It's 2020 folks. 2020!

I didn't say it was rare

And we're talking about schoolgirls

Idea that girls are sexually knowing and actively looking to incite lust in males is just off the mark

No it's not off the mark, unless you are talking about "all girls".
It's perfectly normal, and extremely common, for 14/15yo teenagers to want to and try to attract the opposite sex.
Stop bringing 10 yos being ogled by old men into it.

Most women just want to look 'nice' don't they, according to the current fashions which yes of course pander to male gaze. But the individuals putting the clothes on aren't usually trying to send specific messages about sexual availability etc. Even though so many men and some women (much of society in general) say they are.

I think this is all the more reason not to let those boundaries be eaten away, though, not to say "oh whatever." If it's pretty clear that certain things aren't appropriate, as it is for men most f the time, it makes life a lot simpler.

Although I would argue about it being rare for women to be interested in using appearance and clothing to signal sexual availability, or to have a particular effect. I think women are often just as interested in that sort of thing as men are, and most of them past about age 25 are clued in enough to understand what clothes send what signals.

No man's sexual morality has ever been questioned because of what he wore.

You have to be careful with making this the equivalence though. In our culture men's attire has rarely been designed to have the same kind of effect. If you think of cases where it has, it's instructive of the gap - Burt Reynolds with his short shorts and shirt half open. Possibly Daniel Craig or Sean Connery as Bond in a bathing suit - at the beach. But generally if you see a picture of a man billed as super-sexy, even at something like an awards event, he's probably wearing something like a great suit. Going the Burt Reynolds route sometimes even leads to speculations that the person is trying to appeal to gay males.

The issue is that she looks like she is going to a cocktail party not representing a political party.

But isn't this in part because it's considered ok to up the sexiness level a little at that sort of event? Whereas the office is considered to be where that should be the most restrained (and properly so given all the very serious downsides of office sexual politics.)

Women's clothing decisions are fraught with difficulty tbh

So much store is set by them, in a way it's just not for men. Loads of judgements about the motives in putting them on, assumptions about her sexuality, how many sex partners she has etc.

Most women just want to look 'nice' don't they, according to the current fashions which yes of course pander to male gaze. But the individuals putting the clothes on aren't usually trying to send specific messages about sexual availability etc. Even though so many men and some women (much of society in general) say they are.

It's a really complicated area and one that women and girls, in society as it is, generally will be deemed to be doing something wrong whatever they do!

I was very surprised to see what she was wearing in the HoC. But having read the paper today it seems she had been at a music event and then rushed to the Commons and also had a broken ankle so was standing awkwardly.

I her position I would probably have donned a jacket, or a nice comfy cardy.

Interesting that a woman who says they just think oh there's a woman in the hoc showing a bit more shoulder than is generally considered appropriate for work gets pulled up

But not the woman who says she looks at that pic and thinks oh she looks like she's just been fucked in an alleyway

Interesting.

Anyway, to me it's clearly not office attire. It might work for a cocktail event after work. A cardigan or something possibly could have made it work for both.

I think though it probably looks a lot worse from the camera angle in the HoC, though, and maybe she didn't realise it would have that "looking down your top" effect. Lots of people occasionally make a wardrobe error where something doesn't come off quite the way they thought when they left home.

It is unprofessional because it flouts the dress code for what is considered professional day wear. Yet it would be perfectly acceptable to wear an off the shoulder dress at a smart evening event.

The issue is that she looks like she is going to a cocktail party not representing a political party. If she were being criticised purely for dressing inappropriately for the occasion, that would be fine. The issue is that her "morality" is being questioned because she made a social faux pas - "only a slapper would wear evening dress in the day."

No man's sexual morality has ever been questioned because of what he wore. And, let's be honest, there isn't even an equivalent negative word for a man who shags someone over the bins or puts it around a bit.

Oh for god's sake she looks fine. How despressing that anyone is still getting worked up about a few inches of female shoulder in 2020. Fuckssake we're going backwards! Good on her for tackling the petty insults head on though. She sounds cool.

I think oh there's a woman in the house of commons showing rather more shoulder than is generally appropriate for work. And that's it.

But you are just asserting it without looking for the root of what makes it inappropriate for work.

There is constantly this very weird split where some feminists are quite happy to talk about the sexualisation of women in the media, in fashion, about how it is exploitative, how it warps our images of ourselves, how it warps young girls images and the way young boys think about women.

But as soon as someone says, in a setting like an office or a school - wearing the clothing that is designed to do that, designed to sexualise us - isn't appropriate, they back right up. All of a sudden it's not about that at all. Somehow, as soon as they go on an actual woman's body, the clothing loses all that, it's just a piece of cloth, just a style, just fashion. It has no influence on anyone and if some men think it's sexualising it's just their own pervyness, and if some women think it's sexualising they are some sort of traitors to their sex.

Maybe the reason a lot of women object is that they are tired of being seen as sexual objects and they know it isn't just magazine photos that create that atmosphere, cause if no one was taken in by them and bought the clothes there really wouldn't be that much effect. Men don't mind so much because they don't have to live with those expectations.

Certainly when I rolled my skirt up I did it because that's what we all did. I absolutely did not want to be followed, ogled, stared at etc by adult men.

Yes, perhaps you were trying to be cool like the other girls, that's common and all the more reason kids that age need some adult direction and boundaries. But the poster upthread was talking about herself. And I can say the same thing, there absolutely are girls who are very much dressing for the male gaze when they get to high school, and often well into their 20's. I kind of find it difficult to believe that someone could not realise that. I would suggest that for many, they are basically victims of our culture's obsession with women's sexual availability. I can't decide if people think this should be ignored because the poor women are too dumb to realise what the fashion industry does, or because they think it's empowering so long as they choose it.

That's a dreadful picture it does look a bit like her zip had come undone and she had carried on with her job regardless

It looks fine in other shots so I can't see the issue with it

And actually WTF gives anyone any rights ever to say someone looks like they have been banged over a wheelie bin

I was at school 30 years ago as well and skirts were rolled all through secondary so from 11.

When shorter skirts are in fashion many girls wear them including later primary school.

The idea that these clothing choices must be driven by a desire to attract sexual attention is worrying.

Many girls are just following fashion and actively hate/ feel uncomfortable at getting sexual attention. Which they get irrespective of the length of skirt tbh it starts as soon as their bodies start to develop.

Idea that girls are sexually knowing and actively looking to incite lust in males is just off the mark and causes a lot of victim blaming.

I subscribe to the look pretty or look professional view.

Criticising a women who chooses professional for not being pretty enough is sexist. I don't think that is the case here.

Criticising a women who chooses pretty for not being professional is not something I would do, but I can understand it happened.

Not sure many will agree though.

Frogs, my experience, which is admittedly 30 years ago, was that the rolling up of skirts started at about 14/15, not 10. And yes we were doing it for male attention. I am certainly not suggesting 10 year olds would have the same mind set (and am quite frankly that you would infer otherwise), I was just responding to your outright denial that a desire to attract the male gaze might sometimes be behind a decision to bare more of one's body.

Well apparently many women on this board (looking at you justhadathought and myimangunarycat..) seem to not be aware we are in 2020 not 1950.

I wear an above the knee skirt for work I'm not seeking to get lustful glances.

I wear it because it 'looks nice' in the context of fashion and society.

Man was staring at me on the tube last night. I don't like it now and I didn't like it when a was a kid.

I also think that men will be iffy to girls irrespective of what they wear. Blaming the girls skirts for the bad behaviour of men is as old as the hills but seemingly going nowhere.

The framing of female children as sexually knowing, deliberately tempting men causes huge problems for girls, I'm surprised that is being pushed.

Short skirt= asking for it is a thing I thought was long gone.

Well yes the posters saying that of course schoolgirls roll their skirts up to get sexual attention haven't said some schoolgirls.

It's a bit grim.

My 10yo gets leered at. She sometimes wears a skirt above the knee. With leggings. Idea that she's looking for it is grim.

Personally I don’t see anything wrong with what she is wearing.

What I do have issues with is some of the doctors/junior doctors at work who often wear tight bodycon dresses with heels. They are seen tottering around the wards and I can’t imagine them running down the corridor and performing cpr on someone collapsed on the floor!

She is shadow culture sec. not women and equalities.
Anyway. Yeah, the outfit was nice, I thought, but not appropriate for work. Still the fucking disgusting comments are way over the top.
Personally I dressed like a Victorian widow for school, in the longest skirts I could find but yes of course teenage girls want to look attractive to boys, on the whole, and they just don't think about the pervy old men.

Totally inappropriate comments. And an inappropriate outfit for the occasion.

The idea that all schoolgirls are dressing to be sexually appealing rather than because it's the fashion, and having this repeated by lots of women, is weird tbh.

I don't think anybody said all. You clearly didn't.
But a lot of us did. And clearly still do.
Do people forget what they were like at that age?

I think this is a feminist issue in that it appears she thinks she needs to show flesh. In every setting. She doesn’t; none of us do.

I agree with this.

The idea that all schoolgirls are dressing to be sexually appealing rather than because it's the fashion, and having this repeated by lots of women, is weird tbh.