There has been a change in the visual texture of the lobby of nearly every investment bank in Midtown Manhattan on a Tuesday morning. Finance has never been a runway, so it’s not dramatic, but it’s noticeable. blazers with more structure. broader lapels. The occasional chalk stripe that purposefully cuts a sharp vertical line across a jacket with a slightly large shoulder. In a way that business casual never quite managed, women in their thirties and forties, both managing directors and analysts, are dressed in a way that feels deliberate.
The power suit, which has been deemed obsolete or obsolete more times than anyone can honestly recall, has returned. However, the discussion surrounding its return and its significance to the women who choose it is more fascinating than the actual item of clothing.
The original narrative has extensive documentation. When women began to enter corporate finance in significant numbers in the 1970s and 1980s, they turned to the only visual language that the boardroom already understood: dark colors, padded shoulders, structured jackets, and the silhouette of a man’s suit that had been slightly modified to fit a different body type.
It was wardrobe assimilation. In Baby Boom, Diane Keaton wore pinstripes. In Working Girl, Sigourney Weaver wore them. Beneath the style, the message was basically, “Take me seriously, and here is the visual proof I thought you might need.” That reasoning made sense. It was also draining.
By the 1990s, women who were more well-established in the executive world started eschewing strict tailoring in favor of softer materials like cashmere, suede, and Donna Karan’s flowing separates that subtly hinted at wealth. Then came the 2000s, the emergence of business casual, and finally the pandemic, which limited professional attire to what could be seen above a laptop camera. The suit seemed genuinely historical for a while, as if it were mentioned in a documentary about glass ceilings and shoulder pads.
It’s important to be clear about how the current situation differs from all of that. After years of working remotely, women who returned to trading floors and client-facing positions did not just revert to their previous behaviors. Many deliberately chose to dress with greater, not less, visual intention. Additionally, a sizable portion chose structured tailoring, such as wide-leg pants, oversized blazers, and chalk stripes, not because the style was popular on the catwalk (though it was at Balenciaga and Jil Sander long before finance caught up), but rather because it conveyed a message they genuinely wished to convey.
On Wall Street, the broad shoulder and the chalk stripe have a particular history. Traditionally, they have been associated with male financial authority, such as the trader, partner, or room-controlling man. Women are doing something that appears both familiar and subtly subversive by donning those same fabrics in oversized, modern cuts. They are repurposing the old uniform rather than copying it. Wearing a pinstripe because the room demands it and wearing one because you’ve made the decision that it now belongs to you are two very different things.
The clothing itself has evolved to the point where it is noticeable. In contrast to the 1980s model, the modern power suit places a higher priority on comfort. Wide-leg, loose-fitting pants with soft interiors are cut from heavy wools and stripes of chalk. Nothing is constrictive, despite the jacket’s slightly oversized fit and slightly exaggerated shoulder. Instead of wearing stilettos, women are wearing these suits with upscale loafers or pointed flats, which is a subtle change with its own message. Without exerting much effort, the appearance is commanding. Or at least that’s what it seeks to achieve.
In settings where prejudice is more pervasive than dress codes, one may be somewhat dubious about the extent to which any particular article of clothing truly makes a difference. The equity gap in corporate finance was not closed by the power suit in the 1980s, and there is no reason to believe that it will be closed now.
However, there’s a sense that something has truly changed as you watch this happen on the floors of companies that spent decades defining professional attire almost exclusively through the prism of male convention. Not exactly in the clothing. in the way those who wear them stand. When you’re not wearing the suit to gain entry, it fits differently. You already wear it, so you’re wearing it.
