Robert Bly, the great author and poet, used to teach that if a person loves a particular shade of red, he should wear that color. But Bly also taught that it is incumbent on every adult to act in ways that are respectful to others, as well as to the rituals, customs, and practices of the culture or institution.
Psychological maturity, he taught, requires us to integrate our personal passions within a cultural context and boundaries so that we keep both ourselves and our culture strong and vibrant. To have no passion empties a life of meaning, but to only follow our passions without these boundaries leads to the destruction of the entire culture.
Seven hundred years ago, William of Wykeham, the Bishop of Winchester and Chancellor of England, chose the statement “Manners Maketh Man” for the motto of New College at Oxford, and from then to now this phrase has been used in popular culture as a statement of behavior reflecting ethics. From Sting’s “Englishman in New York” to the original Kingsman movie, it is a constant reminder that we are not beasts driven only by our urges and desires. But manners, which includes how we act, speak, and dress, seem to not only have been forgotten, but entirely rejected by the current Democratic leadership… or at least by Chuck Schumer and John Fetterman.
How we act, speak, and dress is much more important than just following social norms. These are the behavior patterns that demonstrate respect for others–and respect for ourselves. Chuck Schumer’s unilateral decision to change the dress code of the United States Senate shows exactly how far he has fallen from respecting others. Schumer’s acceptance of no dress code is so distasteful that even the Democratic whip, Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), has said that the dress code must be reinstated, and Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has already started a push to return to appropriate attire.
But why is this such a big deal? Is it really important how a leader dresses? The simple answer is yes; the clothes that we wear are vitally important in a variety of ways.
The Book of Leviticus discusses proper dress multiple times with regard to what the ancient priests of Israel must wear and what is prohibited. This is obviously not because God cares what we are wearing, but because of the recognition of how our external appearance changes our consciousness. In order to facilitate the ancient Hebrews feeling “spiritual,” they were instructed to put on special clothing, jewelry, and accessories that would remind them that they were in a holy place among other holy people, and they should act accordingly.
Sacred garments helped them feel sacred in their ceremonies. This practice is true throughout the world: Jews wear a kittel on Yom Kippur, the Yaqui Indians wear the Ojo de Venado during the Deer Dance ceremonies, the Yoruba wear the Grand Buba when praying to the Orisha deities, and Catholic nuns wear their habits. Each culture recognizes the truth that the outer expression of a person changes their inner experience.
Think about how a man feels when he puts on a tuxedo or a woman when she wears an evening gown. The clothing changes our behavior to fit the circumstance. Our posture improves, we are more aware of our language, and our very essence is more conscious about being in a special environment. Every woman I know has (or at least had when she was single) the “little black dress and heels” that she wears when going on a special date, while the somber colors at a funeral reflect the sadness in the same way that the bright colors at a wedding reflect the emotions of the event.
Our external clothes change how we feel internally. As importantly, they show caring and respect for the environment and people that we are interacting with. A mourner would probably be offended if someone showed up at the funeral wearing a colorful mini-dress, and people treat priests differently when they are in street clothes as opposed to wearing their collars.
On a daily basis as a rabbi, I choose to wear a ball cap as opposed to a yarmulka so that people feel comfortable around me as opposed to the pressure they put on themselves to “meet the Rabbi’s standards,” but when I lead services or speak publicly, the yarmulka is back on. I have found that the difference between how I feel, as well as how others react to me, is significantly dependent upon what is covering my head.
Hoodies and shorts are terrific if you want to be one of the guys just hanging out playing basketball. They lead to camaraderie and community. But they have no place as the attire for a leader of this nation. The citizens of this country need to respect our leaders, and to discard the traditional dress code of the Senate is to degrade that office of leadership. But maybe that is exactly what Schumer and Fetterman desire?
Changing the dress code is an attack, consciously or unconsciously, on the very fabric of leadership. In a time when the populace is already questioning the ethics of our national leaders, the acceptance of this changing of the Senate dress code is a practice that degrades all leaders. When any senator can come to work looking like a thug and criminal, it leads to the belief that all senators are thugs and should not be trusted. If one senator dresses “down,” it affects every other member of that institution as well as every American who, as a result, starts to have less respect for the Senate itself.
While domestically it reduces faith in our leadership, the results are even more pronounced internationally. The acceptance of Fetterman’s hoodies tells both our allies and enemies that Americans no longer take their leadership seriously. No longer can we be viewed as a country led by mature and thoughtful people, but instead become looked at as petulant teenagers who have no self-respect nor respect for others. Can you imagine the reaction of a foreign dignitary or royalty meeting with an American leader in a sweatsuit? How can we be taken seriously on the world stage if our leaders can’t even take themselves seriously enough to get dressed?
While I respect that Pennsylvania voters made their choice, clothing is not the only reflection of Fetterman’s disdain for our nation, its history, standards, and values. His entire behavior since becoming a senator has been appalling and offensive. He publicly and proudly uses offensive language, acts like a cartoon clown, and refuses to show respect in any way to anyone. Bluntly put, he acts not like a United States senator but like a spoiled, obnoxious teenager, and he should be treated as a teenager, being given strict boundaries instead of being encouraged in his juvenile behavior.
There is another cultural wound that Schumer’s decision is causing that is even more distressing. If a senator can dress and act like a buffoon, it is a tacit acceptance of any authority figure to do the same. This may be Schumer’s ultimate goal: to so degrade the Senate that any leader is now permitted to act like a teenage clown.
After all, if a senator can dress in a hoodie, why can’t a shop teacher wear fake Z-size breasts? If the Senate will approve any dress code, then why can’t an elementary school mandate attendance for children to go see drag queens? If Schumer is okay with Fetterman wearing a hoodie and shorts in the Senate, why wouldn’t he be okay with a kindergarten teacher not wearing underwear at all in her classroom?
This may be the most dangerous result of Schumer’s decision to endorse Fetterman’s behavior: it endorses other outrageous behavior among “authority” figures. It eats away at the values that have sustained this country and culture for centuries. It takes away the manners that maketh a man and replaces that value with an embracing of humanity’s basest and most animalistic urges.
The best thing for the Senate, the country, and Fetterman himself would be for him to be forced to grow up. He should be fined, censured, and prohibited from speaking or voting on the Senate floor without being appropriately attired. If he is going to be a leader, he needs to start acting and dressing like one. If he is not forced to act appropriately, it will hurt this nation in ways that will be felt for decades.
We need to remember Robert Bly’s teaching. If it gives Fetterman joy to wear hoodies when he is walking around town or even at black tie affairs, that is his choice. But not on the Senate floor. If he does not subjugate his personal choice to the requirements and responsibilities of the United States Senate, he is contributing to the degradation of all leaders, and to the destruction of our culture.
Let us all hope that the Senate repeals Schumer’s dangerous acceptance of Fetterman, a man who, at least for now, acts like a teenage thug. And shame on Chuck Schumer for even going down this path in the first place.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member