fashion stereotypes essay

International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research

• Open access
• Published: 22 November 2014

Dress, body and self: research in the social psychology of dress

• Kim Johnson 1 ,
• Sharron J Lennon 2 &
• Nancy Rudd 3  

Fashion and Textiles volume  1 , Article number:  20 ( 2014 ) Cite this article

368k Accesses

57 Citations

55 Altmetric

Metrics details

The purpose of this research was to provide a critical review of key research areas within the social psychology of dress. The review addresses published research in two broad areas: (1) dress as a stimulus and its influence on (a) attributions by others, attributions about self, and on one's behavior and (2) relationships between dress, the body, and the self. We identify theoretical approaches used in conducting research in these areas, provide an abbreviated background of research in these areas highlighting key findings, and identify future research directions and possibilities. The subject matter presented features developing topics within the social psychology of dress and is useful for undergraduate students who want an overview of the content area. It is also useful for graduate students (1) who want to learn about the major scholars in these key areas of inquiry who have moved the field forward, or (2) who are looking for ideas for their own thesis or dissertation research. Finally, information in this paper is useful for professors who research or teach the social psychology of dress.

Introduction

A few social scientists in the 19 th Century studied dress as related to culture, individuals, and social groups, but it was not until the middle of the 20 th Century that home economists began to pursue a scholarly interest in social science aspects of dress (Roach-Higgins 1993 ). Dress is defined as “an assemblage of modifications of the body and/or supplements to the body” (Roach-Higgins & Eicher 1992 , p. 1). Body modifications include cosmetic use, suntanning, piercing, tattooing, dieting, exercising, and cosmetic surgery among others. Body supplements include, but are not limited to, accessories, clothing, hearing aids, and glasses. By the 1950s social science theories from economics, psychology, social psychology, and sociology were being used to study dress and human behavior (Rudd 1991 , p. 24).

A range of topics might be included under the phrase social psychology of dress but we use it to refer to research that attempts to answer questions concerned with how an individual’s dress-related beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, feelings, and behaviors are shaped by others and one’s self. The social psychology of dress is concerned with how an individual’s dress affects the behavior of self as well as the behavior of others toward the self (Johnson & Lennon 2014 ).

Among several topics that could be included in a critical review of research addressing the social psychology of dress, we focused our work on a review of published research in two broad areas: (1) dress as a stimulus and its influence on (a) attributions by others, attributions about self, and on one’s own behavior and (2) relationships between dress, the body, and the self. Our goal was to identify theoretical approaches used in conducting research in these areas, provide an abbreviated background of research in these areas highlighting key findings, and to identify future research directions and possibilities. The content presented features developing topics within the social psychology of dress and is useful for undergraduate students who want an overview of the content area. It is also useful for graduate students (1) who want to learn about the major scholars in these key areas of inquiry who have moved the field forward, or (2) who are looking for ideas for their own thesis or dissertation research. Finally, information in this paper is useful for professors who research or teach the social psychology of dress.

Body supplements as stimulus variables

In studying the social psychology of dress, researchers have often focused on dress as a stimulus variable; for example, the effects of dress on impression formation, attributions, and social perception (see Lennon & Davis 1989 ) or the effects of dress on behaviors (see Johnson et al. 2008 ). The context within which dress is perceived (Damhorst 1984-85 ) as well as characteristics of perceivers of clothed individuals (Burns & Lennon 1993 ) also has a profound effect on what is perceived about others. In the remainder of this section we focus on three research streams that center on dress (i.e., body supplements) as stimuli.

Provocative dress as stimuli

In the 1980s researchers were interested in women’s provocative (revealing, sexy) dress and the extent to which men and women attributed the same meaning to it. For example, both Edmonds and Cahoon ( 1986 ) and Cahoon and Edmonds ( 1987 ) found ratings of women who wore provocative dress were more negative than ratings of women who wore non-provocative dress. No specific theory was identified by these authors as guiding their research. Overall, when wearing provocative dress a model was rated more sexually appealing, more attractive, less faithful in marriage, more likely to engage in sexual teasing, more likely to use sex for personal gain, more likely to be sexually experienced, and more likely to be raped than when wearing conservative dress. Cahoon and Edmonds found that men and women made similar judgments, although men’s were more extreme than women’s. Abbey et al. ( 1987 ) studied whether women’s sexual intent and interest as conveyed by revealing dress was misinterpreted by men. The authors developed two dress conditions: revealing (slit skirt, low cut blouse, high heeled shoes) and non-revealing (skirt without a slit, blouse buttoned to neck, boots). Participants rated the stimulus person on a series of adjective traits. As compared to when wearing the non-revealing clothing, when wearing the revealing clothing the stimulus person was rated significantly more flirtatious, sexy, seductive, promiscuous, sophisticated, assertive, and less sincere and considerate. This research was not guided by theory.

Taking this research another step forward, in the 1990s dress researchers began to investigate how women’s provocative (revealing, sexy) dress was implicated in attributions of responsibility for their own sexual assaults (Lewis & Johnson 1989 ; Workman & Freeburg 1999 ; Workman & Orr 1996 ) and sexual harassment (Johnson & Workman 1992 , 1994 ; Workman & Johnson 1991 ). These researchers tended to use attribution theories (McLeod, 2010 ) to guide their research. Their results showed that provocative, skimpy, see-through, or short items of dress, as well as use of heavy makeup (body modification), were cues used to assign responsibility to women for their sexual assaults and experiences of sexual harassment. For example, Johnson and Workman ( 1992 ) studied likelihood of sexual harassment as a function of women’s provocative dress. A model was photographed wearing a dark suit jacket, above-the-knee skirt, a low-cut blouse, dark hose, and high heels (provocative condition) or wearing a dark suit jacket, below-the-knee skirt, high-cut blouse, neutral hose, and moderate heels (non-provocative condition). As compared to when wearing non-provocative dress, when wearing provocative dress the model was rated as significantly more likely to provoke sexual harassment and to be sexually harassed.

Recently, researchers have resurrected the topic of provocative (revealing, sexy) dress. However, their interest is in determining the extent to which women and girls are depicted in provocative dress in the media (in magazines, in online retail stores) and the potential consequences of those depictions, such as objectification. These researchers have often used objectification theory to guide their research. According to objectification theory (Fredrickson & Roberts 1997 ) women living in sexually saturated cultures are looked at, evaluated, and potentially objectified and treated as objects valued for their use by others. Objectification theory focuses on sexual objectification as a function of objectifying gaze, which is experienced in actual social encounters, media depictions of social encounters, and media depictions that focus on bodies and body parts. The theory explains that objectifying gaze evokes an objectified state of consciousness which influences self-perceptions. This objectified state of consciousness has consequences such as habitual body and appearance monitoring and requires cognitive effort that can result in difficulty with task performance (Szymanski et al. 2011 ). In such an environment, women may perceive their bodies from a third-person perspective, treating themselves as objects to be looked at and evaluated.

Self-objectification occurs when people perceive and describe their bodies as a function of appearance instead of accomplishments (Harrison & Fredrickson 2003 ). Experimental research shows that self-objectification in women can be induced by revealing clothing manipulations such as asking women to try on and evaluate the fit of a swimsuit as compared to a bulky sweater (Fredrickson et al. 1998 ).

To examine changes in sexualizing (provocative) characteristics with which girls are portrayed in the media, researchers have content analyzed girls’ clothing in two magazines (Graff et al. 2013 ). Clothing was coded as having sexualizing characteristics (e.g., tightness, bare midriffs, high-heeled shoes) and childlike characteristics (e.g., frills, childlike print, pigtail hair styles). The researchers found an increase in sexualized aspects of dress in depictions of girls from 1971 through 2011. To determine the extent of sexualization in girls’ clothing, researchers have content analyzed girls’ clothing available on 15 retailer websites (Goodin et al. 2011 ). Every girl’s clothing item on each of the retailer websites was coded for sexualizing aspects; 4% was coded as definitely sexualizing. Ambiguously sexualizing clothing (25%) had both sexualizing and childlike characteristics. Abercrombie Kids’ clothing had a higher percentage of sexualizing characteristics than all the other stores (44% versus 4%). These two studies document that girls are increasingly depicted in sexualizing clothing in U.S. media and that they are offered sexualized clothing by major retailers via their websites.

Since girls are increasingly sexualized, to determine if sexualized dress affects how girls are perceived by others Graff et al. ( 2012 ) designed an experiment wherein they manipulated the sexualizing aspects of the clothing of a 5 th grade girl. There were three clothing conditions: childlike (a grey t-shirt, jeans, and black Mary Jane shoes), ambiguously sexualized (leopard print dress of moderate length), highly sexualized (short dress, leopard print cardigan, purse). In the definitely sexualized condition, undergraduate students rated the girl as less moral, self-respecting, capable, determined, competent, and intelligent than when she was depicted in either the childlike or the ambiguously sexualized conditions. Thus, wearing sexualized clothing can affect how girls are perceived by others, so it is possible that sexualized clothing could lead to self-objectification in girls just as in the case of women (Tiggemann & Andrew 2012 ).

Objectification theory has been useful in identifying probable processes underlying the association between women’s provocative dress and negative inferences. In a study using adult stimuli, Gurung and Chrouser ( 2007 ) presented photos of female Olympic athletes in uniform and in provocative (defined as minimal) dress. College women rated the photos and when provocatively dressed, as compared to the uniform condition, the women were rated as more attractive, more feminine, more sexually experienced, more desirable, but also less capable, less strong, less determined, less intelligent, and as having less self-respect. These results are similar to what had previously been found by researchers in the 1980s (Abbey et al. 1987 ; Cahoon & Edmonds 1987 ; Edmonds & Cahoon 1986 ). This outcome is considered objectifying because the overall impression is negative and sexist. Thus, this line of research does more than demonstrate that provocative dress evokes inferences, it suggests the process by which that occurs: provocative dress leads to objectification of the woman so dressed and it is the objectification that leads to the inferences.

In a more direct assessment of the relationship between provocative dress and objectification of others, Holland and Haslam ( 2013 ) manipulated the dress (provocative or plain clothing) of two models (thin or overweight) who were rated equally attractive in facial attractiveness. Since objectification involves inspecting the body, the authors measured participants’ attention to the models’ bodies. Objectification also involves denying human qualities to the objectified person. Two such qualities are perceived agency (e.g., ability to think and form intentions) and moral agency (e.g., capacity to engage in moral or immoral actions). Several findings are relevant to the research on provocative dress. As compared to models wearing plain clothing, models wearing provocative clothing were attributed less perceived agency (e.g., ability to reason, ability to choose) and less moral agency [e.g., “how intentional do you believe the woman’s behavior is?” (p. 463)]. Results showed that more objectified gaze was directed toward the bodies of the models when they were dressed in provocative clothing as compared to when dressed in plain clothing. This outcome is considered objectifying because the models’ bodies were inspected more when wearing provocative dress, and because in that condition they were perceived as having less of the qualities normally attributed to humans.

In an experimental study guided by objectification theory, Tiggemann and Andrew ( 2012 ) studied the effects of clothing on self-perceptions of state self-objectification, state body shame, state body dissatisfaction, and negative mood. However, unlike studies (e.g., Fredrickson et al. 1998 ) in which participants were asked to try on and evaluate either a bathing suit or a sweater, Tiggemann and Andrew instructed their participants to “imagine what you would be seeing, feeling, and thinking” (p. 648) in scenarios. There were four scenarios: thinking about wearing a bathing suit in public, thinking about wearing a bathing suit in a dressing room, thinking about wearing a sweater in public, and thinking about wearing a sweater in a dressing room. The researchers found main effects for clothing such that as compared to thinking about wearing a sweater, thinking about wearing a bathing suit resulted in higher state self-objectification, higher state body shame, higher state body dissatisfaction, and greater negative mood. The fact that the manipulation only involved thinking about wearing clothing, rather than actually wearing such clothing, demonstrates the power of revealing (provocative, sexy) dress in that we only have to think about wearing it to have it affect our self-perceptions.

Taking extant research into account we encourage researchers to continue to investigate the topic of provocative (sexy, revealing) dress for both men and women to replicate the results for women and to determine if revealing dress for men might evoke the kinds of inferences evoked by women wearing revealing dress. Furthermore, research that delineates the role of objectification in the process by which this association between dress and inferences occurs would be useful. Although it would not be ethical to use the experimental strategy used by previous researchers (Fredrickson et al. 1998 ) with children, it is possible that researchers could devise correlational studies to investigate the extent to which wearing and/or viewing sexualized clothing might lead to self- and other-objectification in girls.

Research on red dress

Researchers who study the social psychology of dress have seldom focused on dress color. However, in the 1980s and 1990s a few researchers investigated color in the context of retail color analysis systems that focused on personal coloring (Abramov 1985 ; Francis & Evans 1987 ; Hilliker & Rogers 1988 ; Radeloff 1991 ). For example, Francis and Evans found that stimulus persons were actually perceived positively when not wearing their recommended personal colors. Hilliker and Rogers surveyed managers of apparel stores about the use of color analysis systems and found some impact on the marketplace, but disagreement among the managers on the value of the systems. Abramov critiqued color analysis for being unclear, ambiguous, and for the inability to substantiate claims. Most of these studies were not guided by a psychological theory of color.

Since the 1990s, researchers have developed a theory of color psychology (Elliot & Maier 2007 ) called color-in-context theory. Like other variables that affect social perception, the theory explains that color also conveys meaning which varies as a function of the context in which the color is perceived. Accordingly, the meanings of colors are learned over time through repeated pairings with a particular experience or message (e.g., red stop light and danger) or with biological tendencies to respond to color in certain contexts. For example, female non-human primates display red on parts of their bodies when nearing ovulation; hence red is associated with lust, fertility, and sexuality (Guéguen and Jacob 2013 ). As a function of these associations between colors and experiences, messages, or biological tendencies, people either display approach responses or avoidance responses but are largely unaware of how color affects them. In this section we review studies that examine the effects of red in relational contexts such as interpersonal attraction. However, there is evidence that red is detrimental in achievement (i.e., academic or hiring) contexts (e.g., Maier et al. 2013 ) and that red signals dominance and affects outcomes in competitive sporting contests (e.g., Feltman and Elliot 2011 ; Hagemann et al. 2008 ).

Recently researchers have used color-in-context theory to study the effects of red dress (shirts, dresses) on impressions related to sexual intent, attractiveness, dominance, and competence. Some of these studies were guided by color-in-context theory. Guéguen ( 2012 ) studied men’s perceptions of women’s sexual intent and attractiveness as a function of shirt color. Male participants viewed a photo of a woman wearing a t-shirt that varied in color. When wearing a red t-shirt as compared to the other colors, the woman was judged to be more attractive and to have greater sexual intent. Pazda et al. ( 2014a , [ b ]) conducted an experiment designed to determine why men perceive women who wear red to be more attractive than those who wear other colors. They argued that red is associated with sexual receptivity due to cultural pairings of red and female sexuality (e.g., red light district, sexy red lingerie). Men participated in an online experiment in which they were exposed to a woman wearing either a red, black, or white dress. When wearing the red dress the woman was rated as more sexually receptive than when wearing either the white or the black dresses. The woman was also rated on attractiveness and by performing a mediation analysis the researchers determined that when wearing the red dress, the ratings of her attractiveness as a function of red were no longer significant; in other words, the reason she was rated as more attractive when wearing the red dress was due to the fact that she was also perceived as more sexually receptive.

Pazda et al. ( 2014a , [ b ]), interested in women’s perceptions of other women as a function of their clothing color, conducted a series of experiments. They reasoned that like men, women would also make the connection between a woman’s red dress and her sexual receptivity and perceive her to be a sexual competitor. In their first experiment they found that women rated the stimulus woman as more sexually receptive when wearing a red dress as compared to when she was wearing a white dress. In a second experiment the woman wearing a red dress was not only rated more sexually receptive, she was also derogated more since ratings of her sexual fidelity were lower when wearing a red dress as compared to a white dress. Finally, in a third experiment the stimulus woman was again rated more sexually receptive; this time when she wore a red shirt as compared to when she wore a green shirt. The authors assessed the likelihood that their respondents would introduce the stimulus person to their boyfriends and the likelihood that they would let their boyfriends spend time with the stimulus person. Participants in the red shirt condition were more likely to keep their boyfriends from interacting with the stimulus person than participants in the green shirt condition. Thus, both men and women indicated women wearing red are sexually receptive.

Also interested in color, Roberts et al. ( 2010 ) were interested in determining whether clothing color affects the wearer of the clothing (e.g., do women act provocatively when wearing red clothing?) or does clothing color affect the perceiver of the person wearing the colored clothing. To answer this question, they devised a complicated series of experiments. In the first study, male and female models (ten of each) were photographed wearing each of six different colors of t-shirts. Undergraduates of the opposite sex rated the photographed models on attractiveness. Both male and female models were rated most attractive when wearing red and black t-shirts. In study two the same photos were used, but the t-shirts were masked by a gray rectangle. Compared to when they wore white t-shirts, male models were judged to be more attractive by both men and women when they wore the red t-shirts, even though the red color was not visible. In the third study the t-shirt colors in the photos were digitally altered, so that images could be compared in which red or white t-shirts were worn with those in which red had been altered to white and white had been altered to red. Male models wearing red were rated more attractive than male models wearing white that had been altered to appear red. Also male models wearing red shirts digitally altered to appear white were rated more attractive than male models actually photographed in white. These effects did not occur for female models. The authors reasoned that if clothing color only affected perceivers, then the results should be the same when a model is photographed in red as well as when the model is photographed in white which is subsequently altered to appear red. Since this did not happen, the authors concluded that clothing color affects both the wearer and the perceiver.

In addition, the effects of red dress on impressions also extend to behaviors. Kayser et al. ( 2010 ) conducted a series of experiments. For experiment one, a female stimulus person was photographed in either a red t-shirt or a green one. Male participants were shown a photo of the woman and given a list of questions from which to choose five to ask her. Because women wearing red are perceived to be more sexually receptive and to have greater sexual intent than when wearing other colors, the researchers expected the men who saw the woman in the red dress to select intimate questions to ask and this is what they found. In a second experiment, the female stimulus person wore either a red or a blue t-shirt. After seeing her picture the male participants were told that they would be interacting with her, where she would be sitting, and that they could place their chairs wherever they wished to sit. The men expecting to interact with the red-shirted woman placed their chairs significantly closer to her chair than when they expected to interact with a blue-shirted woman.

In a field experiment (Guéguen 2012 ), five female confederates wore t-shirts of red or other colors and stood by the side of a road to hitchhike. The t-shirt color did not affect women drivers, but significantly more men stopped to pick up the female confederates when they wore the red t-shirts as compared to all the other colors. In a similar study researchers (Guéguen & Jacob 2013 ) altered the color of a woman’s clothing on an online meeting site so that the woman was shown wearing red or several other colors. The women received significantly more contacts when her clothing had been altered to be red than any of the other t-shirt colors.

Researchers should continue conducting research about the color of dress items using color-in-context theory. One context important to consider in this research stream is the cultural context within which the research is conducted. To begin, other colors in addition to red should be studied for their meanings within and across cultural contexts. Since red is associated with sexual receptivity, red clothing should be investigated in the context of the research on provocative dress. For example, would women wearing red revealing dress be judged more provocative than women wearing the same clothing in different colors? Also researchers interested in girls’ and women’s depictions in the media, could investigate the effects of red dress on perceptions of sexual intent and objectification.

Effects of dress on the behavior of the wearer

Several researchers studying the social psychology of dress have reviewed the research literature (Davis 1984 ; Lennon and Davis 1989 ) and some have analyzed that research (see Damhorst 1990 ; Hutton 1984 ; Johnson et al. 2008 for reviews). In these reviews, Damhorst and Hutton focused on the effect of dress on person perception or impression formation. Johnson et al., however, focused their analysis on behaviors evoked by dress. An emerging line of research focuses on the effects of dress on the behavior of the wearer (Adam and Galinsky 2012 ; Frank and Galinsky 1988 ; Fredrickson et al. 1998 ; Gino et al. 2010 ; Hebl et al. 2004 ; Kouchaki et al. 2014 ; Martins et al. 2007 ).

Fredrickson et al. ( 1998 ), Hebl et al. ( 2004 ), and Martins et al. ( 2007 ) all used objectification theory to guide experiments about women’s and men’s body image experience. They were interested in the extent to which wearing revealing dress could trigger self-objectification. The theory predicts that self-objectification manifests in performance detriments on a task subsequent to a self-objectifying experience. Frederickson et al. had participants complete a shopping task. They entered a dressing room, tried on either a one piece swimsuit or a bulky sweater, and evaluated the fit in a mirror as they would if buying the garment. Then they completed a math performance test. The women who wore a swimsuit performed more poorly on the math test than women wearing a sweater; no such effects were found for men. A few years later Hebl et al. ( 2004 ) used the same procedure to study ethnic differences in self-objectification. Participants were Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, and Asian American undergraduate men and women. Participants completed the same shopping task and math test. Participants who tried on the swimsuits performed worse on the math test than participants who tried on the sweater and these results held for both men and women of all ethnicities.

Martins et al. ( 2007 ) used the same shopping task as Frederickson et al. ( 1998 ) and Hebl et al. ( 2004 ), but employed a different behavioral measure. Their participants were gay and heterosexual men and the garment they tried on was either Speedo men’s briefs or a turtleneck sweater. After the shopping task the men were given the opportunity to sample and evaluate a snack and the amount eaten was measured. Wearing the Speedo affected eating for the gay men, but not the heterosexual men, such that gay men in the Speedo condition ate significantly less of the snack than gay men in the sweater condition. Taken together these studies demonstrate that a nominal clothing manipulation can have effects on the behavior of the wearer.

In one of the first studies to demonstrate the effects of clothing on the wearer, Frank and Gilovich ( 1988 ) noted that the color black is associated with evil and death in many cultures. They studied the extent to which players wearing black uniforms were judged more evil and aggressive than players wearing uniforms of other colors. They analyzed penalties awarded for aggressive behavior in football and ice hockey players. Players who wore black uniforms received more penalties for their aggressive behavior than those who wore other uniform colors. Since the penalty results could be due to biased refereeing, the authors videotaped a staged football game in which the defensive team wore either black or white uniforms. The same events were depicted in each version of the videotape. Participants watched short videos and rated the plays as more aggressive when the team members wore black as compared to white uniforms. In another part of the study, participants were assigned to wear either black or white uniform shirts. While wearing the shirts they were asked the type of games they would like to play; the black-shirted participants selected more aggressive games than the white-shirted participants. The authors interpreted the results of all the studies to mean that players wearing black are aggressive. Yet, when the level of aggressiveness was held constant in the staged football game, referees still perceived black-uniformed players to be more aggressive than white-uniformed players. The authors concluded that the color of the black uniform affects the wearer and the perceiver. This study’s results are similar to those of the researchers studying red dress who found that the color red is associated with a cultural meaning that affects both the wearer and the perceiver of the red dress (Roberts et al. 2010 ).

In a similar way, Adam and Galinsky ( 2012 ) determined that when clothing has symbolic meaning for the wearer, it also affects the wearer’s behavior. The researchers found that a white lab coat was associated with traits related to attentiveness. Then they conducted an experiment in which one group wore a white lab coat described as a painter’s coat and another group wore the same lab coat which was described as a medical doctor’s lab coat. A third group saw, but did not wear, a lab coat described as a medical doctor’s lab coat. Participants then performed an experimental task that required selective attention. The group that wore the coat described as a medical doctor’s lab coat outperformed both of the other two groups.

Gino et al. ( 2010 ) studied the effects of wearing designer sunglasses that were described either as counterfeit or authentic Chloe sunglasses on one’s own behaviors and perceptions of others. Although counterfeits convey status to others, they also mean that the wearers are pretending to be something they are not (i.e., wealthy enough to purchase authentic sunglasses). Participants who thought they were wearing fake sunglasses cheated significantly more on two experimental tasks than those who thought they were wearing authentic sunglasses. In a second experiment, the researchers showed that participants who believed they were wearing counterfeit sunglasses perceived others’ behaviors as more dishonest, less truthful, and more likely to be unethical than those wearing authentic sunglasses. In a third experiment the researchers showed that the effect for wearing counterfeit sunglasses on one’s own behavior was due to the meaning of inauthenticity attributed to the counterfeit sunglasses. Consistent with Adam and Galinsky ( 2012 ) and Frank and Gilovich (1988), in Gino et al. the effect of dress on one’s own behavior was due to the meaning of the dress cue in a context relevant to the meaning of that dress cue. While none of these three studies articulated a specific theory to guide their research, Adams and Galinsky outlined an enclothed cognition framework, which explained that dress affects wearers due to the symbolic meaning of the dress and the physical experience of wearing that dress item.

To summarize the research on the effects of dress on the behavior of the wearer, each of these studies reported research focused on a dress cue associated with cultural meaning. Some of the researchers had to first determine that meaning. The manipulations were designed so that the meaning of the dress cues was salient for the context of the manipulation. For example, in the objectification studies the revealingness of dress was varied in the context of a dressing room mirror where the revealing nature of the cue would be relevant. So to extend the enclothed cognition framework, we suggest that for dress to affect the wearer, the context of the experimental task needs to be such that the meaning of the dress item is salient.

Future researchers may continue to pursue the effects of dress on the wearer. The extended enclothed cognition framework could be applied to school uniforms. A possible research question could be that if school uniforms are associated with powerlessness among schoolchildren, would wearing school uniforms affect the level of effort children expend to solve homework problems or write papers?

It is interesting that previous researchers who examined the effect of school uniforms on various tasks did not ask children what associations uniforms had for them (e.g., Behling 1994 , 1995 ; Behling and Williams 1991 ). This question is clearly an avenue for renewed research in this area. Another situation to which the extended enclothed cognition framework might be investigated is in the context of professional sports. Since wearing a sweatshirt or cap with a professional team’s logo is associated with being a fan of that team, would people wearing those items evaluate that team’s performance higher than people wearing another team’s logos? Would they provide more excuses for their team than fans not wearing the team’s logos? We encourage researchers to continue to investigate the effects of dress on one’s own behaviors utilizing a range of dress cues (e.g., cosmetics, tattoos, and piercings).

Dress and the self

An ongoing area of research within the social psychology of dress is relationships between dress and the self. Although some researchers use the terms identity and self interchangeably, it is our position that they are not the same concepts but are related. We begin our discussion of the self with research on the body.

The physical body and the self

Whereas the first section of our review focused on body supplements (i.e., the clothed body), this section focuses on body modifications or how the body is altered. Within this discussion, the two research directions that we include are (1) body modifications that carry some risk, as opposed to routine modifications that typically do not, and (2) the influence of body talk and social comparison as variables influencing body image.

Body modifications that carry some risk

Societal standards of attractiveness in the Western world often focus on a thin appearance for women and a mesomorphic but muscular appearance for men (Karazia et al. 2013 ). Internalization of societal standards presented through various media outlets is widely recognized as a primary predictor of body dissatisfaction and risky appearance management behaviors including eating pathology among women (Cafri et al. 2005a , [ b ]), muscle enhancement and disordered eating behaviors in men (Tylka 2011 ), tattooing among young adults (Mun et al. 2012 ), and tanning among adolescents (Prior et al. 2014 ; Yoo & Kim, 2014 ). While there are several other risky appearance management behaviors in the early stages of investigation (e.g., extreme body makeovers, cosmetic procedures on male and female private parts, multiple cosmetic procedures), we isolate just a few behaviors to illustrate the impact of changing standards of attractiveness on widespread appearance management practices in the presentation of self.

Experimental research has demonstrated that exposure to social and cultural norms for appearance (via idealized images) leads to greater dissatisfaction with the body in general for both men and women (Blond 2008 ; Grabe et al. 2008 ); yet a meta-analysis of eight research studies conducted in real life settings suggested that these appearance norms were more rigid, narrowly defined, and prevalent for women than for men (Buote et al. 2011 ). These researchers also noted that women reported frequent exposure to social norms of appearance (i.e., considered bombardment by many women), the norms themselves were unrealistic, yet the nature of the messages was that these norms are perfectly attainable with enough time, money, and effort. Men, on the other hand, indicated that they were exposed to flexible social norms of appearance, and therefore report feeling less pressure to attain a particular standard in presenting their appearance to others (Buote et al. 2011 ).

Eating disorders

A recent stream of research related to individuals with eating disorders is concerned with the practice of body checking (i.e., weighing, measuring or otherwise assessing body parts through pinching, sucking in the abdomen, tapping it for flatness). Such checking behaviors may morph into body avoidance (i.e., avoiding looking in mirrors or windows at one’s reflection, avoiding gym locker rooms or situations involving showing the body to others) (White & Warren 2011 ), the manifestation of eating disorders (Haase et al. 2011 ), obsession with one’s weight or body shape, and a critical evaluation of either aspect (Smeets et al. 2011 ). The propensity to engage in body checking appears to be tied to ethnicity as White and Warren found, in their comparison of Caucasian women and women of color (Asian American, African American, and Latin American). They found significant differences in body checking and avoidance behaviors in Caucasian women and Asian American women over African American and Latin American women. Across all the women, White and Warren found positive and significant correlations between body checking and (1) avoidance behaviors and higher body mass index, (2) internalization of a thin ideal appearance, (3) eating disturbances, and (4) other clinical impairments such as debilitating negative thoughts.

Another characteristic of individuals with eating disorders is that they habitually weigh themselves. Self-weighing behaviors and their connection to body modification has been the focus of several researchers. Research teams have documented that self-weighing led to weight loss maintenance (Butryn et al. 2007 ) and prevention of weight gain (Levitsky et al. 2006 ). Other researchers found that self-weighing contributed to risky weight control behaviors such as fasting (Neumark-Sztainer et al. 2006 ) and even to weight gain (Needham et al. 2010 ). Lately, gender differences have also been investigated relative to self-weighing. Klos et al. ( 2012 ) found self-weighing was related to a strong investment in appearance, preoccupation with body shape, and higher weight among women. However, among men self-weighing was related to body satisfaction, investment in health and fitness, and positive evaluation of health.

One interesting departure from weight as a generalized aspect of body concern among women is the examination of wedding-related weight change. Considering the enormous cost of weddings, estimated to average $20,000 in the United States (Wong 2005 ), and the number of wedding magazines, websites, and self-help books on weddings (Villepigue et al. 2005 ), it is not surprising that many brides-to-be want to lose weight for their special occasion. Researchers have shown that an average amount of intended weight loss prior to a wedding is 20 pounds in both the U.S. and Australia with between 12% and 33% of brides-to-be reporting that they had been advised by someone else to lose weight (Prichard & Tiggemann 2009 ). About 50% of brides hoped to achieve weight loss, yet most brides did not actually experience a change in weight (Prichard & Tiggemann, 2014 ); however, when questioned about six months after their weddings, brides indicated that they had gained about four pounds. Those who were told to lose weight by significant others such as friends, family members, or fiancé gained significantly more than those who were not told to do so, suggesting that wedding-related weight change can have repercussions for post wedding body satisfaction and eating behaviors. Regaining weight is typical, given that many people who lose weight regain it with a year or so of losing it.

Drive for muscularity

Researchers have found that body modifications practiced by men are related more to developing muscularity than to striving for a thin body (Cafri et al. 2005a , [ b ]) with particular emphasis placed on developing the upper body areas of chest and biceps (Thompson & Cafri 2007 ). The means to achieve this body modification may include risky behaviors such as excessive exercise and weight training, extreme dieting and dehydration to emphasize musculature, and use of appearance or performance enhancing substances (Hildebrandt et al. 2010 ).

One possible explanation for men’s drive for muscularity may be objectification. While objectification theory was originally proposed to address women’s objectification, it has been extended to men (Hebl et al. 2004 ; Martins et al. 2007 ). These researchers determined that like women, men are objectified in Western and westernized culture and can be induced to self-objectify via revealing clothing manipulations.

Researchers have also examined how men are affected by media imagery that features buff, well-muscled, thin, attractive male bodies as the aesthetic norm. Kolbe and Albanese ( 1996 ) undertook a content analysis of men’s lifestyle magazines and found that most of the advertised male bodies were not “ordinary,” but were strong and hard bodies, or as the authors concluded, objectified and depersonalized. Pope et al. ( 2000 ) found that advertisements for many types of products from cars to underwear utilized male models with body-builder physiques (i.e., exaggerated “6 pack” abdominal muscles, huge chests and shoulders, yet lean); they suggested that men had become focused on muscularity as a cultural symbol of masculinity because they perceived that women were usurping some of their social standing in the workforce. Hellmich ( 2000 ) concurred and suggested that men were overwhelmed with images of half-naked, muscular men and that they too were targets of objectification. Other researchers (e.g., Elliott & Elliott 2005 ; Patterson & England 2000 ) confirmed these findings – that most images in men’s magazines featured mesomorphic, strong, muscular, and hyper-masculine bodies.

How do men respond to such advertising images? Elliott and Elliott ( 2005 ) conducted focus interviews with 40 male college students, ages 18-31, and showed them six different advertisements in lifestyles magazines. They found six distinct types of response, two negative, two neutral, and two positive. Negative responses were (1) homophobic (those who saw the ads as stereotypically homosexual, bordering on pornography), perhaps threatening their own perceived masculinity or (2) gender stereotyping (those who saw the ads as depicting body consciousness or vanity, traits that they considered to be feminine). Neutral responses were (3) legitimizing exploitation as a marketing tool (those who recognized that naked chests or exaggerated body parts were shown and sometimes with no heads, making them less than human, but recognizing that sex sells products), and (4) disassociating oneself from the muscular body ideals shown in the ads (recognizing that the images represented unattainable body types or shapes). Positive responses were (5) admiration of real or attainable “average” male bodies and (6) appreciating some naked advertising images as art, rather than as sexual objects. The researchers concluded that men do see their gender objectified in advertising, resulting in different responses or perceived threats to self.

There is evidence that experiencing these objectified images of the male body is also partially responsible for muscle dysmorphia, a condition in which men become obsessed with achieving muscularity (Leit et al. 2002 ). Understanding contributors to the development of muscle dysmorphia is important as the condition can lead to risky appearance management behaviors such as extreme body-building, eating disorders, and use of anabolic steroids to gain bulk (Bradley et al. 2014 ; Maida & Armstrong 2005 ). In an experiment, Maida and Armstrong exposed 82 undergraduate men to 30 slides of advertisements and then asked them to complete a body image perception test. Men’s body satisfaction was affected by exposure to the images, such that they wanted to be notably more muscular than they were.

Contemporary researchers have found that drive for muscularity is heightened among men when there is a perceived threat to their masculinity such as performance on some task (Steinfeldt et al. 2011 ) or perceiving that they hold some less masculine traits (Blashill, 2011). Conversely, researchers have also suggested that body dissatisfaction and drive for muscularity can be reduced by developing a mindfulness approach to the body characterized by attention to present-moment experiences such as how one might feel during a certain activity like yoga or riding a bicycle (Lavender et al. 2012 ). While the investigation of mindfulness to mitigate negative body image and negative appearance behaviors is relatively new, it is a promising area of investigation.

Tattooing is not necessarily a risky behavior in and of itself, as most tattoo parlors take health precautions with the use of sterile instruments and clean environments. However, research has focused on other risk-taking behaviors that tattooed individuals may engage in, including drinking, smoking, shoplifting, and drug use (Deschesnes et al. 2006 ) as well as and early and risky sexual activity (Koch, Roberts, Armstrong, & Owen, 2007). Tattoos have also been studied as a bodily expression of uniqueness (Mun et al. 2012 ; Tiggemann & Hopkins 2011 ) but not necessarily reflecting a stronger investment in appearance (Tiggemann & Hopkins 2011 ).

Tanning behaviors are strongly associated with skin cancer, just as smoking is associated with lung cancer. In fact, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization has classified ultraviolet radiation from the sun and tanning devices that emit ultraviolet light as group 1 carcinogens, placing ultraviolet radiation in the same category as tobacco use (World Health Organization, 2012 ). Yet, tanning behaviors are prevalent among many young adults and adolescents causing them to be at increased risk of skin cancer, particularly with indoor tanning devices (Boniol et al. 2012 ; Lostritto et al. 2012 ). Studies of motives for tanning among these populations suggest that greater tanning behavior, for both genders, is correlated with high investment in appearance, media influences, and the influence of friends and significant others (Prior et al. 2014 ). Frequent tanning behaviors in adolescent boys have been related to extreme weight control, substance use, and victimization (Blashill 2013 ). Among young adults, Yoo and Kim ( 2014 ) identified three attitudes toward tanning that were related to tanning behaviors. The attitude that tanning was a pleasurable activity influenced indoor and outdoor tanning behaviors. The attitude that a tan enhances physical attractiveness influenced use of tanning beds and sunless tanning products. The attitude that tanning is a healthy behavior influenced outdoor tanning. They advised that tanning behaviors could be studied further particularly in relation to other risky behaviors.

Body talk and the self

A relatively recent line of investigation concerns the impact of talk about the body on perceptions of self. One would think that communication among friends would typically strengthen feelings of self-esteem and psychological well-being (Knickmeyer et al. 2002 ). Yet, certain types of communication, such as complaining about one’s body or appearance, may negatively impact feelings about the self (Tucker et al. 2007 ), particularly in the case of “fat talk” or disparaging comments about body size, weight, and fear of becoming fat (Ousley et al. 2008 ; Warren et al. 2012 ). Such fat talk has become normative behavior among women and, according to one study, occurs in over 90% of women (Salk & Engeln-Maddox 2011 ) and, according to another study, occurs in women of all ages and body sizes (Martz et al. 2009 ) because women feel pressure to be self-critical about their bodies. More women than men reported exposure to fat talk in their circle of friends and acquaintances and greater pressure to engage in it (Salk & Engeln-Maddox). Thus, fat talk extends body dissatisfaction into interpersonal relationships (Arroyo & Harwood 2012 ).

Sladek et al. ( 2014 ) reported a series of studies that elaborated on the investigation of body talk among men, concluding that men’s body talk has two distinct aspects, one related to weight and the other to muscularity. After developing a scale that showed strong test-retest reliability among college men, they found that body talk about muscularity was associated with dissatisfaction with the upper body, strong drive for muscularity, symptoms of muscle dysmorphia, and investment in appearance. Body talk about weight was associated with upper body dissatisfaction, symptoms of muscle dysmorphia, and disordered eating attitudes and behaviors. They suggest future research in body talk conversations among men and boys of all ages, from different cultural backgrounds, and in different contexts.

Negative body talk among men appears to be less straightforward than that among women (Engeln et al. 2013 ). These researchers reported that men’s body talk included both positive elements and negative elements, while that of women tended to focus on the negative, perhaps reflecting an accepting body culture among men in which they can praise one another as well as commiserate with other men on issues regarding muscularity and weight. Yet, both muscle talk and fat talk were found to decrease state appearance self-esteem and to increase state body dissatisfaction among men.

While the fat talk literature clearly establishes the normative occurrence of this type of communication, as well as establishes the negative impact on the self, the literature has not delved into theoretical explanations for its existence. Arroyo ( 2014 ) has posited a relationship between fat talk and three body image theories (self-discrepancy, social comparison, and objectification), and suggested that degree of body dissatisfaction could serve as a mediating mechanism. Self-discrepancy theory suggests that the discrepancy between one’s actual self and one’s ideal self on any variable, such as weight or attractiveness, motivates people to try to achieve that ideal (Jacobi & Cash 1994 ). Social comparison theory (Festinger 1954 ) explains that we compare ourselves to others on some variable of comparison. When we compare ourselves to others who we believe to be better than ourselves (upward comparison) on this variable (say, for example, thinner or more attractive), we may feel worse about ourselves and engage in both non-risky and risky behaviors such as extreme weight control to try to meet those expectations (Ridolfi et al. 2011 ; Rudd & Lennon 1994 ). Objectification theory, as mentioned earlier in this paper, states that bodies are treated as objects to be evaluated and perceived by others (Szymanski et al. 2011 ); self-objectification occurs when individuals look upon themselves as objects to be evaluated by others.

Arroyo ( 2014 ) surveyed 201 college women to see what effect weight discrepancy, upward comparison, and objectified body consciousness had on fat talk; a mediating variable of body dissatisfaction was investigated. She found that how satisfied or dissatisfied the women did indeed impact how they felt about each variable. Each of the three predictor variables was positively associated with body dissatisfaction and higher body dissatisfaction predicted fat talk. She concluded that fat talk is more insidious than other social behaviors; it is a type of communication that perpetuates negative perceptions among women as well as the attitude that women should be dissatisfied with their bodies. Future research suggestions included examining the impact of downward social comparisons (in which the individual assumes they fare better than peers on the variables of comparison, such as weight), and examining all three phenomena of self-discrepancy, social comparison, and objectification together to determine their cumulative impact on self-disparaging talk.

Negative body talk or fat talk is related to perceptions about the self and to appearance-management behaviors in presenting the self to others. In a sample of 203 young adult women, negative body talk was related to body dissatisfaction and poor self-esteem, and was associated with stronger investment in appearance, distorted thoughts about the body, disordered eating behavior, and depression (Rudiger & Winstead 2013 ). Positive body talk was related to fewer cognitive distortions of the body, high body satisfaction, high self-esteem, and friendship quality. Another form of body talk, co-rumination or the mutual sharing between friends of negative thoughts and feelings, is thought to intensify the impact of body talk. In this same study, co-rumination was related to frequent cognitive distortions of the body as well as disordered eating behaviors, but to high perceived friendship quality. Thus, negative body talk achieved no positive outcomes, yet co-rumination achieved negative outcomes for the self, but positive outcomes for quality of friendship. Thus, future research could tease apart the specific components of the social phenomenon of co-rumination in relation to self-perceptions and appearance management behaviors.

Dress and self as distinct from others

Shifting attention from relationships between the body and self, we move to a discussion of relationships between dress and that aspect of the self that is concerned with answering questions about who we are as distinct and unique individuals (e.g., what type of person am I?). Earlier we shared research about how wearing certain article of dress might impact one’s own physical behaviors. We shift now to sharing research addressing the role dress might play in thinking about oneself as a unique and distinct individual (i.e., self-perceptions). Researchers addressing this topic have utilized Bem’s ( 1972 ) self-perception theory. Bem proposed that similar to the processes we use in forming inferences about others, we can form inferences about ourselves. Bem argues that people’s understanding of their own traits was, in some circumstances, an assessment of their own behaviors. This process was proposed to be particularly relevant to individuals who were responsive to self-produced cues (i.e., cues that arise from an individual’s own behavior or characteristics).

In the 1980s, Kellerman and Laird ( 1982 ) utilized self-perception theory to see whether wearing a specific item of dress (e.g., eye glasses) would influence peoples’ ratings of their own skills and abilities. They conducted an experiment with undergraduate students having them rate themselves on an array of traits when wearing and when not wearing glasses and to complete a hidden figures test. Although there were no significant differences in their performance on the test, the participants’ ratings of their competence and intelligence was higher when wearing glasses than when not. In related research, Solomon and Schopler ( 1982 ) found that both men and women indicated that the appropriateness of their clothing affected their mood.

Studying dress specifically within a workplace context, in the 1990s Kwon ( 1994 ) did not have her participants actually wear different clothing styles but asked them to project how they might think about themselves if they were to wear appropriate versus inappropriate clothing to work. Participants indicated they would feel more competent and responsible if they wore appropriate rather than inappropriate clothing. Similarly, Rafaeli et al. ( 1997 ) a found that employees indicated a link between self-perception and clothing associating psychological discomfort with wearing inappropriate dress for work and increased social self-confidence with appropriate attire. Nearly ten years later, Adomaitis and Johnson ( 2005 ) in a study of flight attendants found that the attendants linked wearing casual uniforms for work (e.g., t-shirt, shorts) with negative self-perceptions (e.g., nonauthoritative, embarrassment, unconfident, unprofessional). Likewise, Peluchette and Karl ( 2007 ) investigating the impact of formal versus casual attire in the workplace found that their participants viewed themselves as most authoritative, trustworthy, productive and competent when wearing formal business attire but as friendliest when wearing casual or business casual attire. Continuing this line of research with individuals employed in the public sector, Karl et al. ( 2013 ) reported participants indicated they felt more competent and authoritative when in formal business or business casual attire and least creative and friendly when wearing casual dress.

As workplace dress has become casual, it would be useful for researchers to uncover any distinctions in casualness that make individuals feel more or less competent, respected, or authoritative. Another aspect of clothing that could be investigated is fit as it might impact self-perceptions or use of makeup.

Guy and Banim ( 2000 ) were interested in how clothing was used as means of self-presentation in everyday life. They implemented three strategies to meet their research objective of investigating women’s relationships to their clothing: a personal account, a clothing diary, and a wardrobe interview. The personal account was a written or tape recorded response to the question “what clothing means to me.” The clothing diary was a daily log kept for two weeks. The wardrobe interview was centered on participants’ current collection of clothing. Participants were undergraduates and professional women representing several age cohorts. The researchers identified three distinct perspectives of self relative to the women’s clothing. The first was labeled “the woman I want to be”. This category of responses revealed that the women used clothing to formulate positive self-projections. Favorite items of clothing in particular were identified as useful in bridging the gap between “self as you would like it to be” and the image actually achieved with the clothing. The second category of responses was labeled “the woman I fear I could be”. This category of responses reflected experiences where clothing had failed to achieve a desired look or resulted in a negative self-presentation. Concern here was choosing to wear clothing with unintentional effects such as highlighting parts of the body that were unflattering or concern about losing the ability to know how to dress to convey a positive image. The last category, “the woman I am most of the time” contained comments indicating the women had a “relationship with clothes was ongoing and dynamic and that a major source of enjoyment for them was to use clothes to realize different aspects of themselves” (p. 321).

Interested in how the self shaped clothing consumption and use, Ogle et al. ( 2013 ) utilized Guy and Banim’s ( 2000 ) views of self to explore how consumption of maternity dress might shape the self during a liminal life stage (i.e., pregnancy). Interviews with women expecting their first child revealed concerns that available maternity dress limited their ability to express their true selves. Some expressed concern that the maternity clothing that was available to them in the marketplace symbolized someone that they did not want to associate with (i.e., the woman I fear I could be). Several women noted they borrowed or purchased used clothing from a variety of sources for this time in their life. This decision resulted in dissatisfaction because the items were not reflective of their selves and if worn resulted in their projecting a self that they also did not want to be. In addition, the women shared that they used dress to confirm their selves as pregnant and as NOT overweight. While some of the participants did experience a disrupted sense of self during pregnancy, others shared that they were able to locate items of dress that symbolized a self-consistent with “the woman I am most of the time”.

Continuing in this line of research, researchers may want to explore these three aspects of self with others who struggle with self-presentation via dress as a result of a lack of fashionable and trendy clothing in the marketplace. Plus-sized women frequently report that they are ignored by the fashion industry and existing offerings fail to meet their need to be fashionable. A recent article in the Huffington Post (“Plus-sized clothing”, 2013 ) noted that retailers do not typically carry plus sizes perhaps due to the misconception that plus-sized women are not trendy shoppers or the idea that these sizes will not sell well. Thus, it may well be that the relationship between dress and self for plus-sized women is frustrating as they are prevented from being able to make clothing choices indicative of their selves “as they would like them to be”.

Priming and self-perception

While several researchers have confirmed that clothing worn impacts thoughts about the self, Hannover and Kühnen ( 2002 ) were interested in uncovering processes that would explain why clothing could have this effect. They began with examining what role priming might have in explaining how clothing impacts self-perceptions. Using findings from social cognition, they argued that clothing styles might prime specific mental categories about one’s self such that those categories that are most easily accessed in a given situation would be more likely to be applied to oneself than categories of information that are difficult to access. Thus, if clothing can be used to prime specific self-knowledge it should impact self-descriptions such that, a person wearing “casual” clothing (e.g., jeans, sweatshirt) should be more apt to describe him or herself using casual terms (e.g., laid-back, uses slang). The researchers had each participant stand in front of a mirror and indicate whether or not specific traits were descriptive of him or herself when wearing either casual or formal clothing (e.g., business attire). The researchers found that when a participant wore casual clothing he or she rated the casual traits as more valid self-descriptions than the formal traits. The reverse was also true. They concluded that the clothing worn primed specific categories of self-knowledge. However, the researchers did not ask participants to what extent they intentionally considered their own clothing when determining whether or not a trait should be applied to them. Yet, as previously noted, Adam and Galinsky ( 2012 ) demonstrated that clothing impacted a specific behavior (attention) only in circumstances where the clothing was worn and the clothing’s meaning was clear. Thus, researchers could test if clothing serves as an unrecognized priming source and if its impact on impression formation is less intentional than typically assumed.

Dress and self in interaction with others

Another area of research within dress and the self involves experience with others and the establishment of meaning. Questions that these researchers are interested in answering include what is the meaning of an item of dress or a way of appearing? Early researchers working in this area have utilized symbolic interactionism as a framework for their research (Blumer 1969 ; Mead 1934 ; Stone 1962 ). The foundational question of symbolic interaction is: “What common set of symbols and understandings has emerged to give meaning to people’s interactions?” (Patton 2002 , p. 112).

There are three basic premises central to symbolic interactionism (Blumer 1969 ). The first premise is that our behavior toward things (e.g., physical objects, other people) is shaped by the meaning that those things have for us. Applied to dress and appearance, this premise means that our behavior relative to another person is influenced by that person’s dress (Kaiser 1997 ) and the meaning that we assign to that dress. The second premise of symbolic interaction is that the meaning of things is derived from social interaction with others (Blumer). This premise indicates that meanings are not inherent in objects, must be shared between individuals, and that meanings are learned. The third premise is that meanings are modified by a continuous interpretative process in which the actor interacts with himself (Blumer). As applied to clothing, this premise suggests that the wearer of an outfit or item of clothing is active in determining the meaning of an item along with the viewer of that item.

Symbolic interactionism posits that the self is a social construction established, maintained, and altered through interpersonal communication with others. While initial work focused on investigating verbal communication as key to the construction of the self, Stone extended communication to include appearance and maintained that “appearance is at least as important in establishment and maintenance of the self” as verbal communication (1962, p. 87).

Stone ( 1962 ) discussed a process of establishing the self in interaction with others. This process included selecting items of dress to communicate a desired aspect of self (i.e., identity) as well as to convey that desired aspect to others. One stage in this process is an individual’s review of his/her own appearance. This evaluation and response to one’s own appearance is called program. One might experience a program by looking in the mirror to assess whether the intended identity expressed through dress is the one that is actually achieved. After this evaluation of one’s appearance, the next stage involves others reacting to an individual’s appearance. This is called a review. Stone contends that when “programs and reviews coincide, the self of the one who appears is validated or established” (p. 92). However, when programs and reviews do not coincide, the announced identity is challenged and “conduct may be expected to move in the direction of some redefinition of the challenged self” (p. 92).

Researchers using this approach in their investigations of dress have used Stone’s ( 1962 ) ideas and applied the concept of review to the experiences of sorority women. Hunt and Miller ( 1997 ) interviewed sorority members about their experiences with using dress to communicate their membership and how members, via their reviews, shaped their sorority appearances. Members reported using several techniques in the review of the appearance of other members as well as in response to their own appearance (i.e., programs). Thus, the researcher’s results supported Stone’s ideas concerning establishment of an identity (as an aspect of self) as a process of program and review.

In an investigation of the meaning of dress, in this instance the meaning of a specific body modification—a tattoo, Mun et al. ( 2012 ) interviewed women of various ages who had tattoos to assess meanings, changes in self-perceptions as a result of the tattoo, and any changes in the women’s behavior as an outcome of being tattooed. To guide their inquiry, the researchers used Goffman’s ( 1959 ) discussion of the concept of self-presentation from his seminal work The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . According to Goffman, on a regular basis people make inferences about the motivations that underlie other people’s behaviors. To make these inferences they use everyday details. Because most people make these inferences, Goffman believed that individuals could purposely control the content of those inferences by controlling their behavior. Included in this behavior was an individual’s dress. These researchers found support for Goffman’s reasoning. Participants shared that their tattoo(s) had meaning and were expressive of their selves, their personal values and interests, important life events (e.g., marriage), and religious/sacred beliefs. The meaning of a tattoo was also dynamic for several participants rather than static. Participants’ self-perceptions were impacted as a result of being tattooed with several participants sharing increases to their confidence and to their perceived empowerment. Individuals who shared a change in behavior primarily noted that they controlled the visibility of their tattoos to others as a method to control how others might respond to them having a tattoo especially within the workplace.

Since an array of body modifications (e.g., piercings, gauging, scarification) are being adopted cross-culturally, investigations of people’s experiences with any of these modifications is fertile area for future researchers interested in the meaning(s) of dress and how dress impacts the self through interaction with others. Researchers may want to investigate men’s experiences with piercing/gauging as well as women’s experiences with body building and other developing forms of body modification. Extreme forms of body piercings (e.g., piercings that simulate corset lacings) and underlying motivations for these body modifications would add to our understanding of relationships between dress and self. The meanings of facial hair to men or body hair removal (partial, total) for both men and women are additional aspects of dress that could be investigated.

Dress and self as influence on consumption

In the aforementioned research by Ogle et al. ( 2013 ), the researchers found that a primary reason their participants were disappointed by the maternity clothing offered through the marketplace was due to a lack of fit between their selves and the clothing styles made available. Thus, it is clear that ideas about the self impact clothing selection and purchase. Sirgy ( 1982 ) proposed self-image product-image congruity theory to describe the process of how people applied ideas concerning the self to their purchasing. The basic assumption of the theory is that through marketing and branding, products gain associated images. The premise of the theory is that products people are motivated to purchase are products with images that are congruent with or symbolic of how they see themselves (i.e., actual self-image) or with how they would like to be (i.e., ideal self-image). They also will avoid those products that symbolize images that are inconsistent with either of these self-images.

Rhee and Johnson ( 2012 ) found support for the self-image product-image congruity relationship with male and female adolescents. These researchers investigated the adolescents’ purchase and use of clothing brands. Participants indicated their favorite apparel brand was most similar to their actual self (i.e., this brand reflects who I am), followed by their social self (i.e., this brand reflects who I want others to think I am), and their desired self (i.e., this brand reflects who I want to be).

Earlier, Banister and Hogg ( 2004 ) conducted research investigating the idea that consumers will actively reject or avoid products with negative symbolic meanings. The researchers conducted group interviews with adult consumers. Their participants acknowledged that clothing items could symbolize more than one meaning depending on who was interpreting the meaning. They also acknowledged that the consumers they interviewed appeared to be more concerned with avoiding consumption of products with negative symbolic images than with consuming products with the goal of achieving a positive image. One participant noted that while attempts to achieve a positive image via clothing consumption may be sub-conscious, the desire to avoid a negative image when shopping was conscious.

Closing remarks

It is clear from our review that interest in the topic of the social psychology of dress is on-going and provides a fruitful area of research that addresses both basic and applied research questions. Although we provided an overview of several key research areas within the topic of the social psychology of dress we were unable to include all of the interesting topics being investigated. There are other important areas of research including relationships between dress and specific social and cultural identities, answering questions about how dress functions within social groups, how we learn to attach meanings to dress, and changing attitudes concerning dress among others. Regardless, we hope that this review inspires both colleagues and students to continue to investigate and document the important influence dress exerts in everyday life.

a These researchers used role theory to frame their investigation.

Abbey A, Cozzarelli C, McLaughlin K, Harnish RJ: The effects of clothing and dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: do women and men evaluate these cues differently?. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1987, 17 (2): 108-126.

Google Scholar  

Abramov I: An analysis of personal color analysis. The psychology of fashion: From conception to consumption. Edited by: Solomon M. 1985, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 211-223.

Adam H, Galinsky AD: Enclothed cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2012, 48 (4): 918-925.

Adomaitis A, Johnson KKP: Casual versus formal uniforms: flight attendants' self-perceptions and perceived appraisals by others. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 2005, 23 (2): 88-101.

Arroyo A: Connecting theory to fat talk: body dissatisfaction mediates the relationships between weight discrepancy, upward comparison, body surveillance, and fat talk. Body Image. 2014, 11 (3): 303-306.

Arroyo A, Harwood J: Exploring the causes and consequences of engaging in fat talk. Journal of Applied Communication Research. 2012, 40 (2): 167-187.

Banister E, Hogg M: Negative symbolic consumption and consumers’ drive for self‐esteem: the case of the fashion industry. European Journal of Marketing. 2004, 38 (7): 850-868.

Behling D, Williams EA: Influence of dress on perception of intelligence and expectations of scholastic achievement. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1991, 9 (4): 1-7.

Behling D: School uniforms and person perception. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1994, 79 (2): 723-729.

Behling D: Influence of dress on perception of intelligence and scholastic achievement in urban schools with minority populations. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1995, 13 (1): 11-16.

Bem D: Self-perception theory. Advances in experimental social psychology. Edited by: Berkowitz L. 1972, Academic, New York, NY, 1-62.

Blashill A: Psychosocial correlates of frequent indoor tanning among adolescent boys. Body Image. 2013, 10 (2): 259-262.

Blond A: Impact of exposure to images of ideal bodies on male body dissatisfaction. Body Image. 2008, 5 (3): 244-250.

Blumer H: Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. 1969, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Boniol M, Autier P, Boyle P, Gandini S: Cutaneous melanoma attributable to sunbed use: systematic review and meta-analysis. British Medical Journal. 2012, 345: 1-12.

Bradley L, Rudd NA, Reilly A, Freson T: A review of men’s body image literature: what we know, and need to know. International Journal of Costume and Fashion. 2014, 14 (1): 29-45.

Buote V, Wilson A, Strahan E, Gazzola S, Papps F: Setting the bar: divergent sociocultural norms for women’s and men’s ideal appearance in real-world contexts. Body Image. 2011, 8 (4): 322-334.

Burns LD, Lennon SJ: The effect of clothing on the use of person information categories in first impressions. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1993, 12 (1): 9-15.

Butryn ML, Phelan S, Hill JO, Wing RR: Consistent self-monitoring of weight: a key component of successful weight loss maintenance. Obesity. 2007, 15 (12): 3091-3096.

Cafri G, Thompson JK, Ricciardelli L, McCabe M, Smolak L, Yesalis C: Pursuit of the muscular ideal: physical and psychological consequences and putative risk factors. Clinical Psychology Review. 2005, 25 (2): 215-139.

Cafri G, Yamamiya Y, Brannick M, Thompson JK: The influence of sociocultural factors on body image: a meta-analytic review. Clinical psychology: Science and practice. 2005, 12 (4): 421-433.

Cahoon DD, Edmonds EM: Estimates of opposite-sex first impressions related to females’ clothing style. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1987, 65 (2): 406-406.

Damhorst ML: Meanings of clothing cues in social context. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1984-85, 3 (2): 39-48.

Damhorst ML: In search of a common thread: classification of information communicated through dress. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1990, 8 (2): 1-12.

Davis LL: Clothing and human behavior: a review. Home Economics Research Journal. 1984, 12: 325-339.

Deschesnes M, Fines P, Demers S: Are tattooing and body piercing indicators of risk-taking behaviors among high school students?. Journal of Adolescence. 2006, 29 (3): 379-393.

Edmonds EM, Cahoon DD: Attitudes concerning crimes related to clothing worn by female victims. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 1986, 24 (6): 444-446.

Elliot AJ, Maier MA: Color and psychological functioning. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2007, 16 (5): 250-254.

Elliott R, Elliott C: Idealized images of the male body in advertising: a reader-response exploration. Journal of Marketing Communications. 2005, 11 (2): 3-19.

Engeln R, Sladek M, Waldron H: Body talk among college men: content, correlates, and effects. Body Image. 2013, 10 (3): 300-308.

Feltman R, Elliot AJ: The influence of red on perceptions of relative dominance and threat in a competitive context. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 2011, 33 (2): 308-314.

Festinger L: A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations. 1954, 7 (2): 117-140.

Francis SK, Evans PK: Effects of hue, value, and style of garment and personal coloring of model on person perception. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1987, 64: 383-390.

Frank MG, Gilovich T: The dark side of self and social perception: black uniforms and aggression in professional sports. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988, 54 (1): 74-85.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Fredrickson BL, Roberts TA: Objectification theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 1997, 21 (2): 173-206.

Fredrickson BL, Roberts TA, Noll SM, Quinn DM, Twenge JM: That swimsuit becomes you: sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1998, 75 (1): 269-

Gino F, Norton MI, Ariely D: The counterfeit self: the deceptive costs of faking it. Psychological Science. 2010, 21 (5): 712-720.

Goffman E: The presentation of self in everyday life. 1959, Doubleday, New York, NY

Goodin SM, Van Denburg A, Murnen SK, Smolak L: “Putting on” sexiness: a content analysis of the presence of sexualizing characteristics in girls’ clothing. Sex Roles. 2011, 65 (1–2): 1-12.

Grabe S, Ward LM, Hyde JS: The role of the media in body image concerns among women: a meta-analysis of experimental and correlational studies. Psychological Bulletin. 2008, 134 (3): 460-476.

Graff KA, Murnen SK, Krause AK: Low-cut shirts and high-heeled shoes: increased sexualization across time in magazine depictions of girls. Sex Roles. 2013, 69 (11–12): 571-582.

Graff K, Murnen SK, Smolak L: Too sexualized to be taken seriously? Perceptions of a girl in childlike vs. sexualizing clothing. Sex Roles. 2012, 66 (11–12): 764-775.

Guéguen N: Color and women attractiveness: when red clothed women are perceived to have more intense sexual intent. The Journal of Social Psychology. 2012, 152 (3): 261-265.

Guéguen N, Jacob C: Color and cyber‐attractiveness: red enhances men's attraction to women's internet personal ads. Color Research & Application. 2013, 38 (4): 309-312.

Gurung RA, Chrouser CJ: Predicting objectification: do provocative clothing and observer characteristics matter?. Sex Roles. 2007, 57 (1–2): 91-99.

Guy A, Banim M: Personal collections: women’s clothing use and identity. Journal of Gender Studies. 2000, 9 (3): 313-327.

Haase AM, Mountford V, Waller G: Associations between body checking and disordered eating behaviors in nonclinical women. International Journal of Eating Disorders. 2011, 44 (5): 465-468.

Hagemann N, Strauss B, Leißing J: When the referee sees red…. Psychological Science. 2008, 19 (8): 769-771.

Hannover B, Kühnen U: “The clothing makes the self” via knowledge activation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2002, 32 (12): 2513-2525.

Harrison K, Fredrickson BL: Women's sports media, self‐objectification, and mental health in black and white adolescent females. Journal of Communication. 2003, 53 (2): 216-232.

Hebl MR, King EB, Lin J: The swimsuit becomes us all: ethnicity, gender, and vulnerability to self-objectification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2004, 30 (10): 1322-1331.

Hellmich, N. (2000). Body fixation may be missing on health. USA Today, ᅟ , 6d. 19 September.

Hildebrandt T, Alfano L, Langenbucher JW: Body image disturbance in 1000 male appearance and performance enhancing drug users. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2010, 44 (13): 841-846.

Hilliker JAS, Rogers JC: Color analysis in the marketplace. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1988, 6 (3): 26-31.

Holland E, Haslam N: Worth the weight: the objectification of overweight versus thin targets. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2013, 37 (4): 462-468.

Hunt S, Miller K: The discourse of dress and appearance: identity talk and a rhetoric of review. Symbolic Interaction. 1997, 20 (1): 69-82.

Hutton SS: State of the art: clothing as a form of human behavior. Home Economics Research Journal. 1984, 12 (3): 340-353.

Jacobi L, Cash TF: In pursuit of the perfect appearance: discrepancies among self- ideal percepts of multiple physical attributes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1994, 24 (5): 379-396.

Johnson KKP, Lennon SJ: The social psychology of dress. Encyclopedia of world dress and fashion (online). Edited by: Eicher JB. 2014, New York, NY, Berg

Johnson KKP, Workman JE: Clothing and attributions concerning sexual harassment. Home Economics Research Journal. 1992, 21 (2): 160-172.

Johnson KKP, Workman JE: Blaming the victim: attributions concerning sexual harassment based on clothing, just-world belief, and sex of subject. Home Economics Research Journal. 1994, 22 (4): 382-400.

Johnson KKP, Yoo J-J, Kim M, Lennon SJ: Dress and human behavior: a review and critique of published research. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 2008, 26 (3): 3-22.

Kaiser SB: The social psychology of clothing: Symbolic appearances in context. 1997, Fairchild, New York, NY

Karazia B, van Dulmen M, Wong K, Crowther J: Thinking meta-theoretically about the role of internalization in the development of body dissatisfaction and body change behaviors. Body Image. 2013, 10 (4): 433-441.

Karl K, Hall L, Peluchette J: City employee perceptions of the impact of dress and appearance: you are what you wear. Public Personnel Management. 2013, 42 (3): 452-470.

Kayser DN, Elliot AJ, Feltman R: Red and romantic behavior in men viewing women. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2010, 40 (6): 901-908.

Kellerman J, Laird J: The effect of appearance on self-perceptions. Journal of Personality. 1982, 50 (3): 296-315.

Klos L, Esser V, Kessler M: To weigh or not to weigh: the relationship between self-weighing behavior and body image among adults. Body Image. 2012, 9 (4): 551-554.

Koch JR, Roberts AE, Armstrong ML, Owen DC: Frequencies and relations of body piercing and sexual experience in college students. Psychological Reports. 2007, 101 (1): 159-162.

Kouchaki M, Gino F, Jami A: The burden of guilt: Heavy backbacks, light snacks, and enhanced morality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2014, 143 (1): 414-424.

Knickmeyer K, Sexton K, Nishimura N: The impact of same-sex friendships on the well-being of women: a review of the literature. Women & Therapy. 2002, 25 (1): 37-59.

Kolbe RH, Albanese PJ: Man to man: a content analysis of sole male images in male audience magazines. Journal of Advertising. 1996, 24 (4): 1-20.

Kwon Y: The influence of appropriateness of dress and gender on the self-perception of occupational attributes. Clothing and Textile Research Journal. 1994, 12 (3): 33-39.

Lavender J, Gratz K, Anderson D: Mindfulness, body image, and drive for muscularity in men. Body Image. 2012, 9 (2): 289-292.

Leit R, Gray J, Pope H: The media’s representation of the ideal male body: a cause for muscle dysmorphia?. International Journal of Eating Disorders. 2002, 31 (3): 334-338.

Lennon SJ, Davis LL: Clothing and human behavior from a social cognitive framework Part I: theoretical perspectives. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1989, 7 (4): 41-48.

Levitsky DA, Garay J, Nussbaum M, Neighbors L, DellaValle DM: Monitoring weight daily blocks the freshman weight gain: a model for combating the epidemic of obesity. International Journal of Obesity. 2006, 30 (6): 1003-1010.

Lewis L, Johnson KKP: Effect of dress, cosmetics, sex of subject, and causal inference on attribution of victim responsibility. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1989, 8 (1): 22-27.

Lostritto K, Ferrucci LM, Carmel B, Leffell DJ, Molinaro AM, Bale AE, Mayne ST: Lifetime history of indoor tanning in young people: a retrospective assessment of initiation, persistence, and correlates. BMC Public Health. 2012, 12: 1-9.

Maida D, Armstrong S: The classification of muscle dysmorphia. International Journal of Men’s Health. 2005, 4 (1): 73-91.

Maier MA, Elliot AJ, Lee B, Lichtenfeld S, Barchfeld P, Pekrun R: The influence of red on impression formation in a job application context. Motivation and Emotion. 2013, 37 (3): 389-401.

Martins Y, Tiggemann M, Kirkbride A: Those Speedos become them: the role of self-objectification in gay and heterosexual men's body image. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2007, 33 (5): 634-647.

Martz D, Petroff A, Curtin L, Bassini D: Gender differences in fat talk among American adults: results from the psychology of size survey. Sex Roles. 2009, 61 (1–2): 34-41.

McLeod, SA. (2010). Attribution Theory. Retrieved from ., [ http://www.simplypsychology.org/attribution-theory.html ]

Mead GH: Mind, self and society. 1934, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

Mun J, Janigo K, Johnson KKP: Tattoo and self. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 2012, 30 (2): 134-148.

Needham BL, Epel ES, Adler NE, Kiefe C: Trajectories of change in obesity and symptoms of depression: the CARDIA study. American Journal of Public Health. 2010, 100 (6): 1040-1046.

Neumark-Sztainer D, van den Berg P, Hannan PJ, Story M: Self-weighing in adolescents: helpful or harmful? Longitudinal associations with body weight changes and disordered eating. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2006, 39 (6): 811-818.

Ogle J, Tyner K, Schofield-Tomschin S: The role of maternity dress consumption in shaping the self and identity during the liminal transition of pregnancy. Journal of Consumer Culture. 2013, 13 (2): 119-139.

Ousley L, Cordero E, White S: Fat talk among college students: how undergraduates communicate regarding food and body weight, shape and appearance. Eating Disorders. 2008, 16 (1): 73-84.

Patterson M, England G: Body work: Depicting the male body in men’s lifestyle magazines. Proceedings of The Academy of Marketing Annual Conference. 2000, University of Derby, England, Cd-Rom

Patton MQ: Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 3

Pazda AD, Elliot AJ, Greitemeyer T: Perceived sexual receptivity and fashionableness: separate paths linking red and black to perceived attractiveness. Color Research & Application. 2014, 39 (2): 208-212.

Pazda AD, Prokop P, Elliot AJ: Red and romantic rivalry: viewing another woman in red increases perceptions of sexual receptivity, derogation, and intentions to mate-guard. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2014, 40 (10): 1260-1269.

Peluchette J, Karl K: The impact of workplace attire on employee self-perceptions. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2007, 18 (3): 345-360.

Plus-sized clothing sold online but not in stores poses problem for shoppers. (2013). Retrieved from ., [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/plus-size-clothing-online_n_3479724.html ]

Pope HG, Phillips K, Olivardia R: The Adonis complex. 2000, Free Press, New York

Prichard I, Tiggemann M: Unveiled: pre-wedding weight concerns and health and beauty plans of Australian brides. Journal of Health Psychology. 2009, 14 (7): 1027-1035.

Prichard IJ, Tiggemann M: Wedding-related weight change: The ups and downs of love. Body Image. 2014, 11 (2): 179-182.

Prior S, Fenwick K, Peterson J: Adolescents’ reasons for tanning and appearance motives: a preliminary study. Body Image. 2014, 11 (1): 93-96.

Radeloff DJ: Psychological types, color attributes, and color preferences of clothing, textiles, and design students. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1991, 9 (3): 59-67.

Rafaeli A, Dutton J, Harquial C, Mackie-Lewis S: Navigating by attire: the use of dress by administrative employees. Academy of Management Journal. 1997, 40: 19-45.

Ridolfi D, Myers T, Crowther J, Ciesla J: Do appearance focused cognitive distortions moderate the relationship between social comparisons to peers and media images and body image disturbance?. Sex Roles. 2011, 65 (7–8): 491-505.

Rhee J, Johnson KKP: Investigating relationships between adolescents’ liking for an apparel brand and brand-self congruency. Young Consumers. 2012, 13 (1): 74-85.

Roach-Higgins ME: A social science of dress, 1947-1966: A personal view. Social science aspects of dress: New directions. Edited by: Lennon SJ, Burns LD. 1993, ITAA, Monument, CO, 2-24.

Roach-Higgins ME, Eicher JB: Dress and identity. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1992, 10 (4): 1-8.

Roberts SC, Owen RC, Havlicek J: Distinguishing between perceiver and wearer effects in clothing color-associated attributions. Evolutionary Psychology: An International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to Psychology and Behavior. 2010, 8 (3): 350-364.

Rudd NA: Textiles and clothing in higher education: Strengthening linkages and conceptual identity. Critical linkages in textiles and clothing subject matter: Theory, method, and practice. Edited by: Kaiser SB, Damhorst ML. 1991, International Textile and Apparel Association, Monument, CO, 24-32.

Rudd NA, Lennon SJ: Aesthetics of the body and social identity theory. Aesthetics of textiles and clothing: Advancing multi-disciplinary perspectives. Edited by: DeLong M, Fiore AM. 1994, International Textiles and Apparel Association, Monument, CO, 163-175.

Rudiger J, Winstead B: Body talk and body-related co-rumination: associations with body image, eating attitudes, and psychological adjustment. Body Image. 2013, 10 (4): 462-471.

Salk RH, Engeln-Maddox R: “If you’re fat, then I’m humongous!” Frequency, content, and impact of fat talk among college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2011, 35 (1): 18-28.

Sirgy MJ: Self-concept in consumer behavior: a critical review. Journal of Consumer Research. 1982, 9 (3): 287-300.

Sladek M, Engeln R, Miller S: Development and validation of the Male Body Talk Scale: a psychometric investigation. Body Image. 2014, 11 (3): 233-244.

Smeets E, Tiggemann M, Kemps E: Body checking induces an attentional bias for body-related cues. International Journal of Eating Disorders. 2011, 44 (1): 50-57.

Solomon M, Schopler J: Self-consciousness and clothing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1982, 8: 508-514.

Steinfeldt JA, Gilchrist GA, Halterman AW, Gomory A, Steinfeldt MC: Drive for muscularity and conformity to masculine norms among college football players. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 2011, 12 (4): 324-338.

Stone GP: Appearance and the self. Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach. Edited by: Rose AM. 1962, Houghton Mifflin, New York, 86-118.

Szymanski DM, Moffit LB, Carr ER: Sexual objectification of women: advances to theory and research. The Counseling Psychologist. 2011, 39 (1): 6-38.

The muscular ideal: Psychological, social, and medical perspectives. 2007, American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.

Tiggemann M, Andrew R: Clothes make a difference: the role of self-objectification. Sex Roles. 2012, 66 (9–10): 646-654.

Tiggemann M, Hopkins L: Tattoos and piercings: bodily expressions of uniqueness?. Body Image. 2011, 8 (3): 245-250.

Tucker K, Martz D, Curtin L, Bazzini D: Examining “fat talk”, experimentally in a female dyad: How are women influenced by another woman’s body presentation style?. Body Image. 2007, 4 (2): 157-164.

Tylka T: Refinement of the tripartite influence model for men: dual body image pathways to body change behaviors. Body Image. 2011, 8 (3): 199-207.

Villepigue J, Rivera HA, Allen R: The body sculpting bible for brides: A complete workout to look your best in your wedding dress. 2005, Hatherleigh Press, New York

Warren C, Holland S, Billings B, Parker A: The relationships between fat talk, body dissatisfaction, and drive for thinness: perceived stress as a moderator. Body Image. 2012, 9 (3): 358-364.

White E, Warren C: Body checking and avoidance in ethnically diverse female college students. Body Image. 2011, 10 (4): 583-590.

Wong C: Ka-ching? Wedding price tag nears $30k. 2005

Workman JE, Freeburg EW: An examination of date rape, victim dress, and perceiver variables within the context of attribution theory. Sex Roles. 1999, 41 (3–4): 261-277.

Workman JE, Johnson KKP: The role of cosmetics in attributions about sexual harassment. Sex Roles. 1991, 24 (11–12): 759-769.

Workman J, Orr RL: Clothing, sex of subject, and rape myth acceptance as factors affecting attributions about an incident of acquaintance rape. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 1996, 14 (4): 276-284.

International Agency for Research on Cancer monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. IARC Monographs. 2012

Yoo J, Kim H: Perceived negative health effect of tanning: the interface between tanning attitudes and behaviors. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 2014, 32 (1): 6-19.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Minnesota, 240 McNeal Hall, 1985 Buford Ave, St Paul, MN, USA

Kim Johnson

Indiana University, 1021 East 3rd Street, Bloomington, 47405, IN, USA

Sharron J Lennon

The Ohio State University, 2330 Hartsdale Dr, Powell, 43065-9213, OH, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kim Johnson .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

KJ, SL, and NR drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final draft of the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 ), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Johnson, K., Lennon, S.J. & Rudd, N. Dress, body and self: research in the social psychology of dress. Fashion and Textiles 1 , 20 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-014-0020-7

Download citation

Received : 01 October 2014

Accepted : 28 October 2014

Published : 22 November 2014

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-014-0020-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social psychology

Get Free Access To Our Publishing Tools And Create New Ideas

Sign up to see more

Already a member?

By continuing, you agree to Sociomix's Terms of Service , Privacy Policy

It's Time To express Yourself

Stereotypes of the fashion industry that needs to be busted.

"Fashion means breaking stereotypes by not being one"

If most of what you have learned about fashion has come from The Devil Wears Prada , then there is some serious unlearning and learning to be done. Snapshots of grand beach house parties hosted by celebrities, glamourous fashion weeks, and glittery jittery all night after-parties showed in movies, shows, and shared across different social media platforms create an unreal fetish or even disregard towards the fashion industry. Be that as it may, not all that you see on a superficial level means what goes on in the background.

In the end, everything, including fashion, is just business. As a general rule, the legendary myths and generalizations related to this business are misrepresented, bogus, or simply outdated. While certain generalizations are in some cases saturated with truth, however, the generalization of it is not true to its core.

Here, we have scrutinized the most widely recognized fantasies about working in this business and busted them. In case you are a curious individual or you're keen on being a part of this industry in your journey, keep reading to debunk the most common myths or stereotypes that need to be shattered, instead of sheltered.

  Stereotype #1: Fashion is expensive

  ‘Being well dressed hasn’t much to do with having good clothes. It’s a question of good balance and good common sense.’

– Oscar de la Renta

Fashion is more often so associated with the rich or the elite class. But this myth needs to be busted as fashion is inculcated within every individual, whether consciously or unconsciously. Fashion is not only on-ramps, or in designer showrooms, but also streets and thrift stores, or even footpath vendors. Fashion is a form of art. 

The pipeline theory is a great way of understanding this: An item is first introduced by designers and trendsetters and it further gains popularity with the help of media channels. As time passes, it becomes a copy in the mass market and is finally discounted and can be purchased by those on a budget.

One doesn’t necessarily need to buy Prada bags or Versace t-shirts, as art also lies in styling in a way to make the ordinary look extraordinary. Everyone can afford fashion, from designers to premium brands, fast-fashion retailers to vintage stores, it is accessible to everyone.

One does not necessarily need to burn a hole in their pockets in order to look fashionable. In fact, many times, the inspiration of a trend lies in the lower-class people. We can take an example of the ripped jeans inspired by beggars or low waist baggy jeans inspired by prisoners whose belts were taken away to prevent being used as a weapon.

Stereotype #2: The journey is like a walk in a park

''When I design and wonder what the point is, I think of someone having a bad time in their life. Maybe they are sad and they wake up and put on something I have made and it makes them feel just a bit better. So, in that sense, fashion is a little help in the life of a person. But only a little.’'

– Miuccia Prada

Even though social media platforms like Instagram make everything look like simply a slick festival of fashion influencers traveling to exotic places, glam photo shoots, celebrities wearing cautiously curated street style looks, fashion weeks and their VIP front-row guests, celeb-studded after-parties and the list can go on and on, therein, in reality, a great deal of off-camera difficult work that goes into these events.

After all, these events don’t set themselves up overnight. All of these events are a result of a ton of running, hustle, and no rest. Working in this environment needs a lot of endurance and the capacity to work under immense pressure and tension so as to comply with tight schedules and not to forget, it’s extremely dynamic in nature.

Despite the fact that going to parties, attending events, and socializing is a great advantage that accompanies this business, it's just a little portion of what people in the fashion industry does. In any event,  even when people are attending and celebrating occasions, they are working and making associations, just in a fancier manner and showy setting.

  Stereotype #3: Rigidity in gender roles and norms

 "Conformity is the only real fashion crime. To not dress like yourself and to sublimate your spirit to some kind of group identity is succumbing to fashion fascism.’'

— Simon Doonan

Ladies in gowns, and men in suits, ladies in heels and men in boots, ladies in pink and men in blue, ladies overdressed and men having no clue.

There was a time when the gender norms in terms of fashion were rigid and there was rarely an occasion where one could witness people crossdress. However, in this day and age, these claims don’t stand true and are outdated since those lines are getting blurred each passing day.

Earlier, we could see the distinction in a woman’s pearls and a man’s tie. Today, we often spot men and women wearing the same Nike sneakers on the streets. It’s not that today’s fashion brands are just getting lazy to create distinction in gender outfit pieces, but there is a reason why they are making fashion gender fluid.

The style needs to wipe out those 'labels'. This implies design needs to deconstruct sex generalizations with regard to wearing styles. Jaden Smith is known for wearing skirts, Cara Delevingne’s pansexual identity reflecting in her clothing style, transgender models such as Tracey Norman, and Valentina Sampaio are just a few examples, to begin with. The world is wearing off their labels, and so is fashion.

Stereotype #4: Everyone is very narcissistic, shallow, and catty in this industry

. '‘Delete the negative; accentuate the positive!’'

– Donna Karen

One of the biggest myths of fashion business is that everyone is like Miranda Priestly: strict, tough, rude, rigid, and cutthroat. It is a myth that everyone in this industry is shallow and selfish. Of course, there are catty and selfish people present everywhere, in each industry but not every woman wearing pencil heels or every man in a sharp suit is mean.

Not everyone is looking for a way to rip someone else’s eyes out in order to climb the social ladder. Most of them are just there to do their work and build lifelong connections. And it’s a well-known fact that deep connections cannot be built with a shallow personality.

In any work environment, there are both cold and warm people. One should just make it a point to recognize and associate with the warm ones.  

Stereotype #5: It is all about celebs and designers

"Fashion is not something that exists in dresses only. Fashion is in the sky, in the street, fashion has to do with ideas, the way we live, what is happening"

-Coco Chanel

It is untrue that fashion belongs only to an exclusive bunch of people, mainly designers, supermodels, and film stars. The family of fashion includes many more crucial designations acting as the backbone of this industry.

Fashion journalists, forecasters, managers, graphic designers, photographers, PR, merchandisers, stylists, sales associates, account managers, creative directors, wage workers, technical designers, etc may not be photographed by paparazzi in quirky outfits but without them, the industry wouldn’t have survived.

In light of this, someone aspiring to enter this line need not be a good designer or model. It's important to choose your own niche and be committed to it.

Stereotype #6: Fashion is short-lived

" There's never a new fashion but it's old."

  - Geoffrey Chaucer

Fashion is known for its dynamic nature. And while it is true that fashion hops on from one trend to the other in almost no time but that does not make the nature of fashion necessarily short-lived. Think of a basic white tee and blue denim, or little black dress, or a pair of a leather jacket as a winter essential; these are trends that managed to make a permanent place in people's wardrobe.

What makes a company, brand or an individual fashionable is the capacity to take inspiration from the old or the classics and give it a contemporary flair. The life of fashion moves around in a cyclic motion and trends have a habit of making a comeback in an evolved sense.

Designer Karl Lagerfield rightly said that Style is eternal.

No Saves yet. Share it with your friends.

Get Free Access To Our Publishing Resources

Independent creators, thought-leaders, experts and individuals with unique perspectives use our free publishing tools to express themselves and create new ideas.

Trending Tags

We use cookies to improve your experience and deliver personalized content. by using sociomix, you agree to our terms & privacy policy.

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

The big picture: challenging fashion stereotypes

Londoner Nadine Ijewere cheerfully explodes the industry’s narrow notions of beauty with an image that typifies her work

N adine Ijewere grew up in Peckham in south-east London and until she picked up a camera in sixth form she planned to study medicine. At school, there was a darkroom where she could process film and the excitement of watching the colours of her first rolls come to life changed her career path and won her a place at the London College of Fashion. At weekends, she and friends would get suitcases full of clothes from their wardrobes and drag them to the local park to dress up and have fun; she was the designated photographer. Within a few years, she was much in demand, shooting a campaign for Stella McCartney in Lagos, seeing some of her pictures of siblings exhibited at Tate Britain; in 2018, aged only 26, she made headlines as the first woman of colour to shoot a cover for Vogue , with a photograph featuring Dua Lipa and celebrating “the future”.

Ijewere took this image for the Wall Street Journal ’s W S J . Magazine in 2019, in a fashion feature devoted to the spring dress. Its energy is typical of her work, which is collected in a new monograph called Our Own Selves . The photos demonstrate her commitment to cheerfully exploding any narrow ideas of beauty that the fashion industry still clings to. Interviewed for her book, Ijewere talks about how, “when I started exploring photography in the magazines I’d flick through, I would think to myself, ‘Well…’ I never saw anyone that really looked like my friends or anyone I could relate to in those images. If they were people of colour or Black women, they were all light-skinned and had European features. If they had curly hair, it was blow-dried straight to match the white women. None of my friends really looked like that.”

She is on a mission to put that right.

• Photography
• The big picture

Most viewed

2022-2023 Issues , [redacted]

The Politics of Fashion: An Exploration of Clothing’s Complex Role as the Fabric of our Socio-Political Existence

June 5, 2023 June 5, 2023

Photo: NDZ/STAR MAX/IPx 2021 9/13/21 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at the 2021 Met Gala Celebrating In America: A Lexicon Of Fashion. (New York)

By Sarah Ben Tkhayet

Appearance — perception of oneself and others — is a governing concept that undeniably is at the center of human existence. With this, fashion comes into play, emerging as a useful and powerful tool that allows us to have more control over these appearances that inform our  understanding of gender, race and class — all factors that dictate much of our social interactions. Because of this, fashion also appears to be a tool that can restrict us, causing us to conform to preconfigured façades. 

How does fashion’s complex nature translate on a more macrocosmic scale? In considering these questions, fashion’s macrocosmic ambivalence emerges. Fashion materializes as a facilitator of popular expression and driver of social progress, as well as an important element of stagnation that both upholds and creates vehicles of oppression. 

How is fashion’s macrocosmic ambivalence evident in the real world? How does it exert its influence on relationships that span regions, countries or even continents? How does it transcend the social sphere to engrain itself into the very fabric of politics, economics and everything in between? And why do these questions even matter? 

These questions obviously bring in a large scope of themes within the field of politics. However, in the interest of providing a more productive and in-depth analysis of fashion’s influence on politics, only specific illustrative instances were chosen to focus on. Professor Jane Lynch, who teaches the Yale course ‘In Ordinary Fashion,’ provided key guidance about the political phenomena that are crucial to this conversation, and for which the link between fashion and politics is strong and clear. 

The scope of fashion’s role as a tool for freedom is narrowed down to its use in: colonial movements which have defined history and revolutionized peoples’ way of protesting, the feminist movement that changed fashion from something that had been used to oppress women into a emancipatory tool, and in the Civil Rights Movement that utilized fashion to affirm the Black community’s humanity and deserving of equality. 

On the other hand, fashion’s unfortunate restrictive quality has been narrowed down to a couple of both diverse and major themes. These include: the issue of fast fashion and climate change, the question of the link between cultural expression and fashion as it is posed by accusations of cultural appropriation, the risk of performativity that inevitably emerges with the use of fashion for public political expression and finally, high fashion and its ability to maintain class divisions. 

Fashion: a tool for freedom

Clothing & Colonialism: the use of fabric for revolt, the affirmation of a national identity, and ultimately, emancipation

When talking about clothing in a colonial context, Professor Lynch told The Globalist that “there is a way in which [clothing] homogenizes, objectifies and also freezes in time a representation of a particular person.” She highlighted clothing’s potential restrictive nature: “it presents [individuals] in the context of a colonial gaze which doesn’t allow for self-representation or diverse ways of being.” However, simultaneously, victims of colonialism have been able to “wear or use clothing as a way to challenge and self-represent both socially and politically.” The reality of fashion’s potential to act as this tool for emancipation from colonialism was illustrated in both colonial Algeria and colonial India.

French Algeria & the use of hijab 

France’s presence in Algeria was long, impactful and riddled with tension. The French entered Algeria in 1830 and engaged in settler-colonialism. During its rule over the North African territory, France implemented changing laws called the “indigénat.” While Algeria had been recognised as a part of France, Algerian Muslims were still not considered French citizens unless they renounced their culture and religion to adopt a French identity. This entailed abandoning their Muslim faith and Arabic language to adopt the Christian religion and learn to converse in French. From an Orientalist point of view, the French were thought to be liberating a population from their “barbaric,” outdated practices in order to implement new, better, more civilized ones. 

Professor Jennifer Sessions explained this in her text Colonizing Revolutionary Politics : “If the French occupation was defined as a mission civilisatrice , Algerians’ resistance to it could be taken as evidence they were “peoples whose character, religion, and customs energetically rejected the civilized order.” This exacerbated tensions between the French settlers and Algerian natives, ultimately culminating in the Algerian War of Independence.

It was during this war that the aforementioned cultural clashes took on a new dimension and expanded into the world of clothing. The veil or hijab became widely recognized as a symbol for the culture and religion of those fighting for independence. It became a symbol of resistance to French presence and all that that presence entailed. Female fighters wore the veil as a reclamation of their identity in the face of growing Algerian erasure. 

In Frantz Fanon’s Algeria Unveiled , he explained that the hijab also had a more literal use in teaching Algerian women “how to carry a rather heavy object dangerous to handle under the veil and still give the impression of having one’s hands free.” Indeed, female freedom fighters in the National Liberation Front used their “haiks” (North African wrap used by women to practice modesty) to conceal their weapons or classified documents. Evidently, this diminished French power, causing France to view the hijab as yet another token of the backward, barbaric quality of Algerian civilization and culture. Therefore the French used their supposed goal of liberating these women from their oppressive culture to justify an extensive use of violence that was only amplified during the war. 

The hijab’s status as a powerful symbol of popular upheaval and a threat to French authority was solidified by the public unveiling ceremonies which were frequently organized during the war in 1958, mostly by the French army. According to Neil McMaster’s book Burning the Veil: The Algerian War and the ’emancipation’ of Muslim Women, during these ceremonies, Algerian women removed their “haiks” or they would have them removed by European women. The “haiks” would then be burned or thrown to the ground. Oftentimes, in an attempt to model popular opinion, speeches in support of the French and their project in Algeria would follow the ceremonies. These addresses would emphasize the emancipatory quality of the previous act and the role it had in freeing Muslim Algerian women. Sometimes, organizers would go as far as to recruit poor women from high schools and pressure them with threats to their safety in order to coerce them into participating. Therefore, most, if not all, of the time, the women involved were not present out of their own free will. 

Clothing & Indian independence: an industry’s role in the building of  national identity

Much like in Algeria, India’s 200-year-long history under British rule featured famous instances of popular upheaval and conflict. It has marked history books because of its enduring fight for emancipation from colonialism. More specifically, Gandhi and his legacy of non-violence and self-discipline are crucial identifying elements of India’s colonial period. However, the two-fold fundamental role of clothing and textiles as important tools in the Indian struggle for independence are often overlooked. 

Firstly, and more clearly, cloth was an economic product, as explained by Dr. Susan S. Bean in her work on fabric and Indian independence. In Gandhi and Khadi, the Fabric of Indian Independence , Dr. Bean holds that cloth was a tool for “economic nationalism.” Dr. Bean details the long, important history of Indian cotton pre-British colonialism and its undeniable popularity. However, once colonial rule was established, England secured supplies of raw cotton from India and utilized its advanced spinning, weaving and dyeing machinery to start producing cheap cotton textiles. 

Through this, England was not only able to surpass India in the cotton market, but India also went from being the world’s greatest exporter of cloth to instead exporting raw cotton and importing cloth. Dadabhai Naoroji, the main proponent of economic nationalism, believes that there is a direct causal link between these two facts and thereby blames British rule for India’s economic decline. This is when the idea of swadeshi (the promotion of indigenous products) emerged. Because English cloth was synonymous with English domination, Indian cloth became synonymous with Indian liberation. Continued support for Indian products, particularly textile or clothing-related products, became a core component of Indian economic nationalism. This support was shown, amongst other things, through the boycotting of English products, like how in 1896 the people of Dacca boycotted Manchester cloth. 

However, clothing also served as a medium of communication, and as mentioned in the introduction to this section, acted as a social marker. Costume rapidly became a central consideration for Gandhi and the movement as a whole. As he switched between different types of costume and experimented with different public images, Gandhi was unsatisfied by many of the dress options because they “indicated region, class and religion” while his goal was to call for the “unity of all Indians […] rich and poor, Hindu, Sikh and Muslim.” For Gandhi, his way of dressing was a non-verbal communicator of his political agenda and goals for India. Ultimately choosing to dress himself in a white khadi , Gandhi embraced the “purity and simplicity” of the garment and favored hand-made khadis , often opposing the mechanization of the weaving process.

Fashion & Feminism in the United States: The 4 Waves of Feminism 

Another form of emancipation that has been facilitated by fashion is the feminist movement, advocating for the equality between men and women. Fashion has traditionally been interpreted as a vehicle for the expression of femininity and these two concepts have been intertwined for a majority of feminism’s long history. For Professor Lynch, during every wave of feminism, fashion served a nuanced role and proved to be a crucial tool in the movement’s fight to gain both attention and legitimacy.

Nineteenth century first wave feminism took on the big challenge of dismantling the popular belief of women’s inherent inferiority to men with the specific goal of obtaining suffrage. Despite the movement’s political focus, feminist activists recognized that the oppression of women was also fuelled by existing social hierarchies, some of which relied on clothing and fashion. Indeed, the expectation at the time was that women would wear corsets and other uncomfortable heavy dress in order to conform. 

Thus, when feminist Amelia Bloomer advocated for bloomers — comfortable long bulb shaped pants — it rapidly became an important visual symbol for the movement. Bloomers were a challenge to the social norm and a fashion statement all in one. They marked the beginning of fashion’s dual function within the feminist movement.

Fashion’s political function only became stronger in the 20th century, as comfortable turned into androgynous through Coco Chanel’s influence. Chanel popularized pants, which were up until then a strictly masculine garment. While this influence originated in the early 20th century, at the same time as the rise of flapper culture, it continued on gaining traction in the 1940s during the Second World War. Women (left behind by their husbands who went to war) engaged in traditionally masculine tasks like office work and their fashion reflected that, featuring Chanel-inspired masculine and structured silhouettes. However, soon thereafter the men returned from war and the feminist movement experienced some backsliding, but not before the 1960s came about to reignite the movement.

In fact, the 60s second wave feminism marked a fundamental shift from women adopting traditional masculine styles, to women looking to embrace their femininity through fashion. This took the form of shorter length outfits, particularly the miniskirt. Having been considered indecent and vulgar, the feminist movement took this clothing item and turned it into a symbol of feminine freedom and rebellion from traditional expectations of what a woman should dress like.

These two different aforementioned uses of fashion — both to reclaim women’s ability to embrace the masculine and feminine — coexist in feminism’s third and fourth waves, that span from the 1990s until now. Conversation around women’s dress features far more voices nowadays and remains largely polarized primarily between proponents of more traditional feminine dress and advocates for modern, liberated expressions of femininity. Nonetheless, the work that the feminist movement has done with fashion has allowed an important transformation of fashion from a socially restrictive tool to one that is used by women to express their personal understanding of what it means to be a woman. 

Fashion in the Civil Rights Movement: the fight for legitimacy & the expression of group identity 

Activists in the Civil Rights Movement saw similar potential for fashion to be a tool that would allow for a more rapid advancement towards their movement’s goal by allowing them to obtain the legitimacy they lacked because of the racist stereotypes and biases that operated against them. In particular, like Dr. Abeena L. Mhoon explains in her article Dressing for Freedom , several accounts of iconic civil rights activist Rosa Parks describe her as being “impeccably dressed in tailored clothing.” This was not a coincidence, but rather an active effort to dismantle racist perceptions of African-Americans as “unprofessional.” Interestingly, Black organizers looked to conform to social norms of dress while looking to dismantle all of the social, political and economic norms that kept them oppressed. Like Dr. Mhoon skillfully explains, as they were “arrayed in subtle conservative apparel, they aggressively revolutionized the nation’s existing order.” 

The same trend continued and was further amplified in the churches where these organizers regularly met. Vera Swann, a civil rights organizer and one of the first African-American Presbyterian missionaries assigned outside of Africa explained the rules of dress as they apply in church. For her, it’s key to “be comfortable but still look good”. More specifically, she explains that: “for a meeting with an organization or face-to-face with whites, we dressed.” This included only dresses or skirts for women, no pants allowed. However, the ability to adapt was also key for these activists. Because of this, once they started traveling and meeting in more informal spaces, their outfits began to reflect that. When activists like Ira Stolhman traveled to Alabama to talk to workers, she wore work clothes. 

On the other hand, some Black civil rights activists embraced the incorporation of cultural elements from their African heritage into their everyday fashion. The Black Panthers in particular were known for their choice to opt for natural hair styles like the Afro or cultural dress. They affirmed their individuality and freedom through their choice of fashion. Dr. Mhoon explains that adherents to this line of thought were younger activists who felt freer, caring less about how others may perceive them. According to Mary Vargas in her paper Fashion Statement or Political Statement they also took inspiration from French resistance in WW2 for their iconic black berets, reclaiming them as symbols of militancy. Coupled with black leather jackets, pants and gloves, the Black Panthers had created a uniform so powerful that it sent a clear political message through an entirely non-verbal medium.

Fashion’s limits: its role in society’s stagnation and in the upholding of hierarchies

Despite the aforementioned undeniable truths about the power and potential for change that fashion holds, it is impossible to ignore some of the regressive roles that fashion adopts both as an industry and as a tool for communication and perception. Criticism of the fashion industry’s large environmental cost has left little room to discuss other equally important debates and issues. The choice to focus on these more “peripheral” conversations, in hopes of providing new, productive analysis, has guided the sections below. 

The debate around Cultural Appropriation: between Empowerment & Erasure

Cultural appropriation is a concept and term that refers to the adoption of cultural or traditional elements from a minority group by a majority group with clear insensitivity or malicious intent. The latter part of that definition is key. The phenomenon I am referring to is specific and not all uses of the term online are merited or accurate. Like Maggie Strauss explains in her New York Times Op-Ed, on the scale of history “the adoption of certain practices from one culture to the next” is obviously productive and favorable. Adoptions of certain cultural traditions by non-members in a respectful and positive manner are key to human progress. 

Accusations of cultural appropriation that have emerged recently, especially post-2010, and have been directed at a large variety of social actors, from fashion designers and artists to entire communities of people, for exploiting or stereotyping certain cultural traditions. Fashion appears as a medium for cultural insensitivity and disrespect. The ability to culturally appropriate is a direct result of fashion’s inherent use for cultural expression. Because fashion is a tool that has been historically used by different groups to affirm their identities, fashion can also be turned around and used in a way that deforms those cultural expressions. Cultural appropriation of Black culture in particular has especially taken center stage in American internet politics given the long history of cultural insensitivity directed against core elements of Black culture. For instance, this insensitivity is reflected in the socially-accepted idea that natural and culturally significant African-American hairstyles like Afros and Dreadlocks are “unprofessional” or “inappropriate” to wear in professional environments. However, those same styles when sported by majority white models in the 2017 Marc Jacobs fashion are fashion-forward, artistic and stylish. 

Here lies the main issue that critics of cultural appropriation often point to and that cultural appropriation non-believers refuse to acknowledge: the double standard that clearly emerges. The wearing of culturally significant styles by individuals who are not part of that culture would not be considered problematic by some if it weren’t for the historical and continued disrespect for those styles by a significant social majority.  

Furthermore, unfortunately, more often than not, these minority cultural styles are not adopted in educated ways, but rather, in ways that display sheer disregard and disinterest for the history and depth that come with those cultural elements. 

Choosing to dress a model in a feather headpiece and lingerie for the 2017 Victoria’s Secret show that occurred in November, during Thanksgiving, is tone-deaf and inconsiderate. How much research would have been needed in order to avoid this faux pas? The intention matters, and in the event of a clear lack of consideration, criticism from the appropriate community is bound to emerge. Fashion’s double edge sword becomes evident through this, its capacity for impact when in the hands of the wrong people turns into a tool for cultural insensitivity. 

Fashion as an enabler of performative politics

As extensively shown in previous sections, fashion can undeniably take on a political dimension on the scale of a community. But how productive is this same political function when it is utilized on an individual level? More specifically, when a celebrity or public figure chooses to make a political statement through their dress? The example of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s “Tax the Rich” dress that she wore at the 2019 Met Gala is perfect to analyze this question.

Following the publication of photos of AOC at the Met Gala, the Internet broke into debate much like it has in the past, polarized as ever between those who deemed her fashion choice merely performative and largely unproductive and those who saw the choice of clothing as a clever and powerful way to challenge the capitalist status quo. Generally, both sides recognized the obvious contrast between the statement and the environment in which it was made. The Met Gala operates as an annual nexus for New York high society, leaders of the fashion industry and celebrity actors and singers — an obvious concentration of wealth. The first strains of both criticism and praise were directly related to the setting in which AOC made her statement. Critics claimed it was hypocritical of AOC to attend and enjoy an elitist event given her clear anti-elitist, anti-capitalist agenda. Others saw this as even more powerful, describing AOC as bold and unflinching, holding on to her values despite how uncomfortable it might have been for her to do that in the presence of the very people she was fighting against. 

AOC’s status as a politician also often took center stage in these conversations. For many, this status expunged AOC from being described as engaging in performative politics, given that that would mean that she would not be following up with concrete political actions that are compatible with the same political agenda. However, AOC has been a very vocal advocate for higher taxes and the implementation of left leaning policies like the Green New Deal. The core of the criticism against her falls apart following this realization. However, critics have held that despite this, AOC’s decision to wear the dress remains unproductive. Ella Henry of the Bowdoin Orient holds this opinion, citing the fact that the dress served as ammunition for the opposite side of the political spectrum to mock AOC. Indeed, among other things they compared her dress to a “paper bag from Chick-fil-A,” turning her into an Internet joke. 

Furthermore, more generally, people have expressed valuing tangible political change over simple statements. This comment is inscribed within a larger debate on the place of fashion in politics. “Clothing and fashion have been, in some ways, taken less seriously, seen as a frivolous topic, or a topic only to be discussed in women’s magazines,” explained Professor Lynch. This lack of faith in the power for change that fashion holds, despite sometimes being merited, clearly functions as a brake on more positive perceptions of fashion’s presence in politics. This realization is central to a proper understanding of popular accusations of performative activism. The arena in which these accusations are being made and received also matters, the development of the Internet as a means for communication has transformed fashion from being something that is perceived by one’s immediate entourage to something that “can be presented on social media and instantly available globally” as explained by Professor Lynch. 

High fashion & the world of authenticity & forgery: the politics of the “fake”

While fashion’s role as a communicative tool should not be underestimated, interest in fashion as an industry and the negative mechanisms that are inextricably linked to it is also needed for a complete understanding of the link that operates between fashion and politics. 

The development of high fashion brands has shown the potential for clothing to adopt varying degrees of value. This value is given according to a number of factors: the quality of the fabrics, where the item was made, and perhaps the most powerful, what the tag on it says. Particularly because of the latter factor, value appears to be a fabricated idea most of the time based very loosely on the former criteria. Dr. Lynch elaborates on this by explaining how the “made in Italy” tag has acquired significant symbolic value. She remarks that for a lot of the garments donning this tag, a good portion of the production process occurs in places like China. 

The legal regulations surrounding the ability of these firms to use this tag open up the conversation on the production of authenticity and how specific fashion houses are “rooted in a long, long history that ties to genealogy and a sense of place.” Through this emerges the question of what makes something “real,” and consequently, what makes something “fake?” And why are these questions important? How do these concepts impact our understanding of society and culture? 

Dr. Magdalena Craciun’s paper “Rethinking fakes, authenticating selves” focuses on answering these questions through an ethnographic lens. By choosing to look at Turkish fake designer sellers, Dr .Craciun talked to two merchants Kerim and Mustafa. It became rapidly clear that these sellers faced the challenge of constantly having to fight against popular belief that “the legitimate commodity has an author while pirated product does not have one”. Having been banished to the sidelines of society for participating in an industry usually not out of choice but rather necessity, people like Kerim seek to legitimize “through … honesty and professionalism against the common assumptions that dealing in fake brands does not necessitate personal and professional investment” or that his only goal is to “cheat his customers.”  He also made a valid argument about the value of clothing being in “experience” and “workmanship” rather than “genealogy.” 

Through several other examples, Dr. Craciun draws a direct line between selling fakes and “anxiety over the integrity and credibility of one’s existence.” She makes a rather psychological argument that engaging with the fake items industry is something that can be detrimental to the person in question. Fashion, therefore, has the faculty to mold self-identification and self-perception, giving it power on an individual scale. 

Thus, fashion and clothing’s incredibly multifaceted relationships with the world of politics appear to be a key component in our understanding of the interactions that occur within communities of people. 

Professor Lynch urges more interest in the topic. “You can think about clothing and fashion as intersecting with almost every discipline. From political science to thinking about biological sciences: what are the kinds of fibers, such as cotton, that are used in these textiles? There’s so much to explore here.” 

Fashion is not without substance, it’s not only about enjoyment. It governs the everyday world of appearance, and its influence is without bounds — whether it be used for good or bad. 

Sarah Ben Tkhayet is a first-year in Timothy Dwight College and can be reached at [email protected]. 

An Inclusive Digital Feminist Magazine Amplifying Diverse Voices + Stories

Mental Health Expert Uses Profession To Craft Uplifting Coming-Of-Age Story

A Tender & Witty Reflection Of Living With A Terminal Illness, From 71 Year Old Debut Author

Katie Taylor’s Next Fight Could Be the Best Yet

Surveyed: Most Americans Use Social Media To Learn About Health, Wellness, And Different Cultures

New Art Exhibit Inspired By Artist’s Experience As An Exotic Dancer Challenges Preconceived Notions About Sexual Agency

BIPOC Rom-Com From First Gen. Indian-American Author Set To Spice Up Your Spring Reading List

30 Female Artists Join Forces To Share Unique Perspectives On Womanhood, Empowerment, And Creativity

Women In Power – 32% Of The Renewable Energy Sector Workforce Is Now Female

Do Art Museums Portray Enough Diverse Artists In The US?

Adapting Your Workout Routine To Manage Hormone Changes and Menstrual Cycle

• Fashion & Beauty

Breaking Barriers: The Decline Of Fashion Stereotypes

For many years, fashion stereotypes have existed within society. However, at the turn of the new decade, perceptions surrounding many pre-existing opinions have changed. While, of course, social alterations have played a pivotal role in modernizing outdated views, a greater emphasis on self-perception and personal happiness has been the catalyst in allowing women around the world to break free from fashion stereotypes. So, let’s take a look at how several traditional perceptions no longer have a place within modern-day society.

The Emergence of Color and Style Fluidity 

Perhaps one of the oldest stereotypes surrounds color. Although it isn’t limited to fashion, the ideology that blue is associated with men and pink with women has been rife since the 1950s , according to a report at Forbes. In seeking to challenge 70-year-old social constructs, leading fashion designers have used their platforms to highlight the fluidity of color. As per Medium, John Galliano used tailoring techniques to demonstrate that there’s no correlation between fashion and gender-specific characteristics. This aimed to rid fashion of gender limitations .

Much like color, style is another stereotype that stems from the 1900s. During the 1940s, women typically wore dresses to  achieve an hourglass figure . Even formally, the era dictated that women had to dress in blouses, jackets, and skirts. Although this was normal for the time, the perception that females should wear dresses has only recently been challenged. Now, there’s less pressure to dress in long, sweeping fashion pieces. For office-based working women, traditional suits have become a must-have outfit, while jeans, for example, are a common choice, as highlighted by the fact that  25 percent of American women  own at least ten pairs of jeans.

Uncool Accessories are a Thing of the Past 

Away from gender stereotypes , general fashion perceptions have also drastically changed during the 21st century. Glasses, for example, have long had connotations of being worn by smart, less attractive people as opposed to being a health necessity. However, after world-renowned brands broke into the market, such stereotypes began to become less common.

The products at GlassesUSA reflect this stylistic development. Along with the likes of Gucci, Prada, and Versace, the American-based organization has a wide range of Ray Ban sunglasses for women . With numerous colors, frames, and shapes to choose from, glasses have become a fashionable extension of a person’s personality. Moreover, with various materials also available, stylishly breaking barriers is now more plausible than ever before.

Although not typically uncool, the perceptions around jewelry have also changed during the past few decades. Unlike in years gone by, accessorizing isn’t viewed as an attempt to show off wealth or material possessions. Instead, it’s more commonly used to complete an outfit. Furthermore, gender stereotypes in this field have also lessened as women now prefer more masculine textures,  such as matte finishes . 

Stepping in the Right Direction 

Despite the fact that some outdated perceptions are still prevalent within modern-day society, the progress made in recent times is a positive reflection on those seeking to break away from traditional norms and values. As such, individuality has moved to the forefront regarding outfit selections, and that’s the way that it should be.

Read More Inspiring Content

Support & Self-Love: The Key To Feeling Fantastic In Your Bra

Creating A Feminine Look With High Rise Jeans

Poolside Glam: Chic and Stylish Outfits for Lounging by the Pool

Fashion 2024: How Baggy Is Becoming The New Sexy

What Your Hair Health Says About You: Top Tips And Advice To Make Your Locks Truly Lush

7 In 10 Americans See Beauty & Value In Aging, Not Just Youth

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Life Clothes

The Importance of Gender Neutral Clothes: Abolishing the Gender Stereotypes

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Feature of Character
• Childhood Lessons

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Androgynous Fashion from the Concept to Consumers: An Empirical Study

• Conference paper
• First Online: 27 April 2021
• Cite this conference paper

• Indranil Saha 7 ,
• Akanksha 8 &
• Diotima Basu 9  

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 221))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Research into Design

2369 Accesses

1 Citations

The concept of androgynous or gender-neutral fashion is known for its distinctive attribute that blends both conventional masculine and feminine design characteristics. In the history of fashion, the notion of androgynous fashion has been evolving since the 1920s, although it was irregular at times. In the postmodern Western cultures, androgynous aesthetic in fashion is increasingly accepted, encouraging the multiplicity of gender expressions. With significant influencers of the generation identifying themselves as gender-neutral and speaking out on the topic, the concept of being gender fluid is catching a lot of attention recently in the international fashion industry. Androgynous fashion is an emergent trend, which reflects in fashion ramps with models showcasing silhouettes and design elements that breakdown gender stereotypes. With this in mind, the current research aims to study androgynous fashion from both conceptual and user-centric perspectives in the Indian context. Data were collected through primary and secondary sources. Relevant secondary data were gathered from various books, research papers and fashion publications to set the conceptual context of the research. Additionally, to gather primary information about the Indian LGBTQ consumers’ perception of androgynous fashion, a questionnaire was circulated amongst young Indian fashion consumers using convenience and snowball sampling methods. The results and analysis of the study reveal the aspirations behind the gender-neutral design genre. This study also brings out the emotional needs of the Indian LGBTQ community members, who are the primary consumers of androgynous aesthetic.

• Androgynous

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Tseelon, E.: Communicating via clothes (1989)

Google Scholar  

Ranathunga, G.M., Uralagamage, S.R.: An investigative study of the androgynous fashion concept and its impact on the Sri Lankan fashion market (2019)

Chapek, G.: Genderless Fashion (2017)

Chauhan, V., Reddy-Best, K.L., Sagar, M., et al.: Apparel consumption and embodied experiences of gay men and transgender Women in India: variety and ambivalence, fit issues, LGBT-fashion brands, and affordability. J. Homosex 1–27 (2019)

Kealy-Bateman, W.: The possible role of the psychiatrist: the lesbian gay bisexual, and transgender population in India. Indian J Psychiatry 60 , 489 (2018)

Reilly, A., Catalpa, J., McGuire, J.: Clothing fit issues for trans people. Fash Stud 1 , 1–22 (2019)

Article   Google Scholar  

Reddy-Best, K.L., Pedersen, E.L.: Queer women’s experiences purchasing clothing and looking for clothing styles. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 33 , 265–279 (2015)

Veblen, T.: The Theory of the Leisure. Cl (New York New Am Libr 1953) (1899)

Veblen, T.: 77ie Theory of the Leisure Class. Allen, London (1959)

Lamb, J.M., Kallal, M.J.: A Conceptual Framework for Apparel. 42–47 (1992)

Sudha, M., Sheena, K.: Impact of influencers in consumer decision process: the fashion industry. SCMS J. Indian Manag. 14 , 14–30 (2017)

De Mooij, M.: In: Consumer Behavior and Culture: Consequences for Global Marketing and Advertising. SAGE Publications Limited (2019)

An, H., Lee, I.: A conceptual framework for Asian women’s emotional needs in fashion design. Int. J. Fash. Des. Technol. Educ. 8 , 206–213 (2015)

Dictionary.com: Androgyne|Definition of Androgyne at Dictionary.com. In: dictionary.com (2020). https://www.dictionary.com/browse/androgyne . Accessed 5 Jun 2020

Watchravesringkan, K., Hodges, N.N., Kim, Y.-H.: Exploring consumers’ adoption of highly technological fashion products. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 14 , 263–281 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1108/13612021011046101

Duignan, B.: In: Butler, J. (ed.) Biography, Gender Trouble, and Facts, Britannica (2019). https://www.britannica.com/biography/Judith-Butler . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Crepax, R.: In: The Aesthetics of Mainstream Androgyny: A Feminist Analysis of a Fashion Trend (2016)

McKeage, K., Crosby, E., McKeage, J.: The roots of genderqueer identity through consumption: androgynous and unisex fashion in the 20th Century. Genderqueer Identity 206–208 (2015)

Venter, M., Chinomona, R., Chuchu, T.: Factors influencing fashion adoption among the youth in Johannesburg, South Africa. J. Econ. Behav. Stud. 8 , 92–108 (2016)

Sarkar, A.R.: In: 2018, Gender-Fluid Fashion Dominated Indian Runways and How!-The New Indian Express (2018). https://www.newindianexpress.com/lifestyle/fashion/2018/dec/23/in-2018-gender-fluid-fashion-dominated-the-indian-runaways-and-how-1915572.html . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Jamooji, S.: In: Gender-Neutral Uniforms Are The Norm At This Mumbai School-Homegrown (2017). https://homegrown.co.in/article/801006/gender-neutral-uniforms-are-the-norm-at-this-mumbai-school . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Chrisman-Campbell, K.: In: A Brief History of Unisex Fashion-The Atlantic (2015). https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/when-unisex-was-the-new-black/390168/ . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Radin, S.: 6 Indie fashion magazines highlighting queer storytelling in an authentic way-fashionista. In: fashionista.com (2018). https://fashionista.com/2018/12/queer-fashion-magazines-2018 . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Atkinson, M.: Battleground: Sports [2 volumes]: Sports. ABC-CLIO (2008)

Talati-Parikh, S.: Dark side of the moon. In: livemint (2018). https://www.livemint.com/Leisure/5Gn1fwt8y5m9PVuPg5sFGL/Dark-side-of-the-moon.html . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Mankani, S.: Transgender model Anjali Lama is breaking gender barriers in the modelling industry|VOGUE INDIA. In: Vogue India (2018). https://www.vogue.in/magazine-story/anjali-lama-transgender-model-lgbtq-rights-vogue-india-interview/ . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

D’Souza, O.: The rise of genderless fashion in India. In: DNA India (2018). https://www.dnaindia.com/just-before-monday/report-the-rise-of-genderless-fashion-in-india-2657979 . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Ladha, S., Shaikh, S.: Highlights from day 3 At Lakmé fashion week winter/festive 2018, Verve Magazine (2018). https://www.vervemagazine.in/fashion-and-beauty/highlights-from-day-3-at-lakme-fashion-week-winter-festive-2018 . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Tripathi, N.: Lakmé Fashion Week Winter/Festive 2018: Gender-neutral fashion concept takes centre stage, Forbes India. In: Forbes India, pp. 6 (2018). https://www.forbesindia.com/aperture/slideshow/lakme-fashion-week-winter/51121/6 . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Negi, S.: Wendell rodricks only one who supported LGBTQ community, says india’s first plus size queer model-News18. In: News18 (2020) . https://www.news18.com/news/lifestyle/wendell-rodricks-only-one-who-supported-lgbtq-community-says-indias-first-plus-size-queer-model-2499031.html . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Katju, A.: One year after freedom: how are LGBTs faring today, since Section 377 was struck down by the Supreme Court? In: The Times of India (2019). https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/toi-edit-page/one-year-after-freedom-how-are-lgbts-faring-today-since-section-377-was-struck-down-by-the-supreme-court/ . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Tarlo, E.: In: Clothing Matters: Dress and Identity in India. University of Chicago Press (1996)

Lee, Y.: Shikhandi: and other tales they don’t tell you, by Devdutt Pattanaik, India: Penguin and Zubaan 2014, pp. 179 (2016). ISBN 9789383074846. Motifs An Int J English Stud 2:156–158

Devy, G.N.: In: Indian Literary Criticism: Theory and Interpretation. Orient Blackswan (2002)

Deb Roy, L.: LGBTQ: queer fashion challenges rigid stereotypes. In: Outlook India (2018). https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/queer-fashion-challenges-rigid-stereotypes/316132 . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Snyder, H.: Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 104 , 333–339 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Arvanitidou, Z., Gasouka, M.: Construction of gender through fashion and dressing. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 4 , 111 (2013)

Van den Heuvel, T., van Trijp, H., van Woerkum, C., et al.: Linking product offering to consumer needs; inclusion of credence attributes and the influences of product features. Food. Qual. Prefer. 18 , 296–304 (2007)

Arvanitidou, Z., Gasouka, M.: In: Fashion, Gender and Social Identity. First Fash Colloq, London, pp. 1–19 (2011)

Marcangeli, S.: Undressing the power of fashion: the semiotic evolution of gender identity by coco chanel and Alexander Mcqueen (2015)

Dhar, S., Narayanan, K.A.: Gender neutrality starts with school uniforms, India News-Times of India (2019). https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/gender-neutrality-starts-with-school-uniforms/articleshow/71326053.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst . Accessed 9 Jun 2020

Sandler, P.C.: In: The language of Bion: A Dictionary of Concepts. Routledge (2018)

An, H., Lee, I.: Extraction of fashion sensibility vocabulary for globalization. J. Korea Soc. Basic Des. Art. 14 , 133–141 (2013)

Hartley, J., Trueman, M., Rodgers, A.: The effects of verbal and numerical quantifiers on questionnaire responses. Appl. Ergon. 15 , 149–155 (1984)

Balasundaram, N.: Factor analysis: nature, mechanism and uses in social and management science research. J. Cost Manag. Accountant Bangladesh 37 , 15–25 (2009)

Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S.: Using Multivariate Statistics. Northridge, Cal Harper Collins (1996)

Vänskä, A.: From gay to queer—or, wasn’t fashion always already a very queer thing? Fash. Theory 18 , 447–463 (2014)

Vasan, S., Pujar, S.K., Gopalakrishnan, S.: Perception on unisex clothing among apparel designers: a study. Int. J. Text Fash. Technol. (IJTFT) 7 (2), 17-26 (2017)

Lupano, M., Vaccari, A.: Fashion at the Time of Fascism. Damiani, Bol Italy (2009)

Riggle, E.D.B., Whitman, J.S., Olson, A., et al.: The positive aspects of being a lesbian or gay man. Prof. Psychol. Res. Pract. 39 , 210 (2008)

Diamond, L.M.: What does sexual orientation orient? a biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual desire. Psychol. Rev. 110 , 173 (2003)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Indian Institute of Technology, Hyderabad, India

Indranil Saha

Amity University, Kolkata, India

Biswa Bangla Marketing Corporation Limited, Kolkata, India

Diotima Basu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Indranil Saha .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Centre for Product Design and Manufacturing, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Amaresh Chakrabarti

IDC School of Design, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

Ravi Poovaiah

Prasad Bokil

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Saha, I., Akanksha, Basu, D. (2021). Androgynous Fashion from the Concept to Consumers: An Empirical Study. In: Chakrabarti, A., Poovaiah, R., Bokil, P., Kant, V. (eds) Design for Tomorrow—Volume 1. ICoRD 2021. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 221. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0041-8_60

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0041-8_60

Published : 27 April 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-0040-1

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-0041-8

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Essay on Fashion for Students and Children

500+ words essay on fashion.

Fashion refers to anything that becomes a rage among the masses. Fashion is a popular aesthetic expression. Most Noteworthy, it is something that is in vogue. Fashion appears in clothing, footwear, accessories, makeup, hairstyles, lifestyle, and body proportions. Furthermore, Fashion is an industry-supported expression. In the contemporary world, people take fashion very seriously. Fashion is something that has permeated every aspect of human culture.

History of Fashion

The origin of Fashion is from the year 1826. Probably everyone believes Charles Frederick to be the first fashion designer of the world. He also established the first Fashion house in Paris. Consequently, he began the tradition of Fashion houses. Furthermore, he gave advice to customers on what clothing would suit them. He was prominent form 1826 to 1895.

During this period, many design houses hired artists. Furthermore, the job of these artists was to develop innovative designs for garments. The clients would examine many different patterns. Then they would pick the one they like. Consequently, a tradition began of presenting patterns to customers and then stitching them.

At the beginning of the 20th century, new developments in Fashion took place. These developments certainly began in Paris first. Then they spread in other parts of the world. Consequently, new designs first came into existence in France. From Paris, they went to other parts of the world. Hence, Paris became the Fashion capital of the world. Also, Fashion in this era was ‘haute couture’. This Fashion design was exclusively for individuals.

In the mid-20th century, a change took place. Now Fashion garments underwent mass production. There was a significant increase in the rate of production of Fashion garments. As a result, more and more people became involved with Fashion garments. By the end of the 20th century, a sense of Fashion awareness was very strong. Now people began to choose clothes based on their own style preference. Hence, people began to create their own trends instead of relying on existing trends.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Fashion Trend

Political influences certainly play a major role in influencing Fashion. Many politicians become fashion symbols. Notable examples are First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy and Princess Diana. Also, political revolutions make a huge impact on the Fashion trend. For example, in 1960’s America, liberal clothing styles became popular among the younger generation. This was due to the Liberal revolution.

Another significant factor which influences Fashion trend is technology. There certainly has been a rapid growth of technology in the Fashion industry. For example, wearable technology has become a popular Fashion trend. Furthermore, 3D printing technology and the internet have also made an impact on Fashion.

Social influences are probably the strongest influences on the Fashion trend. Many music stars strongly influence Fashion choice. For example, wearing hoodies became famous due to rap musicians. Furthermore, movie and television actors create a big impact on Fashion. Many youngsters love to emulate the Fashion sense of their favourite celebrity.

To sum it up, Fashion certainly has become a part and parcel of human life. It certainly is a force that is here to stay. Most noteworthy, Fashion has immersed every place on Earth.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Beyoncé Is Boldly Defying Country’s Stereotypes

E very Black woman has been called a Jezebel. The term, which originates from the Bible, is one of the oldest examples of misogyny in the world. Instead of being heralded for her reign as Queen, the Phoenician princess (after whom the term was named) was slut-shamed and subjected to whorephobia. To this day, her name conjures up images of promiscuity. 

For those raised in the church, young women and girls are encouraged to not have a “jezebel spirit” because a church girl can never be a whore. But for many Black women and girls, there is not an option to cast out or distance oneself from the Jezebel spirit, because according to America, we’ve been whores since 1619 . Although the hypersexualization of Black women did not come from the Bible, the ideal of a modern, chaste woman did. When the Bible found itself stateside, those ideals and beliefs began to disseminate throughout the 13 original colonies; any woman who was not white and shapely was a Jezebel . A woman meant to be feared. A woman meant to be isolated. A woman not meant to be seen. Because if this woman was seen, perceived, and respected, it would certainly be a sign of hell on Earth.

Black women have been raising hell on Earth, particularly in the South, for generations. Rissi Palmer, Holly G of Black Opry, and Kamara Thomas of Country Soul Songbook have been leading the charge through their activism to create better conditions for Black women not just in the South, but in country music. And with the release of Cowboy Carter , the second album in the Renaissance trilogy, Beyoncé has become the latest artist to challenge these norms.

Read More: Beyoncé Has Always Been Country

When Beyoncé arrived at the 65th Annual Grammy Awards on February 4, a visible change had occurred. Although the general public did not know at the time that she was officially making her foray back into country, she was leading the charge with her fashion. No longer was she adorned in the glistening silver chrome looks of Renaissance , Beyoncé, in her white shirt, Stetson hat, and oversized Black leather jacket and skirt, had become an outlaw. And country music loves an outlaw . 

The problem is that country music only loves an outlaw when they are white. The outlaw movement , which started as a staunch rebuke against the red tape of Nashville, allowed white men in country music, such as Willie Nelson, to be seen as rebellious—but in a way that was not anti-Nashville. From Johnny Cash to George Jones to Merle Haggard , these hell raisers have not only been warmly embraced in country music but championed. And the way these artists would often display this defiant spirit was through their dress.

Historian and scholar Dr. Francesca Royster writes about country’s outlaw movement in Black Country Music : Listening for Revolutions : “As the Man in Black, Johnny Cash could stand up for injustices against incarcerated folks and other outsiders, his Black shirt, hat, and jeans trademarks for his heroically critical stance.” Royster continues, “Blackness’s association in mainstream white culture with danger, illegality, and outsiderhood was put to use in Cash’s career to lend an element of authenticity. These moments reveal how, for these white male outlaws, proximity to Blackness—particularly metaphorical Blackness—is the ultimate expression of outsiderhood.``

Yet it is Beyoncé’s Blackness that country took issue with in the first place. The most telling part of her Grammy outfit was not her choice to wear Pharrell Willliams’ Western-inspired menswear collection for Louis Vuttion, but the red manicure that accompanied it. The manicure, featured on the singer’s Instagram post from the night, was most noticeable when she gave her red nails a bite. Fashion and costume historian Shelby Ivey Christie equates Beyoncé’s red nails to setting off a flare, making everyone in Nashville aware about her re-entry into country music. 

“There’s a Shakespearean saying about biting your thumb at someone, and that's to make fun of them,’” says Christie. “I feel that imagery is kind of that. She's biting her thumb at you. She's teasing you.”

It’s a tease that continued when Beyonce appeared at Super Bowl LVIII with Dolly Parton-esque hair and a Texas bombshell-inspired outfit . Compared to the Grammys, where the singer donned a straightforward western look, this felt more sultry, more seductive—almost as if the singer was invoking the spirit of the Jezebel.

The Jezebel has been known by many names, one of them being Jolene. In the country music lexicon, Jolene was immortalized by Parton as a beautiful red-headed woman with emerald green eyes and ivory skin who has the ability to take Parton’s man away from her. Similar to how the Jezebel Root has been historically used in Hoodoo practices to attract men of wealth and high status, Jolene became known as the woman to avoid unless you want the destruction of your household. 

“Women in country can be seen as more bombshell glam,” says Christie. “I think [the Super Bowl] was kind of [Beyonce’s] moment to give us that and to show us that the country genre wasn’t something that was on her. It’s in her.” But compared to her first foray into country music where Beyoncé wore what culture journalist Victoria M. Massie noted was a “ voluminous Antebellum-style dress cut from African wax print ” in the visuals for “Daddy Lessons,” her second attempt into country is being done the Renaissance way. 

The visuals for Cowboy Carter tell a story between the two, seamless acts. In act i, Beyoncé slyly introduced the country outlaw aesthetic by donning herself in a black fringed leather jacket for the album’s teaser trailer . At this year’s Gold Party , Beyoncé and Jay Z’s annual Oscars party, she fronted a more masculine aesthetic in a black Givenchy structured blazer and flared trousers. Both outfits were accompanied by a black cowboy hat—a playful homage to her Texas roots, which then took center stage in her album cover for Cowboy Carter . In a red, white, and blue latex outfit, a nod to her American and Texas roots, the singer’s posture feels reminiscent of painter Kehinde Wiley’s majestic compositions. (Wiley’s approach to painting, similarly to Beyoncé’s approach to country, is to bridge the gap between the past and present through the creative arts.) From her usage of Americana aesthetics to her platinum blonde locks, Beyoncé is giving the public an insight into her “ un-American life .”

The one thing that stands out most in Beyoncé's country era is her bleach blonde hair. Taking note from Parton, to be a blonde in Southern culture, in particular, has always been regarded as tacky and not tasteful. But as Parton famously said: “It takes a lot of money to look this cheap,” and with her new locks, Beyoncé is turning that stereotype on its head, too.

In the South, the societal norms that police women’s bodies, especially Black women’s bodies, stem from Christianity . And in country music, women are expected to present themselves in a particular way that adheres to those rules, despite not receiving adequate resources from their record labels. Even more-so, the sexual violence inflicted onto  Black women’s bodies because they are curvier or more voluptuous are thought to be justified. As a result of these societal, cultural, and political forces, Black women are socialized to keep their distance from anything that could perceive them as Jezebel-like. 

“Instead of men controlling themselves, respecting women's bodies, and having boundaries, it is the woman's responsibility to do that, by covering herself, by contorting herself into whatever boundary or rules are created to make them more palatable around men and to make them more palatable to the women peers around them,” says Christie. “That extends to color.”

There is a reason why Beyoncé decided to use the color red for “ Can’t B Broken ,” her Super Bowl commercial with Verizon. She wanted to be seen. She wanted to be heard. She wanted to tell Nashville that she is doing country her way, all the while honoring the legion of Black women in country music who came before her. 

In the official visualizer for “ Texas Hold ‘Em ,” Beyoncé in a mixture of black and silver walks onto the screen in a beehive, side ponytail and bang, a clear homage to Linda Martell , the first Black female country star. The style, which was immortalized in the May 1970 issue of Ebony, shows Martell on a press tour at WSM Radio alongside fellow country music legend Jeannie C. Riley on the heels of Martell’s  first appearance at the Grand Ole Opry in 1969. With this performance, Martell made history as the first Black female artist to perform on the highly esteemed music show.

But despite Martell’s legendary career, she experienced intense mistreatment and harassment by the country music industry. While at Plantation Records, the record label that she was signed to, Martell expressed discomfort with the label’s name because of its racist history. In addition to racial discomfort, she fell victim to a predatory contract. When she left Plantation Records, Shelby Singleton, the label founder, blacklisted Martell from any opportunities in the country music industry.

Read More: How Beyoncé Fits Into the Storied Legacy of Black Country

When Beyonce sweeps up her hair into an illustrious beehive and side swept bangs, it is a homage to Martell. Without saying a word, she is honoring the pioneering efforts of Martell and the Black women country artists of that time, while also sounding an alarm to the country music genre:that she expects to be treated with respect. For the entire world has their eyes on Beyoncé as she enters the country music industry for the second time. But it is not Beyoncé who should be in fear—it is Nashville. 

In a celebratory dinner with her husband Jay Z to commemorate Valentine’s Day, Beyonce appeared in mourning dress . Her Black Southern Gothic look drew inspiration from the post-Civil war period where widows wore a mourning veil for an alloted period of time. The question is: whose death is she calling into existence? The death of the country genre? The death of the barriers that restrict Black women from achieving success in country? Or has she become death itself? An omen of what’s to come.  

If Jezebel has to be one to kill the country genre, so be it. It is time for the church girl and the Jezebel to be seen as one in the same. It is time for the structures that govern and police Black women’s bodies to die. And it’s time we bury the old ways country music has been governed by into the ground.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• Jane Fonda Champions Climate Action for Every Generation
• Biden’s Campaign Is In Trouble. Will the Turnaround Plan Work?
• Why We're Spending So Much Money Now
• The Financial Influencers Women Actually Want to Listen To
• Breaker Sunny Choi Is Heading to Paris
• Why TV Can’t Stop Making Silly Shows About Lady Journalists
• The Case for Wearing Shoes in the House
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

L.S.U.’s Kim Mulkey Courts Controversy With Style

Inside the coach’s winning fashion playbook.

By Vanessa Friedman

The smog of a Washington Post exposé may have been hanging over Kim Mulkey’s head during the L.S.U. game on Saturday afternoon, but the highest paid coach in women’s collegiate basketball wasn’t going to hide. How could you tell?

Well, in part because at the start of the N.C.A.A. tournament, she had given a news conference threatening a lawsuit about the article, thus calling to attention to it. In part because there she was, running up and down the sidelines and screaming her head off. And it part because … goodness, what was she wearing?

A gleaming pantsuit covered in a jumble of Op Art sequined squiggles, as if Big Bird had met Liberace and they’d teamed up for “Project Runway.”

Even in the context of basketball, a sport in which players and coaches understood the power of personal branding through clothes long before almost any other athletes, Ms. Mulkey stands out. More than perhaps anyone else in the league — possibly in all of women’s basketball — she has made her image a talking point, a reflection of her own larger-than-life personality and a tool to draw attention to her sport. She is basketball’s avatar of the Trumpian era, offering a new version of The Mulkey Show at every game and costuming herself for the moment. As her team meets the University of Iowa again in the Elite Eight, brand Mulkey will most likely be raising the stakes once more.

It would be wrong to call her clothes “fashion.” They have little to do with trends or silhouette. But love what she wears or hate it, love how she behaves or hate it, her sometimes ridiculous, always eye-catching outfits are, like her winning record, abrasive personality and problematic comments , impossible to ignore.

“She’s the OG example of how to capitalize on who you are,” said Sydney Bordonaro, a stylist who works with seven W.N.B.A. players and was herself a Division I basketball player. “How many eyes are on her during each game? How could you not take advantage of that opportunity? It’s priceless.”

As such, and as the women’s game becomes increasingly popular and new N.I.L. rules put a premium on the monetization of image and identity, Ms. Mulkey is fast becoming the author of a different kind of playbook. One that has made her a lightning rod not just because of her coaching style, but because of her style as a coach.

“She has built herself into a brand,” said Mitchell S. Jackson, the author of “Fly: The Big Book of Basketball Fashion.” “It’s about ratings and about personality.”

A Brief History of Basketball Coach Fashion

It was the Lakers coach Pat Riley who set the tone for sideline fashion back in the 1980s when he adopted a wardrobe of Armani suits, using clothes to convey his ambition and polish. “He became the standard-bearer,” Mr. Jackson said. “But he also blended in.”

Pat Summitt, who spent 38 years as the women’s basketball coach at the University of Tennessee, took a similar approach, becoming known for her shoulder pads and power suits. As Lindsay Gibbs, the founder of the newsletter Power Plays, pointed out, female coaches had long understood that “they were being scrutinized to a different level” and that what they wore was going to play a role whether they liked it or not.

Yet overall, it has been the men who have garnered much of the attention — perhaps because they also had the paychecks and the discretionary income. And perhaps because the W.N.B.A. has a long and fraught history with gender stereotyping, which for years saw the organization pushing classically “feminine” ideals, including offering hourlong makeup and hair tutorials for rookies to combat traditionalist nervousness about powerful female athletes and all they represent.

In recent years, and especially in the men’s game, the coaches have ceded the spotlight to the players, opting to dress in team apparel rather than designer clothes, even as their on-court stars have ended up on the front row of fashion shows. Ms. Mulkey is an alternative to all that.

And though she is not the only style-forward coach in the game — Dawn Staley of South Carolina , Adia Barnes of the University of Arizona, and Sydney Carter, the director of player development for the University of Texas are lauded for their image-making flair — Ms. Mulkey is the most extreme. She has been compared to a Who from Dr. Seuss’s Whoville , Ric Flair of WrestleMania and a flamingo . (Well, she has been called a “rare bird.”)

Whether you consider her looks merely “eccentric,” as Ms. Bordonaro does, or straight from “the Las Vegas clown section,” as Tom Broecker, the costume designer of “Saturday Night Live,” does, it may matter less than the fact that you consider them at all.

“She’s making a statement about her individuality and determination to be herself, no matter what,” Ms. Gibbs of Power Plays said. “It has become something people look out for, and she’s leaning in.”

Sparkle, Sparkle, Sparkle

Ms. Mulkey’s penchant for outré dress began to emerge during her 21 years at Baylor, in which she led her team to three national championships. During that time, she also courted controversy with comments dismissing the university’s sexual misconduct scandal and her treatment of her star player, Brittney Griner, who has talked publicly about being told to stay in the closet by her coach and to cover her tattoos. (Later, Ms. Mulkey did not speak up when Ms. Griner was imprisoned in Russia in 2022.) Still, her style was a lot more “normal, for want of a better word,” Ms. Gibbs said.

It was during L.S.U.’s run to the N.C.A.A. trophy last year that Ms. Mulkey vaulted from basketball fame to national fame, thanks in part to her penchant for sequins, feathers and lurid color combinations. She wore a black and white sequined polka-dot pantsuit, a Kelly green and hot pink plaid jacket with pink feathers on the sleeves, a rose-pink jacket with enormous … well, roses, on the sleeves and, for the final game, an allover sequined tiger-stripe pantsuit. (The tiger is the L.S.U. mascot.) Riding in the celebration parade afterward, she chose a purple sequined jacket with more tigers.

It is not a coincidence that one of Ms. Mulkey’s favorite labels is called Queen of Sparkles . Designed by Jaime Glas, it is sold at the Baton Rouge store Rodéo Boutique, where Ms Mulkey reportedly gets many of her outfits — or where Jennifer Roberts, the L.S.U. director of women’s basketball player personnel and influence, gets them for her. At this point, according to a 2023 article on her closet in the Louisiana daily The Advocate , she has 171 pairs of shoes and “29 glittery jackets.”

“Look, we’re from Louisiana,” Ms. Mulkey said , by way of explaining her taste. “We like sparkles, we like diamonds, we like Mardi Gras, we like to eat and we like to party.”

Whatever the reason, her choices have meant that even people with no particular interest in basketball (like the FUG girls ) have suddenly begun watching the games. “People tune in to see what she’s wearing,” Mr. Jackson said.

And Ms. Mulkey understands the stakes. When she gave that news conference about the Washington Post article at the start of the N.C.A.A. tournament, she left the sequins behind for the institutional security of a simple long-sleeve purple L.S.U. T-shirt. As if to remind everyone what a team player she really is.

Vanessa Friedman has been the fashion director and chief fashion critic for The Times since 2014. More about Vanessa Friedman

Inside the World of Sports

Dive deeper into the people, issues and trends shaping professional, collegiate and amateur athletics..

The Kim Mulkey Show: The L.S.U. women’s basketball coach has made her fashion choices a talking point , a reflection of her own larger-than-life personality and a tool to draw attention to the sport.

Pushing Back on Betting: People can now legally wager on the individual performances of student athletes. The N.C.A.A. isn’t happy .

Back to the Big Time: For those wanting to trace the evolution of money and college sports over the past half-century, Southern Methodist University offers a perfect example .

Hope in Little Tokyo: For a Los Angeles community contending with gentrification and an aging population, the Japanese baseball star Shohei Ohtani’s accession with the Dodgers has been galvanizing .

Ice Skating and the Brain: How do champion skaters accomplish their extraordinary jumps and spins? Brain science is uncovering clues .