posted
dkw, I think the implication of morality or virtue comes with assuming what someone is trying to say by what they wear. I was shocked when my former workplace seemed to be seeing something sexual in my clothes which I saw differently.
I am trying to puzzle out some objective model of what is going on here so that I can understand and know what is right. As I said, I don't seem to have the instincts that other people have about this.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
ack, I'm sorry kat! I'm all for smilies. I appreciate deadpan humor but often times the appreciation is only gained painfully after the pan has come back to hit me on the head!
posted
I have owned a pair of Naturalizers, professionally fitted at Nordstrom's and everything. They still pinched my toes in the wide model though they were better than most.
I think I've had a pair of aerosoles too, in fact I think they are in the back of my closet. The cushioning was comfy and they didn't pinch my toes but they rubbed the back of my heels raw instead.
AJ
(I didn't think that men's feet were built that much differently than women's but they must be because the only shoes that ever fit me are size 8.5 men's)
posted
And what I was saying was that it’s possible that no one at your workplace was seeing anything sexual in your clothes at all. Perhaps they have had trouble in the past with women wearing “sexy” skirts and now have a standard policy that skirts must be knee-length or longer. I’d much rather work at a place that did it that way than at a place that examined skirts on an individual basis to determine how sexy they were intended to be.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
ak, I don't know that an "objective model" is possible. The entire issue is subjective.
And I am far more concerned about Taliban rules prohibiting women from attending school, working, and so forth than what they required them to wear.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Banna, perhaps you have mutant feet? <insert winking smile or not, as needed>
I’ve loved every pair of Naturalizer shoes I’ve ever had. I once walked five miles, through the woods, in a pair of 2 inch heels (no, this was not a planned hike) with no trouble at all.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Right, Turin=Jeff Fore=Rakeesh. That's why I kept failing to think of this guy as a newbie.
Whatever happened to Rakeesh, anyway? Did he vanish in a huff, or did his life get too busy for Hatrack, or what?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
I wasn't offended by Tom's original post, but by the subsequent explanation. (Scary that kat and I agree on that, no? )
All y'all keep calling Turin a newbie, but did you notice that his registration date was 2001? That's not really what I would call a n00b.
Anne Kate, if the woman in the symphony had been wearing a string bikini, would you have noticed? I think that there is appropriate clothing for certain places. If you work at McDonald's you wear the McDonald's uniform. If you work in an office, you wear office attire. (You know, suit, skirt, whatever that particular office policy is.)
I don't want to see strippers in scuba outfits and I certainly don't want the checker at the grocery store dressed in a G-string bikini.
So, should you be allowed to wear short skirts to work? Why should you? It seems the dress code is that they don't want you to. They seem to not want anyone wearing short skirts though, so you aren't being discriminated against. However, if you feel the need to wear short skirts, you are free to find another job. That's the freedom. It's not to wear whatever you want, because there are somethings that are inappropriate. However, you are free to choose what to wear and where to work. Your bosses are free to fire you, too.
Companies have to draw a line somewhere. I mean, they allow skirts. Then someone decides that mid-thigh is a good idea. It raises some eyebrows, but hey, it's a skirt and the dress code says skirts are okay. Then, they get someone who wears a micro mini skirt, and people don't even have to drop pencils anymore to see what kind of undies she wearing (or not.) So, they decided that to put out a dress code that specifically states how long the skirt has to be. It's their business and they get to decide what the employees are allowed to wear. After all, they are paying you and what you look like, and how you present yourself to the client, affects their reputation and bank account.
So, yeah, you should be allowed to wear what you want, but they should be allowed to hire and fire who they want.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I kept thinking of Turin as Jeff, too, and couldn't figure out why everyone was so worried aobut Rakeesh being gone, when (i thought) he had been posting.
Jeff's fine, he's busy, and doesn't have a working computer. He did give me permission to give his phone number to anyone who wanted it. If you ever call his house, make sure to ask for Jeff JUNIOR, or you'll get his dad, who has no idea who you are.
I have to compliment you guys on the strangest threadreading experience ever.
I'll comment on the dress/shoe thing, too, so as to not derail the thread again.
I like wearing dresses that show off my figure, but I'm not fond ones that show a lot of cleavage. I'm totally fine with ones that show silly things like shoulders and arms. My high school had a rule aobut no bare shoulders, which I thought was about the dumbest one ever. What's so sexy about shoulders? I don't like short skirts much... anything higher than about mid thigh makes me nervous. I have to say knee length skirts are my favorites, though i usually can't find any i really love. They're back in style now, so i might be able to.
My style is really a little random, a mix of boyish, boxy, comfortable stuff, and girly, frilly, flowy stuff. I usually even play up this difference by pairing a girly shirt wiht a pair of loose pants with lots of pockets. Or i wear clunky shoes wiht a really feminine outfit.
I hate women's shoes. With a passion. I have big feet(size 11), and it's almost impossible to find comfortable shoes that don't make me look like a clodhopper. So i buy guys shoes most of the time. but dress shoes are hard. the style lately tends towards platforms, which make my feet look even bigger.also, even the size 11 shoes are too narrow.
quote:But no mens' dress code ever seems to specify things like skirt length that speak to sexuality content.
Typically, a men's professional dress code specifies that men must wear slacks, which is why I say they already are more modest. Certainly a larger percentage of our bodies was covered up at my former employer.
I wonder what would have happened if I had worn a kilt? Would it have been considered completely inappropriate, or would I have had to adhere to length requirements? Given that I was a middle school teacher at the time, though, it probably wouldn't have flown at all.
I do know that when I was first gaining weight, I was taken aside and told that my clothes were too tight.
Túrin, I don't know what to say. You still see conspiracies where I do not. Your judgment of me is already made, and frankly I'm not interested in trying to change it, but it means that it will color everything you read by me to the point where you will see an insult in everything I say, so you will not believe me when I say this: This is a forum for discussion. Not everybody will see things as you do. Many people in this thread have come to your defense. If you see persecution every time two or three people disagree with you about what is offensive, then maybe you wouldn't be happy in any online forum. Of course, you'll just see this as me saying "Don't let the door hit you . . . " (Which is sad, because then you clearly have not in your years here read any of my posts, because that's not in my character.) Maybe somebody who has not already offended you will concur with what I'm saying. I can only hope, though, that you won't immediately categorize it as further persecution. And see, that's the thing. If you see it as persecution every time one person speaks in disagreement with you, nobody can ever get pas that barrier--you have a ready reason to reject every message you don't like!
Kayla, I don't believe I ever referred to him as a newbie. I was careful not to. He implied that he was one, when he said we weren't being welcoming enough.
Do your research! (j/k )
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I have a side question that I would have asked sooner in this thread, but didn't because of other interesting topics contained herein.
What do you guys think of the terms "lady companion" or "lady friend"? I know people can mean them with the utmost deference, but both terms rub me the wrong way. Maybe I have heard too many dirty old men types say "lady friend" with a cackle, implying someone is less than a lady to begin with. But, it bugs me and I can't figure out why.
posted
I've always found the term "lady friend" to be kind of tasteless, and I cringe a bit when I hear it. I associate it with old men in cheap, ill fitting suits, who smell faintly of alcohol and stale tobacco. No idea why I have such a specific association for that one.
posted
Nope, you're not. I have very negative associations with both of those terms. But I was assuming this was a cultural difference and trying to ignore it.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never heard the phrase "lady friend" used outside of Sherlock Holmes books and the musical Showboat. Where did you hear it?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I knew a girl in college who refused to say boyfriend or girlfriend.
She simply said: friendboy and friendgirl.
The best pair of fitting and comfortable hiking boots I can ever find are always in the boys section. They are the only ones that fit my fat, little duck feet. I highly recommend shopping for shoes in the boys section, ladies. Not only do they seem to fit better, they last longer and usually don't cost as much.
Don't know what y'all would do for pumps in that case tho' -
And I think the clothes on a man definitely matter - for example, it's far more appealing to see a man in leather chaps and leather jacket with a beautiful head of hair, than see a man in raggedy jeans, showing his crack at the back end and his beer gut under his skanky t-shirt up front.
posted
I figured it was intended to be a politely neutral term - perhaps noting a non-romantic relationship, but still wanting to specify that he was talking about a woman?
I'm not really sure - I think I find it awkward, more than anything. I'd have said "my girlfriend" if it was a romantic relationship or "the woman/lady I'll be going to the theatre with," or maybe just said "my friend" and let the fact we were talking about dresses be enough to specify that she is a woman.
But, like dkw said, perhaps a cultural difference of sorts. I've nearly gotten used to hearing and reading phrasings that I find a little odd. That's what happens when you have friends all over the world!
Posts: 2661 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
First paragraph of first post on this thread from Turin, Italics mine.
quote:My lady companion and I are attending the theatre next week, and since it's opening night, I planned on wearing my kilt. My lady companion does not have an evening dress.
The older Pinkerton security guard here who is semi-retired and a bit loony and has hair growing out of his ears also definitely uses the term "lady friend" though when he is mad at her she is the "old bat". I've wondered about her looniness too.
posted
That's strange--I completely glossed over that. Now that you draw my attention to it I remember seeing it and finding it strange, but my mind dismissed it so thoroughly that I thought that I'd never seen the term used.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's wearing a kilt - that's fine, but it isn't standard. I just assumed he was adopting the off-beat language as well as the outfit. I didn't think he meant the term seriously any more than we were meant to take the kilt seriously.
posted
I thought it seemed like he was taking his kilt pretty seriously. But I have no idea what to take seriously anymore!
Incidentally I have a friend from Scotland who got married in Scotland, in full clan regalia, her husband was American but full Scottish.
My favorite wedding picture was the groomsmen in kilts lined up in the church bathroom facing the urinals. Nothing indecent is exposed other than some hairy legs but it just makes you pause and think!
posted
You got it, Noemon - that's it, nothing else. NO accessories - at least not the ones you proposed. Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The issue of modesty is a really confusing thing for me because it is such a culturally relative thing. What is consider "modest" by conservative christians, is not the same as what is considered "modest" by Muslims or orthodox jews. Among certain buddhists, partial nudity is not immodest, but wearing expensive clothing is. In most of Europe, wearing the amount of make-up common on the BYU campus is considered so immodest that only prostitutes do it.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've made it a strict policy of mine to simply never wear skirts shorter than just above the knee. This way when they ride up when I sit down (come on, we all know this happens) I'm follwing the previously mentioned no-higher-than-mid-thigh rule and I'm not stuck in the nasty predicament of wondering if it looks like I'm actually wearing anything. My only real gripe with dress codes is the whole no strapless, no tank tops thing. When I'm not wearing long or 3/4 sleeves I live in tank tops and spagetti straps. Not because I'm trying to send messages, but because they're comfortable and just downright nice to wear. I think my preference for either really long or nonexistent sleeves comes from those five years of dance uniforms and costumes. Which sort of leads me to a question of my own... Edit to wonder why the enter key suddenly means submit post... Anyway, though.... Just what is so terrible about halter tops? All they show is back and forgive me if I'm being silly but what on earth is bad or immoral about that?
posted
Pixie, if you had my post in mind when you asked about halter tops, I personally have no problem with halter tops. On other people . They just don't generally look good on me.
Posts: 1676 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Leaving aside the issue of backs and shoulders for the moment, I am concerned that Pixie used the words "bad" and "immoral."
I certainly do not think that wearing clothes that I would not wear makes one either of those things. If I gave that impression, I do sincerely apologize.
posted
Regarding comfortable shoes, you should try Rockports. They make really nice shoes for men; however, I don't know if they make dress shoes for women. Worth a peek at their website, though.
Regarding "ladyfriend", the consensus among my etiquette books is to avoid using that term and simply introduce your gal by name:
"Bob, I'd like you to meet Cindy Strange. Cindy, this is Bob Weird."
In other words, avoid the title altogether when making introductions.
posted
You just need different books - any self-respecting Harley shop could provide you with one or two up-to-date guides. Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To answer the question about string bikinis etc, my personal belief is that everyone should wear what they feel comfortable wearing, and the essence of class is not to notice things that don't matter. Like if someone arrives at my formal dinner dressed in a frogman suit, then ideally everyone would smile and greet them normally and not notice, other than. "Would you like me to take your mask?"
However, I can totally understand being unable to resist lines like, "Everyone's in the living room, just dive on in, I'll be there shortly".
[ September 24, 2003, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One Friday my math professor wore Micky Mouse ears to class and said nothing about them, except that halfway through the class he stopped and gave a totally uncharacteristic rant about how kids today don't have any respect for professors and that students nowadays thought nothing at all of pointing and laughing at professors in the halls.
When the bell rang someone said, "See you next week!" in a Bobby voice, then someone else said, "Why? Because we like you." Ah, fun times! I miss college. Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rivka: Just put quotation marks around those words ("bad" and "immoral"). I meant to but I shrugged it off thinking that it was understood. My sincere apologies.
Posts: 1548 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pixie, I was only worried that I had unintentionally offended YOU (or others). Just ignore little ol' paranoid me. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: "Bob, I'd like you to meet Cindy Strange. Cindy, this is Bob Weird."
In other words, avoid the title altogether when making introductions
I agree with this.
I, personally, like the term 'lady friend' much more than 'girlfriend'. The connotation of the former is more elegant and denotes a relationship between a mature man and woman. 'Girlfriend', to me, sounds somewhat highschoolish and sophomoric.
This is not to say that I would use the term 'lady friend' in spoken conversation. In spoken conversation, it would be too formal. This brings up the question, then, of what term I would use in spoken conversation. I honestly don't know. I suppose I would just grit my teeth and use 'girlfriend' when speaking about my girl to other people the first time I was trying to convey to them our relationship, but probably not in her presence so not to offend.
*scratches head* Dating becomes really confusing after 30. I guess my best advice is to get married by the time you're 25 and avoid the whole issue all together.
By the way, I'm not sure it's very thoughtful to criticize someone you don't know very well for how they call someone they care about. Tůrin hasn't really been posting on here all that long, and I would guess that criticizing him for how he chooses to refer to his girlfriend might be a bit much before he knows anyone very well on this forum.
I understand no one meant it in a mean way, but I could definitely see how someone might be irritated at the criticism if they didn't know it was coming from friends.
posted
I don't think the were being critical . . . I think the conversation just meandered to that topic. I too saw how Túrin might misinterpret it as criticism, and as everybody ganging up on him for whatever reason.
*helpless shrug*
I don't know that we can walk on eggshells all the time. I'm going to post what I'm going to post and just cross my fingers that people won't take it as an attack on the occasions when I don't intend it that way.
I personally see nothing wrong with "lady friend." Like you, I think it's preferable to "girlfriend." Plus, it also covers the situation where maybe there isn't really a romantic attachment yet, but one is open to the possibility that there might be one in the near future.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The way I figured it was that Turin had already complained that we were ganging up on him and said he was leaving after a pretty mild Hatrack experience.
This was a question I had meant to post anyway and I would have been interested in Turin's opinion and how he felt about using the term. I think he meant it in a very respectful way, but I can't be sure. I didn't feel that the question would have normally been inappropriate for Hatrack considering there is almost never a requirementto actually stay on topic in a thread and didn't feel like walking on eggshells about it as Icarus had said.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
