The suspense is over

Speculation began weeks ago about what Justice Elena Kagan would wear with her robes for the Supreme Court "class photo" last week. Specifically, would she opt for a collar or jabot the way Justices O'Connor and Ginsburg have done? Or would she go without, as Justice Sotomayor has done more often than not? On Friday, the day arrived, and there was no jabot in sight for Justice Kagan:

The Washington Post's Robin Givhan has already deconstructed this choice far beyond anything I could do, but I will say this: I wish that she had chosen perhaps a subtle light blue for her blouse instead of white. Justice Kagan's skin is so fair that from a distance (like when the photo is small) her collar blends in to her skin, and she looks a little like she's wearing a neck brace. Maybe something like this:

Pantsed

Did you hear? Elena Kagan was sworn in as a Justice of the Supreme Court. Oh, you did? Well did you hear she wore pants? She did!

I don't think we have any reason to fear the pants suit, as long as it is well-fitted, which this one is. Justice Kagan looks infinitely more comfortable in her clothes and her skin than she did in the skirt suits she wore during her Senate confirmation hearings.

Unfortunately, she's still gravitating to round bead necklaces that aren't very flattering, but considering that this is one of the last outfits a wide public audience will see her wear before she dons the big black robes, she made a good choice.

Now all the remains to be seen is what kind of collar she will pair with her robes. Justice Sotomayor wears one that Justice Ginsburg gave her as a gift when she joined the Court.

Elena Kagan got dressed. Two days in a row.

I suppose that after the Washington Post brouhaha over the appearance of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, I should have expected that people would be watching what she would wear during her Senate confirmation hearings. And sure enough, they did. 

In case you missed it, here's day 1:

Lots of praise out there for the blue color, and I don't disagree. She does well with this saturated royal blue. But the collar! It's such an oversize proportion and she is (famously) of a short stature, and those big black buttons just add to the overwhelming effect of that detail. She's back to her favorite necklace and earring set, which we've already mentioned is not the strongest choice for her either.

Day 2 got less attention, but I would say she looked better:

Medium gray works for just about everyone and this jacket, while less visually interesting, is a much better choice for her. We have another rounded necklace and earring set here, but it's an improvement over the perfectly round and reflective pearls.

What we wear matters - a response to Robin Givhan

I promised you that we would discuss Robin Givhan's controversial review of Elena Kagan's style. And so we shall. I'm sure by now you've read it, and read numerous responses, reviews and rehashes of it. If you haven't, maybe start with Fishbowl DC. 

In a way, it's the reaction that surprises me - this article is precisely what we would expect from Robin Givhan right now. It's what she was hired to do. She wrote a practically identical article about Sonia Sotomayor during her hearings. And although she makes comparison to the "utterly ordinary" style of Samuel Alito and the other male justices in the Kagan piece, there was no article about his fashion choices or body language. She wrote a similarly analytical (although significantly more flattering) essay on Nancy Pelosi when she became Speaker. These are prominent women in Washington and intense scrutiny is the name of the game.

I don't necessarily agree with Givhan - I don't think Kagan's style on the Hill was deliberately drab, nor do I think her appearance is the sole reason for persistent innuendo about her sexual orientation. And Givhan's suggestion that there would be "nothing profoundly inappropriate" about wearing platform stilettos in the halls of Congress other than the fact that it would fly in the face of expectations for a political figure is patently absurd. As if perception didn't matter in politics. Givhan has always had a profound disdain for what Washington considers appropriate to wear in any given situation, on no particular authority other than that she is a fashionista and not a Washingtonian.

But it's tough to blame a fashion critic for being, well, critical about fashion choices, even when she's wrong. ["Bland equals responsible. Matronly equals trustworthy." Please.] I do think Kagan could have made better choices for herself in some areas. Her jackets were too boxy for someone so famously short. Her jewelry, as I've said before, is in serious need of an update. And if you're wearing a skirt, you do need to keep your knees together. It's not like she was at risk of a Britney Spears-style flash, but any recruiter would tell you that body language matters in a job interview. Like it or not, if her look is drawing this much negative attention, there's a problem. And that is where Givhan and I sort of agree. In writing about Nancy Pelosi in 2006, she said this:

Attire is not the sole province of women, but in comparison with men, it remains an area in which they have the greater number of choices, more flexibility, the heavier burden. The public has already settled on the defining characteristics of a powerful man: He wears a dark suit that is well tailored. He pairs it with a crisp white shirt, and if he wishes to underscore his authority, he wears French cuffs. He wears a four-in-hand -- a bow tie if he wants to emphasize his eccentricity. He tries to look dignified and serious. But what does a woman of great power look like?

It's a valid question, and one that still hasn't been figured out. Pelosi has found one way, Condoleezza Rice found another - a way that Givhan clearly prefers, as she seems to spend so many column inches wistfully suggesting a return to that chic sexuality. With an Obama cabinet and administration full of so many prominent women - Hillary Clinton, Janet Napolitano, Kathleen Sebelius, if you've been reading carefully, you don't really need another list - we can see that there might be as many ways of dressing a powerful woman as there are powerful women.

People ask me all the time why I write this blog. Am I trying to be funny? Am I trying to be snarky? Do I want Robin Givhan's job? No, none of those. What we wear matters. What we look like communicates a message to our viewer, and women in politics don't need one more reason not to be heard. Bad clothes and sometimes "good" clothes can draw attention that distracts from our words simply because we are women. Making good choices about what we wear will help us get our point across. At least we are getting to a point where people are not just noticing but expressing outrage at the blatant sexism that makes a woman's wardrobe newsworthy in a way that a man's is not.

Homework assignment

Oh, yes, we're going to talk about Robin Givhan's article on Elena Kagan in the Washington Post. But I'm having a pretty busy week, so have a look at the article, and Senator Klobuchar's remarks below, and our previous coverage of both Kagan and Klobuchar, and then we'll talk.


Extra Credit: Read Pearls, Politics, and Power: How Women Can Win and Lead by Madeleine Kunin.

Too Many Circles for Elena Kagan

Whether or not you were expecting President Obama's announcement of Elena Kagan as his nominee for the Supreme Court, today's speeches were par for the course. Unfortunately, so was Ms. Kagan's jewelry:

This necklace and earring set is clearly a stand-by for the Solicitor General, worn frequently at her televised appearances. They're just not doing her any favors. The stark round shapes fight against the straight lines in her features and emphasize the roundness of her chin. The necklace is also a bit too long - if it hit her collar bone higher up, where the neckline of this dress falls, it would be in better harmony with the shape of her face.

She looks vibrant, healthy and even a bit more feminine than usual, in part because of the warm green color of her jacket and in part because of a warmer make up palette, both of which bring color to her face.

For now, Supreme Court hearings are not televised, but Ms. Kagan's comments in the past seem to indicate that that could change. I hope she's ready.