In today’s high paced competitive environment dressing sense plays an important role. What people wear and how they look often becomes ground for judgement. Time and people, whether public figures or common folk, are criticized and shamed. In the age of the internet and Twitterati, trolls are in abundance and they are almost unstoppable.
We’re going to utilize this post to talk about 4 events from the last 10 days. These incidents involve the shaming of public figures for their dressing sense and a preemptive measure by a government after a controversy sparked thus. The last incident is, while slightly unrelated, equally important, and shows how rules of dressing apply differently to women. How the clothes of a woman are always in questioned, even when it comes to their pay.
Wearing Jeans to the parliament is “non-sanskari”
When Bengali actresses Mimi Chakraborty and Nusrat Jahan walked into the Parliament for their first day, they expected to face a lot of challenges. They probably understood the weight and responsibility that lay ahead of them. Not only are they amongst the few women, they are also amongst the youngest to be elected. But they were looking forward to working, and they were truly excited. Their Instagram accounts showed their excitement, as they uploaded pictures from outside the parliament with their identification.
And yet, their excitement for the work or the victory margins they achieved, were inconsequent to trolls. They were inconsequent because these two women decided to walk into the parliament in western wear. Dressed in a jeans a top (Mimi) and a peplum suit (Nusrat), they were immediately adjudicated as being unworthy of the parliament. Their dressing sense showed a lack of etiquette according to one twitter response. In another picture the actresses can be seen posing outside the Parliament, which has also received a lot of criticism from the masses.
When I, as a girl in my early twenties, saw their pictures, I was happy to see a departure from the conventional. For years now Parliamentarians have been senior citizens and middle aged people. So to see two young women, who were so excited about the work they would be doing, it was refreshing. I thought that maybe a change truly was coming. Young people were entering the parliament. These young energetic voices would help to make changes in the system that was old-fashioned and dominated by people who are unwilling to listen to the youth. But then, seeing the responses they got, my happiness immediately deflated.
How is it that we live in the 21st century, at a time when women are progressing in every field of life, and yet they are judged for their dressing sense? More importantly, why is it that these two women were questioned, while so many other men were not. In the past, faces like Paresh Rawal and Anurag Thakur have also worn similar clothes to the Parliament. And why just look at the past? Gautam Gambhir also walked into the Parliament on his first day in jeans. These two incidents happened together, and yet, Gambhir was not trolled. Why?
Sarfaraz Ahmed wearing Salwar Kameez, called out for being in “Pyjamas”
The ICC Cricket World Cup fever was kicked off in London last week. It brings with it a sense of competition that sees the citizens of the participating countries turning into live wire. In India and Pakistan especially, the cricket fever is stronger than all sports.
As a part of the welcoming of the cricket teams, the captains of the participating teams were met by Queen Elizabeth and Prince Harry at the Buckingham Palace. There was even a moment of friendly competition between Prince Harry and the Australian Captain Aaron finch. Pictures of the meet and greet were shared across the internet. The captains were all admired for their conduct and smart appearance.
Among them was the Pakistan team captain Sarfaraz Ahmed. While the other captains chose formal pants with blazers and ties, Sarfaraz opted for a traditional Salwaar Kameez. This obtained him a lot of criticism from the trolls. In fact Tarek Fateh, a columnist from Pakistan even said “Captains of #Cricket playing nations competing 4 the #CricketWorldCup had a photoshoot with the Queen. Guess who came dressed in his pyjamas? None other than the #Pakistan captain (back row, left).”
The trolls came after him mercilessly, criticizing him for being informal and for dis-reputing the country. The same columnist, further went ahead to say, ” I’m surprised he didn’t come in his Lungi-Banyan-Topi costume”.
A large number of people came to his defence. Apart from Public figures, even cricket fans defended him, from not just Pakistan, but also India. The positive comments included “Love & Respect”, “We are proud” and “We must respect his values as well as tradition.”
Since dressing sense is such a controversy…
In light of the controversy created by Mimi and Nusrat’s dressing sense at the Parliament, Tamil Nadu seems to have taken preemptive action. In an order issued by the State, the members of the Secretariat have ordered that a specific dress code be followed by all members. Women are expected to dress in salwar kameez, churidar-dupatta or a Saree. Further, these should be in in a “sober colour”. men are expected to be dressed in pants and formal shirts. The idea is to reflect the Tamil and National culture through their attire.
Many people have said that this is just to avoid any further controversy from cropping up. But this can be seen as another example of how further behind we seem to be falling in the 21st century. It is genuinely progress for the sake of progress. What is it worth, really, when we enforce a dress code on individuals who are not just responsible for themselves, but also millions of pother people.
Russian firm’s “femininity marathon campaign”
Another rather controversial to passed recently was one by the Russian firm Tatprof. Under a newly launched “femininity marathon campaign”, the women in the office have been offered a bonus for wearing skirts and applying make up. The bonus offered in worth 100 Roubles. The instructions are that the bonus will be awarded for skirts that are at a length of maximum 5 centimeters below the knees.
Conclusion
In today’s time and age, all of the above mentioned items bring a tone of melancholy with them. I have always been astounded by the ability of people to interfere in the personal lives of another. After all, what clothes a person wears is their personal life. What length their cothes are, is also their personal life. In these above 4 incidents a direct correlation has been drawn between the dressing sense and the person’s abilities.
Can you only be a good statesman if you wear traditional clothes? Why should a person’s integrity or ability be questioned if he chooses traditional clothes over western clothes? What does the pay of an employee have to do with the length of a skirt? Even more so, why is the idea of a “femininity marathon” okay in any kind of situation, whether workplace or otherwise.
My question is, when we rise above these small matters? When will we start giving people the credit they deserve rather than demeaning them for things that don’t matter? I believe it’s time that we let people be who they are and wear what they want. There’s a reason it falls within the scope of “personal life”. The public needs to stop intruding into the personal life.