As for discussion about clothes. Whether a person makes the right choices of clothing - and I am talking about appropriate as well as style, and men and women, is often a guide to who that person is and the quality of their judgement.
About 40 years ago I went to a meeting with my employer's advertising agency. All the men there, bar one, were in suits, I and my female colleague were also smartly dressed. The exception was the Art Director who was wearing crumpled ripped jeans (not todays fashionablely ripped jeans, just ripped jeans) and a well worn unironed T shirt.
It was so contrived and meant a statemen,t it almost hurt, in fact what his choice of clothes said to us, was not . 'Oh what an achingly cool art Director this company has, he must be good' but 'What on earth possessed this man to think that he is dressed appropriately for this meeting, even if he is the art director, I bet his ideas will be as disastrous.
They were. They ignored all the information he had been given about the purpose of the campaign and who the target audience was, the successful campaign we ran bore no relationship to the art work the agency initially prepared.
Clothes say something about a person, whether they like it or not, whether it is high design, or pick something off the floor and put it on. We cannot get away from that and because women have a far greater choice of styles, unfortunately there is more scope for comment.
If Keir Starmer had turned up at Downing St yesterday in open-toed sandals, with or without socks, gardening trousers, a sctuffy T shirt and a tweed jacket with leather patches on the elbows, all the papers and social media, would have forgotten about politics and be talking only about what he was wearing, its inappropriatenes, where the garments were bought originally, how much they cost, and how long he had had them.