Why are society's restrictions on men's appearance never mentioned?

It was something put forward by the TUC at the Labour Party conference I think Ephiny

I think if you're a woman flight attendant you have to wear heels (although not mega high ones).

A lot of the things you are talking about ie short hair for boys, no hair clips, no sign of anything 'feminine', are a direct result of gender stereotyping and misogyny. For males to adopt anything considered feminine is the worst sin. How many threads are there on here about fathers - or other mothers- who freak out at the idea of a DS having a toy pram or a doll? There have been threads about women who 'have' to buy new stuff for their baby, as they're having a boy and he can't use their DD's pink pram/baby clothes. The usual argument is that it might 'turn them gay', as obviously anything 'feminine' makes you less of a heterosexual male

Actually I thought high heels couldn't be part of a workplace dress code any more - though they certainly used to be. I might have got it wrong, but I seem to remember there was a law passed which was mocked in the Daily Mail etc as 'militant Labour feminists to force women to wear ugly shoes' or something . Maybe it was something that was proposed but not actually done?

I think it's a very valid point and would be entirely in favour of men doing a 'resisting compulsory masculinity' experiment/discussion along the lines of the femininity one. I think ties are ridiculous and don't see why men shouldn't wear skirts if they want to (much more cool and comfortable in the summer).

But that has to come from them, and women should be able to talk about women's/feminist issues without feeling obliged to make it all about men.

LRD; what jobs have high heels as part of the dress code?

I've never worn high heels ( or skimpy clothing ) in my life - I've still attracted loads of men.

K999 - there's an interview I read with Manolo Blahnick where he tells the interviewer (who didn't ask!) that he doesn't wear his own shoes, he's 'not so into that'. Made me smile!

There was a case a few years ago where a man won a discrimination case against his employer because he was required to wear a tie and the women in the office were not.

Unfortunately this doesn't seem to have set a precedent - presumably because discrimination law works on a case by case basis (??)

men used to wear high heels a few centuries ago too - admittedly only the rich ones who could also afford to wear lots of satin and lace and jewels - and presumably it was so they could walk taller, but it also made them mince.

I have never worked in an environment that has a dress code beyond safe and sensible - I lived most of my working life in casual clothes and nearly always flat shoes - high heels would have been a distinct disadvantage from a H&S perspective in my job.

I like high heels. Interesting that the two must have brands (according to the mags) are designed by men! Wonder if Jimmy Choo stands all day in heels when he's working ,

Well, except when they're part of a dress code, carmina.

High heels were invented to make women's legs look longer - men like long legs apparently- but women are not 'forced' to wear them - you have a choice.

Seth - compulsory femininity placed on women by male expectations - I pointed out that men have to conform to a fairly strict dress/grooming code too, - so it isn't a case of 'poor little oppressed women having to shave our legs' - men shave too. Therefore I felt my contributions were necessary. However if you want to take the patronising approach feel free.
HTH

Nice high heels analysis, seth - that makes a lot of sense to me.

rofl @ gin, I thought you were hinting everyone in Brighton swans around drinking gin, which seems sort of believable

that's a really interesting question Cattleprod.

my guess would be two things:

1. because heels don't just make you taller, there are all the other things they do, like making it harder for you to run (footbinding analogy etc) and changing the way you hold your body. Men presumably did not want to pay the price of being unable to walk comfortably, whereas that was something men did want to inflict on women (I won't go into it here but Mary Daly is very good on this, and there is a whole chapter on feet in Beauty and Misogyny by Sheila Jeffreys).

1. men had many other ways to achieve power to make up for being short. I can think of quite a few short working class men I have known who made themselves very muscly and strong, and professional men who made lots of money. And having lots of money lessens the pain of shortness quite a bit, I suspect, even if shortness makes it marginally harder for you to do so.

this is an interesting thread.

It's okay, Teddy. I think there should be a gin emoticon, anyway

Gin? No that should be obviously, he's not a gin drinker to my knowledge my first post on the feminist boards as well...

I love high heels and do wear them, but it doesn't stop me thinking it's really crap that some shops expect their female assistants (who're standing for hours, remember) to wear heels as part of their dress code.

I don't think loving clothes, shoes, etc. is the issue here. The issue, to me, is that I feel as a woman, how I dress has a huge impact on the way in which I will be treated. I know some people love that and love that they can dress in a way that performs different identities for them.

I agree with seth in principle that there's no reason not to be interested in society's restrictions on men's clothing, but I do think men often have it easier. It could be the area I'm in, but I've seen maybe one woman who doesn't get negative comments on her appearance - the others are all either criticized for being overly interested in clothes (therefore, superficial/air-headed), or for being 'dowdy' or 'frumpy'. I just don't think men come up for the same flack, though this may be because I'm thinking of a very male-dominated area.

My brother got a lot of stick at school for his style, he's now in Brighton and right at home Certainly in my area if boys aren't in sportswear they are referred to as 'gay' and will have a tough time of it. That is unfair.

Cattleprod Wed 06-Apr-11 09:12:59
"I can't remember a situation where I've been expected to wear something skimpy..."

I can. Every time I go to the pool or the beach. My husband chucks on his baggy board shorts and... he's ready.

I, on the other hand, am supposed to wear a figure hugging, cut away, lycra suit which reveals every lump, bump and crevice (!) and obliges me to shave off half my pubic hair for goodness sake! And I'm talking about a very staid suit from M&S.

Carmina - the clue was in the OP and the title - it was a thread about resisiting compulsory feminity, not about who has it worse, men or women. If your opinions were treated as irrelevent that is probably why. HTH.

I have never felt any pressure to wear something I find uncomfortable. my clothes can be as practical or as pretty as I want them to be.

And I personally feel, in jeans, top and ballet shoes, that my clothes are very practical today - comfortable and unobtrusive. i would be wearing cowboy boots if it was cold or wet (mega comfy!!!)

I could sent an eight year old girl out in a plain unisex white t shirt, checked shirt, converse and blue jeans - comfortable, practical, nobody would notice.
Whereas if I sent my son out to play in leggings, ballet pumps and a pink tunic top, - comfortable, practical - he'd probably come home with no friends and a black eye.

And that's not fair!

my dad caught his fringe in a glasscutting machine. He stopped having a fringe after that.

and my grandad set fire to his coat in the 1950s when he didn't put his pipe out properly - that definitely counts as a dangers of compulsory masculinity thing, doesn't it?