From symbols of a profession to first impressions, are we actually attracted to a person, or are we drawn to the image attached to their uniform?
Have you ever seen a screenshot of a conversation that begins with the simple greeting, “Halo, Dek” (Hello, Dear)? This phrase might sound ordinary. However, when associated with someone wearing a specific professional uniform, its meaning can transform into a compelling topic of discussion.
This phenomenon gained traction on Indonesian social media around 2021. In October 2022, Liputan6.com highlighted the experiences of several women who received messages from individuals in uniform. Netizen responses were varied; some found it amusing, others felt uncomfortable, and many turned it into a joke.
Behind this phenomenon lies a more intriguing issue: how do uniforms influence the way we perceive someone, even before we truly know them?
Every profession carries a distinct social image. Some jobs are considered authoritative, prestigious, or synonymous with specific character traits. But does that professional image truly reflect the personality of the individual performing the role?
When someone appears attractive because of the uniform they wear, who are we actually admiring? The person, the profession, or the image that has been formed in our minds?
Uniforms Are More Than Just Clothing
Fundamentally, uniforms serve a practical function as markers of identity and role differentiation. However, in social life, their meaning is far broader.
We often link specific attire to status, responsibility, authority, and even a person's character. A white coat, for instance, can evoke an impression of professionalism and expertise. The same applies to other professional uniforms often associated with discipline, firmness, or authority.
Yet, clothing does not always reflect the personality of the wearer.
Ernst Cassirer (1944), in his book An Essay on Man, describes humans as animal symbolicum, or beings who understand the world through symbols.
This means humans do not merely view things based on their physical form, but also interpret the meanings attached to those objects.
In this context, a uniform can be understood as a symbol that conveys professional identity, institutional membership, and one's social standing.
This view can also be linked to Jean Baudrillard’s (1998) thoughts on sign-value .
According to this approach, an object does not only have value based on its utility but also based on the social meaning attached to it.
A uniform, for example, is not just clothing worn for work. It can also be a symbol of status and a specific image that influences the judgments of others.
Professional Image and Societal Judgment
Not all uniforms receive the same social response.
Some professions are often considered cool, attractive, or authoritative. Meanwhile, other professions may not receive similar attention, despite making equally important contributions to society.
This difference does not mean one job is more valuable than another. It is possible that what differs is the social image attached to each profession.
This image is formed through experience, daily interactions, and representations that consistently appear in the media.
When a job is repeatedly portrayed as a prestigious profession or one with high authority, society may form specific views toward those who perform it.
Michel Foucault’s ideas in Discipline and Punish (1975) can be used to understand the relationship between institutions, discipline, and social position.
In this reading, a uniform becomes a visual marker that makes a person's function and position within an institution easier to recognize.
However, a marker of social position is not proof of personal quality.
Someone might wear a uniform that symbolizes authority and responsibility. However, this does not automatically prove that they possess a disciplined, honest, or responsible character.
Conversely, jobs that rarely receive the spotlight do not necessarily have smaller contributions.
This is where it is important to distinguish between appreciation for a profession and judgment of an individual.
A uniform can provide clues about someone's job, but it cannot fully explain who they are.
Why Can Attraction Arise Before We Even Know Each Other?
Have you ever felt someone looked more attractive simply because of the clothes or uniform they were wearing?
In social psychology, this phenomenon can be linked to the concept of the halo effect.
Edward L. Thorndike (1920) demonstrated that the assessment of one characteristic of a person can influence the assessment of other characteristics.
Simply put, when we see one positive trait in someone, we may be inclined to assume they also possess other positive qualities, even without sufficient information.
Imagine someone looking dashing while wearing a specific uniform.
Without realizing it, we might immediately imagine that the person is disciplined, firm, mature, or responsible.
Yet, such a conclusion is not necessarily based on behavior we have actually observed.
We are filling in unknown information with assumptions influenced by a first impression.
However, this does not mean every attraction to someone in uniform is caused by the halo effect.
Personal preferences, experiences, environment, and social context also play a role in forming attraction.
This concept only helps explain how appearance can become a shortcut in forming judgments about someone.
Clothing, Perception, and Formed Standards of Attraction
The influence of clothing on social judgment is also a focus in various psychological studies.
Hester and Hehman (2023), through a study titled Dress Is a Fundamental Component of Person Perception, explain that clothing is a key component in the process of forming perceptions of others.
Through appearance, individuals can make judgments regarding social identity, status, psychological condition, and even the aesthetic tastes of others.
In other words, clothing is not just neutral visual information. Appearance helps shape how someone is perceived in social interactions.
Research by Oh, Shafir, and Todorov (2020) also shows that clothing associated with higher economic status can make a person's face appear more competent.
Interestingly, this assessment can change even if the face being observed is the same.
This study does not specifically discuss professional uniforms or romantic attraction. However, its findings show that clothing can influence one's perception of another individual.
This raises an interesting question: do we like a certain uniform because of personal taste, or because we have long been accustomed to seeing it as something attractive?
Media, social environment, and daily experiences can shape images of certain professions.
When a job is constantly portrayed as a dashing, authoritative, or prestigious profession, that image has the potential to influence society's standards of attraction.
Jacques Derrida’s thoughts on deconstruction can also be used as an approach to question assumptions that have been accepted without scrutiny.
Something that looks natural is not necessarily entirely formed by nature. It is possible that habits, social constructs, and cultural influences lead us to believe something has a specific meaning.
In the context of uniforms, we can question why certain professions are considered more attractive than others.
Is it because of the characteristics of the work? The social status attached to it? Media representation? Or personal experiences that shape our views?
These questions are not intended to judge anyone's taste.
Admiring appearance or having a preference for certain professions is normal.
However, it is important to realize that personal taste is not always formed independently. The social environment and the images we consistently consume can also influence what we consider attractive.
Uniforms Are Washed, Not Character
The “Halo, Dek” phenomenon is a simple example of how uniforms can influence a person's initial impression.
We see a symbol, connect it to social meaning, and then form an image of the individual wearing it.
This process can happen very quickly, even before a conversation truly begins.
The problem is that first impressions do not always reflect reality.
Someone might look authoritative while wearing a uniform, but they may not show the same attitude in daily life.
Conversely, someone who appears simple and lacks the professional attributes considered prestigious might have a character far better than the initial impression suggests.
Uniforms can indeed show identity, occupation, and social position. However, they cannot guarantee how someone treats others, makes decisions, or behaves when not on duty.
Knowing someone's profession is not the same as knowing their personality.
Therefore, the expression “uniforms are washed, not character” serves as a reminder that external appearance should not be the sole basis for judging someone.
We may admire certain professions. We may also be attracted to someone because of their appearance. However, such admiration needs to be distinguished from an assessment of personal quality.
Ultimately, what makes a person worthy of respect is not just the uniform they wear, but their attitude, behavior, and how they treat others.
Because while a uniform can shape a first impression, it is character that determines how someone is truly known.
References
Baudrillard, J. (1998). The consumer society: Myths and structures. SAGE Publications.
Cassirer, E. (1944). An essay on man: An introduction to a philosophy of human culture. Yale University Press.
Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1967).
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Pantheon Books. (Original work published 1975).
Hester, N., & Hehman, E. (2023). Dress is a fundamental component of person perception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 27(4), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683231157961
Martevalenia, B. A. (2022, October 12). Fenomena sapaan 'Halo Dek' oknum berseragam dan bidan, korban: Idih ilfeel! Liputan6.com. https://www.liputan6.com/citizen6/read/5094957/fenomena-sapaan-halo-dek-oknum-berseragam-dan-bidan-korban-idih-ilfeel
Oh, D., Shafir, E., & Todorov, A. (2020). Economic status cues from clothes affect perceived competence from faces. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0782-4
Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071663
Comments 0
Write a Comment Share your response