Clothing on Campus: Finding the Right Fit

A theme that continued to surface this week was how clothing, the first "words" we chose to exchange with those around us, is a deciding factor in our relationships with others. In class we continually referred back to the diagram --> | <--- depicting the impact clothing has on intimacy. Based on the examples we discussed, it seems clothing is a very powerful agent, but works in contradictory manners, both allowing us to traverse that boundary and grow closer to others, while at the same time creating exclusive categories and alienating one from another. In our society, clothing can be seen as a bonding opportunity. As exemplified in Mean girls, the scene in which Lindsey Lohan first makes a connection with the school's it crowd begins with the line, "get in the car loser, we're going shopping!" 

Based on my observation, and this could be very much skewed by the fact that I don't align or spend time with any religious groups, specific religious clothing is not very prevalent on campus. Clothing does, however, play a major role in forming various communities. Many of these groups engage in weekly meetings, practices, social events, etc. to give meaning to their time at Hamilton. Members of fraternities don Nantucket red shorts and Sperry's or sweat, snapbacks and Tims on the weekends. Athletes go to class in Hamilton apparel, Nike mid calfs, and a Gatorade water bottle. Yes these are classic stereotypes, but many of us still mold to them. And then there are those artsy darksiders. Although they strive to break outside the bounds of the accepted, these students end up creating their own category, expected  to wear rolled jeans and Birkenstocks.  When I was talking to a friend about clothing on campus he stated, "I mean I get they are trying to make a statement, but just wear normal clothes."  Just as in Shibana Mir's comment about Muslim women not dating, just because what they are doing is different from the people my friend surrounds himself with, he considered it "not normal". Based on our definition of pop-culture religion, fashion itself could be considered a religion on campus. Students follow fashion magazines and blogs, create rituals such as watching project runway with a certain group every week, and idolize designers and fashion forward celebrities as godlike figures. 

While clothing is a means of growing closer to our peers, both at Hamilton and in the outside world, it also builds barriers and increases exclusivity based on personal preference, socio- economic opportunity, and religion. In Shabana Mir's article, she notes how Muslim women are faced with a lose/lose situation. While wearing the hijab allows them to grow closer to other Muslim students, the garment alienates them from non-Muslim students. Alternatively if they don't wear it, Muslims will judge them. 

We select our clothes in order to experience intimacy and become part of a community. In doing so, however, we drive ourselves further from our true selves. As in the Adam and Eve story, nakedness is true authenticity. By piling layers of clothing on top of that, we create new identities and diminish that original intimacy. 

The New Cross

The clothes one wears will be the first impression of what they buy into to others. As Lurie pointed out, whether they wear it as a symbol of status or for an associated magic that goes with them, they are communicating who they wish to associate themselves with (whether or not they consciously mean to).
On a college campus, image often takes a high priority since it is part of  the development of individual identity, helping to exaggerate these impressions and making each association more significant. Body space is prime real-estate, and students have to be careful with how they use it. In today's society, religion has become much less pronounced and, as a result, so has religiously affiliated clothing. For example, it is common for Crosses adorn necklaces that are tucked away, a modest representation of faith. When something is worn outright such as a hijabi, as Shabana Mir said, it will be viewed extremely and with prejudice.
Because of these various prejudices, students use their body-space for more acceptable clothing that still allows them to identify with a larger group. This want has manifested itself in the absurd number of Mac Laptops, Beats by Dr. Dre headphones, and other accessories that serve both as a status symbol and unifier. Somewhat (un?)fortunately, Beats are now made in different colors, so that people are more able to express themselves while remaining in the comfort of conformity.
If we were to try and identify religious affiliations through clothing alone, it might seem that large companies are the new religion.

Secularism and the Demise of Religious Garb

            In The Language of Clothes, Alison Lurie explores how we use clothes as an unspoken language that can identify us within a group, or as Shabana Mir contends, can exclude us in the case of the hijab. This phenomenon can certainly be seen on campus, for example the popularity of pastel shorts and boat shoes sends a message, as these items are commonly signifiers of “preppy” culture. However, there is surprisingly few, if any, religious attire on campus.

            Hamilton is a pretty secular campus, yet I struggle to think of even one example of religious wear beyond the occasional necklace. Is this just a result of every single student being that secular, or has the campus culture changed those that might otherwise dress religiously? A Jewish friend of mine attends a liberal arts school, which has a similar campus atmosphere as Hamilton. Throughout his life, even in high school, he wore a yarmulke. However, within only a few weeks into college he shed it for a more secular, less “unique” look. According to him, he felt awkward meeting new people with it on as he felt immediately judged, a very similar experience brought up by Mir on the hijab.  To fit in and be socially accepted, he felt the need to change the way in which he expresses his religious beliefs. As Lurie puts it: “Apart from the chameleon, man is the only animal who can change his skin to suit his background. Indeed, if he is to function successfully he must do so” (209). If people who commonly wear religious garb feel isolated and pressured to change, do the rest of us have a responsibility to be more welcoming? Is it even possible to do so, or is this exclusionary effect just a universal result of a secular environment that can’t be helped?

College & Clothing: Where Culture Trumps Faith

To the trained student’s eye, clothing choices betray a person’s socio-economic status, cultural identity, and religion, and cause the “watcher” to make a snap judgment of the student being observed. This judgmental nature creates a desire among college students to fit in with the social norms of college – colorful pants, Vineyard Vine fleeces, and fancy jewelry – for fear of standing out and being ostracized. 

 Understanding the fear of being judged solely on one’s clothing makes the lack of stars of David, crosses, and Hijabs on the Hill make sense. Instead of disregarding clothing norms, many students of faith choose to hide their religious identity by tucking their religious necklaces and symbols under their shirts or in their bags until they are alone or surrounded by like-minded individuals. 

 The few students who do choose to wear their faith quite literally on their sleeve, do so, many times, to “stick it” to the dominant college culture, as if saying, “Sure, judge me on my faith, but there is more to me than just this cross!” The fashion language on campus forces religious students to label themselves as overly devout or irreligious.

"Fashion too is a language of signs, a nonverbal system of communication." 

– Alison Lurie 

Clothing As Identifiers

Clothing as an identifier has predated most academic writing on it. In Alison Lurie's piece she touches upon the societal implications of clothing. Lurie goes through the history of clothing as a social divider. In 2014, this fact has not changed. However, despite this lasting trend, we currently have the most clothing autonomy in human history. How we chose to use that freedom is more paramount today than ever before. Clothes are not simply a reflection of what you are, as they have been in the past, but a social indicator of what you want the world to see you as.

Clothing allows people to show more of their personality that ever before. As Lurie suggests, something as simple as color pattern relays personality. The "language of colors" as Lurie argues is vital in understanding oneself and perceiving the world. Conservative colors, such as those seen in religious communities and even in business, highlight the importance of visual appearance. Clothing signals more than it ever has in human history, complicating identification and classification.

First Impressions

Before attending any interviews or new settings people are usually advised to “make a good first impression.” It takes approximately three-seconds for someone to evaluate you when you meet them for the first time. Within these three-seconds, the other person unconsciously formed an opinion about you based upon your appearance and how you are dressed. According to Alison Lurie, this process has been happening for thousands of years. People are constantly registering how others are dressed and by the time they actually meet the individual in person and converse, they have “already spoken to each other in an older and more universal language.” Dress is a constant manifestation of intimate thoughts, a language, a symbol” (Lurie 203). I have noticed that even on the Hamilton campus people are not excessively displaying their religious identities because they are more conscious of making a good first impression on their peers and teachers. 

In particular, I have a Christian friend who is part of the Inter Varsity Christian Fellowship group on campus. Even though she is Christian she does not outrightly display Christian symbols, such as wearing a cross on her neck. She does, however, dress more modestly. For instance, she will not wear clothing that emphasize her curves. We have read that some of Shabana Mir’s participants had to change how they dress so they could fit into their campus culture. I have known my friend since freshman year and there was not a day when she thought about wearing a tight skirt or shirt. Like some of the girls in Mir’s novel, my friend has been questioned on the way she does not wear certain types of clothing and sometimes “strategically plan[s her] outfits” so she would not reveal too much. For instance, combining a thin shirt with a sweater or complementing a pair of tighter jeans with a larger sweater. Her sense of fashion might not be as striking as the hijabs Muslim American women wear, but what she wears is still a “nonverbal system of communication" in the sense that silently reaffirms her Christian faith. Therefore, one could conclude that she does not want to hide who she is but at the same time she wants to be socially accepted by the Hamilton community. 

Visual Identity

Does clothing truly reveal our identity? In today’s world, as Alison Lurie argues, clothing reveals a lot about the sex, age and socio-economic status of an individual. The things we wear act as a language that communicates to the rest of the world some information about ourselves. When a woman wears a hijab, we identify her as a conservative Muslim who is obliged to fully cover her face and her body from the eyes of the strangers. Moreover, the hijab makes Muslim women seem oppressed and shy to western societies.

As Shabana Mir argues in her article, it is unfair to make such statements because it creates false stereotypes. The wearing of the hijab is not an essential part of Islam. Just because a woman wears the hijab, it does not mean that she is subjugated or timid. I’m not sure if this is the case at Hamilton, but there are plenty of Muslim women like Latifa on other campuses, that wear the hijab and are sociable and broad-minded. One of my friends at Hamilton does not wear the hijab and is not identified by the majority as a Muslim because she dresses and acts “normally”. Therefore, the form of identity that is suggested by clothing can be deceiving in many ways. On one hand, clothing does reveal the sex, age and socio-economic status of an individual, but on the other, it doesn’t fully reveal his or her character. What is shown on the outside is just a visual identity, an abridged projection of our individuality to the outer world.

Clothing as a Language

Alison Lurie states in her book The Language of Clothes that “if clothing is a language, it must have a vocabulary and a grammar.” Lurie is making the point that people can read a message from the clothes you wear, whether it be about where you are from or what you believe in. Hamilton College is a very secular place, and I think that has a very large impact in the way in which people express religion in clothing, which makes it hard to understand peoples’ religious beliefs solely through their clothing. I think at Hamilton, we have very little choice in terms of what we can wear because of the secularity. Although people may show their style, whether it is preppy, or artsy, or athletic, religious dress is something that is seen pretty rarely around our campus. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Hijab at Hamilton and I’ve definitely never seen a boy walking around with a yarmulke. The main things that I’ve seen that display religion is a Cross necklace or a Star of David necklace. I think that the secularity has a negative effect on many students here because I don’t think that all the students express as much religion as they would like. Becoming isolated or an outcast, like many of the girls in Shabana Mir’s research, is something that many people fear, so they will try to look as secular as possible in order to fit in. As a Jewish student on campus, I will say that I don’t think my clothes can identify me, and I think I can say the same for my non-Jewish friends as well.