The Sexist Formula for Dressing Professionally

[Forty Two]

http://www.xojane.com/issues/profession ... -for-women The Sexist Formula for Dressing “Professionally” As A Woman That I Learned Running a Website That Crowdsources First Impressions of LinkedIn Photos – “At that time (my early 20s), I just wanted to look pretty without seeming like I was trying too hard. (Read: as hard as I was actually trying.) That was back before my perception of how I looked was further complicated by the opinions of people who had power over my career.” http://skepchick.org/2017/05/quickies-e ... s-illness/

So, the formula for dressing professionally is, according to the good folks at xojane and apparently skepchick.org, is sexist, and by sexist I assume they mean discriminatory against women in some way - detrimental to women qua women - perhaps harder for women than for men, based on sex. That's what comes across in the article, as I read it.

However, I've generally been of the view that, if anything, clothing standards are sexist against men, not against women, particularly in the "professional" environment. In a "professional" environment, men have few options. Certainly, wearing anything other than pants is not allowed. Women can wear dresses, skirts, pants, even shorts or calf link pants and still be within the dress customs or codes of most professional environments. When it comes to shirts, men generally have a solid color shirt, mostly white, sometimes blue, and occasionally some other color (but, such forays beyond white or blue are generally disfavored). In some professional environments (namely engineering) a short sleeved dress shirt is allowed, but that is not allowed in most professional environments. But, women can generally wear sleeveless shirts, low or high necklines, and even shirts which don't tuck in the pants (whereas men must generally be tucked).

In most high level professional environments ties are required for men, but not for women. Women can wear them, but they are allowed to be fancier or modified in someway - like hanging loosely about the neck, rather than tied up fully.

I get the article's angst about women being judged by contradictory standards -- men want you to be smart but not too smart, attractive but not too sexy or you're seen as slutty, etc. But, men have these kind of contradictory standards imposed on them by women too - be nice, but not too nice. Be strong and confident, but don't be pushy or conceited. This happens to everybody.

With dress codes, though, in the last 3 decades of my own experience, in a variety of professional settings - I can't really fathom how women could claim that this was an area where they were given the short end of the stick as compared to men.

Also, the article seems to overstate the difficulty of dressing in a manner that would be viewed by most everyone as professional. I mean, in an office environment, a solid color skirt or pants, button down shirt and blazer, with a nice pair of shoes (flat or heels), and you're dressing professional. Same as with men - dress pants, shirt, dress shoes. Done. Women have more options in that vein, as I noted (sleeves, necklines, fabrics, etc.), but other than having more options, what's the difficulty?

What say ya'll?

[pErvinalia]

Didn't read the article, coz reasons, but I assume they are talking about first appearances like on LinkedIn. And managers are more likely to be men than women, so there is that pressure to conform to certain beauty standards. But having said that, I'd be pretty sure most hr people are women.

[Forty Two]

Well, the article is about attire, not "beauty standards" per se. A beauty standard can involve a person's physical appearance, which is not attire. An ugly person can dress professionally and still not meet "beauty standards."

As for beauty standards in general, however, everyone is stuck with beauty standards. Most people aren't good looking, including men. In my personal experience, however, women are far rougher on other women than men are toward women, in the professional environment.

[laklak]

I am so fucking glad I don't have to deal with that shit any longer. I haven't worn a tie in 9 years. I don't own a suit, though I have a sport jacket that I haven't worn in about 5 years. I don't own a pair of "dress" shoes. I've probably worn closed shoes three or four times in the last year. If board shorts, T shirt and flip flops aren't sufficient then I don't go. I did wear a pair of jeans the other day, because the restaurant we went to is usually cold.

[Forty Two]

You're so privileged. If you were a woman, you wouldn't be allowed to do that.

[Brian Peacock]

I'm for total fashion equality. If a gent wants to wear a sleeveless top or an A-line frock, or a woman want to wear button flies and a bow tie, then that's fine with me. Then again, I'm at an age where I don't care what people think about how I look - comfort over fashion wins every time - and I don't care what others look like. Where possible I avoid looking entirely - listening to someone generally gives a far better clue to who and what they are, at least that's what I find.

Anyway, the article says that people are sexist if they expect or demand that women dress a certain way - in a way somehow expected of, or in keeping with, their gender. Most bigotry, sexism included, is arbitrary, as is most criticism of it. The basic point I take from the OP is that women have very little to complain about - I mean, they're allowed to work now, so what's the problem? - and when they do complain they usually blow things out of all proportion. Am I right fellas, or am I right? The complainer in the OP was probably on their period anyway.

[Forty Two]

Well, has someone said the things you noted in your last sentences? Or is that just something you imagine other people are saying?

Also, saying that this is not an area where women have it worse than men is not saying women have nothing at all worthy of complaint. Just because they have some legitimate gripes doesn't make every gripe legitimate. Men have gripes too, that doesn't make everything a worthwhile gripe for them, does it?

Are dress code customs really harder on women than men? I mean, don't women have far more customarily accepted choices and options than men?

[Brian Peacock]

Oh sorry, I thought this was sarcasm hour.

[JimC]

Sometimes, having a lot of choice is a pain. I don't have to think to hard about what I put on each morning as I dress to go to school, whereas the pretty young teachers amongst my colleagues clearly go to a lot of trouble, and there is a lot of diversity in their outfits. Personally, I don't give a damn what they wear, of course...

[Brian Peacock]

Don't you all get issued cardigans with the school motto enblazened upon the breast?

[JimC]

Hehehehehe hehe hehehehehehehehe hehe hehe hehe hehehehe...

hehehehe hehe hehehehehehehe...

hehehe hehe hehe hehe....

You said "breast"... hehe hehe hehe...

hehehe hehe hehe hehehe hehehe hehe hehe hehe hehe....

[pErvinalia]

Well, the article is about attire, not "beauty standards" per se. A beauty standard can involve a person's physical appearance, which is not attire. An ugly person can dress professionally and still not meet "beauty standards."

As for beauty standards in general, however, everyone is stuck with beauty standards. Most people aren't good looking, including men.

I meant in terms of dress standards. I used to "beauty" to imply that the dress standard is about making women look more beautiful as opposed to looking more suitable as an employee in general.

[pErvinalia]

Well, has someone said the things you noted in your last sentences? Or is that just something you imagine other people are saying?

He's taking the piss out of you and your like. The kind of people who don't understand sexism/racism/bigotry etc. The kind who whine "won't somebody think of the men?!!1".

Oh look:

Also, saying that this is not an area where women have it worse than men is not saying women have nothing at all worthy of complaint. Just because they have some legitimate gripes doesn't make every gripe legitimate. Men have gripes too, that doesn't make everything a worthwhile gripe for them, does it?

Are dress code customs really harder on women than men? I mean, don't women have far more customarily accepted choices and options than men?

[Forty Two]

Sometimes, having a lot of choice is a pain.

How would having more choice be a pain when it comes to clothes? I mean, a guy walks into a business meeting with sleeveless shirt, with a plunging neckline and he'd be"judged" plenty.

I don't have to think to hard about what I put on each morning as I dress to go to school, whereas the pretty young teachers amongst my colleagues clearly go to a lot of trouble, and there is a lot of diversity in their outfits. Personally, I don't give a damn what they wear, of course...

They go to a lot of trouble, but do they have to? Or, is it that they like to? Nobody says they have to have a lot of diversity in their outfits. I've worked in professional offices for decades. Women can easily wear a skirt or pants, a button down shirt, and a blazer, pretty much the same as what a guy wears, and they're fine. The trouble seems to arise when they want to wear clothing that starts to be plunging, tight, revealing or flashy. But, being "judged" for that doesn't appear to be sexist, because if men did that, then they'd be judged just as harshly, probably moreso.

[Forty Two]

Well, the article is about attire, not "beauty standards" per se. A beauty standard can involve a person's physical appearance, which is not attire. An ugly person can dress professionally and still not meet "beauty standards."

As for beauty standards in general, however, everyone is stuck with beauty standards. Most people aren't good looking, including men.

I meant in terms of dress standards. I used to "beauty" to imply that the dress standard is about making women look more beautiful as opposed to looking more suitable as an employee in general.

I don't think that's the case in the case of professional attire. Professional attire for women is more like professional attire for men. A woman's suit, other than being more detailed or specifically tailored, and not generally needing a tie, is not much different in character than a man's professional attire. Even business casual - women can easily wear slacks and button down shirt. I see it all the time. I think the issue arises when women want to deviate into areas that are "revealing" or "flashy" or "sexy" -- which, again, have a guy walk in with a backless shirt, and pants so tight you can see the outline of his penis, and people will "judge" ....