Don't get me wrong. I am not a fan of Melania Trump. Nor did I confront the news of Trump separating families at the Mexican border with anything other than horror and revulsion. However, the disproportionate media focus on what Melania was wearing when she visited a border holding facility is just another example of misogynistic reductivism - reducing the value and meaning of women to the clothes they're wearing.
Yes, clothing lies at the interface of the social and the individual. Yes, recognition of and interaction with the human body in social contexts is mediated by clothing, which is often perceived to have signaling power equivalent to bodily cues. Yes, sartorial choices are often an exercise of individual agency and contribute to the process of identity creation. Yes, we are cognitive misers looking for shortcuts to judgment, namely, appearance heuristics. But does any of this justify reducing a woman's worth to the clothing she is wearing? No. Did anyone scrutinize what Trump was wearing when he signed the executive order last week? (In all likelihood, a cheap suit made in Mexico; how INSENSITIVE). No, of course not, because men are rarely judged on their appearance or their apparel.
Would you assume that the man walking past you down the street wearing a t-shirt with "the future is female" emblazoned across his chest is therefore incapable of sexual assault or gender-based discrimination? Of course not. So why do we attribute greater meaning to female clothing? Why do we give it more power than it deserves? Why do we ask rape victims what they were wearing when they were violated by a friend or relative or colleague? Why do we tell women to "dress the part" for specific occasions, as if cotton or linen or polyester possessed magical properties? Why do we demean and diminish female politicians based on their pantsuits?
Regardless of whether Melania's sartorial choice was some meta red herring for the "fake news media" or a deliberate decision to convey apathy for the migrant children she had just visited, the fact remains that judging women for their apparel is decidedly misogynistic and archaic. Surely, if you believe that the value of Melania's visit to Texas should be judged solely on the jacket she was wearing at the time, you also believe that women who dress "provocatively" are deserving targets of male aggression? Reducing women to their clothing is precisely what perpetuates rape culture; the idea that rape victims who were not conservatively dressed were "asking for it". Speaking as a victim of sexual assault who was fully clothed at the time (leggings and a bulky sweater), I can assure you that that is not the case.
The judgment of female worth according to how it is dressed contributes to the animalization and infra-humanization of women every day. Was Melania's jacket an inappropriate, insensitive, and tone-deaf sartorial decision? Yes. Are the only female actions worth judging their early-morning wardrobe decisions? No. Women are more than their clothes, including the ones to whom we are ideologically opposed. As Liz Plank points out, Melania's coat is not committing human rights abuses at the border, Donald Trump is. So please, stop focusing on the jacket and focus on the story that actually matters.