Fashion shapes identity in a multitude of different ways; from the colors we pick to the stores we frequent, who we are is ingrained in our style.

Clothes, shoes, accessories, and even body modifications, like piercings, tattoos, hair dye, and cosmetic surgery, are all a part of fashion in one way or another. Somehow we decide why we want those jeans, that pair of shoes, or our first tattoo. Considering we are highly complex individuals who absorb many different characteristics throughout our lives, identity is a complicated concept. From how fashion shapes identity in terms of age, gender, class, and more, we hope that this will help shed some light on who you are, why we make certain style related choices, and how to better understand others.

Age

Women have been taught, oftentimes from a very young age, that there is a certain social standard for how we should dress at different stages in our lives. And if you’ve ever been told that you should dress your age – like when your twelve-year-old self tried to sneak out in a mini skirt, only to be told by your mother that you won’t be leaving looking like that, then you probably understand this concept a little better than most.

Chances are, many women have been on the receiving end of the “dress your age” judgments, even those who are well into their 40s, 50s, 60s and so on. So why is this such a crucial part of our identities? Many of us use clothes to represent our ages, whether the actual one, or how we feel inside, and as we grow older, our fashion sense usually changes with it. Fortunately, though, these rigid roles are beginning to become more fluid in the adult world (sorry twelve-year-old me), allowing your great aunt to proudly display her pink hair and butterfly ink.

Further supported by a paper published by the University of Manchester, which states, “In relation to clothing and dress, it means the end of the old culture of age ordering, of self effacement, and drab and frumpy dress: there is no reason why older people should not wear the same clothes, shop at the same fashion conscious shops as younger people. For women in particular it offers liberation from what is a very negative set of messages around sexuality, appearance and self assertion, policed by a heavily moralistic language.” In other words, rock on Grandma. Rock on.

Gender

When we’re born, clothing typically reflects our gender – boys are in blue and girls in pink. But as we grow older and begin to develop likes and dislikes, what we are left with can drastically change. With gender fluidity and the greater social acceptance of transgender individuals, our mainstream ideas of man and woman based on clothing alone is no longer the best identifier. What ends up happening is that we utilize fashion as the self-expression needed to convey our genders, whether actual or desired, to the world.

An insightful article from the Berg Fashion Library on the study of fashion, dress, and gender, notes, “In the humanities, the most influential gender theorist has been Judith Butler, whose canonical book Gender Trouble contributed the concept of gender performativity. This theory argues that seemingly stable gender expressions are actually the result of constant negotiations between an individual’s sense of self and the feedback acquired through social interactions, in a context of signs and symbols that are constantly subject to change.”

Class and Culture

How much money we make helps determine which brands we can afford, where we will acquire clothing, and how we will dress. Fashion shapes identity thereby further supporting the wearer’s lifestyle. Luxury names, branded handbags and clothing, and the ability to afford more cosmetic procedures, which are often out of reach for most, may become an important part of a wealthy person’s life. Whereas, someone on the opposite end of the spectrum may find themselves shopping at thrift stores, or possibly struggling to maintain a clean, tatter-free wardrobe. Our clothing is a stark reminder of our identities, whether we like it or not.

Self-Esteem

If you’ve ever had a favorite dress that fits perfectly in all the right places, or a power suit that always seems to give you that extra boost of confidence before a meeting, then you probably understand how clothing can have a direct affect on your self-esteem and how class and culture trickle down into this area. Although you don’t have to be rich to look nice and to buy new clothes, when you can’t afford any at all, then self-esteem and self-worth can, understandably, take a hit. The correlation between clothing and how we feel about ourselves is so strong that in “The Psychology of Dress“ published by the Berg Fashion Library, a team of social psychologists found “that when women put on a swimsuit as part of a research project, they performed more poorly on a subsequent math test than other women who put on a sweater.”

Other’s Opinions

The way we dress is like communicating without words, and whether we like it or not, other people judge us by our appearances. While we shouldn’t allow our self-esteem to ride on the opinions of others, what we glean from people throughout our lives, be it good or bad, helps to shape our identities. Like the story about the homeless man who received little to no assistance, but once he was wearing a suit strangers were more apt to help him, to the excuse about “the way she was dressed” as a way to explain away a motive for sexual assault, there are many predeterminations and misconceptions about outward appearances – it’s up to us to change them.

Although this is just barely scratching the surface, there’s no doubting the effect that fashion has on our identities. Based on these notions, is there one that you most closely relate to? What do your clothes say about you? Share your thoughts with us on the EcoSalon Facebook page!

Related on EcoSalon

5 Ways Vegan Fashion Changed My Life (Not Just My Wardrobe!)

The #LetNoorShine Campaign Combines Clothing and Activism to End Human Trafficking

7 Charitable Companies Redefining Retail Therapy: Making Slow Fashion and Giving Back Look Cool

Image of Woman in Red Dress via Shutterstock

The post How Fashion Shapes Identity: What Do Your Clothes Say About You? appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnOprah seems to think she knows best when it comes to social and religious identities. Here’s why that should piss you off.

During an awkward television interview last month, the extraordinarily famous Oprah Winfrey informed endurance-swimmer hero Diana Nyad that Nyad was not, despite her claims, an atheist.

Almost immediately, the godless Internet lit up with a range of reactions from heretics of all shapes and sizes proclaiming their indignation, anger and even “hurt.” This was Oprah—Queen of the popular media big leagues—and she was getting it wrong. But there’s more to this story than “nonbelievers annoyed.” Believers should be too.

The exchange took place on Winfrey’s Super Soul Sunday, which featured the talk-show host trying to muscle Nyad’s ability to experience awe and wonder into what is increasingly becoming mainstream God vocabulary—that is to say, one that expands the definition of the term well beyond its traditional angry-dude-in-clouds confines. Nyad, eloquent and powerful (figuratively, as well as literally), allowed Winfrey some wiggle room with language, but overall wasn’t having it:

Nyad: I’m not a God person…

Winfrey: Do you consider yourself atheist?

Nyad: I am an atheist…

Winfrey: But you’re in the awe.

Nyad: I don’t understand why anyone would find a contradiction in that. I can stand at the beach’s edge with the most devout Christian, Jew, Buddhist, go on down the line, and weep with the beauty of this universe and be moved by all of humanity—all the billions of people who have lived before us, who have loved and hurt and suffered. To me, my definition of God is humanity, and is the love of humanity…

Winfrey: Well I don’t call you an atheist then. I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and in the mystery, then that is what God is… God is not a bearded guy in the sky.

Nyad: It’s not bearded, but there is an inference with ‘God’ that there is a presence, that there is either a creator or an overseer.

A moment later, after Nyad stated the fact that “we will never know,” Oprah said “’til that last breath—and [somewhat defiantly] maybe it will be an ‘oh, wow’ one for you…”

For us nonbelievers, this kind of exchange is nothing new. It’s one we’ve all had with often well-meaning folks (I should say that Oprah shows no malice here and seems genuine, albeit insensitive) who have trouble arranging us on their spiritual (and often religious) gameboards. It’s certainly well-trodden ground in the media. Here’s another recent example that caught a news cycle or three—CNN anchorman Wolf Biltzer, after May’s deadly tornado in Moore, Oklahoma, interviewing a survivor standing amidst horrible debris with her young child in arms:

Blitzer: I guess you gotta thank the Lord, right?

Tornado survivor: Yeah. [Clearly trying to quickly dismiss the question.]

Blitzer: Do you thank the Lord? …

Tornado Survivor: I – I – I’m – I’m actually an Atheist.

Unlike Oprah, Blizter seemed to quickly catch the woman’s drift, as it were, and moved on to playing with the kid. (Very cute.) Nevertheless, in watching the interview, one gets the sense that in that moment he was pushing the issue. When he didn’t get the “oh, yes, praise be” response he expected, he slipped into ‘But you have to, right? Do you?’ Like Nyad to Oprah, this woman did not fit his paradigm and he was taken aback.

These high-profile exchanges bring up two important questions. The first, which has been well covered, is whether atheists can have awe (and/or spirituality) in their lives without god(s) or a “higher” power. As a nonbeliever, I certainly don’t want to diminish the issue, but the question’s frequency really isn’t all that surprising, despite its insulting nature. The concept of being unable to make room for supernatural dualism in one’s spiritual framework is confounding to many. Burden of proof issues and a lack of scientific method aside, believers are operating within a framework that simply does not accommodate the kind of utter oneness that edges out anything higher or lower or elsewhere; it’s just something they can’t not see.

But question two is broader and more baffling, and one that has caught the attention of a number of my faithful friends (yes, believe it or not, I have many): Why is it that Oprah would feel comfortable responding to someone explaining his or her (very) personal sense of self (such as, “I’m a spiritual atheist”) with a “No. You can’t be that. I’ll tell you what you are.” Odd, right? Well, not really.

Pegs and Holes—Atheists are Not Alone

Sadly, it’s not difficult in our culture to find a wide range of precedent for the “you don’t believe what you say you believe” admonition. In fact, most of us can start quite young. Remember mom and dad’s head-patting “I know you think you believe that”? (Oh, man. Instant tantrum.)

How many women have been nominally exiled outside the cap-F, feminist camp because they might harbor the idea that a fulfilling life for them features being a stay-at-home mom, or perhaps, god forbid, they enjoy porn now and again? How about the virgin homosexual teen being told he or she’s not really gay—yet—or the bisexual who’s informed by certain members of the homosexual and lesbian communities that he or she is merely “confused”?

Want more? Might you be an animal rights advocate who’s “not” because you eat meat? An environmentalist cast away for not being sold on the evils of GMOs? And here’s one that’s near and dear to my heart: evidently, to some, my atheism somehow interferes with the Jewish identity with which I was born. (There’s a great line from Ricky Gervais that I like to trot out when asked by my tribespeople why I’m an atheist: “God made me this way.”)

The list goes on.

We all know how our culture is sadly characterized by a scarcity of empathy. But what about these instances where empathy is simply not available, when there’s just no way one can put themselves in the shoes of others who are so, well, other? What’s missing from the equation that leads people to feel okay contorting another’s sense of self and transmuting that sense into their own ideas and language? The answer seems to lie in the inability to simply listen and accept—baffled or not. Comfortable bemusement is just not in most people’s skill set. Control, however, is.

But that’s their side of the street, right? What about ours? Us others? What is our role in the cultural codependence that has the likes of not only average Joes telling us who and what we are, but our institutions, as well? Where do pundits and anointed culture purveyors like Oprah and Wolf come off telling us what we think? How dare they!?

How dare they, indeed. Have we handed them the keys to our personal kingdoms? Perhaps. Oprah’s untold millions are “earned” from a nation of viewers who turn to her to interpret their thoughts for them (not to mention telling them what books to read—including, um, “The Secret”). Why would we be surprised when she offers such interpretations and contortions designed to bring outsiders into the mainstream from what must surely be the cold? She’s just doing her (read: our) job.

What was great about Nyad (who, at 64 recently achieved her goal of swimming from Florida to Cuba) is not only how she didn’t evade the issue (she chose to appear on a show called Super Soul Sunday, for god’s sake) but how well thought out her feelings were, and how she held firm throughout the discussion.

Not all of us are prepared to come out of our closets when our belief systems are queried, challenged and dismissed, nor should we feel forced to do so. But given the opportunity—and the platform—to stand one’s ground, doing so deserves a ton of credit. That pesky acceptance thing, both self- and societal, ultimately emerges from freedom from fear and the courage to speak one’s mind.

Now, no one is suggesting that the shaken Moore survivor should have blitzed Blitzer with what might have been a (some might argue wiser) alternate question: “Why do you think God chose to punish and kill all those people? What do you think they did to earn such horrifying and violent deaths?” That would be insensitive, right?

The bottom line is that no one gets to tell you who you are or what you think. That’s up to you—no matter what anyone believes. Or doesn’t.

Scott Adelson is EcoSalon’s Senior Editor of HyperKulture, a monthly column that explores opening cultural doors to initiate personal change. He is also the author of InPRINT, which reviews and discusses books, new and old. You can reach him at scott@adelson.org and follow him @scottadelson on Twitter.

Related Reading:

HyperCulture: From The Sanbox to Syria – Tribe, Ego and Decision Making

HyperKulture: In Swoon’s Way – Time traveling and Staring Down Florence Syndrome

InPRINT: A Novel Challenge – Take Action and Read Outside Your Box

InPRINT: You Want Erotic? The Countless Shades of Anaïs Nin

InPRINT: Albert Camus and the Biggest Question of All

Images: Surian Soosay (top) and Bob Wells

The post Dear Oprah, Please Tell Us Who We Are — Atheists, Feminists and Other ‘Others’ Need to Know: HyperKulture appeared first on EcoSalon.

QuotesDaily quotes at EcoSalon.

“To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting.”

– e.e. cummings

Image: Jerine

The post Battling Identity appeared first on EcoSalon.