It is often said that dressing well is a choice, a discipline or a sign of self-respect. Well-groomed hair, clean clothes, subtle makeup, ironed clothes, polished shoes, etc. are touted as neutral signs of professionalism and good character. However, this concept of respectability is never neutral; It has always been deeply political. Those who are praised for their well-groomed appearance and those who are criticized, reprimanded or excluded subtly reveal the gender, caste or class and race at work in our lives.
For many women, body care is not just a matter of appearance; rather, it is a matter of life and death. If a woman does not appear neat enough, it is interpreted as reckless, irresponsible or even immoral. The most famous argument from a feminist scientist Sandra Bartky is that beauty practices act as a form of disciplining of the female body, with routines requiring time and money and/or emotional labor but are branded as natural femininity. A woman should appear as if she had just collapsed, even though the work went on and on, exhausting and barely paid.
Well-groomed hair, clean clothes, subtle makeup, ironed clothes, polished shoes, etc. are touted as neutral signs of professionalism and good character.
These expectations are most pronounced in the workplace and in everyday life. A woman wearing light lipstick may be said to convey an unprofessional appearance, while the same lipstick may come across as a bold or confident shade on another woman, probably a fair-skinned, English-speaking and socially secure woman from the dominant caste. Similarly, any woman who doesn’t wear makeup can be labeled as lazy or unpresentable, unless she belongs to a “high-class” group where minimalism is viewed as an expression of sophistication. We must always remember that beauty standards are not personal preferences, but part of systems of power, including patriarchy, caste, race and class, that determine whose bodies deserve care and attention and whose bodies deserve to be seen.
Caste, class and the unequal price of looking “decent”.
In South Asian situations, caste ensures respectability at the highest level. Historically associated with the dominant castes, characteristics such as fair skin, straight or well-groomed hair, modest clothing, soft speech, and physical discipline were normalized as indicators of decency and politeness. These rules are even considered universal, even though they are caste-codified. The Body by Dalit, Bahujan and Adivasi people are often perceived as too loud, too attention-grabbing, too disruptive and even too inappropriate, no matter how well they are portrayed.
FII
Dalit feminist activists have repeatedly emphasized that reputation cannot be achieved through imitation. Dignity is often denied even when Dalit people have complied with all the requirements of personal hygiene, dress and behavior. This is not a question of appearance, but rather a social structure that has dehumanized some bodies in the past.
This is the result of a report by the Center for Law and Policy Research 78% of Dalit women and a significant proportion of Dalit people, including transgender respondents, said their skin color was used to identify caste and indicate “lower class” status.
The class also determines who can look tired, disheveled or disheveled. An immigrant maid who reports to work with her hair tied loosely may be reprimanded for her negligence, while a company employee who reports the same will be viewed as a burnt-out person and viewed with empathy. The same unkempt appearance that signals devotion and overwork in one body signals irresponsibility in another body. sociologist Erving Goffman described social life as a performance, but not everyone is given the same costume, the same rehearsal time, or the same margin for error.
Race, gender expression and the boundaries of respectability
These policies are exacerbated by race and color. Black women around the world are penalized for having their natural hair, which is considered unprofessional simply because it does not conform to white and Eurocentric beauty standards. Professionalism has long been racialized; However, feminist activists have long argued that the idea of professionalism is based on thinness, whiteness and controlled norms of femininity.
The Times of India report highlights that skin color prejudices persist even in states like Kerala that are considered socially progressive, showing that skin color prejudices do not disappear with education or per capita development.
These policies are exacerbated by race and color. Black women around the world are penalized for having their natural hair, which is considered unprofessional simply because it does not conform to white and Eurocentric beauty standards.
Gender expression is also policed through respectability politics, particularly for queer and trans people. Masculinity that appears too feminine is punished, as is femininity that appears too visible. For trans women, there is always a false expectation that comes with grooming and makeup. Using too much or too little makeup can lead to ridicule or aggression, or acceptance or marginalization. gender, how Judith Butler What shows us is not just carried out but imposed through repeated rewards for conformity and punishments for deviation.
It becomes clear that “putting things together” is not just about care or self-expression, but about conformity. It asks a quiet but powerful question: How close can you get to an ideal that was never designed for you? Feminist activist Audrey Lorde warned us that the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house, and respectability is one such tool. It promises acceptance but rarely fulfills dignity. So questioning the politics of respectability does not mean rejecting care, beauty, or pleasure. The question is why care is tirelessly demanded by some places and viewed as optional for others. It’s about challenging a system that measures value based on cleanliness, shine and performance. Perhaps true liberation lies not in looking “put together,” but in being allowed to be tired, imperfect, and human without losing security, dignity, or respect.
Dharanesh Ramesh hails from Coimbatore and is a PhD candidate in Gender and Development Studies at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Hyderabad. Based on the belief that stories shape structures, his studies and work explore the intersections of gender, caste and public policy from an intersectional feminist perspective. He is particularly interested in understanding how power, privilege and politics interact to define inclusion and justice in everyday life. Dharanesh is naturally curious and often turns to drawing, painting, photography and writing as an extension of his reflective practice. His work seeks to bridge thought and experience, analysis and art in the pursuit of justice and representation.
