Coder wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 11:29 am
Yes - I think the term “fabulous” is overloaded in a way that the regular male out on the street might bristle at it. If you were to tell them they can dress fabulously… they might dress even more macho that before.
But I think giving fashion freedom a name could be helpful - is there a better one? “Fashion freedom” is ok, perhaps a bit too ‘merica.
"Fabulousness," to me at least, implies campy, stereotypical, homosexual behavior. Definitely a turn off to most regular guys. It fits with the descriptions of a few of these guys, however. Some of their stuff sounded way over the top. But some sounded quite reasonable, even professional, just with a bit of extra color and fun.
"Fashion freedom" may be a bit "Merica" sounding, I suppose, but I never read it that way till you mentioned it. It honestly felt like a pretty neutral term, with maybe just a little bit of the opposite, with some implied "showiness" or something from the word "fashion."
As to creative dressing at work, I think there is a limit, and it depends on the industry, the occasion, and so on. The guys interviewed seemed to get that, either intuitively or as the result of being directly told to tone it down after stepping too far past the fuzzy, grey line of acceptability.
For any location or event there are standards, and dressing accordingly is what used to be known as "modesty." (Different standards at church and at the beach, for instance.) Depending on your position, there are different standards as well, and dressing to those is part of humility. (My boss dresses differently than I do most days, office workers dress differently from electricians and welders, etc.)
One of the interviewees stated that he wears the same stuff to the club as to work. I don't see how that should ever really work, and I think he was one that got shot down by his boss. But I also wouldn't say it's appropriate to wear a business suit to the club or to the beach either. (Too many hard-core "conservatives" or "traditionalists" miss this side of the equation.)
While I'd like to see more individuality allowed in more places, there are limits. I remember my one old college professor talking about his time working on Wall Street. He said at one time they tried to institute "casual Fridays." He first complained that he had to buy new clothes, as he owned very little that was between his suits and the stuff he painted the house in. But then he made the real point: "people expect their bankers to look like bankers." And it's true. If someone goes to deposit many thousands of dollars, but the person he is about to hand it over to doesn't look like a banker, are they going to go elsewhere?
I think most people today would consider a banker in a colorful bow tie to be appropriately dressed, and even appreciate the splash of color in an otherwise somber and serious environment. But I also see why it could be seen as unnecessarily risky in a high stakes professional environment. Thus guys relegate their desire for color to their socks. What a sad state of affairs.