Robin Givhan

You know, there's a very particular way of presenting femininity, and there's a very particular way of presenting masculinity.

And in some ways, it's so prescribed that it doesn't allow for diversity because it's so strict that if you don't have or are unwilling to create the sort of, you know,

I don't want to malign an entire state, so I won't call them Utah curls, but that's the sort of long barrel curled hair, you know, that has become sort of one of the defining definitions of how a woman looks in this sort of universe.

And, you know, it seems very petty, but at the same time, when it's so...

narrow in that way it doesn't leave room for like very many kinds of people to participate to have a say to be deemed competent if those are the the definitions of competency in many ways like the you know the i think we expect there to be some kind of you know strange or

distinctive kind of uniform or way of dressing.

But what is perhaps the most disconcerting is that the most banal kinds of attire have been worn and used.

I mean, whether or not it's, you know, the khakis and polo shirts from, you know, the Charlottesville march or, you know, it's

bunch of guys dressed up like they belong to a fraternity.

And those are the things that are sort of markers of the far right.

And I think if we look for something that seems jarring or sort of

Well, you know, I think for some of the designers, certainly, particularly around the time of inauguration,

were trying to kind of separate the person from the institution.

The particular administration from this sort of historical American moment.

Now, I don't know that that's possible.

But, you know, I think at that point, there was definitely a sense of...

trying to be nonpartisan.

I don't know that if choosing nonpartisanship under those circumstances is a choice that will ultimately sit well with history.

I think that the fashion industry is like

any other in that it is a business that is trying to look out for its bottom line.