The New York Times

It's 2018: You Can Run for Office and Not Wear a Pantsuit

NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A few months ago, when Rachel Roberts, a 44-year-old owner of yoga studios in Newport, Kentucky, decided to run for state Senate as a Democrat, her newly hired campaign manager sent her a packet of photographs of successful women and suggested she pick one and model her campaign look accordingly “There was Nancy Pelosi and Sheryl Sandberg,” Roberts remembered, rolling her eyes. The problem: “That’s not who I am. I spent the last seven years in Lululemon.” At a time of smartphones and instant imagery, when unprecedented numbers of women are running for office and often placing their gender at the center of their campaigns, it is impossible to ignore the role image can play in positioning. After all, if you are going to be the change, don’t you have to look the change? Last week 80 women, including Roberts, came to Yale University here to attend the 2018 Women’s Campaign School and, among other things, try to answer that question. An intensive five-day course, hosted although not administered by the Yale Law School, it helps prepare women to run for office, get ready to help others run for office and establish political networks. The course includes seminars in how to do a stump speech, budget for media and direct mail, raise funds, determine voter turnout — and decide how to deal with the pantsuit. Or, as one two-hour session was titled, Dress to Win. But what, exactly, does that mean? It is a complicated question in a world in which for a long time the unspoken presumption was that the best approach was a man’s suit in a different color, and one in which women have long chafed against being judged on appearance. Indeed, many women resent that it is asked at all. “The reaction is always mixed,” said Karen Petel, referring to the style session. Petel is the founder of a namesake political consultancy, the former political director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and a board member of the campaign school. “There’s no doubt how you present yourself matters, but we have so little time and there is so much to cover,” said Shannon Lynch, a 26-year-old producer of a political talk show on Sirius XM in Washington who was at the campaign school to test her own appetite for office. “Do we really have to spend two hours on this?” Patricia Russo, the executive director of the Women’s Campaign School, said the answer is increasingly yes. “It’s not fair, but this is the reality,” she said. As Michelle Dhansinghani,28, the founder of Elan Strategies, who plans to run for Congress in 2020 from her home state of Texas, said: “What you project is what people believe. And the standards are higher when you are a woman, and even higher if, like me, you are a woman of color, and even higher if, like me, you are a woman of color from one of the poorest parts of your state. Texas has never had a Latina congresswoman.” (This year, two Latina women are running.) Although the WCS, which is nonpartisan, was founded in 1994 because “there are simply specific gender challenges to running for office,” the Dress to Win session did not exist until five years ago. That is when, Russo said, “it became clear this is part of the package, and students were confused about it.” Now the campaign school is trying to teach those students to see dress not as a liability to overcome but as a weapon women are lucky enough to wield. “People are judging you,” said Sonya Gavankar, the lecturer in charge of Dress to Win, at the opening of her class. A onetime Miss America contestant, she is director of public relations for the Newseum in Washington and has a sideline as an image consultant. Even if you are being judged, she argues, it does not mean that you should fall back on the safety net of banal dressing. “When you put on the black suit and the patriotic scarf, that does not tell people to pay attention,” she said. “It tells people: ‘I am boring. And maybe an FBI agent.’ It presents the most bland version of yourself. It’s not going to inspire people to want to hear what you say. Let the men be boring. You can be different.” This is easier said than done, however. At issue is the tension between two schools of thought. On the one hand, there is the traditional wisdom regarding female candidates and how they dress. “Your clothes should not speak for you,” said Rosana Vollmerhausen, the founder of DC Style Factory, a wardrobe consultancy that works with female and male political candidates. And on the other, there is the growing belief,apparent at WCS Yale, that says that clothes should absolutely say something about who you are and what makes you different. “We are living in a reality TV world,” Joel Silberman, a media trainer who runs a class titled Magnifying your Magnificence, told the class. “Everything about your presence has to be on purpose, and I need to see it in five seconds.” “See” being the operative word.

This article originally appeared in .

You're reading a preview, sign up to read more.

More from The New York Times

The New York Times9 min read
Slack Wants to Replace Email. Is That What We Want?
Slack is coming for your job. The workplace chat company, valued at more than $7 billion at the time of its last funding round, is going public this week. It claims to already have more than 10 million daily users and, in its listing prospectus, bill
The New York Times7 min readSociety
Vaccine Injury Claims Are Few and Far Between
(Science Times) At a time when the failure to immunize children is driving the biggest measles outbreak in decades, a little-known database offers one way to gauge the safety of vaccines. Over roughly the past dozen years in the United States, people
The New York Times6 min readSociety
Eager to Limit Exemptions to Vaccination, States Face Staunch Resistance
As measles spread across the nation earlier this year, 71 residents of Vancouver, Washington, fell ill, most of them unvaccinated children. So state Rep. Paul Harris, a Republican representing the district, sponsored a measure to limit exemptions fro