|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 15, 2017 14:44:14 GMT -5
www.cnn.com/2017/07/14/opinions/paul-ryan-congress-dress-opinion-robbins/index.htmlThe author of this op-ed rolls from here into a rant about Trump and Gianforte as "support" for her position, which is "keep the dress code": To be fair, she also notes a study that job performance is linked to clothing choices, but then she also engages in silly hyperbole to make her argument. What she never really does is explain why a ban on open-toed shoes and sleeveless dresses makes sense. Me, I can kinda see the sleeveless dress stuff, to a point. But open-toed shoes? For that matter, I'm kinda over the whole men-must-wear-ties thing. I don't see the point anymore. It's a tradition based on nothing, really. Ties are nothing but decorative, now. They are no longer needed to hold shirts closed. I'd be okay with tossing the whole practice, or at least making it completely optional, no different than jewelry or a scarf. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 15, 2017 18:31:25 GMT -5
Ties are useless, but so are covered arms and legs, unless you're cold.
Shorts and tank tops FTW.
Obviously that wouldn't go over at all, because perception. Culture can be so dumb sometimes.
That study referenced in the article is ridiculous to me. I would not magically feel more attentive with a goddamned lab coat on, that's just silly. But I get that other people feel they can or must be more productive or attentive when they're perceiving themselves a certain way. It's psychological, that's all. I perceive myself as productive and attentive in shorts and tank tops and even, when I worked from home for two years when my youngest was a baby, pajamas. (Hey, it's less laundry when your wear the same thing for 24 hours.)
Of course, I dress up to see clients. Because it's expected. Last week I ended up going straight back to the office after seeing a client, and I'd wager I was somewhat less productive because I couldn't kick off my shoes and tuck my feet under me in my chair. Psychologically I was more the opposite of the study.
As far as Capitol Hill, I'd say whenever they are going to be seen by the public or other important people, they should not wear whatever they want--again, only due to perception and culture--but outside of that, who cares what they wear. And if they could, in the meantime, dial it back a bit--fewer suits and ties, more business casual--maybe that would help to change perceptions in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 15, 2017 19:38:01 GMT -5
I wonder what Optimus thinks of that study? Maybe a better study would be on people in their own professions, wearing (1) the dress code and (2) dressing up or down, as the case may be. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 19:46:55 GMT -5
I actually have no issue with dress codes, including this one. It's simple, ladies. Wear a sleeveless blouse or dress under a suit jacket. It's air-conditioned inside anyway. Done. And I don't really like looking at people's toes in the office. Personally, I like dressing up, having a distinction between work clothes and lounging around clothes, I feel more professional in professional clothes, and I feel I'm treated more professionally. Team dress code. ETA: I also like black tie functions and I look longingly at old photos, pre 1965 or so, where all the women looked chic and the men all wore hats that were not baseball caps. ETA: People should look more like this in the office:  ETA: They should also banter like Bogie and Bacall rather than talk like they're straight out of Idiocracy. ETA: The poll needs a "revert to 1944 dress code" option. |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 15, 2017 20:05:00 GMT -5
They look great (except for the cigarette). But... required? You're such a New Yorker.  I agree that people in general do view a suit-clad person as professional, but you really do *feel* more professional? Like, it affects your brain? Your ability to think professionally? Because that's what the study indicated, essentially (and why I tend to think it's bogus). Also I'll have you know that my flip flop-shod feet are always beautiful. Strangers have been known to compliment me on my beautiful toes. ETA: I differentiate between what is fashionable, or pretty, or debonair, or just really enjoyable to wear or see someone wearing, and what should be required attire. I enjoy seeing man in a well-cut suit; I know from experience it doesn't make him smart or professional. Same with women. |
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 15, 2017 20:22:08 GMT -5
I wonder what Optimus thinks of that study? Maybe a better study would be on people in their own professions, wearing (1) the dress code and (2) dressing up or down, as the case may be. There are several studies that demonstrate slight increases in performance based on what people are wearing, including business-attire in professional settings. One of the studies cited in that article is a dumb one, though, mainly because the authors tried to coin the term "enclothed cognition" which no one in the field uses or takes seriously because it's such a stupid phrase. At the school where I did my most recent masters degree, the chair in charge of one of the psych grad programs instituted a "business attire" dress code on all of the students in that program, which I thought was really stupid, because it was a classroom setting and not a professional job, but I have no problem with them in the actual workplace. In my corporate days, I always dressed professionally and made an effort to look better than my bosses too (because fuck them), so I don't have a problem with dress codes, especially as a way to project professionalism. Yeah, "professional attire" is a cultural thing but that's the entire point. It conveys a certain message (of respect, seriousness, authenticity, etc.) to people that our culture has more or less agreed on and accepts. However, dress codes (professional or otherwise) shouldn't be sexist and should consider and adjust for contemporary professional business fashion trends. "No open-toed shoes" seems an uncontroversial requirement. I know little of women's fashion, but pumps look much more professional to me than heels. But the "no sleeveless dresses and shirts" requirement for women is simply absurd. However, I think the entire kerfuffle over this is idiotic in the first place because it's focused on an issue that really doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of "things that are important." The internet outrages about the fucking stupidest things, and though updating the dress standards on Capitol Hill is probably past due, I'm less concerned with whether our elected representatives dress professionally and much more concerned with the fact that they don't act professionally. |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 15, 2017 20:43:28 GMT -5
I wonder what Optimus thinks of that study? Maybe a better study would be on people in their own professions, wearing (1) the dress code and (2) dressing up or down, as the case may be. There are several studies that demonstrate slight increases in performance based on what people are wearing, including business-attire in professional settings. One of the studies cited in that article is a dumb one, though, mainly because the authors tried to coin the term "enclothed cognition" which no one in the field uses or takes seriously because it's such a stupid phrase. Agreed but, what about the stats? Should casual Fridays be nixed in the interest of greater productivity? I agree. But it's not based on anything real. E.g., Trump wears expensive suits every day.... The fact that the shoes, whether open or closed toe, are elevated, is sexist. Why are women supposed to walk around on their tippy toes, with said toes shoved into tiny triangles? Because, fashion? We hates them, precious. And closed-toe flats are ugly as AF (imo) and also uncomfortable. I am not finding any women's shoes that are professional, comfortable, and flattering. (Sorry, not your problem, rant off.  ) Well, not really, because if women can wear sleeveless, men should be able too as well. But no one is clamoring for men to be able to wear wife-beaters. Cultural norms for attire are dumb. Well said. I totally agree. It's rob's fault we're even talking about this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 20:59:10 GMT -5
Trump's suits look like shit. He needs a better tailor. They may be expensive, but they don't fit him properly. And yes, I do think I work better when I'm dressed professionally. It makes a psychological difference. I actually try to look nice even if I'm alone at home and no one will see me -- not dressed up, but dressed neatly and looking nice. It makes a difference to my mood. Unfortunately, too, people really abuse casual day at the office. Professionals in a law office should not be in running shorts and flip-flops (yes, I have seen this). Loafers and khakis, please. And lots of skin or hairy flesh is for the beach, not the office. But all that said, I'm not ready to rage about it. Just sigh for more glamorous times. ETA: Tailors agree: Trump needs a tailor. www.swwilsonclothiers.com/donald-trump-needs-new-tailor/ |
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 15, 2017 21:15:49 GMT -5
There are several studies that demonstrate slight increases in performance based on what people are wearing, including business-attire in professional settings. One of the studies cited in that article is a dumb one, though, mainly because the authors tried to coin the term "enclothed cognition" which no one in the field uses or takes seriously because it's such a stupid phrase. Agreed but, what about the stats? Should casual Fridays be nixed in the interest of greater productivity? That's up for each individual business to decide based on their own productivity goals. Best way to figure it out would be for a business with a strict dress code to test a casual Friday type of thing and see if it makes a meaningful difference. I don't know what you mean by "not based on anything real." The stereotypical values ascribed to professional attire are a cultural norm here and is as "real" as any cultural norm about attire can be. However, you also seem to be confusing the cultural perception of stereotypical business attire, in general, to the evaluation of a specific person dressed in business attire. These phenomena are not the same. There is of course an element of individuation to this. A stock photo of a random, nameless person in professional attire would likely be perceived in a more positive way than a picture of Trump in professional attire, because he's Trump. That specific instance of individuation (the fact that it's Trump) would likely overpower whatever positive qualities the average person perceives to be related to business attire. Yes, really. Men's and women's fashions are different. There is no current men's fashion trend in men's professional attire of a sleeveless anything. There is in women's fashion, so you're really comparing apples to oranges and trying to say that they're the exact same fruit. A women's professional sleeveless dress or dress shirt is not at all equivalent to a men's white cotton tank top undershirt ("wife-beater"). Despite what dirty, drunk people on TV might think, "wife beaters" are made to be worn under their clothes, not worn as outerwear itself. And, it's certainly not considered professional attire, so your comparison here is not a serious one. However, I do agree that dress code policies should be worded in a gender-neutral way, to avoid these types of objections. If one of the rules is "nothing sleeveless," then it should say that is the policy for everyone, and it shouldn't single women out. However, if it allows sleeveless dresses and dress shirts for women, then it should be allowed for men, too. But, currently, there is no serious fashion trend in men's professional business attire that is comparable. So, a man can wear a sleeveless woman's dress or women's dress shirt if he'd like, but he will sacrifice all possibility that he'll ever be taken seriously again. If a man wants to pay that social price, he should be more than welcome to do so. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 21:24:36 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 21:25:03 GMT -5
Guys? Don't wear those.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 15, 2017 21:31:06 GMT -5
Romphims aren't a trend; they're a travesty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 15, 2017 21:38:37 GMT -5
That's up for each individual business to decide based on their own productivity goals. Best way to figure it out would be for a business with a strict dress code to test a casual Friday type of thing and see if it makes a meaningful difference. Well yes, exactly. And I would think they would have... done that by now? And decided that casual Fridays are not actually decreasing productivity? That's my point. Businesses aren't going to allow crappy productivity just so that their employees can dress down once a week. By "not anything real" I mean that a fancy suit is not actual evidence of professionalism or capability. Yes, it provides the perception of professionalism and capability. But it is not evidence of those things. So, if perception is all you have to sell, you're good. If you have to open your mouth and speak, produce a service or a product, provide some advice or counsel, or just not be a total douchebag... the suit isn't going to help with that. That was my point, perhaps not well stated. It is from the standpoint that culture dictates that men don't wear sleeveless anything, as you said. That's my point. Other than wife-beaters, men don't go around without sleeves. So why should women be granted the privilege? Because fashion. Fashion dictates dress code. And who dictates fashion? And why are we all at the mercy of fucking fashion? Goddamnit I'm ranting again. So we should be meaninglessly, politically correct on the subject of dress code. So sayeth Opty. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2017 21:40:03 GMT -5
Romphims aren't a trend; they're a travesty. Agree. Now THIS, on the other hand...  |
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jul 15, 2017 21:46:27 GMT -5
That's up for each individual business to decide based on their own productivity goals. Best way to figure it out would be for a business with a strict dress code to test a casual Friday type of thing and see if it makes a meaningful difference. Well yes, exactly. And I would think they would have... done that by now? And decided that casual Fridays are not actually decreasing productivity? That's was my point. Businesses aren't going to allow crappy productivity just so that their employees can dress down once a week. I guess I don't really get your point, then. The reason that "casual Fridays" and other such things exist in the first place is because some businesses have already tested them and made the determination that they make a meaningful difference for those businesses. If "casual Fridays" didn't already exist, then we wouldn't be able to have a conversation about them. I was only speaking to how professional attire seems to be perceived by the general public. I wasn't implying that it had magic powers to significantly change people's personalities. It might increase the productivity of some college undergraduates in some controlled studies, but that doesn't mean that it prevents Bob (or Trump) from being an asshole at the office. |
|
I agree that people in general do view a suit-clad person as professional, but you really do *feel* more professional? Like, it affects your brain? Your ability to think professionally? Because that's what the study indicated, essentially (and why I tend to think it's bogus).
) 