A female MP has made national news because (please brace yourselves, this may shock you), she had an exposed shoulder in the House of Commons. The row started when someone took a snap of Labour MP Tracey Brabin during a session in the house, wearing an off the shoulder dress.As a result, this morning she had to tweet informing people that she is not, ‘a slag, hungover, a tart, about to breastfeed, a slapper, drunk’ and that she had not ‘just been banged over a wheelie bin.’
Despite the fact that people regularly take naps during these sessions, it’s the woman with a bit of her arm and chest on display who makes headlines.
Isn’t being a female MP just the best?
Plenty of critics have taken the stance that her dress was ‘inappropriate’ for the workplace, and that if she didn’t want to become a news story for having an armpit, she should have dressed differently. But here’s the thing about being a woman. Everything you wear sends a message. Everything you wear tells a story. Your clothes are soaked in semiotics, and therefore there is no such thing as a neutral outfit.
If you dress conservatively, you are telling the world that you view full coverage as ‘appropriate’ for work. If you wear less clothing, you are making a statement about slut-shaming. Oversized clothing is frumpy; tight clothing is slutty. Colours are attention-grabbing, monochrome is drab. Following fashion suggests you are powerful, wearing vintage suggests you are sustainable. Structured, tailored, often uncomfortable outfits mean professionalism. Soft, comfortable outfits mean you are lazy. Every time we leave the house, our clothes start screaming before we can open our mouths.
It’s a double-edged sword because plenty of us enjoy the option to dress up, to express ourselves through our clothing and to send a message about who we are through what we choose to put on in the morning. Fashion is the most accessible kind of art, art that we all partake in. But it would also be nice to have the option to occasionally sit it out – to have a neutral option.
Men in politics do not make headlines because of what they are wearing, because they predominantly wear the same thing. A blue, grey or navy suit. No one assesses how well cut it is, whether it is flattering on their bodies, whether they chose a double breast to make their chest seem bigger or if their trousers are too short. And as such, men have a sort of invisibility cloak. Of course they can partake in fashion, and many do. But for the days when they want their voices to do the talking and their outfits to stay silent, there are suits.
Women’s suits do not do that. When a woman wears a suit she has chosen between a skirt (feminine, perhaps sexually aggressive?) and trousers (frumpy, a ball breaker, masculine?). She has to pick between flat shoes (comfortable but not sexy) and heels (why is she being so frivolous?). A man’s shirt is a practical, serviceable garment. A woman’s shirt walks a difficult line between unflatteringly enormous or gaping and demi-pornographic.
There was a time, many years ago, when our clothing was the only way we were able to express ourselves – the only message we could send to the world. And I dare say women were grateful for that, because telling out your soul with some ribbons and feathers was probably better than nothing. But we no longer require ribbons to signal our feelings and opinions. Our clothes no longer need to talk for us. And yet one look at the messages aimed towards Tracy Brabin and you will see, they still do.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson bringing Jo Cox's memory into a debate is an insult.
READ MORE: Cynthia Nixon discusses her mother's illegal abortion