“Graphique, so chic. The front bench is just like the front row and you need wow factor. This right honourable coat gets our vote”

The over-analysation of female politicians’ wardrobes is an old game. Hell, I am probably guilty of dissecting them during my time as a fashion writer on a newspaper. And it’s true; women do get to use a larger wardrobe palette than men who are restricted to the boring suit-and-tie option. Thus, when it comes to politics, where journalists are fed generic soundbites, it’s tempting for a hack to try to read the runes of a female politician’s wardrobe for signs of her true intentions. For example, Forbes magazine claimed that the German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s “frumpy style” has been an asset to her career because “the dull outfits for which she became famous demonstrated consistence and prudence, two qualities generally prized in German politics”. Similarly, the magazine stated that the Bush administration’s Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s “black clothes and fashion-forward cuts” turned her into “an action-figure diplomat”.

However, there comes a point when such idle speculation crosses the line into sheer sexism and that point comes when a female politician’s shoes garner more attention than her speech, as happened to May back in 2012 when she wore leopard-print shoes at the Conservative Party conference. Women might have bagged big jobs in politics, but they’re still reduced to clothes horses and haircuts. That’s because, underneath all their power and smarts, they’re just little ladies who love pretty frocks, right?

The bold blazer

Downing Street Style