Fashion is a practice that individuals use to express identity
Introduction
Fashion says a lot about individuals and our society than we can give credit to. Fashion exhibits social evolution of humans in different aspects. Through appearance style which is either personal interpretations or resistance to fashion, a person announces who they are, who they want to be and who they do not want to be. Fashion has been used as an identifier of certain groups of people or subcultures for instance occupation, religious identity, social class, music type etc. For instance, in 1990`s wearing of baggy t-shirts and trousers was associated with hip-hop music culture. If you saw somebody rocking these items of clothing, you would definitely identify the person as a hip hop music fan (Freitas et al.1997, p.327).
Often appearance style visually articulates multiple and overlapping identities such as ethnicity, sexuality, aesthetics, gender, age, politics and national identity. These identities are not usually present and influence one`s awareness of one identity or another. While some identities such as whiteness, masculinity, heterosexuality are considered to be natural, intersecting identities are difficult to put in context in relation to who we want to be or associated with. It has been observed that sexuality and gender are tricky to navigate and the tools of style like clothing and fashion for instance, are very helpful in analyzing the similarities and differences among the studied population. Since the queer subculture has been viewed in terms of medical, immoral or social problems, homosexuals have utilized fashion to construct presentational styles to conceal or reveal their true identities (Stets and Burke 2000, p. 226). This paper looks at different ways in which queer community uses fashion as a way of to express identity.
Fashion and identity construction
The aspect of individual and collective selves is an important one in identity disclosure as people define who they are according to groups they belong to. (Bucholtz and Hall 2005, p.586) pointed out that people represent who they are by using fashion and other aspects such as music. A study conducted by Schofield and Ruth sought to explore the clothing behavior of homosexual men. Identity presentation revealed by the study indicated that there were three different types of individual gay identity construction expressed in clothing. These were tribal identity, shared gay identity and situational identity. They realized that gays used their clothing to signify their sexuality, attract and appeal to other sexual partners and in most situations to blend into the homosexual or heterosexual society. Identity is now viewed as a matter of systematic establishment and signification between individuals and collectivities.
The need by the gay community to navigate one's identity in the 1990`s led to emergence of the hanky code. This was a wordless means of communication that was used for recognition in different social situations. Gay males who participated in this form of coding used to place handkerchiefs of different colors in the back pockets of their pants. The right side was used for submissive partners while the left side was for dominant sexual partners (Walker, 2015, N.p).
Figure 1.
Bruce Springsteen (Walker, 2015).
According to the image above, the red handkerchief is worn in the right-back pocket which connotes a submissive sexual role. On this cover of Bruce Springsteen of his 1984 album, suggested that he was interested in sexual favors with other men (Walker, 2015, N.p.).
During the early 1970`s many women centered on masculinity as a public image to signal other lesbians. They used masculine markers such as a collar tie and trousers as a means of asserting difference. In America women were required to wear three pieces of women`s clothing and it was illegal to be found in men`s clothing. The public negatively reacted to lesbianism in what was known as the “butch” (referred to masculine center of women) lesbianism. American activist and lesbian writer Wendy Somerson looked so masculine that she earned the name “bull dyke” from teenagers (Nestle 1988, p.100). However, not all lesbians prefer wearing male attires, some prefer female outfits such as skirts, make up hair and shoes (Walker, 2015, N.p)
Walker (2015, N.p) points out that despite homosexuality and lesbianism being morally wrong and illegal in most countries, this has forced many of them to live virtually undetected. Not until the gay liberation movement in the early 1970s the most crucial part of dressing in public for gay men was to be “seen” as heterosexual. None the less, many were alert of the subtle signs that could be used as a sexual pass (Davis 1992, p.23). These signs were often in the form of a particular accessory or item of clothing. During the 1890s a green carnation was used as a symbol. During this time, the color green was often associated with gays and those of queer sexual nature. These symbols often change over time as each generation tries to find an item they can relate to. Over time it was green suits, red neckties and suede shoes (Crane 2000, p.12)
By the early 1970s, lesbians and gays all over the world started advocating for their right not to be treated as second class citizens and an end the stereotype. While demanding for recognition and equality, gays and lesbians profoundly changed their style and appearance. Prior to this, these men wore masculine attires but in the early 70s, gay men wore bold masculine attires such as construction attire, cowboy outfits and rugged jeans as their new form of style and identity. They adopted and started to wear masculine attires they could find and donned short haircuts (Freitas et al 1997, p.332).
Their clothes were descriptively chosen to appreciate contours in the male body. Some developed their sexual preferences by trying sadomasochism. The gay community adopted a lifestyle known as “Leatherman”. The Leatherman style involved a strict way of dressing and a new method of signifiers, notably, colored handkerchiefs in the back pocket declaring your sexual interest. With time, the image was linked to older HIV positive gay men. Currently, gays have celebrated their bodies through having strong muscular frames and “gym” bodies. Other sub cultural styles that have been adopted by gay men include having shaven heads, wearing boots and bold chains (Guy and Banim 2000, p. 317).
The beginning of gay rights movement led to a change in stereotype on how lesbians and gas were perceived. Trousers had become increasingly popular and acceptable for women and it was impossible to pick out lesbians on basis of trouser wearing. The term “androgyny” was coined in fashion. In the beginning, the move was aimed at giving men a more female look but staunch gay and lesbian societies declined this for a more masculine look for both genders (Butler 2011, p.245).
The increase in radical feminism saw a denial of forced femininity. Baggy trousers, flat shoes and faces with no makeup sent a strong message about not dressing to please men. A new stereotype of the lesbian emerged, this was of the dungaree wearing and short haired feminists. The 90s saw a change and diversification in how lesbians dressed. The fading of butch and femme divides, the changes forced in women’s dress by feminism and the strong emergence of lesbians in public social circles stirred up a debate on what lesbians should wear. (Ang 2000, p.11). One development in this time was the emergence of lipstick popularly known as designer dyke. Dressing codes moved away from the now seen backward butch style and allowed gay women to adopt a trendy urban look that had subtle hints of lesbianism masked in heterosexuality (Reddy-Best and Pedersen 2015, p.58).
Fashion as a means to express self
After the 1970s stigma and hate towards the association of gays and fashion began to dwindle. With the steady rise in intercultural fashion and information, it was presumed normal for young boys to be interested in fashion and design. John Stephen, who started a boutique called Carnaby street fashions produced designer clothes more quickly, less expensive and for the young generation. He is credited for starting boutiques that sold fitting clothes for the gay clientele (Stets and Burke 2000, p.228).
However, some people just want to fit in the trend or certain fashion preferences and has nothing to do with identity especially now that homosexuality is being accepted by the society. In the fashion industry, a large segment of men who work in this field are gay (Kaiser 1999, p.75). All through the twentieth century, most who have worked in creative, theatre and service industry have been highlighted by historians as so. Some of the top designers that are known to be homosexuals include Yves saint Laurent, Christian Dior, Cristobal Balenciaga, Versace and Calvin Klein (Crane 2012, p.67). Despite this, it can be argued that the consumers of their products are not necessarily gay. The wearers of the clothes want to identify with the trend or brand and not rather the sexual orientation of the creator or designer. This suggests that not all times fashion articulates identity.
The modern consumer is moving away from concerns with elaborate artifice towards individual expressions (Breward, 2003, p. 200). For instance, a person may wear red color not because they want to identify with certain identity but because they feel loved and want to express that feeling. Modernity has created a dislocation and fragmentation in the fashion industry from class to consumer fashion. In figure highlighted above, Bruce Springsteen who is a musical celebrity is seen in a gay dress code. Being a person of influence some of his fans may feel cool to wear the same outfit not to express their gay identity but to identify with his music. This shows that fashion can bring overlapping identities and send mixed messages that may not be true as perceived by the receiver (Wilson, 1985, p.12)
For centuries clothing has been used to express identity for instance social class, religion identity, or sexual orientation among public spaces. In the 1970s gay utilized fashion and clothing to identify other gays among in hetero sexual functions (Kellner, 1994, p.7). In the twenty first century, we have witnessed emergence of subcultural groupings that use prop material and commercial culture to mark their difference and freedom. (Breward 2003, p. 222). Identity has many advantages over the fixed concept of personality therefore we can conclude that identity is not “self”. (Gregory, 1965 N.p). Miniskirts is such a fashion that expresses freedom of dress choice among women.
Figure 2.
A lady dressed in a Miniskirt (Prettylittlething.com 2018)
Conclusion
Fashion combines various aesthetic, political, and social elements that complicate about how fashion can be considered as a vital space of the efforts on the creation of identities. The term fashion refers to dynamic change of style and meaning that symbolize the innovations in clothing. The clear definition of items of clothing in both genders illustrate the difference in social construction in gender identities that goes beyond the biological sex. Fashion has been viewed as a product of culture with multiple forms that reflects the concerns and predictions of the society. While still people use fashion to express identity today, the modern day consumer is more leaned more towards expressing self. Fashion is inherently ambiguous and contradicting because of the uncertainties of responses that may be caused by the garment.
Fashion has also been identified to reveal the hidden fears and desires of the wearer. The dressing can also protect the wearer from the outsiders of his group who may be unable to understand the reason why an individual covers their entire body such as the encoded dressing associated with homosexuals. The liquidity of fashion demonstrates the diversity of culture, the facets of which must be displayed and captured allowing the fluency of the definitions of gender sexuality and identity (Ross and Harradine 2011, p. 309).
Clothing and fashion demonstrate the unconscious and conscious view of morality, the ideology of the fashion designer and that of the wearer’s. Fashion is superficial but it is not sociologically inconsequential. Fashion has shown to have great influence, on the social structure through the creation of different identities, including gender. Fashion is not only concerned with the creation of sophisticated images that is intended to smoothen the reality of the body that faces the cruelty of our culture (Reddy-Best and Pedersen 2015, p.61).
References.
Ang, I., 2000. Identity Blues. In Without Guarantees: In Honour of Stuart Hall., London: pp.11.
Breward, C., 1995. The Culture of Fashion. Manchester, U.K.: Manchester University Press, pp. 200.
Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K., 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse studies, 7(4-5), pp.585-614.
Butler, J., 2011. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge 9(3), pp.241-247
Craik, J., 2009. Fashion: the key concepts (Vol. 1). Bloomsbury Academic. (6), pp.71- 80
Crane, D., 2000. Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender, and Identity in Clothing. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, pp.12
Crane, D., 2012. Fashion and its social agendas: Class, gender, and identity in clothing. University of Chicago Press (3), pp. 67
Davis, F., 1992. Fashion, Culture, and Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 23
Freitas et al., 1997. "Appearance Management as Border Construction: Least Favorite Clothing, Group Distancing, and Identity … Not!" Sociological Inquiry 67, no. 3: 323-335
Gregory, P., 1965. Appearance and the Self. In Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order. Edited by Mary Ellen Roach and Joanne B. Eicher. New York: Wiley,
Guy, A. and Banim, M., 2000. Personal collections: Women's clothing use and identity. Journal of gender studies, 9(3), pp.313-327.
Kaiser, S., 1999. Identity, Postmodernity, and the Global Apparel Marketplace. The Meanings of Dress. New York: Fairchild Publications. pp. 75
Kaiser, Susan B., Richard N, and Sandra S. Hutton., 1991. "Fashion, Postmodernity and Personal Appearance: A Symbolic Interactionist Formulation." Symbolic Interaction 14, no. 2: pp. 165-185
Kellner, D., 1994. Madonna, Fashion, and Identity." In On Fashion. Rutgers University Press, pp.7
Nestle, J., 1988. A Restricted Country: Essays and Short Stories. London: Sheba, pp. 100
Prettylittlething, 2018. Pretty Little Thing skirts.
Available at. https://www.prettylittlething.us/ [Accessed 10 March 2018].
Reddy-Best, K.L. and Pedersen, E.L., 2015. The relationship of gender expression, sexual identity, distress, appearance, and clothing choices for queer women. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 8(1), pp.54-65.
Ross, J. and Harradine, R., 2011. Fashion value brands: the relationship between identity and image. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 15(3), pp.306-325.
Stets, J.E. and Burke, P.J., 2000. Identity theory and social identity theory. Social psychology quarterly, pp.224-237.
Walker, J., 2015. A brief history of gay signaling, from hanky codes to that 'what gay guys are actually like' Available at. https://splinternews.com/a-brief-history-of-gay-signaling-from-hanky-codes-to-t-1793847578
[Accessed 10 March 2018].
Wilson, E., 1995. Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, pp.12
