?

Log in

No account? Create an account
gender inequalities - Princess
maigrey
maigrey
gender inequalities
A thought just occurred to me, brought to the surface by a lot of things anne has been posting, which have been cool thought provoking things on the topic of gender equality.

Here's my gender equality question: Why is it that if you're a guy, you can get away with wearing black sneakers with any of your outfits and have it be considered 'matching'. I mean, you can wear them with suits, for gol-durn's sake!

Okay, the only exception is with khaki shorts and knee high crews, but if you're a guy and wearing that, you've got bigger problems.

Current Mood: i should be sleeping

4 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
lvglenn From: lvglenn Date: June 6th, 2001 08:48 pm (UTC) (Link)
I'll answer your question with a question. Why is it that the clothes which on a man would be "business casual" are okay for women to wear on non-casual office days?

Sorry, you struck a nerve. :)
maigrey From: maigrey Date: June 12th, 2001 08:27 pm (UTC) (Link)

casual days

it depends on what you mean by 'business casual'. If you mean khakis and a polo short, then no I don't think that's okay for a woman on non casual office days.

But, blouses and nice pants isn't 'business casual'
lvglenn From: lvglenn Date: June 12th, 2001 09:56 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: casual days

Actually, my comment is really more a reflection on my own office situation. When we finally persuaded the "powers that be" to allow one casual day a week, their dress code for men essentially described the way that the women dressed on a fairly regular basis (the male equivalent of blouses and nice pants).

Sorry, I think I gave kind of a tounge-in-cheek response to what you probably intended as more of a serious question. I certainly did not mean to make a big statement about gender politics or about my beliefs regarding the relative costs or benefits any particular social arrangement may provide for me.

And for the record ... I think black sneakers with a suit looks pretty dorky. :)
anne From: anne Date: June 12th, 2001 02:32 pm (UTC) (Link)
I've been out of town but have meant to respond to your post. I'm glad you've gotten something from what I've written...I've been reading some very interesting, thought-provoking, and mind-expanding stuff for my exam! :)

I'm sorry you got the response you did. As one piece suggested here said, as is generally the case, human beings take for granted the benefits derived from some social arrangement but are aware of its costs for them. It is likely that men viewed women as the more sheltered sex, free from male pressure to provide and to achieve. Men are going to be more likely to notice things that impact them negatively, but fail to notice the overwhelming general advantage they have in society. Chivalry, such as in the case of women having doors held open for them, is simply not in the same league as pay inequality and pink-collar occupational ghettos.

Certainly, there are different social expectations for men and women, including dress standards. I love how at 'black tie' functions, women are all wearing different gowns, but men all look the same in their tuxedos. Of course, men are also only wearing pants, while women have more flexibility in clothing choices. I see these as less pressing concerns, but they are certainly indicative of the different expectations that exist for men and women in our society (and in societies around the world).
4 comments or Leave a comment