Kamala Harris's sartorial choices have become a significant part of the narrative surrounding her political journey in the United States. From the beginning of her career, Harris has consistently worn pantsuits, a choice that reflects both a strategic alignment with the traditional image of power in American politics and a subtle assertion of her identity as a woman of color navigating a predominantly male-dominated arena.
In the U.S., suits have long been synonymous with authority and leadership, particularly in the realm of politics. The image of a U.S. President without a suit is almost unimaginable, as it has become a visual shorthand for presidentiality. This association extends to female politicians as well, with figures like Hillary Clinton adopting suits as a symbol of their readiness to assume the highest office. However, Harris’s choice to wear pantsuits goes beyond mere conformity to this norm; it is a deliberate, nuanced statement.
Harris’s decision to consistently wear pantsuits can be seen as a way to claim space in a field historically dominated by men. By adopting the suit—a staple of political power—she signals her competence and readiness to lead while also navigating the challenges that come with being a woman in a leadership role. This is especially significant considering the intense scrutiny that women in politics face regarding their appearance, where any deviation from the expected can invite criticism.
The symbolism in Harris's sartorial choices became particularly evident during the Democratic National Convention when she wore a tan suit—a color choice that harkened back to Barack Obama's infamous tan suit moment. This was not just a fashion statement but a subtle nod to the political legacy she aims to inherit and continue. The tan suit, once criticized when worn by Obama, became a powerful visual connection between Harris and the former President, emphasizing continuity and shared values.
Harris’s style also embodies the balance between power and femininity. Her pantsuits are often paired with blouses and soft-toned pearls, blending the traditional masculine connotations of the suit with elements that highlight her identity as a woman. This combination allows her to project authority without sacrificing her personal style, offering a visual representation of her approach to leadership—strong, yet inclusive of her unique identity.
The use of pearls in Harris's wardrobe is particularly symbolic, dating back to her time at Howard University, where she was a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the first black sorority in the United States. Pearls have since become a part of her political identity, connecting her current role with her roots and the sisterhood that has supported her journey.
Harris’s clothing choices are also carefully calibrated to avoid the pitfalls that have ensnared other female politicians. While Hillary Clinton's pantsuits were often criticized as being too bold or costume-like, Harris’s selections are more subdued, striking a balance that feels accessible and relatable to the electorate. Her choices reflect an understanding of the “imagination barrier” that voters often face, where the mental image of a President is typically white, male, and suited. By wearing suits that are neither too bold nor too dull, Harris subtly redefines this image, making space for a woman of color in the highest office.
Her fashion choices are not just about aesthetics; they are a tool for storytelling. Harris uses her clothing to communicate her values, her identity, and her vision for America. For instance, during Biden’s inauguration, she wore outfits designed by Black designers, and when Biden declared victory, she chose a white Carolina Herrera suit to honor the suffragettes and the women who paved the way for her. These choices are intentional, weaving her personal narrative into the broader story of American politics.
Harris’s approach to fashion is also pragmatic. Experts note that her choice of neutral tones allows her personality, rather than her clothing, to take center stage. This strategy ensures that her message and policies are what voters focus on, rather than her appearance, while still allowing her to use fashion as a subtle means of self-expression.
In a political landscape where women are often judged more harshly than their male counterparts for their appearance, Harris’s sartorial strategy is one of calculated resistance. She challenges stereotypes not by rejecting traditional forms of power dressing, but by reinterpreting them in a way that reflects her identity and aspirations. By doing so, she destroys the notion that women in power must conform to rigid, masculine norms to be taken seriously.
Harris’s story, told through her clothing, is one of resilience, identity, and empowerment. She wears the suit of a leader but infuses it with her own narrative, making it clear that while her clothing is a tool for communication, it is not the focus. The focus is on Harris herself—her policies, her vision, and the history she is making as she steps into the spotlight, threading her story with every suit she wears.
