “beige” pantsuit.

PHOTO MIKE SEGAR, REUTERS ARCHIVES

Kamala Harris at the first night of the Democratic convention in Chicago, last Monday

“A beige suit!” wondered the fashion critic of New York Times. “After all, there are few items of clothing less likely to be worn at the public events of major-party presidential conventions. The usual dress code is red, white, and blue: suits and ties, dresses, culottes. This is patriotism in the most obvious sense.”

One thing is for sure, this choice of color has set the internet ablaze. Was Kamala Harris trying to mock conservative commentators and politicians who were outraged to see Barack Obama one day show up in the White House press room wearing a beige suit?

One might doubt it. Especially since the color of Kamala Harris’ suit was not “beige,” but “coconut brown.”

Question from a reader

“If Vice President Kamala Harris is elected president, will she play the same role that Vice President Pence played in certifying the election results on January 6, 2021? Is there a conflict of interest?” asks reader Thérèse Demers.

Answer

Yes, Kamala Harris, as President of the Senate, will play the same role on January 6, 2025, that Mike Pence played on January 6, 2021. A purely ceremonial role, as Pence explained in vain to Donald Trump. A role that former Vice President Al Gore also played without controversy on January 6, 2001, to confirm his defeat against George W. Bush. In short, if all actors follow the Constitution and the law, there is no possible conflict of interest.


source site-60