unisex clothing.

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby pelmut » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:11 am

SkirtsDad wrote:If a male teacher were to be sacked for wearing a skirt then it would not the be the skirt per-se but the fact that he would not have been following the dress code. Similarly a woman should expect the same were she also not to dress as per the women's dress code.

Until recently in the UK, where there have been dress codes, they have been far more restrictive for men than they have for women. With the rare exceptions where there were separate uniforms which allowed no variation, the women were allowed a choice of skirt or trousers but the men were only allowed trousers. Now common sense has prevailed and there is only one dress code - and it allows skirts.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.
pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby SkirtsDad » Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:14 pm

pelmut wrote:
SkirtsDad wrote:If a male teacher were to be sacked for wearing a skirt then it would not the be the skirt per-se but the fact that he would not have been following the dress code. Similarly a woman should expect the same were she also not to dress as per the women's dress code.

Until recently in the UK, where there have been dress codes, they have been far more restrictive for men than they have for women. With the rare exceptions where there were separate uniforms which allowed no variation, the women were allowed a choice of skirt or trousers but the men were only allowed trousers. Now common sense has prevailed and there is only one dress code - and it allows skirts.

It is changing in many companies but the UK government and law still permit discrimination in workplace clothing rules, and whist I agree that typically women have a greater choice, they sometimes have little choice at all. Employers are still legitimately forcing women to wear heels, for instance. http://motto.time.com/4650468/nicola-thorp-britain-high-heels/ Parliament rejected a change in the law to ban employees forcing women to wear heels earlier in the year.
User avatar
SkirtsDad
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:03 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Sinned » Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:48 pm

Caultron, SD, there are some like Steve and I whose spouses are against us wearing skirts, possibly not all the time but enough. So in a sense they are not allowing us to wear skirts as, when and where we want to. In my case MOH is against me wearing skirts outside the house or when there are guests coming. Yes I could say up yours to her but that would cause, at best marital difficulties and at worst the complete breakdown of the relationship and I don't want that. It seems that the other female members of my family ( daughters, daughters-in-law ) have a slightly more relaxed, but hypocritical, attitude in allowing other men to wear skirts but excepting their own menfolk. Just because some of you have complete freedom, possibly because there isn't an OH on the scene don't preach that women have no say in any allowance of men wearing skirts.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Caultron » Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:10 pm

Sinned wrote:Caultron, SD, there are some like Steve and I whose spouses are against us wearing skirts, possibly not all the time but enough...

Understood and agreed. And as for me, my wife continues to refuse to appear in public with me in a skirt (although there are rare exceptions), and to refuse letting me leave the house on foot and take walks around the neighborhood while wearing a skirt. (Remarkably, though, driving a few blocks away and then talking a walk in a skirt is OK, as is retrieving the newspaper or putting out the trash.) But yes, the other 99% of the time I get at least grudging acceptance.

But that's between her and me, and not part of any global feminine conspiracy to ban all men from wearing skirts.

In fact, I believe my wife is my sole opponent in this. She cares but the other 4,500,000,000 or so women on Earth don't (except, in some cases, regarding their husbands.)
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby moonshadow » Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:30 pm

It is true what Dennis said. In addition, often times as I've seen online, many women who support men wearing skirts are okay with it as long as it's not their man wearing one. I'd say most "progressive" type women follow this. Take my mother for instance, she supports the practice, but she'd never date a man who wore a skirt, and would prefer her son not to do so as well.

So in regards to personal relationships, especially pertaining to family (mothers, sisters, aunts, etc) or romance (wives/girlfriends) then yes, I'd agree it is women keeping a lid on the whole M.I.S. thing. Which is not to say that there are not women who do not support us, of course there are. However I do believe they fall in the minority.

There is also the matter of competition, in this way, we men are own own worst enemy. I can say first hand that women, all women, get hit on CONSTANTLY. If they are married or committed in any way, that means nothing. In fact, it's a growing trend to try to pick up a married woman. I believe it may have something to do with how men's brains are wired, some primordial drive to obtain all the females and be "king of the tribe" (so to speak). If we men do anything that may diminish what it "means to be a man", to carry the traits of females, become more feminine, we look "damaged" in the eyes of our mates. I believe there is also a primordial drive in women's brains to select the strongest, more dominant male in the herd. It could be argued that a man who isn't afraid to be himself against all odds, would in essence be the star definition of the "alpha male", but unfortunately I don't think most women see it that way. At least 999/1000 of them seem to always gravitate towards the "macho hunk".

In this way, natural selection is against us.

Finally there is the matter of the patriarchal society we live in with all it's various masculine glorifying customs. The irony here is, in a world dominated by men (it is), that men themselves should be the victim of their own slavery. The reason for this is all eyes in the world are on us to act our part in society. Nobody cares what a nobody is doing because that particular person doesn't matter. The lower you are on social class, the more you can get away with. In this way, I actually have more freedom that all of the men who rank above me at work, but as it's already been explained to me, if I ever get promoted I'd have to nix the skirts and act normal again. Now women are working their way up the "man's" global power ladder, I submit the only reason this is happening is due to these women adopting more masculine characteristics. Masculine = power, feminine = submissive. Nobody wants a submissive leader. It's practically a contradiction in terms.

Now skirts, no matter how "girly" (feminine) are not submissive. They're just clothes after all. If clothes are perceived to be powerful or submissive, it's an arbitrary perception. But, be that as it may, a lot of our world operates on perception.

How to combat it?

There is a greater chance of winning the state lottery by finding a discarded winning ticket in a trash bin that this happening but:

All men (or most men) simply start adopting all things feminine whilst remaining in power and not giving up their positions.

Once this is accomplished, the other two issues, that of objecting females and natural selection will work itself out.

But how do we get there??

To answer that question, one must ponder the chicken and egg paradox...
-Moonshadow
Moon Space
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Terra

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby moonshadow » Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:37 pm

SkirtsDad wrote:It is changing in many companies but the UK government and law still permit discrimination in workplace clothing rules, and whist I agree that typically women have a greater choice, they sometimes have little choice at all. Employers are still legitimately forcing women to wear heels, for instance. http://motto.time.com/4650468/nicola-th ... igh-heels/ Parliament rejected a change in the law to ban employees forcing women to wear heels earlier in the year.


That's interesting, and I confess to being more than a little surprised. In virtually every other matter, the Brits always seem to enjoy more general personal liberties than we do here stateside. And yet, we have this matter where women may be required to wear heels. Interestingly enough I do not think such a measure would stand here in the states. As a general rule, in the United States, women are not required, nor forbidden to do any particular thing with regards to dress, as long as it's "customary" for the field, and as such, with American women, virtually ANYTHING counts as "customary".

However in the odd chance that an American employer made such a requirement, there are several measures to get the woman out of it should she choose:

Generally, under U.S. labor law, there can be differing dress codes between men and women as long as the dress code does not place "undue hardship" on the employee. Under this, I would imagine that as heels have a reputation for being hard on feet and generally uncomfortable, then the EEOC and courts would likely agree that the requirement to wear heels could place an employee under undue hardship, especially if she had issues with her feet.

If that failed, she could simply obtain a doctors note, and/or she can also cite it's against her religion, as some, especially in puritan religious circles might view heels as vanity.

Outside of that, in case you're wondering, in the U.S. YES, as far as I know it's completely legal in all 50 states to fire a man for wearing a skirt, on or off the clock. You'd get unemployment benefits, sure, but outside of that, there isn't a damned thing you can do about it. NOW, the only exception to that is in states where "gender identity" is a protected class, in which you'd have to claim you're "transgender", in other words, you're essentially affirming that you are not a man, rather you're a woman. Thus the point is somewhat moot with regards to men in skirts. Most states do not even offer gender identity protection, those who do are outlined here (link) You would think that that constitutes sex discrimination, as women have the right to choose but men do not, but, as it stands, the courts tend not to agree and in most cases rule in favor of the employer in this matter. Is it right? No.. but it is what it is... but remember... we freeeeeeee!!! *pffft* :roll:

However all that said, I'd say it's a safe bet that if you're just wanting to wear a skirt but not be considered trans*, you're probably okay in a state where gender identity is a protected class.
-Moonshadow
Moon Space
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Terra

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby denimini » Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:45 am

oldsalt1 wrote:How many members of this cafe have spouses that won't " ALLOW" them to wear skirts

How many members of this cafe have bosses or jobs (not counting safety issues) that wont allow them to wear skirts.

If a male teacher showed up for class in a skirt how long would he have that job.

So please don't throw that bull that no one is stopping men from wearing skirts.

Just because some of the members in the cafe have been successful in being able to wear a skirt out and to work. doesn't mean that it is acceptable or allowed in the general populace.

Just getting along and having your own space is where we want to end up but we are a long way from there

I really don't think anyone is disallowing us to wear skirts. It comes down to our personal priorities and choices, if we love our partner or parent enough to modify our behaviour or value our job to the degree that we will modify our behaviour, then it is our choice.
Sometimes I will wear pants to a meeting but it is not because I am not allowed, just that I think it is appropriate attire for the situation.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding your use of the term "allow"; certainly I agree that there is a conservative attitude to dress codes.

I think is is just a matter being brave and copping the flack, just like women did years ago wearing pants. At least we are just reintroducing the idea of men wearing skirts, unlike women who had no previous history of wearing pants.

Studies on Primates (Hominoidea) have shown that the males are generally more conservative than females, so perhaps we are a less "macho" minority and our fellow gender type are not going to give us the support that women had.

If it doesn't get any better, just consider it character building.

Speaking as a single, self employed primate.
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1072
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Caultron » Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:16 am

moonshadow wrote:...in the U.S. YES, as far as I know it's completely legal in all 50 states to fire a man for wearing a skirt, on or off the clock...

I'm not at all sure that's true. I can tell you from experience that if you're a manager and talk to your HR department about firing someone, they make you jump through months of performance counseling and results montoring, and they will tell you terrible tales about lawsuits where that wasn't done.

And anything legal you do off the jobs is, by definition, non-job-related and not a legal basis for termination.

Then again, a lot of managers (and companies) ignore that advice, and as the fired employee, it's very hard to find an attorney who will pursue the matter on a contingency basis.

But aside from all that, I think very few, perhaps infinitesimally few, managers would attempt to fire a person for violating a dress code once. (Although I gather you did once come across one of those infinitesimally few.)
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Darryl » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:00 am

moonshadow wrote:Now skirts, no matter how "girly" (feminine) are not submissive. They're just clothes after all. If clothes are perceived to be powerful or submissive, it's an arbitrary perception. But, be that as it may, a lot of our world operates on perception.
...Once this is accomplished, the other two issues, that of objecting females and natural selection will work itself out.

But how do we get there??

To answer that question, one must ponder the chicken and egg paradox...


Ummmm.... :twisted: ...mind-altering substances? Resurrect the 60s? Genetic engineering of a targeted virus where it's "three sneezes and you're in skirts for life?"

Hmmmm. Let me think on this...... :mrgreen:
Darryl
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:32 am
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Sinned » Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:16 pm

Anthony, as one possessing an OH that is mostly male skirt unfriendly I can assure you that she does try and dictate how, when and where I wear a skirt. So in that sense she (ab)uses her power of censorship. Of course I push the boundaries and at my peril ignore her sometimes and incur her wrath. Unless you are in that situation it's difficult to appreciate. Were I single like you then I wouldn't have the stress that I have and would wear a skirt as I please and not give a damn about what others think.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby moonshadow » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:30 pm

Caultron wrote:I'm not at all sure that's true. I can tell you from experience that if you're a manager and talk to your HR department about firing someone, they make you jump through months of performance counseling and results montoring, and they will tell you terrible tales about lawsuits where that wasn't done.


I will admit I may have went too far in my generalization, for I do not know the laws of all 50 states. I have heard stories over the years coming from employers based in states of all types of "political views" that have fired employees for reasons that had nothing to do with job performance, downsizing etc. In other words, fired for beliefs they held, opinions, political views, and other matters.

In fact, even in California, there was a story of a taco stand who is owned by a transgender woman, she makes it a point to hire transgender employees for her stand. As they interviewed some of the transgender employees for the story, many had stories of being fired from previous employers (even in the L.A. area of California!) for being transgender.

I read on a legal weblog about a year ago that in New York, it is perfectly legal to fire someone over a political opinion. So if you live in New York, and your boss doesn't like that political sign you put in your yard, he can fire you for it.

I believe it was after the Charleston South Carolina church shooting, a man lost his job with his employer because a news camera captured him in the background of a white-pride rally.

In the last two scenarios, the employer is clearly terminating employment for reasons outside of work. Mostly I'd say, due to the issue of public perception of the business that has/had the employee on payroll. Of course a man who is simply wearing a skirt could not hardly be compared to a white supremacist, however it's still politics, and depending on the region you work in, firing a man in a skirt could very well be the "locally political correct" thing to do. It may not fly on the west coast, but in the U.S. south... it's the thing to do. Simply put, having a skirt wearing man on payroll can cost business. Some customers may not mind being serviced by a man who's wearing a skirt, but given the looks and glares I get, I'd say quite a few would mind. They'll just go somewhere else to do their business. And that is their right, people have a right to shop wherever they want.

I can respect the tight rope that employers have to walk, especially in this highly charged political landscape we are in today. This is essentially why I avoid going into the stores I work for, even off the clock while wearing a skirt. I'll admit I was angry about it for a while, but since then I've come to understand the barrel I put the company I work for over. They never told me I couldn't visit the stores in a skirt, it was mentioned it may harm my shot at advancement, but that was it. I choose not to because they didn't fire me that day. They could have, but they didn't. And out of respect for that, I keep this lifestyle away from their business.

I still have issues with certain people within the company, but I can not judge the whole company based on just a few prejudiced people. And do I think that it's right that the female employees can basically wear whatever they want while males are stuck in the same boring stuffy drab? No, of course not. But then again, that practice of women IS socially acceptable, so they don't have to worry about public blow back. Nobody is surprised to see a female deli clerk with piercings all over her face, tattoos, blue and green hair, tongue rings, ripped jeans, and crocs... that's just girls being girls right?? But around here, a man better look like a man. Perhaps someday, before I die, the men's lib movement will catch up to the women's lib movement from 50 years ago. Or maybe not. I'll still be true to myself either way.

Teaser: I'm actually about 1/3 of the way through a very interesting book on "Coal Towns" I picked up at the antique store a few weeks ago. The area written about is centered right where I live, and upon reading it, I'm beginning to understand why the people are the way they are around here. Once I'm finished, I'll post to off topic my thoughts on it as I do believe it explains the unique issues I have with regards to how I dress.
-Moonshadow
Moon Space
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Terra

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby SkirtsDad » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:31 am

moonshadow wrote:I will admit I may have went too far in my generalization, for I do not know the laws of all 50 states. I have heard stories over the years coming from employers based in states of all types of "political views" that have fired employees for reasons that had nothing to do with job performance, downsizing etc. In other words, fired for beliefs they held, opinions, political views, and other matters.


I knew that there's very little in the way of employee rights as I worked for an American company and some people were told on a Friday simply to to show up on Monday. It didn't seem like they were given any reason other that they weren't needed any more. I was fortunate, being employed from the UK, that I had the same rights as anyone else in the UK. After reading moon's post, and saw that things are perhaps even worse than I already knew, I did some digging around and found this article which talks about some of the differences in rights and protection in many of the various states: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/donna-ballman/can-you-be-fired-for-your_b_9154066.html

Luckily the UK's already much better rights have been strengthened further by European Union legislation, however, I am fearful that after Brexit then the situation won't be as favourable. The biggest loophole that employers have here is the use of zero hour contracts. So brilliant.... you don't need to fire anyone, you just don't give them any work if they fall out of favour. Many EU countries have banned them and this is likely to change for those that have not as the EU is trying create new legislation to limit the use of these contracts and make employers give a minimum number of hours work.
User avatar
SkirtsDad
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:03 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby moonshadow » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:02 am

I know it's hard to believe, but we are actually light years ahead of where we were just a hundred years ago. The book on "Coal Towns" I'm reading now, in addition to the other literature I've read and documentaries I've watched around the time of the American industrial revolution are enough to make your skin crawl. Working conditions in those days were downright dismal.

Things started to improve as America started to unionize, later followed the list of Federal and various State labor laws such as minimum wage, child labor laws, overtime pay, and other various laws and guidelines. Prior to the enactment of labor laws and the unionization of the work force, it was not uncommon for young children to work in some of the most dangerous and dismal conditions imaginable, for mere pennies and virtually all of your waking life. 80-100 hour work weeks were not uncommon, and in those days, you didn't just come home and pop a dinner in the microwave or stop at McDonalds on your way home. There was MUCH housework to do, hence the very binary gender roles of the day, young boys and men worked in the field, young girls and women tended the home, which was indeed a full time job of the day!

Now most of my practical experience with labor law comes from my lifetime of working in what's known as "employment at will" or "right to work" states. Basically in these states, you are not required to be a member of a union to have employment, even in companies that are unionized. It basically gives unions very weak teeth to really do anything. Thus, unions are slow, or simply do not have a strong presence in the particular states (most of them are in the U.S. south) Typically, in "employment at will" states, you can be fired for anything, or no reason at all, as long as it's not a violation of Federal or State law. The old saying here is "you can be fired for the color of your shoes". And it's actually true! So being fired for wearing skirts goes without saying....

All that said, I'd rather live in 2017 than 1917..... to hell with that!
-Moonshadow
Moon Space
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Terra

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby r.m.anderson » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:40 am

moonshadow wrote: snip

All that said, I'd rather live in 2017 than 1917..... to hell with that!


With the present political landscape we seem to be drifting back to that time frame !
I won't go further with this point as discussion belongs in another section of the forum.
But it still is not easy wearing a skirt when you want to unless you are a retired ole fart like myself.
Damn the dress ah er skirt codes - so much for EQUAL rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness !
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Bloomington MN

Re: unisex clothing.

Postby Caultron » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:49 am

r.m.anderson wrote:[...it's still is not easy wearing a skirt when you want to unless you are a retired ole fart like myself.
Damn the dress ah er skirt codes - so much for EQUAL rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness !

So, (1) if you're an old fart enjoy it, and (2) if you're not, stand up and be yourself. Don't be afraid to do what some 65+ year old guy gets away with.
Courage, conviction, nerve, verve, dash, panache, guts, nuts, balls, gall, élan, stones, whatever. Get some and get skirted.

caultron
User avatar
Caultron
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:12 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

PreviousNext

Return to In the News / Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest