Is the men's attire in your workplace more restrictive than the women's?

falseatheist

I ask because it seems that in nearly every job that requires formal attire, men have to wear a suit and tie while women can wear pants, dresses, skirts, high heeels etc. In other words they have more choice than men.

Do you think a man can be allowed to wear a black professional skirt in the workplace or would he be called into HR?

seamus

On principle a man cannot be sanctioned for wearing a "professional" skirt into work, though equality laws do have some wiggle room on grounds of reputation and decency.

It's more likely that someone in a professional services company will find this to be a career-limiting choice; you will be specifically excluded from meeting a lot of clients face-to-face.

There is a certain fine line to be treaded in terms of equality; while it prevents a company from treating you differently, it imposes no such restrictions on a company's clients. So if it's determined that a specific client will react badly to a man in a dress, or a woman, or a black person, then the company itself would have a reasonable defence for sending a grouped of suited white men into that client.

intheclouds

falseatheist wrote: »

Do you think a man can be allowed to wear a black professional skirt in the workplace or would he be called into HR?

Id say he could wear a formal kilt and no one would bat an eyelid.

manonboard

Yes I OP I would think that attire for men is more rigidly defined.

Case in point. I joined a new job recently and there are two women here who dress in clothes I would consider quite inappropriate.

I've been amusing myself internally with dialog about it.
Checking whether I am prudish, or overly sexualising the outfits in a way that the problem points at me rather than them.

I've settled on the conclusion that they are infact dressed very provocatively and overtly sexual given our social norms. I think if men here were to do the same, it would be mentioned. I think there is quite a fear element involved that would hinder people making comments on these particular cases. I think that is sexist but nobody is going to touch the issue with a barge pole. If a male manager has an issue with it, it would likely be reflected upon him. Similar in the way that I had to question whether i was the one with the issue, I think it could easily be projected onto a male manager rather than it being an issue of dress ware. There would even be some male to male josting about "Why did you make her cover up? It was a bit of craic seeing her each day!".
I think also it would cause the women particular embarrassment and thus awkward feelings all around. We don't have many female managers so I suspect it will go undisturbed.

One of them wears so little clothing the first few times i seen her, I felt a physical shock happen momentarily. Just completely unexpected. Its similar to dress ware my friends would wear to a club. The other tends to cover up but most of her clothing seems designed to be visibly see through to her underwear.

In the end, they're not doing anyone any harm. Any people affected by it can teach themselves to be less judgmental and just ignore it. I suspect there are some benefits and disadvantages they receive because of it, but such is life.

syklops

intheclouds wrote: »

Id say he could wear a formal kilt and no one would bat an eyelid.

No, eyelids will be batted and HR will have discussions.

I know. Ive been there.

syklops

How does a man dress provocatively?

intheclouds

syklops wrote: »

No, eyelids will be batted and HR will have discussions.

I know. Ive been there.

hmmmm, I seem to remember a scottish director in a different job who occasionally showed up in a kilt if he had a formal function later that evening - no eyelids were ever batted.

syklops

intheclouds wrote: »

hmmmm, I seem to remember a scottish director in a different job who occasionally showed up in a kilt if he had a formal function later that evening - no eyelids were ever batted.

Maybe because he was a director. Different kettle of fish when your a pleb.

intheclouds

syklops wrote: »

Maybe because he was a director. Different kettle of fish when your a pleb.

He would be in the full attire also - ie, equivalent of black tie.

However, there would have been a hard time arguing that some other male couldnt wear a kilt with him strolling about in one 3 times a year or so.

JackHeuston

syklops wrote: »

How does a man dress provocatively?

Tight t-shirts and pants trousers?

Or a tank top

Carlos Orange

syklops wrote: »

Maybe because he was a director. Different kettle of fish when your a pleb.

Probably more that the real world is alarmingly inconsistent. I know a guy who got in trouble with HR for having a flag in his cube but I wouldn't claim everyone who does so would.

messy tessy

syklops wrote: »

How does a man dress provocatively?

Diet coke ad guy

Sunny Dayz

I wouldn't describe it so much as being restrictive but moreso as being limited. In a professional office - it's suit, and shirt and tie. Jacket/no jacket, tie/no tie. Shirt: white, coloured, plain, patterned. Trousers limited to what, 3 colours? (black,grey, navy).


With women there's more choice available - dress, skirt suit, trouser suit. More variety in terms of tops you can wear and colours and patterns which can be worn.


I've never worked in a office where someone has dressed in skimpy clothes, but I've worked in a place where some of the girls wore hoodies and uggs at their desk in the winter and nothing was said to them by management.

gizmo555

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

I wouldn't describe it so much as being restrictive but moreso as being limited.

I'd see that as an advantage for us guys TBH. Less to think about (and probably not as costly).

President Obama always wears the same thing. Which is part of his secret to getting so much done.
As he told Vanity Fair:

"You'll see I wear only gray or blue suits," [Obama] said. "I'm trying to pare down decisions. I don't want to make decisions about what I’m eating or wearing. Because I have too many other decisions to make."

This is because, the Commander in Chief explained, the act of making a decision erodes your ability to make later decisions. Psychologists call it decision fatigue: it’s why shopping for groceries can be so exhausting and judges give harsher rulings later in the day.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3026265/work-smart/always-wear-the-same-suit-obamas-presidential-productivity-secrets

biko

JackHeuston wrote: »

Tight t-shirts and pants?

That would be provocative alright.
I'd assume he'd be at least wearing trousers over them.

JackHeuston

biko wrote: »

That would be provocative alright.
I'd assume he'd be at least wearing trousers over them.

Edited https://zenofhen.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/sad-puppy.jpg I need a quick course on AE and BE

Irish_Elect_Eng

gizmo555 wrote: »

I'd see that as an advantage for us guys TBH. Less to think about (and probably not as costly).

President Obama always wears the same thing. Which is part of his secret to getting so much done.
As he told Vanity Fair:

"You'll see I wear only gray or blue suits," [Obama] said. "I'm trying to pare down decisions. I don't want to make decisions about what I’m eating or wearing. Because I have too many other decisions to make."

This is because, the Commander in Chief explained, the act of making a decision erodes your ability to make later decisions. Psychologists call it decision fatigue: it’s why shopping for groceries can be so exhausting and judges give harsher rulings later in the day.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3026265/work-smart/always-wear-the-same-suit-obamas-presidential-productivity-secrets

Great Post.

Many famous people use very limited wardrobes either to cut down on decision making in a busy life or indeed as part of their personal brand. So much so that our image of them includes their clothes as part of our mental image of them as a person.

• Mark Zukerberg
• Steve Jobs
• Einstein
• Dean Kamen
• Fran Lebowitz
• Jean Nouvel
• Johhny Cash
• Jerry Garcia
• Slash
• Michael Kors
• Simon Cowell
• Karl Lagerfeld

Outside of the outlandish, I would say that men self-limit or peer-group-limit their choices much more than their organisations formally do. There is the concept that we dress for the role that we want. More senior roles are occupied by older staff and older staff are more conservative in their mode of dress and therefore we self select to dress to a conservative norm.


However in a herd, having a personal style, within reason, is a good idea, being memorable is a valuable trait when backed up with effective work. Even in a subtle way, always wearing a particular type of tie, a notable well groomed tach or beard, always wearing a colorful waistcoat, using a pocket watch, etc, all can work.

WoollyRedHat

Yes, ****ing ties, give me a skirt any day of the week

gizmo555

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

Great Post.

Many famous people use very limited wardrobes either to cut down on decision making in a busy life or indeed as part of their personal brand.

I vaguely remember reading an interview with the novelist Paul Auster where he said something along the lines that once a year he buys five pairs of black Levis and five black turtleneck jumpers and that's his clothes sorted.

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

having a personal style, within reason, is a good idea, being memorable is a valuable trait when backed up with effective work. Even in a subtle way, always wearing a particular type of tie . . .

I'm a self employed business consultant and I started wearing bow ties for work a couple of years ago. Firstly, I realised I could buy a good silk bow tie for about the same price as getting an ordinary tie dry cleaned. But, more importantly, I took on board comments by Ken Grace of Grace & Harvey Motors in Glasthule, from whom I once bought a car.

Ken always wore bow ties, because as he explained, selling cars is a very competitive trade, but prospective customers will often make a lot of visits and talk many times to the sales guys before deciding on a purchase. And as Ken said, they may not remember my name, they may not remember my face, but they'll remember the chap with the bow tie!

intheclouds

gizmo555 wrote: »

I vaguely remember reading an interview with the novelist Paul Auster where he said something along the lines that once a year he buys five pairs of black Levis and five black turtleneck jumpers and that's his clothes sorted.

Ive been doing similar for years - its my work "uniform". Im female and no way do I have time to be wasting deciding on an outfit each day. So I own 10 of the same top, 5 pairs of trousers and several cardigans/wraps. One less decision to be made daily.

zoobizoo

In general, there is more scope for women whether that be in or out of the workplace. Colours, styles, seasons etc are greater in number.

A black pair of trousers can be tight, flared, leggings, coulottes, wide legged, or even shorts with tights underneath for women.

For men, most pairs of black trousers will be similar albeit the details (flat front, 1 peat / 2 pleat) may be different.

It means that men can have an easier decision when it comes to what to wear - either formal (suit), casual (jeans) or business casual (smart jeans).

It also depends on the tight of workplace you're in and whether you need to dress smart or not.

If it's a totally casual workplace, then it's level pegging. As it gets more formal, men have more limited options.

Phantasos

syklops wrote: »

How does a man dress provocatively?

Four undone shirt buttons, a hint of hairy nipple.

Heart Break Kid

Women seem to get away with wearing more sexualised items but i suppose its in the eyes from the beholder or viewer but I think black leather pants of which I see a lot crosses the line.

Mrs OBumble

What is a bisexual item? The mind boggles ....

messy tessy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What is a bisexual item? The mind boggles ....

I think that person meant androgynous clothing.