Presidential candidate Nikki Haley is an anomaly. Haley is the sole female contender vying for a spot on the ballot this November. The proud daughter of Indian immigrants, Haley stands out on the debate stage as a woman of color against her male counterparts. More eye-catching for some is that in a sea of suits, Nikki Haley wears skirts.
Americans are fixated on what women are wearing, despite everything else they bring to the table — Haley is no exception. In the third Republican debate this November, presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy referred to Haley as, “Dick Cheney in three-inch heels.”
Haley maintained her usual retort to this attention to her wardrobe and said, “I’d first like to say, they’re five-inch heels, and I don’t wear ’em unless you can run in ’em.” Haley continued to the sound of applause, “The second thing I will say is: I wear heels. They’re not for a fashion statement; they’re for ammunition.”
The public discourse about Haley’s wardrobe is no coincidence, as it is a clear intention of her campaign. “I don’t put up with bullies. And when you kick back, it hurts them more if you’re wearing heels,” said Haley at the conclusion of her three-and-a-half-minute campaign announcement video.
“The way she’s talked about herself and the only way she’ll seem to criticize Trump [is to say] that we need a new set of leaders: a younger, newer, bolder set of leaders,” said Richard Fox, Ph.D., associate chair of political science and international relations and recently appointed incoming dean of the Bellarmine College of Liberal Arts.
Haley is pulling ahead of Florida Governor Ron Desantis in GOP primary polls ahead of the election. Her success despite a deviation from a traditional political uniform could mean that womanhood may no longer be an issue to manage but an identity to embrace.
“I think Nikki Haley [is trying to convey] that [she] is fresh and different, and her dress may just be a smaller component of that broader message,” said Fox.
Historically, women tread the fine line that constitutes dressing for success in the political arena – not too feminine and frilly, but certainly not an overtly masculine suit and tie. Haley has mastered this limbo.
The New York Times pointed out that Haley specifically wears knee-length skirts, which encapsulates this paradox. Knee-length skirts evoke an image of traditional Sunday best for most. Yet, on a political stage, “she looks both acceptably conservative and radical at the same time.”
In another fashion, the power pantsuit was intrinsic to Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy. In her novel, “What Happened,” Clinton explained why she chose to conform to the typical political uniform.
“As a woman running for president, I liked the visual cue that I was different from the men but also familiar. A uniform was also an anti-distraction technique: Since there wasn’t much to say or report on what I wore, maybe people would focus on what I was saying instead,” wrote Clinton.
By putting herself in the same visual realm as her male counterparts, Clinton sought to remove her wardrobe from the conversation. What may now be seen as conforming to the male standard was once radical.
Although it was seldom enforced, women were not permitted to wear pants on Capitol Hill until 1993. The history of the female politician’s power pantsuit dates back to 1969, when Representative Charlotte T. Reid became the first woman to wear pants on the House floor, shocking her male colleagues. She caused a stir in the House, but the Senate upheld their formal dress code.
It was not until decades later that Senators Barbara Mikulski, Nancy Kassebaum and Carol Moseley-Braun led the Pantsuit Rebellion of 1993, fighting for the right for female representatives to wear pants on the Senate floor.
“I’m most comfortable wearing slacks, and well, for a woman to come on the (Senate) floor in trousers was viewed as a seismographic event,” Mikulski told CNN.
Moseley Braun told Vox that women in politics, “are held to a different standard across the board” than men when it comes to dress. As Haley’s skirts continue to make headlines today, it is clear that not much has changed.
Women have historically had to tread a fine line of never being too feminine, too masculine, too revealing, or too conservative to survive in the political realm. Representatives Reid, Mikulski, Kassebaum and Moseley-Braun once had to fight for their right to wear pants in Congress — to be afforded the once-exclusive opportunity to be comfortable in their workplace. Senator Hillary Clinton wore a pantsuit because to have her words heard like a man, she felt that she had to dress like one. Today, Haley is embracing femininity once more, which could indicate a new era.
While Haley’s wardrobe may seem a minute detail of her campaign, it could mark the beginning of a new era in politics — one in which women can embrace their femininity while still garnering political respect.