"I don't worry about things being fashionable," my unbelievably beautiful and glamorous colleague said today when we were discussing her shoes and my shoe story. I believe her. I don't believe in fashion either, which is a good job, because you can't always buy fashionable on ebay or from ethically sourced hippie traders. That's the reason I give for second hand, I'm recycling.
I probably face the same criticism as Natalie Bennett has about her clothing. I have seen her described as "Too hemp", the party campaigners have been instructed to dress in a "mainstream" manner. Could the party end up alienating some of their key voters in an effort to appeal to the general voter? I quite like the idea of voting for a sandal-wearing, dreadlocked, candidate who doesn't believe in deodorant.
In fact, comments on clothing and appearance in general have been quite a feature of this campaign. That could be partly due to the number of women involved in the leaders' debates; suddenly the audience have something else to look at rather than 3 men in grey suits with different colour ties. Remember Karl Stefanovic? The Australian news anchor who wore the same suit for a year to highlight the sexist treatment of his female co-presenter. We don't notice the suits, I haven't seen the Daily Mail trying to induce my husband to "Get the Look" on the high street with this similar grey suit from Next and a slim yellow silk tie from Debenhams; £25.99. But Nicola Sturgeon , according to the Daily Mail again is "Living Proof" that women "become sexier with age, income and office". That's an article is it? A photo comparison comparing a picture of Sturgeon in 2001 and now. I wore a lilac suit to a job interview in 2001. And back then I used to try.
What's slightly messing with my head about all this, and undermining my argument up to a point is that the men in the campaign are being treated in a similar way. "Dead Ringers" tonight (www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007gd85) imagined a sketch with Justine and Sam comparing manicures and hiding from Diane Abbott in a "Real housewives ..." sketch and made the joke that Justine had picture of "Wallace and Gromit" on her wall at university. I ended up googling Ed Milliband and Stephanie Flanders just because it all seemed a bit unlikely, rather like finding a friend on facebook who turns out to have worked with one of your former colleagues allowing you to say "Small world!" in surprised tones when actually I have lived and worked in the same town now for most of my adult life so it's not really that surprising. Last election campaign it was Naughty Nick with his notches on the bedpost and this week even Radio 4 thought it was newsworthy to play a recording from a voter in Cheadle telling Nick Clegg that he was "better looking in real life". Better looking than whom? David Cameron? Well, yeah?
I can't quite figure out if this is equality, or trivia, or something worse. I actually heard a woman on the radio today say that she wasn't going to vote for Labour because she didn't like Ed Milliband as soon as she saw his face, It reminded why I like listening to the radio, I never really know what politicians look like, I thought I'd fancy Andy Burnham more than Tristran Hunt. And if Steven Wolffe wasn't UKIP then who knows? We do judge on appearance whether we like it or not, so perhaps it is a reasonable topic of conversation during this election campaign.
There a two arguments in my life that I remember clearly on this topic. The first was when I was about 16 and I shaved my brother's long hair at the sides - it was acceptable in the early 90s. I had not anticipated my parents' reaction, or at least not the reasons for that reaction. They were worried he would get suspended from school, I knew he wouldn't, he was too invisible, I'd been too good. We could get away with minor infractions, I never once wore uniform correctly. My father was worried about people judging him, and that like it or not, people would see him as a yob. A less yobbish individual than the future vegan that was my brother could not be imagined. I argued, rather well I thought, although I don't remember it reducing my sanction, that that was exactly why people like my brother should have that kind of hairstyle; to alter perceptions.
Ironically, the second argument was almost the reverse of that. A boyfriend of mine had a job interview at the place where I worked. He chose not to wear tie, and wore a jumper over his shirt. I didn't care, I wanted him to marry me in his Converse, but I believed that he was making a statement, something that he wouldn't accept.
This seems to illustrate the fine line that politicians, journalists, commentators and all of us are treading; we want our politicians to look like politicians, and yet we don't like politicians. We want our politicians to be different and yet we don't trust them to do the job when they are. So if the female leaders look different, it's because they are different. If Nicola Sturgeon looks more the part now, then that is because she is, she is now a leader mixing with other leaders and she has to make a decision whether to continue to dress as she likes or to try and fit in. You can always spot Caroline Lucas on tv without the caption as she is wearing a floaty scarf, Theresa May's shoes caught attention once, so now she has to try and make a feature of them. It makes her more colourful and look less like part of a "nasty" party.
We all know we are judged on our appearance and to pretend otherwise is not very genuine. If we choose not to wear make up, shave our legs, let our grey grow, we are accepting the message that that conveys about us. If we expect our politicians to look a certain way before we take them seriously, then we shouldn't be surprised if they start behaving in the same way too.
No comments:
Post a Comment