During a casual conversation the other day, a junior from university said humans use clothing as a mark of civilisation and distinction from other animals, but they fight over it just as beasts do. This indeed is an irony. History is strewn with instances of clothes becoming an article of contestation, conflict and controversy. The hijab row is the latest addition.
In the 19th century, when women took to pants in the U.S., they faced severe condemnation for causing “moral degeneration in society”. The rib-crushing corsets and leg-binding crinolines posed a health hazard for women wearing them regularly. Besides, these compromised their mobility to a considerable extent. It is revelatory to think that a logical and practical demand by women in the interest of their health and ease of movement could trigger such a backlash. And if you have half a mind to dismiss it as a 19th century shibboleth, be reminded of what happened in July 2021, barely a year ago. A 17-year-old girl in Deoria district of Uttar Pradesh was killed and hanged from a bridge by the men of her family for wearing jeans.
What made the men in both instances fear women in pants? Were they worried that if women started wearing the garment, they might take over more of the monopolistic privileges of men? If in 19th century America, the privilege in question was the right to vote, in the Deoria case, it was the freedom to decide what to wear. Patriarchy has been reluctant to share both kinds of freedom with women. While female suffrage may be a reality today, the right to choose one’s clothes is still denied to many women.
Humans started wearing clothes to protect themselves from harsh weather. Over time, clothes became much more than protective covering. They became markers of civilisation, modesty, religious identity, fashion, political expression and dissent. Sportspersons don symbols on their jerseys to show solidarity with wronged peoples or a cause.
Climate-conscious people with deep pockets are going for sustainable clothing as a statement against fast fashion. Thus, beyond their practical necessity, clothes have deep political ramifications.
During the 19th century, backward caste women in Kerala used to be attacked by upper caste men for covering the upper body. Today, there is a tug of war going on between women students who want to wear the hijab and educational institutions in Karnataka which ask them to remove this piece of religious attire that they say violates the uniform code. It brings to the fore yet again the problematic politics of sartorial choices.
We can cover our bodies with clothes, but can we cover our conscience with them too?
mohapatra.sarbani@gmail.com
