Identity-signaling dress is unstable without coercive enforcement of appearance

Evidence

The congruence between appearance and identity required more than mere voluntaristic “self-expression”; it required enforcement. Thus, the contemporary blossoming of such appearential identity indicators as bumper stickers, lapel buttons, and expressive dress styles does not herald the reemergence of the appearential order. A situation where I have only to change my dress style and paste an American flag on my car window in order to pass as a member of the “silent majority” does not guarantee a very stable order, especially when three days later I may switch again by replacing the flag with a peace sign. I repeat: the appearential order was possible only because the linkage of identity to appearance was not a matter of individualistic whim but a matter of coercive and traditional power. — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 1033

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the sumptuary-law material in the immodesty article and to Simmel’s fashion-as-social-form; expressive dress is voluntary signaling where premodern appearance was enforced. — connects to: Seemingly superficial fashions fundamentally organize identity and social life — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 18
• ADDENDUM: Directly supports the immodesty/complaints article thesis: the coercive-enforcement requirement explains why historical dress panics collapsed and modern ‘immodesty’ scandals remain ephemeral.