This is What an Activist Looks Like

“...Clothes have, they say, more important offices than to merely keep us warm. They change our view of the world and the world’s view of us.” - Virginia Woolf 

From the white gowns of the Suffragettes to the red ‘liberty’ caps worn by the sans-culottes in the French Revolution, we have seen different marginalised communities use clothing to  fight for a cause countless times in history. The subject of clothing being a weapon in order to unite people of all genders, colours, and classes as a sign of resistance against forces opposed to them has not only fascinated the world but also begs the question: how did fashion become a symbol for community and rebellion?

The main idea of a movement developing a sort of fashion style can be deeply rooted in individualization, since the more identifiable a group appears in protests, crowds, or even in the media, the more influence and popularity they are able to gather, which can in turn help them gain more awareness and supporters for their cause. An example of a major movement that has adopted and developed this approach can be seen stretching as far back as the Suffragette movement in the early 1900s, with the establishment of the W.S.P.U. (or Women’s Social and Political Union) in 1903, which re-energised the 'Votes for Women' campaign. However, it wasn't until 5 years later, in June 1908, that their cause was brought to nation-wide attention, when the W.S.P.U. decided to hold its first 'monster meeting' to celebrate Women's Sunday, which attracted thousands of women from all over the U.K. dressed in white dresses with tricolour sashes that included the colours: purple (to represent loyalty), white (for purity, as well as to contrast the dark suits of men that occasionally were within the crowd protesting against their campaign), and green (for hope), as they marched in seven different processions from Central London to Hyde Park, drawing up a crowd of up to 300,000 people. From the perspective of a spectator (from both the past and future), it would be an understatement to state that the rally was a success The use of this distinct dress code reflected the power of the Suffragettes as a community stemming through sisterhood and perseverance, while reenforcing the key principles and message of a movement through a visual impact. As Case Western Reserve University history Professor Einav Rabinovitch-Fox, PhD, tells Teen Vogue in their article ‘The History of the Colour White and Women’s Suffrage Movement’:

“The movement realised that gaining the right to vote would require building a new more appealing image of what it means to advocate for women’s rights”.

Previous fashion trends that have attempted to ‘liberate’ women through fashion, such as the bloomer, which consisted of a shortened skirt and trousers, resembling the shalwar kameez of Central and South Asia, were only met with ridicule, with the first blow coming from British humour magazine ‘Punch', which described the garment as a "masquerade frippery" that promoted ‘female radicalism’. An assumption that would only trigger a chain reaction as the term (Bloomerism) quickly became well associated with scandalous behaviours of women that stepped out of the boundaries of the patriarchy, such as smoking, drinking, leaving their husbands or children, and serving in the military. As Suffragist, Mary S. Bull recounts in a contemporary view entitled: "Women’s Rights and Other ‘Reforms’ in Seneca Falls", two Bloomer’s and women’s rights activists by the names of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Elizabeth Smith Miller were "followed by a crowd of boys yelling, singing, and laughing, while every door and window was lined with staring faces". Later outlines by Stanton herself state the social and familial impacts she had suffered having chosen to wear the garment, ranging from her sons not wanting to be seen with her, her father banning the outfit from her house, and her husband, Henry, who was a New York State Senator, warning her that "some good Democrats said they would not vote for a man whose wife wore the bloomers", which left her torn to choose either her own comfort or conform to societal expectations of dress-wear. This gendered divide in fashion was not classified by just gender but also by class, with the origination of this great divide beginning in Europe. During England’s regency era from the 1790s to the 1820s, there was a striking change in fashion that was greatly influenced by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, which greatly centred on marking the distinction between people from the aristocracy and the poorer classes. Quickly embraced by the general public, which included the middle and lower classes, they began rejecting the aesthetic and extravagance well associated with the aristocracy and opted for comfortability and functionality that would aid them during their day-to-day jobs. In comparison, fashion trends led by young aristocrats like Beau Brummel became significant ‘models’ for many high society members during the phase of dandyism, which centred around being a "man about town", or socialite. This phenomenon not only paved the way for the modern suit but also made the gap between gendering clothes more apparent by adding patriarchal characteristics and generalisations, which vigorously classified many people into one of two genders, with rules making it almost impossible (and even criminal) for either to dress in the other's garments. With this turmoil tormenting a majority of these Suffragettes, the demise of the bloomer spread internationally, leading British Suffragettes to strive to instead conform to patriarchal fashion ‘rules', with Emmeline Pethnick-Lawrence (co-editor of Votes for Women and member of the W.S.P.U.) devising a colour scheme that would not only enhance their visual community but also make sure that the colours had the potential to be readily available and accessible for every woman who wanted to be a part of the movement since white clothing (a colour that is well-associated with the Suffragettes today) was known to be cheap. Moreover, noting the change of century leading to the change of clothing style in 1908, women’s fashion abandoned the multi-layered, uncomfortable gowns adorned with corsets and steel underskirts of the mid-1800s and exchanged them for a more light and freeing dress that didn’t forsake their femininity. The successful dress code led the American Suffragettes to adopt the dress code style with minor alterations that included the colour yellow instead of green to represent hope, as they first adorned the colours on March 3, 1913, the day before Woodrow Wilson was to be sworn into office, protesting women’s exclusion from the democratic process leading up to the presidential race.

Alternatively, a major diaspora that benefited from using fashion as a means of freedom and rebellion, as well as defying certain racial biases and expectations, was the Black community. During the civil rights movement of 1954–1968, many Black-Americans attempted to fight against injustices and prejudices set unfairly before them that treated them as nothing less than lower-class citizens. One of these acts of prejudice included the Jim Crow laws, which were installed in the South and aimed to marginalise Black people from white people in order to belittle their progress from the Reconstruction that oversaw the development of Black individuals in roles of leadership, such as in the judicial sector and in Public Offices. Since attempting to diverge and fight against these acts of bigotry and stereotypes, many Black-Americans turned towards fashion in order to showcase and diverge the stereotypes that Black people were incompetent, messy, and lazy. This was further evident in non-violent protests that involved bus boycotts, freedom rides, and sit-ins, where protesters wore their "Sunday best" to further personify the passive efforts of a non-violent resistance. However, Black fashion and its empowerment of the community would not be as evident until the founding of the Black Panther Party in 1966 by Merritt Junior College students Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale, with the intention to combat the rising cases of police brutality among the Black community following the assassination of human rights activist and Black nationalist Malcolm X and the death of an unarmed Black teenager (named Matthew Johnson) at the hands of San Francisco police. Unlike the Black nationalist groups before their establishment, who embraced their ‘origins’ tracing back to Africa, by adoring head wraps and ank necklaces, the younger Black nationalists, such as Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale, opposed the aesthetic due to believing that its "opportunist cultural practitioners operating as front men to further exploit black people and impede on the real revolutionary image", as Mary Vargas writes in the article "Fashion statement or political statement: The use of Fashion to express black pride during the civil rights and black power movements of the 1960’s" and instead opted for black leather jackets, powder blue shirts, black pants, shoes, gloves, and most importantly, a beret, which was chosen by both Seale and Newton after seeing a movie about the French resistance against the Nazis during WW2. Vargas says, "They felt that it was a strong symbol of militancy, and such militancy was what they wished the Black Panther Party to convey". This ode could not only be said about their choice of garment but also about their all-black colour choice, which stood out to be a strong reclamation of how powerful, beautiful, and strong the colour was, not only by itself but most importantly as a whole (in a community). 

Overall, since the likes of the Black Panther Party and the Suffragettes, we have seen some major improvements within the fashion world that have took influence from these icons and carried on the torch to pave the way for communities alike to be able to single-handedly represent, communicate, and personify a community for people (past, present and emerging) who want to wear their beliefs on their sleeve.