Male founders and CEOs have turned the humble baseball cap into a tool of personal branding, virtue signaling, and identity projection. But for women, there’s no such equivalent.
In 1947, Jackie Robinson took the field for the first time for the Brooklyn Dodgers wearing a navy cap with a crisp white “B” stitched on the front. It was a cap like any other, yet on Robinson’s head it became something else entirely. As the first Black player to integrate Major League Baseball, Robinson’s uniform, including his cap, was inseparable from his bravery, his discipline, and his grace under pressure. In photographs from that season, the cap is never far from his hand or his brow. It shielded him from the sun, yes, but also from the vitriol. The baseball cap, by then, was no longer just an accessory. It was a vessel of symbolism.
What happened next is a story of branding and a powerful transformation that turned the once-humble baseball cap into one of the most widely used tools of virtue signaling. And, increasingly, for white men in positions of power, wearing caps not in protest or play, but in pursuit of the elusive corporate cool factor.
The baseball cap is now a semiotic device in the C-suites of Silicon Valley, Brooklyn co-working lofts, and the TED Talk stage. Its wearers are not lounging in dugouts but commanding app empires and tech unicorns. The caps are uniform de rigueur for the world’s wealthiest white men: Elon Musk wears his black MAGA cap like armor. Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates are also frequently spotted in them. You’ll find the caps on the heads of sustainability-minded CEOs, too: Rivian founder RJ Scaringe, Peter McGuinness, CEO of Impossible Foods, and Ethan Brown, founder and CEO of Beyond Meat, have all been spotted in a baseball cap while discussing reducing emissions or fixing our food system.
Today’s baseball cap signals more than just team allegiance or sun protection. It is a message that says: I’m working. I’m real. I’m one of you.
But are they?
A brief history of the cap
The modern baseball cap traces its lineage to the Brooklyn Excelsiors of 1860, who sported rounded crowns and long bills. By 1901, teams like the Detroit Tigers added stitched logos, and by 1934, the New Era Cap Company introduced structured wool caps for professional teams, launching a near-century-long monopoly.
The cap’s shift from dugout to daily wear was slow but inevitable. By the 1950s, kids across America were wearing their team colors. The 1980s brought hip-hop into the frame. Rappers from Run-DMC to LL Cool J turned the cap into street couture. In 1996, Spike Lee asked New Era to make a red Yankees cap to match his jacket. The company complied, sparking the now-ubiquitous color variants and collaborations.
Yet it wasn’t until the early 2000s that the baseball cap became a power accessory in tech and startup circles. Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin kept things collegiate with plain caps and zip-ups. The message was calculated: I may be worth billions, but I’m chill.
By 2020, the corporate cap — especially one adorned with a startup logo or slogan — had evolved into a badge of supposed humility. It was the anti-suit. And as more white men in power began wearing it, the more its meaning began to shift.
Today’s cap is all about posture. A white tech CEO in a cap is playing a character: the “cool boss,” the “relatable founder.” It’s no coincidence that many of these men are white. They have the privilege to reject traditional business dress without sacrificing credibility. A Black man in a cap may be read as unserious or rebellious; a white man in a cap is disruptive, visionary, authentic.
There’s an entire language to it; when a white man walks on stage in a Patagonia vest and a baseball cap, he’s not dressing down, he’s dressing strategically. It’s a page from a calculated playbook where casual swag dominates closets in places where Brioni and Brooks Brothers once reigned. And the cap is the crown jewel.
The cap’s double standard
C-suite men in caps, hoodies, and sneakers exist in sharp contrast to the expectations placed on women, especially those in corporate leadership. As men scale back and signal power through understatement, women are still expected to signal their competence, polish, and ambition through visible effort. The baseball cap may be shorthand for male approachability, but there’s no female equivalent. It’s quite the opposite.
For women in the C-suite, power dressing has not relaxed; it has metastasized. The pressure isn’t just to be brilliant or visionary — it’s to be camera-ready at all times: contoured cheekbones, high-definition makeup, injectables, hair and nail extensions, lash lifts. These aren’t indulgences, they’re frequently considered prerequisites for credibility. Try getting a job or funding without them.
Where a white male CEO can pair his backwards cap with day-old stubble and a recycled plastic Patagonia fleece, a female counterpart is often scrutinized for skipping foundation. The beauty industrial complex has tightened its grip under the guise of “empowerment” to the tune of $677 billion expected in sales this year. It made Kylie Jenner the youngest self-made billionaire — a feat she achieved in 2019 by creating the uniform “It Girl” look via her Kylie Beauty brand that’s built an army of Klones.
This double standard is especially acute in industries like wellness, tech, and media, where visual branding blurs with personal identity. Men are allowed to look “busy.” Women are expected to look “flawless.” The baseball cap, in this context, becomes more than just a low-effort flex — it is a reminder of who still gets to be taken seriously while dressing like they just rolled out of bed.
According to a 2023 Harvard Business Review analysis, women in leadership roles face not only appearance-based scrutiny but also appearance-based penalties. A phenomenon known as the “beauty double bind” means women must appear attractive to be seen as competent, but not so attractive as to be considered unserious or vain. Men’s appearances, on the other hand, are far less scrutinized and often weaponized as authenticity. A male founder in a cap looks “focused on the product.” A female founder without makeup risks being read as “disheveled.”
According to the Harvard analysis, one female physician noted that between ages of 20 and 40, men focused predominantly on her looks. After giving a scientific presentation, a male colleague told her that she “looked like a Barbie doll” up on stage.
The pressure to achieve that impossible aesthetic standard is measurable. A 2022 Statista report showed that women in the United States spend an average of $3,756 annually on beauty maintenance — including skincare, cosmetics, hair, and injectables — compared to just $1,308 for men. And this number rises significantly in high-level professional environments. Botox and “preventative” fillers are increasingly considered not indulgences, but tools of professional survival.
These expectations don’t soften at the top. In fact, they often intensify. Women executives, especially those over age 40, report feeling the need to maintain a constantly “put-together” look. Full glam is now the norm at tech conferences, keynote panels, and investor meetings — particularly for women who must visually compensate for the informality men perform with a cap and sneakers.
And the pressure doesn’t just intensify as women age. “In our research we found no age was the right age to be a woman leader,” Harvard noted. “There was always an age-based excuse to not take women seriously, to discount their opinions, or to not hire or promote them. Each individual woman may believe she’s just at the wrong age, but the data make the larger pattern clear. Any age can be stigmatized by supervisors and colleagues to claim that the woman is not valued or is not a fit for a leadership role.”
The political cap: MAGA, MAHA, and manufactured righteousness
No discussion of the cap’s symbolic power would be complete without mentioning its political deployment. President Trump’s bright red “Make America Great Again” hat turned a baseball cap into a cultural firebrand. It was never just merch. It is armor, identity, and provocation — an emblem worn with evangelical fervor at rallies, debates, and insurrections. It shouts not just allegiance, but righteousness.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., too, has played with this visual grammar, donning caps bearing slogans like “Make America Healthy Again”, positioning himself in a lineage of rugged individualism and unvarnished truth-telling.
The simplicity of the cap — cheap, durable, universal — makes it the perfect vehicle for ideological branding. “Hats have long been a signifier of affinity, whether it’s a ballcap showing that you’re on the same sports team or a fan of one, or any number of the pink knitted pussyhats donned by protestors during Trump’s first term, the titular headgear of the Red Hat Society’s free-spirited sisterhood, the coveted camouflage Harris/Walz hat, and beyond,” Kase Wickman wrote for Vanity Fair. “Often, what’s on your head is an easy way to show what’s in your head,” she wrote.
When a room full of (white) men wear the same color cap, it signals solidarity, sanctity, even. That effect has not been lost on tech and climate founders, who increasingly adopt the cap as a uniform of their own pseudo-rebellious virtue. Whether it says “Make Earth Cool Again” or “Plant Trees, Not Flags,” the structure of the message is identical: we are the righteous ones. Our cap is the cause.
It’s the modesty, stupid
There’s a certain irony in well-to-do founders and billionaires signaling their humility via a $35 hat. It’s a visual shorthand for being too busy, too practical, too focused on the mission to worry about appearances. But it’s also a mask.
The same goes for the climate entrepreneur pitching carbon capture software while wearing a cap emblazoned with a tree icon. He is not just selling tech, he’s selling trust and FOMO. Or the wellness CEO in a backwards cap talking about mental health on Instagram Live. The hat, here, stands in for real-world credibility, a secret even. The cap-as-credible extends to celebrities, too — say, a 50-year-old Leonardo DiCaprio trying not to look so 50 next to his newest 25-year-old girlfriend.
It is the branding of virtue.
For a generation of corporate men, the cap is a new kind of uniform — one that pretends to be anything but. It’s a uniform of informality. Like Zuckerberg’s hoodie, the cap is designed to signal freedom from old rules, all while creating new ones. When Salesforce’s Marc Benioff wears a hat, it seems earnest. If you’re a founder today and you’re not in a cap, you’re almost out of touch.
Men in power, particularly white male leaders looking for relevance in the wake of movements like #MeToo and the push for DEI have adopted the casual dress code as a means to project approachability and allyship. This sartorial shift can be interpreted as an attempt to distance themselves from traditional power structures and to align with a more progressive image. However, this visual cue often lacks substantive action. While the attire suggests solidarity, it doesn’t necessarily translate to meaningful engagement or support for systemic change.
Susan Harmeling, Ph.D., wrote in Forbes that virtue signaling is a “lazy proxy” for actual, real virtue. “Today’s virtue signaling is based on the same dangerous innocence and staggering lack of self-examination that [James] Baldwin warned of over a half-century ago,” she noted.
And the trickle-down effect — top-down casual — reinscribes status and virtue while aiming to erase privilege. If anything, it obscures it, allowing power to hide in plain sight. For the most part, it still works. It makes the haves look as humble as the have-nots. It sells. Just look around.
“A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives,” Robinson wrote years after he first stepped out onto the diamond in his Dodgers cap. Robinson’s cap was never meant to soften his image or brand his persona; it was incidental to his uniform, not his power. Yet power is what it symbolizes now. It has been recontextualized, repurposed, and, by a certain class of modern men, rebranded. It’s not fashion, but a thesis on semiotics and strategy. And as long as capitalism demands narrative, the not-so-humble baseball cap will serve as a character all its own.
Related on Ethos:
