Dress Code Discrimination -and LGBT community feeling uncomfortable

[Usermuser]

The Guardian has done an article today about the dress codes in work places for women (heels, make up, skirt above the knee, blonde hair). As far as I can see, it focuses on the law, the health issues of heels and the fact that woman feel sexualised by having to dress this way.

And then there's this:

'MPs also expressed concern that gender specific dress codes reinforced stereotypes which could make lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers feel uncomfortable at work.'

Fine, I'm sure that's true, but many straight women feel uncomfortable with these gender stereotypes too! It's not just an issue of women being sexualised, it's that many would much rather wear trousers than a skirt, and don't see why they should have to conform to 'femininity' and wear makeup. These 'reinforced stereotypes' hurt everyone, not just the LGBT community. Grr.

For anyone who is interested:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/25/law-must-be-tougher-over-dress-code-discrimination-say-mps

Not seeing what the support issue is. My bloody awful Doc boots supported the ankle and they were excruciatingly painful

I'm not sure if I have a few years on people here or just crappy genes ... but, at perimenopause, I have found that my body is generally changing. I can no longer eat what I want (fuck it) and I have ankles from hell. I can't wear flatty-flat-flats or heels. The most comfortable height is about 5/8ths of an inch. I need enclosed ankles, a support strap, a proper footbed with arch support and rounded toes to prevent pinching. Having a tiny and narrow foot makes this all the harder (and expensive) to find.

I agree with SomeDyke that the term 'sensible shoes' is gender specific and no one says it of men's shoes. I'd kill for the range of shoes that men have that are 'sensible' (read 'comfortable').

I'm a bit surprised that on a feminism board, I have to defend the not exactly stunning statement that dykes may have a slightly different perspective on the social forces and pressures acting on women. You may think it's irrelevant 'who you fancy', but the patriarch certainly doesn't. After all, why do you think we have different rules for what men and women are supposed to wear or look like in the first place? Who are we supposed to look attractive for?...............

And I just remember all too clearly the pressures on me when I was younger, when not looking like the other girls and not being attracted to the people the rest of them were attracted to became an issue. These things were linked.

You are making assumptions that the women who disagree with you are heterosexual, for one thing. Also assuming that butch dyke culture applies to lesbians in general and ignoring the existence of bi and pansexual women.

What the hell is "pansexual"?

A new term for bisexual or does it mean someone who is attracted to all animals and not just to humans?

If anyone is going to give the definition of pansexual would you also mind clearing up 'queer' for me?

My generation used it derogatively. And although I have googled it I'm none the wiser.

SomeDyke

I'm with you on the DMs. I bought a pair a few years ago, I had to wear them in. When they were wore in the were the comfiest shoes I ever owned. All my other footwear which I had thought was comfy eventually got replaced with DMs. That said I don't wear trainers or ballet flats because of a physical issue.

Also I see where you are coming from regarding the lesbian clothes/fashion perspective. Society makes very clear that women should look good to attract/keep a man. I have a lot to say on this but as usual when I try to write it it's too garbled and full of pre-preemptive responses to what other people may say.

"Bisexual" carries with it the implication that everyone fits neatly into one or other of the boxes marked Male and Female. "Pansexual" makes a point of rejecting that implication.

ActuallyThatsSUPREMECommander

Thank you. So does that mean a pan sexual person will be attracted to both sets of genitalia, however that person presents? So men, women, trans or otherwise?

And queer?

This is very helpful by the way.

""Bisexual" carries with it the implication that everyone fits neatly into one or other of the boxes marked Male and Female. "Pansexual" makes a point of rejecting that implication."

I don't know what "neatly" means in this context, but except where there is a disorder or genital malformation of some sort all humans are clearly either male or female. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species, like most mammal species.

None of this is controversial and really shouldn't be news to anyone who has had secondary school-level biology lessons.

"does that mean a pan sexual person will be attracted to both sets of genitalia, however that person presents? So men, women, trans or otherwise? "

In practice, it probably means:

"Very few people of either sex are interested in me because I've managed to seriously mess my body up with hormones and surgical operations, so I'll take whatever I can get"

and/or

"I have to say I'm attracted to everyone with whatever genitals because otherwise I couldn't harass lesbians for not wanting my penis".

Is there any evidence that shoes need to support the ankle?

Even my outdoor Karrimor shoes stop below the ankle.

My teen son has never owned any pair of boots, and mostly wears trainers.

Surely most people who wear boots in January (to work or otherwise) are straight women? Because straight women frequently wear just below the knee half inch heel leather boots at this time of year?

Shoes that "support the ankle" actually are not good for the ankle. Limiting a joint's range of motion and allowing it to work less than it normally would have (with a boot, cast, whatever) inevitably weakens the muscles supporting that joint.

Except when you haves joint problem and actually do need to support that joint & limit its motion, of course. For limited period of time, after which you will have to work that joint (physio) to recover optimum strength & range of motion.

The fact that this was framed as a particular issue for LGB T people, and therefore of greater importance than if it was only a problem for women, reminds me of all the attention in the media last year when Brighton College stopped insisting on skirts for girls and trousers for boys. Good for them, but it was all framed as being solely for the purpose of not making trans student uncomfortable, and as being a positive news story for that reason alone. As a the mother of a girl who hates wearing skirts, but who is definitely a girl, it really irritated me that the preferences and comfort of girls is constantly dismissed or disregarded, unless they're "trans," of course, in which case the dress code becomes human rights issue and a matter of life and death.

The difference between bisexual and pansexual is -

Bisexual is an attraction to men with penises and women with vaginas
Pansexual is an attraction to people, however they identify and whatever their genitalia.

I am bisexual. I would still love and want to marry my husband if he was a woman with a vagina.
I wouldn't be sexually attracted if he called himself/identified as a woman, and then whipped out his penis. I want a sexual partner, not a Kinder Surprise.

Whereas I have a friend who is pansexual, who wouldn't be fazed by that.

BD's point is still fair enough. Being a woman who is exclusively attracted to other women is a completely different perspective (and subject to a far greater degree of prejudice and discrimination) than sexual orientations that involve being attracted to men. The pansexual thing is neither here nor there.

"Also assuming that butch dyke culture applies to lesbians in general and ignoring the existence of bi and pansexual women."
No I'm not.

You could say that what I'm talking about in general is non-heterosexual women. Okay, so that includes pan and bi and whatever other prefixes you want to stick into the soup. I'm a lesbian, so I had the temerity (shock! horror!) to talk from my own perspective. That isn't 'leaving out' or 'erasing' anyone elses experience.

But on second thoughts, I think that not being attracted to men/boys is definitely the prime thing. Given that we are supposed to be, so being a bit attracted, or being attracted to some but not others isn't quite as heinous as not being attracted at all to any male ever. Okay, so then I guess I'm leaving out asexual women...........

So back to the dykes! That is what I am and that is what I was talking about.

And kind of comes back to what I was thinking about on another thread, Monique Wittigs statement about lesbians not being women............

I agree with others who think they put in 'LGBT' as a supposedly 'polite' way to say 'trans'.

But, I have come across people who (oddly, to my way of thinking) do think sexuality is relevant to dress codes. There's a woman who's quite well known in academic circles - her business is coaching people through the CV/application side of academic jobs and she runs a blog on it - who wrote a series of pieces about dressing for success. They were a bit notorious, though some people swear by them. Basically, she peddles the whole 'ladies should wear smart clothes, groomed hair, try to wear heels, blah blah' stuff. But she also did a special 'exception to the rule' post, explicitly for butch dykes (her terms not mine).

This was a few years ago, but I remember reading it and finding it quite strange that she was quite happy to urge women to conform to a certain image, but somehow thought that if you were a certain kind of lesbian, it was important enough for you not to conform.

She's just the example I can immediately think of, but I don't think she is totally alone in that. Odd, IMO.

Oh absolutely almond I was just veering off topic explaining the difference between bi and pan :) we definitely enjoy a "passing privilege" that lesbians don't, particularly if we're in a relationship with/married to a man.

Yes, sorry, wasn't aiming my comment at you in particular, Ovaries.

"I agree with others who think they put in 'LGBT' as a supposedly 'polite' way to say 'trans'."
I think they were aiming at this, especially since now really, REALLY not wanting to wear clothes stereotypically associated with your own the one you were coercively assigned at birth by nasty medics...... sex is held up as such a strong indicator of how someone is really trans............

Which, of course, just reinforces the notion that which type of clothing matters. And also throws butch dykes under the bus (well, into the uncomfortable shoes pit at least!), saying they are really trans but unable to admit it. Because anything else would be saying that sane, sensible, normal women (as well as butch dykes) could be totally averse to all this femininity nonsense without actually being a man.............

That's an interesting one LRD. If your personal style is of the "butch dyke" flavour, but you are not actually a lesbian, is that allowable? Is it actually just an alternative style that is "permitted"? Or does one have to be a lesbian?

On the whole "throwing under a bus" issue, no sensible trans person thinks that everyone else is perfectly happy to comply with all the gender stereotypes and expectations. (there are of course idiots in every group of humans you could possibly name)

I believe people when they say that being trans is about more than just wanting (or not wanting) to wear dresses and play with dolls. What that "more" is, I have no experience of, but I believe them that it exists.

Sorry if I was snippy earlier, SomeDyke. I had hideous PMS and was probably projecting a bit about the many 'not a real lesbian if you exhibit X stereotypically feminine behaviour' comments that abound.

"Sorry if I was snippy earlier, SomeDyke. I had hideous PMS...." . Yep, we've all been there.

And I unfortunately seem to have painted myself into a corner where the defining characteristic of whatever the bobbins I was talking about seemed to be not being attracted to men (which I of course resent as them shouldering into the definition even when it's not about them...........).

Time for bed said Zebedee (I need a BOING emoticon!).

Somedyke

Before you get off the Magic Roundabout could you just help me out with the definition of queer and gender queer?

I'm worried if I don't get this all straight soon it will all change anyway.