During the PPP government, when politician Hina Rabbani Khar was appointed as our foreign minister, the government official came under intense scrutiny for her wardrobe. Not that it was inappropriate for someone belonging to an Islamic republic but because it featured items that if put together in a collection, would probably cost more than our national education budget.
The US Presidential hopeful wants to remain front and center in the limelight but it’s her wardrobe that’s generating a buzz.
During the PPP government, when politician Hina Rabbani Khar was appointed as our foreign minister, the government official came under intense scrutiny for her wardrobe. Not that it was inappropriate for someone belonging to an Islamic republic but because it featured items that if put together in a collection, would probably cost more than our national education budget. The debate surrounding Khar’s wardrobe bounced back and forth between whether it was the right of the privileged to lead an indulgent life or whether political representatives should adopt austerity to reflect their country’s economic strife. The furor didn’t subside until Khar stepped down from the position and to date, she’s best known for the Birkin she carried on her premier trip to India.
Another politician to come under fire recently for a similar issue is none other than US presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton. Clinton sparked outrage on Twitter and across social media when fashion hawks identified her wearing a $12000 Armani jacket during her victory speech which focused mainly on injustice and inequality. The irony of the moment was not lost on media commentators who were quick to call her out since Clinton has consistently tried to appeal as “every woman” but hasn’t been able to quite find her groove yet.
The question remains though: does it really matter how expensive Clinton’s wardrobe is? She is after all, running to be the President of America, which isn’t a poor, economically unstable state. She is also the wife of an ex-President which probably entitles her to some privileges and was a well-respected lawyer before turning to politics. Why is it that her merit or politics are being questioned over the cost of her wardrobe? Republican nominee Donald Trump wears bespoke suits that each cost around $7000 but his wardrobe has never sparked the same amount of indignation that Clinton’s did. In fact, even more amusingly, when Sarah Palin was running as Joe Biden’s vice presidential mate the GOP invested $150,000 in her wardrobe to ensure that Palin’s style would resonate with the voters during her campaign trail.
Clinton is often pitted against Michelle Obama, who regularly dons designer wear including couture pieces by Naeem Khan, which we can assure readers costs a lot more than the former’s Armani jacket. Obama is lauded for her style while many often complain that Clinton needs to adopt a more approachable sartorial stance than the power suits she prefers. It appears to be a typical case of reducing a woman to a glorified object, where even the smart ones need to look socially presentable and that too on our terms, for us to take them seriously.
