Growing up on the south side of Chicago, Reverend Dr. Howard-John Wesley received a clear message about the significance of a Black man’s attire. Wesley recalls his father, a pastor who had moved north from Louisiana after World War II to seek better opportunities, emphasizing the importance of appearing well-dressed.
To navigate spaces where Black individuals were unwelcome, his father insisted that dressing appropriately was crucial for acceptance. At 53, Wesley, now a senior pastor in Alexandria, Virginia, acknowledges the duality of clothing; while it can facilitate social navigation, it can also be a source of bias and discrimination. His father prohibited him from wearing baseball caps, fearing racial stereotyping by authorities due to associations with local gangs.
Clothing as a social and cultural message has profound implications for Black men, transcending mere fashion. It’s not just about what is worn, but how society perceives it when seen on a Black man, often with substantial repercussions. Jonathan Square, an assistant professor at Parsons School of Design, notes the inherent dialogue between what one can wear and the indelible traits they cannot amend.
The upcoming exhibit “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style” at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute, launching to the public on May 10, delves into this intersection of race and fashion. The exhibit highlights Black designers and menswear, drawing inspiration from Monica L. Miller’s 2009 book “Slaves to Fashion: Black Dandyism and the Styling of Black Diasporic Identity.” The Met Gala for 2025, co-chaired by notable Black male entertainers such as Pharrell Williams and A$AP Rocky, carries the theme “Tailored For You,” underscoring the event’s focus.
Fashion studies scholar Kimberly Jenkins asserts that clothing holds particular importance for Black men, offering social mobility, self-expression, and agency amidst systemic oppression. Historical self-expression through fashion has taken numerous forms, often influencing broader trends. For instance, the zoot suit of the WWII era, characterized by its exaggerated style, or the hip-hop-driven attire of the 1980s and 1990s, have both gained widespread appeal.
For some Black men, wearing respectable attire has been a strategy to affirm their equality and counter stereotypes. A$AP Rocky, for example, emphasized tailored elegance during his recent legal proceedings, attracting attention for his courtroom style. Conversely, other styles like the berets and leather jackets of the Black Panthers or colorful dashikis, have been deliberate challenges to conventional standards, aligning with Pan-African ideals.
However, fashion has also been subject to cultural policing. Instances where Black men’s clothing choices have led to discriminatory treatment illuminate ongoing prejudices. This weaponization of fashion can impose restrictions on the rights of Black individuals to wear designer clothes or stigmatize those who don’t meet certain standards. Associate professor Elka Stevens describes how such gatekeeping inhibits freedom in fashion based on race or appearance.
Iconic wardrobes, once condemned, have often been recontextualized. The zoot suit, once controversial during resource shortages, and the subsequent formalization in the NBA, reflect shifts in cultural acceptance. Even as streetwear gains global traction, perceptions of its acceptability often depend on the wearer’s identity. The tragic case of Trayvon Martin, a Black teenager killed in Florida in 2012 while wearing a hoodie, exemplifies how attire can still provoke dangerous misconceptions.
Despite hoodies becoming mainstream, for many, the garment remains racially charged. Reverend Wesley, during a sermon following Martin’s death, expressed concern for his sons’ safety, fearing misperceived threats based on their clothing choices. He restricts certain apparel, like sagging jeans, out of apprehension about societal stereotyping, acknowledging the complex link between attire and racial identity.
In reflecting on these realities, Wesley underscores an enduring struggle: clothing cannot erase racial identity but often amplifies societal prejudice. The discrimination persists; a suit may not mitigate biases, while casual attire could exacerbate them.