Categories
antifeminism beta males bunnies creepy dozens of upvotes empathy deficit entitled babies evil sexy ladies evil single moms excusing abuse idiocy imaginary backwards land imaginary oppression irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA one hundred upvotes only men pay taxes apparently oppressed men reddit sexual harassment

Men’s Rights Redditor: “Going to a strip club as a guy must be like going to a regular nightclub as a girl!”

Peep show
Peep show

How stupid do you have to be to actually believe the following nonsense? Not just regular stupid. Men’s Rights stupid.

Wow, just wow. This blew my mind the other day when I went to the strip club (self.MensRights)  submitted 1 day ago* by horqth  So I went in there, with no intention of buying anything, I just went in there and got something to drink and sat down by myself.  After a few minutes, strippers comes up to me and starts to be nice to me, tells me I look good, that I dress well and, they are just basically trying to charm me and they treats me as a king. (This is just to get me to spend money on them of course, but if we ignore that, these girls are basically making me feel really good about myself)  Then it hit me: going to a strip club as a guy must be like going to a regular nightclub as a girl!  Because when a girl goes to a club all the guys will come up to her and treat her nice, and try to charm her.  Told my friends about this and they said their minds were blown as well, what do you think?  Edit: spelling

Heck, this is even stupid by normal Men’s Rights standards. It made me think of this line from Ruthless People.

Now, horqth could very well be a troll. His account is brand new, and, I mean, this is just amazingly dumb. But here’s the thing: his comments are being treated as if they are completely reasonable by the Men’s Rights subreddit. I noticed only a couple of mostly ignored comments out of more than 100 even raising the possiblity that he was a troll.

Not only has his post gotten dozens of upvotes, but in the comments there are numerous other Men’s Rights Redditors — not trolls — who’ve actually managed to outdo him in the sheer ridiculousness of their opinions. And they’re getting upvotes too.

Milessycamore seemed to suggest that horqth had understated the degree to which men were being victimized in both places, and more than 200 Redditors agreed:

milessycamore 162 points 1 day ago (212|50)  except the difference is that you, as a man... pay BOTH places...

Saxonjf thought it would be nice if more women would act like these strippers and make men feel “important special.”

saxonjf 8 points 1 day ago (10|2)  Great analogy. I've never been to a strip club (and have no intention), but it wouldn't hurt women to realize that making a man feel important special will help the relationship.  We've grown up in an era where denigrating men is fashionable, and women don't realize that building us up, rather than tearing us down, will make a huge difference in our relationships.

Itchybrain, putting his economist hat on, suggested that the root of the problem was the massive over-valuation of women:

itchybrain 27 points 1 day ago (36|9)  Very true. Most guys minds would explode if they got the attention the average looking girl gets. I think Marc Rudov said that for a guy to get the kind of attention the average girl gets he would have to be a millionaire. It just shows you how over valued women are sexually and how under valued men are.

So how did the ladies get so overvalued in the first place? Blame the government and all that darn welfare. Responding to one contrarian Men’s Righster who suggested — get this! — that women are appropriately valued — FloranHunter laid down this truth bomb, by which I mean a bunch of complete and utter crap:

FloranHunter 7 points 17 hours ago (8|1)  Not exactly.  The government MASSIVELY subsidizes women, especially single mothers. They still can't get everything they want or possibly need with it but women no longer need a man to survive. This causes a corresponding massive devaluation of unattractive but socially useful (aka has an ok or better job) men. In the past, women needed men or they starved or were vulnerable to violence. This is no longer the case.

If only we could return to the good old days, when women would starve unless they were super nice to unattractive dudes who pestered them in bars!

Lawtonfogle also has no problem with the idea of men being valued for their money; he just wants to get more bang(s) for the buck.

Lawtonfogle 10 points 1 day ago (12|2)  Government intervention in the means of social support programs that result in a woman having far more bargaining power in relationship dynamics. If it weren't for laws that provided support for children and forced fathers to pay for children (even when they aren't the biological father), it would be a very different issue. Men would still be valued for their money and women for their attractiveness, but money would hold more value and being a male willing to commit would also hold (more) value.      permalink     source     parent     save     give gold     hide child comments  [–]IOIOOIIOIO 5 points 23 hours ago (7|2)  Effective male contraception is going to be amazing.

I give up.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

445 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
6 years ago

Not at an interview though, they will expect you to dress better for the interview than they will expect you will dress if you get hired. Tailored clothing looks good in an interview, even if it’s not a suit.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

Yeah, I’d go for woven over knits just because it always looks more pulled together and professional.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
6 years ago

Sounds good then. I put more credence in the applicant’s experience than in what they are wearing. 🙂

kittehserf
6 years ago

Give me one good reason to prefer sex over non-sexual reproduction. IVF even gives you some degree of genetic control, and that degree of control will only rise in the future. Sexual reproduction is a genetic crap shoot.

Let’s see – IVF is a godawful procedure to go through, with the egg harvesting, the hormones, the tests, etc, etc, as well as being horribly expensive.

Most people don’t give a damn about genetics unless they have particular illnesses, conditions etc. they know about and don’t want to risk their children inheriting.

You’re talking out of your arse about love, I see. No surprise though, since you get all weasellywaaaaah about the simple fact of a triangle being a three-sided figure.

Could it be because you’re just another nitwit who’s answering everything in standard bizarroland trollspeak?

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
6 years ago

I vaguely remember reading something about not wearing too much makeup or excessive jewellry to interviews. Breastfeeding during the interview could be a bit of a no-no too. 😉

cloudiah
6 years ago

Hm… I do have a suit jacket I could wear instead. Maybe I’ll explore that.

(Is Triangle gone?)

kittehserf
6 years ago

O rly? Citation desperately needed. Some people find being in a romantic, sexual relationship with another human being (or beings) they deeply care about to be uniquely fulfilling.

PRECISELY.

I sometimes suspect the trolls troll here because they never have and never will be in such a relationship. Oh, I don’t mean sex: I mean love. I’d swear they’re incapable of it.

cloudiah
6 years ago

It would be particularly weird for me to breastfeed during the interview, since I have no children. And I own very little jewelry.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
6 years ago

Will you be comfortable in the clothing you wear? Nothing worse than being in a job interview for over an hour in tight, scratchy, itchy, or hot clothing.

scott1139
scott1139
6 years ago

“I have Pakistani family members who didn’t want my uncle to marry a white German woman because they would feel inferior to her due to her whiteness. The same beauty standards lead to black women devaluing themselves as women because of the white supremacist notion that blackness is inherently ugly.”

That’s really depressing… 🙁

Oh, Ally S, I read your recommendation of Gradient Lair and decided to go check it out. I read a few of her articles before noticing the link to her content use policy. Long story short: she’s been dealing with a lot of crap for a long time, and said her blog is now for women of color only. I didn’t read any more of her content after that, though I did sit there staring at the page for a while.

Assuming you didn’t already, do you think it would help if you went over and wished her well?

cloudiah
6 years ago

Ha ha, “over an hour” — this is an all-day affair, lasting from breakfast through dinner. So I definitely need to be comfortable.

kittehserf
6 years ago

I’m thinking nice black pants, black ankle boots, a dark gray twin set (I know, but this is the world I live in), and then I have this rather nice scarf in a kind of dark red/maroon.

cloudiah, you could come to your intereview in jammies and I’d hire you (if I knew it was you, which kinda borks the question).

The outfit you described sounds fine. I’m not sure I’d even bother with the scarf – could it make it too busy around your neckline?

Ally S
6 years ago

@scott1139

I don’t recall her saying that it’s only for women of color, but if it is then it’s definitely not a good idea to read it if you aren’t a woman of color. It doesn’t mean much to me since I’m a woman of color (half white, half Desi), but it’s important to respect rules like that. Another good blog for woman of color issues that isn’t only intended for women of color is Flavia Dzodan’s blog at redlightpolitics.info.

Ally S
6 years ago

Oh, speaking of racism, one of my uncles once told her ex-wife to make her face whiter so he wouldn’t be embarrassed to be seen with a woman without “fair skin.” I can’t make this shit up.

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Kiwi Girl — I think the problem is the Triangle has managed to conceive of some definition where if men have blue eyes, idfk, 50% of the time, and the rest of the men have brown eyes, but women have blue eyes 25% of the time, then that’s more variance (taken from the bit about plumbers). But if, idk, purple eyes naturally occurred, and only in men, that’d also be more variance.

And with any categorical variable you’re likely going to have some category where one population lands more than another, even if only slightly and not statistically significantly. But that’ debt more variance by the aforementioned “logic”. So by this “logic”…

Men:
Brown eyes — 26%
Hazel eyes — 24%
Blue eyes — 26%
Green eyes — 24%

Women:
Brown eyes — 25%
Hazel eyes — 25%
Blue eyes — 25%
Green eyes — 25%

There’s more variance among men!

Men:
Brown eyes — 25%
Hazel eyes — 25%
Blue eyes — 24%
Green eyes — 26%

Women:
Brown eyes — 25%
Hazel eyes — 25%
Blue eyes — 26%
Green eyes — 24%

Somehow still more variance among men, because they’re more likely to have green eyes than women, or something.

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Also, most genes are not a strict binary thing. Eye color REALLY isn’t. It’s a bunch of interacting genes. For any of that sort of gene, if any of the interacting genes is x-linked, then the possibility for two copies instead of one is going to open the door to more variation among women. Really, the entire idea that men have more variance because x linked recessive genes ignores the vast number of genes where more copies means more variance, or the ones that’re more affected by estrogen than testosterone. And missed the ones modulated by life experiences that are more likely to happen to women than men.

I apologize for this post’s cis centric wording.

…all this genetic talk gave me an idea to a question I was asked about maternal inheritance of mental disorders. Thank you, I now know wtf I should’ve been using as search terms.

contrapangloss
6 years ago

Hey, triangle with an extra side of silly! Guess what? You aren’t alone in thinking sex is icky. Some of us just don’t feel the need to assume everyone else is disgusting or unintelligent because they like it. Frankly, some of the people here are way more clever than both of us, combined.

Guess what else? Test tube biology doesn’t work nearly as well as you think it does. Sure, we can screen for genetic disorders, but actually raising a viable little human outside of a human remains a pipe-dream. There are a ridiculous amount of subtle hormonal, chemical, and other environmental stimuli that trigger gene expression at particular times, which we have not even come close to nailing down. Plus, some exposure to icky environmental things is actually good; please, do yourself a favor and look up some studies on the causes of allergies.

Guess what else? As a biologist, I call BS on your assumption that males have more phenotypic variation. In biology, variation is more “Does this trait exist?” Since females can display all autosomal recessive traits, with two recessive alleles, the recessive argument fails. Since only females have two X chromosomes, only females can display codominant traits that are sex linked. For males to show more variation due to X-Y shenanigans, the alleles would have to be on the Y chromosome… Which is pretty durned limited.

Essentially, the only gene guys have distinct differences in variation from women is the distinct set of 50-60 genes that pretty much are all “make this human a man” proteins. The SRY gene is most fundamental, there. We call that gene “Sorry” when we feel silly.

For scale, humans have about 25,000 genes. For more information on why your phenotypic variation argument is baloney, first read a good intro to genetics text and then familiarize yourself with the human genome project.

Whew. Onto the evo-psych BS. Which, as much as I love some good sociobiology, your version is still very much baloney.

Guess what, again? Reread Fibonacchi’s first wall of text in reply to you. Then, just in case it wasn’t clear enough:

Biology is messy.
The environment can play a huge role in phenotypic expression for many traits and a very little role for some others.
Phenotypic plasticity is a thing, and uber frequent.
One species behavior is rarely a good informative for another species behavior, although generalizations can be CAUTIOUSLY drawn.
Your generalizations failed. Severely. Find a good study, give us a link, and we’ll talk real science.

Peer reviewed, please.

Everyone else, so sorry for the wall of text. I just hate when people misuse biology, stats, and non-Euclidean geometry simultaneously. The rectangle was tromping on all my loves at the same time.

🙁

contrapangloss
6 years ago

Special sorry goes to the ferrets in the David suit.

Can I send you some scented candles, to make up for the errors of my ways?

Everyone else, I’m so sorry.

Here, Internet Bon-bons?

scott1139
scott1139
6 years ago

@Ally S

I think her exact statement was along the lines of “The only thing stopping me from password locking my blog is not knowing which of my readers are women of color and which aren’t.” Anyway, I’ll check out that other blog; thanks for the link! 🙂

katz
6 years ago

Love is a vaguely defined concept that can mean multiple things depending on context. It’s another word like “spiritual” or “family values” or “freedom.” It’s a buzzword. It’s a nice-sounding word that means whatever the listener wants it to mean.

That’s the saddest thing I’ve ever read.

For males, masturbation can replace sex as a source of ejaculation in order to decrease the probability of prostate cancer. For both genders chocolate can replace sex as a source of oxytocin. Dopamine can be replaced by harmless novelty or better yet, by accomplishing tangible things in life.

…Never mind, that’s the saddest thing I’ve ever read.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

The other thing that I couldn’t be bothered engaging with Triangle enough to point out is that the answer to “why have babies via sex?” is “why not?”. If people want to keep fucking, and they can find someone who wants to fuck them, why shouldn’t they? “Because they want to” really is a good enough answer in this case.

katz
6 years ago

Give me one good reason to prefer sex over non-sexual reproduction.

You’ll be able to appreciate this song.

Brooked
Brooked
6 years ago

@Scott1139

Oh, Ally S, I read your recommendation of Gradient Lair and decided to go check it out. I read a few of her articles before noticing the link to her content use policy. Long story short: she’s been dealing with a lot of crap for a long time, and said her blog is now for women of color only. I didn’t read any more of her content after that, though I did sit there staring at the page for a while.

What the hell are you talking about? This is not remotely true, here’s a quote from ‘Gradient Lair 101’:

My target audience are Black women, period. I consider my blog a reflection of myself/my interests and at times a conversation with other Black women… My secondary audience would be other women of colour. And as I mentioned in my bio, other people are welcome to read this blog if they aren’t here to plagiarize, be a voyeur as if they’re “surprised” a Black woman is human, or insert their bigotry. But still…recognize the focus and target.

How is “other people are welcome to read this blog” in any way exclusionary?

Where do you think she says “her blog is now for women of color only”? I cannot even fathom where you got this idea, you have completely misunderstood her policy on contact use. I’ll quote her very reasonable policy below.

Cross-posting without my permission and usually without pay is unacceptable. I decide if I want the majority of/an entire essay cross-posted. I most certainly do not authorize this for White-owned mainstream blogs that reap the page hits and ad revenue while I reap the hatred, -isms, and trolls for the content. Do NOT even bother to contact me to cross-post an essay for free unless 35% or more of your writers are people of colour. Do not expect my writing for free while you are PAID for the same work.

I will consider free cross-posting for blogs that are ideologically friendly to Black women, are Black-owned and/or are womanist or intersectional feminist. White-focused feminist blogs need not apply. Tweet me at @GradientLair for initial inquiry; follow up will be conducted via DM or email from there.

Not wanting to be cross-posted to feminist sites that don’t have any self-generated content by WOC is very reasonable. She’s not willing to be a token-for-hire whose articles are borrowed to add a fake appearance of “diversity”. Good for her.

Feminists of every stripe should check out her blog.

Ally S
6 years ago

Thanks for clarifying, Brooked.

scott1139
scott1139
6 years ago

Going back to find the discussion about password locking now.

kittehserf
6 years ago

Turn the whole “why would you want to breed via sex” thing around: how many cis het women would want to endure pregnancy without even the pleasure of sex beforehand (especially if we’re talking about making love)? Yes, it would be way preferable for many asexual or lesbian women who wanted children, or heterosexual women who don’t enjoy sex – but would the majority of women want this? I doubt it.

But it’s a stupid hypothetical anyway, because this sort of technology is simply not available for most of the world, and it’s not something women go through lightly. IVF is fucking traumatic by all accounts.

Now if there was an artificial womb substitute, or a way that cis men could get pregnant, I’d be all for it. Plus like the old joke says, if [cis] men could get pregnant, there’d only ever be one-child families.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
6 years ago

@Argenti:

Men:
Brown eyes — 26%
Hazel eyes — 24%
Blue eyes — 26%
Green eyes — 24%

Women:
Brown eyes — 25%
Hazel eyes — 25%
Blue eyes — 25%
Green eyes — 25%

There’s more variance among men!

Yeah, still scratching my head – and I know you are too! Using this example, both genders have four eye colours, so the variance in *number* of eye colours is exactly the same (4 colours with 0 variance).

If the estimate for brown eyes (picking on this only as its the first eye colour mentioned) was 26% (22%-30%) for men vs. 25% (22%-28%) for women, then yes the variance for the proportion of brown eye colour in men would be larger. But then, so what – what is the practical outcome of this and why is it important? And I don’t think that was the “point” that tedious troll was trying to make. The actual proportions themselves aren’t a measure of variance because they’re a point estimate (like a mean is a point estimate, but because in this situation we’re dealing with categories, we use proportions instead of means so it makes sense). In the case of proportions, the sample size is used to calculate the variance, see e.g. http://stattrek.com/sampling/variance.aspx

I’ve tried to put some explanation in there for others who are following along. 🙂

And now you can see why tedious troll’s comments on variance make no sense whatsoever, and have no practical implications.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

If I had a choice between doing away with sex and doing away with the whole physical process of pregnancy and childbirth, guess which one I’d pick? Not the one Triangle recommended, that’s for sure.

scott1139
scott1139
6 years ago

http://www.gradientlair.com/post/71637879756/hey-im-sure-sure-sure-that-person-was-well-meaning#disqus_thread

“Honestly the ONLY reason why it’s not password protected already is because I can’t figure out how to go through thousands of readers to know which are Black women and safe to be in my space.”

The link and quote are above. It’s quite possible I misinterpreted what she was saying.

Brooked
Brooked
6 years ago

@Chris

She’s complaining about brutal harassment and social media attacks, and it sounds like she gets a ton of it. A lot of bloggers find the abuse and stress too much, to the point that they give up because of it.

I took it as ONE White person NOT calling me a bigot for THE DAY. I don’t think people who blog at the level (not implying quality, implying frequency and scope) as I do understand what I am facing on a daily basis. I have 50-250 Whites PER MONTH I have to block on Twitter and Tumblr. Hundreds of emails of lies and false claims and demands for content and reports of plagiarism of my work and people expecting a mammy therapist. I am not being hyperbolic. I wish I were.

I respect that she wants the blog to be a safe space for black women. That’s the reason I don’t comment, because I don’t have anything particularly substantial to add to a conversation about the lives of black women. If she took the blog private, I wouldn’t take it personally if she wanted to limit the people who have access to her site.

That said, I don’t think she has a problem with non-harassing white readers like me, so I have no problem reading it. I don’t get your shock over what she said and don’t feel like it should drive away any white reader who understands the blog is fundamentally not about them.

Brooked
Brooked
6 years ago

Here’s a nice little piece she wrote, “My Feminism Is…”
http://www.gradientlair.com/post/62732540637/my-feminism-and-my-womanism-is

Here’s a more substantial post about black women and reproductive rights.
http://www.gradientlair.com/post/74243812084/black-women-pro-choice-roe-v-wade

I like her blog quite a bit, in part because it’s something different from the Huff Po mainstream white feminist fluff. If you are put off by a black woman who get’s pissed off about racism, then, yes, don’t read her blog. I’m not, and it makes me physically I’ll to think how black writers so often have to watch their “tone” in order to coddle white readers’ feelings.

Brooked
Brooked
6 years ago

*makes me physically ill (Thanks a bunch autocorrect.)

kittehserf
6 years ago

Autocorrect and WordPress, minions of Basement Cat.

kittehserf
6 years ago

Say, remember we used the phrase about sitting in the punchbowl? Well …

adelady
adelady
6 years ago

I vaguely remember reading something about not wearing too much makeup or excessive jewellry to interviews.

It’s amazing! One woman stands out in my memory. We were interviewing (a couple of hundred people contesting several available promotions) and in the middle of the second or third day this person came in to our not-very-large room and all three of us almost choked on the pervasive fumes of perfume and she was all decked out in clothes and jewellery that looked as though she was going to a cocktail party after work – not evening clothes, but lots of “decorative” features – and makeup thick enough and obvious enough for stage work. Once she’d left we did a quick debrief – always necessary to cement the details when there are so many people involved – and mentioned this. We were trying to be fair and we agreed that we shouldn’t hold this inappropriate presentation against her for the job in question. We found out later that day that this woman dressed and groomed like this every single working day.

Speaking as an interviewer, we liked to see that you’ve made an effort, but it has to be appropriate. Jewellery is important. The usual rule is that small earrings are better than large, on the earlobe is a safer bet than dangling. Fewer rings are better than more. If you’re looking for a more formal presentation, wearing a s.m.a.l.l. brooch/ pin on the lapel of a jacket or holding a scarf in place can be dressy without being overdone. Bracelets and necklaces are a trap for the unwary – small and one only is better than big or many. And for the sake of FSM _and_ all the saints in every version of heaven, shoes! Must be clean/ polished/ in perfect state of repair – tick every applicable box.

mildlymagnificent
6 years ago

Whoops! That was me.

kittehserf
6 years ago

You’d have cringed at the guy I saw on the tram the other day, mildlymagnificent. Good smart suit, dressed for work, fashionable pointy shoes … but scuffed. Like, really scuffed.

I just hope they were his comfy commuting shoes.

katz
6 years ago

Speaking as an interviewer, we liked to see that you’ve made an effort, but it has to be appropriate. Jewellery is important. The usual rule is that small earrings are better than large, on the earlobe is a safer bet than dangling. Fewer rings are better than more. If you’re looking for a more formal presentation, wearing a s.m.a.l.l. brooch/ pin on the lapel of a jacket or holding a scarf in place can be dressy without being overdone. Bracelets and necklaces are a trap for the unwary – small and one only is better than big or many. And for the sake of FSM _and_ all the saints in every version of heaven, shoes! Must be clean/ polished/ in perfect state of repair – tick every applicable box.

And this is the kind of bullshit that makes me go “fuck it” with a side order of “men have it so much simpler.”

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

I’ve never worn a brooch in my life and I have no intention of starting now. Nor do I own any non-dangling earrings, other than a couple of pairs that were bought for me as a tweener by friends of the family.

This conversation is making me glad I live in California (and have never worked in a really conservative industry).

katz
6 years ago

I wear dusty blue and orange running shoes.

They are comfortable running shoes because I do actual work in them.

They are dusty because I do actual work in them.

Anyone who has a problem with that can fuck right along.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

This is also why I never pursued the financial services job leads that I was offered when I first arrived in San Francisco.

Employment agency rep : So, they’re quite conservative, so you’ll need to wear a skirt.

Me : That’s fine, but you don’t mean every day, do you?

EAR : Yes. Now, do you have a suit?

Me : Of course.

EAR : What color is it?

Me : Excuse me?

EAR : Navy blue or black only, and ideally you should wear a white shirt, though subtle pinstripes are OK. Also shoes – you should wear heels, obviously, but they shouldn’t be too high. About 2 and a half inches would be ideal. Now, about your hair…

Me : Um, I don’t think this company is going to be a very good fit.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

And then I ended up working at a dotcom where everyone wore jeans and flipflops unless they were on a sales trip, and then at a huge tech company famous for the founder’s Hawaiian shirts, and then a newspaper where half the staff had tattoos. Yay, California!

scott1139
scott1139
6 years ago

“I don’t get your shock over what she said and don’t feel like it should drive away any white reader who understands the blog is fundamentally not about them.”

I did not state I was shocked by what she said. When I was staring at the page, it was because I was bewildered and thinking about what I should do.

I also never said I had a problem with her blog. Looking back at my first comment, I realize I must have deleted the part stating I really liked the few articles I did read.

I am a white man, and I do have a ton of privilege I need to learn to identify and keep in check. I mention the previous because I can tell from your responses that I said something wrong, but I don’t know what it is.

kittehserf
6 years ago

katz – I wear whatever shoes I fancy for the day, according to weather, how my feet feel and what colours I’m wearing. I’ve had one job that required a uniform (and how horrible that was!) and for the rest, clean and neat was all that mattered, and that didn’t mean any particular style.

With the guy on the tram (don’t know if the “fuck it” referred to noticing his footwear?) it was tthe combination of smart office suit with neglected office shoes that caught my eye. If they’d been with jeans they’d have looked fine. He was in a district that’s all suit territory, banks and financial companies and whatnot. Suits (with or without jacket) are de rigeur.

katz
6 years ago

Dress requirements are particularly odd in my field (chemistry) because, unlike most white-collar jobs, it has a real possibility of ruining your clothes. Wearing old junk clothes is the most sensible choice–and wearing old junk clothes ought to make you look more professional because it shows that you know what you’re working with. (Interviews can be an exception since of course you don’t do actual chemistry at an interview. But wearing nice clothes still doesn’t actually prove anything.)

I’ve only sacrificed one T-shirt (ferrocene) and one sweater (acid!) to the field, but Doad has ruined any number of pairs of Dickies with adhesives. Yet his work still has a business casual dress code, even though it’s a) usually covered with a lab coat and b) in serious danger of getting stained.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

RE Dude on train, probably commuting shoes. I see women in corporate clothes and trainers on the BART all the time – they carry their work shoes in their bags and put them on at the office.

Weirdest work clothes situation I’ve personally run into was a friend who worked in one of the “clean rooms” that make tech equipment in the Valley. She referred to the full body outfit with mask and gloves that they had to wear as a “bunny suit”.

mildlymagnificent
6 years ago

Hah! We were public service. So the dress standards for “frontline” staff started around bank-clerk-without-the-uniform level. In big departments there’d be some variation but lawyers and accountants tended to be fairly conservative – especially if they had to deal with members of the public. Occasionally we kicked up about this because these standards were often a barrier when we were dealing with, or addressing meetings of, truckies or building workers and other trades. So some blokes got around it by doing the casual office dress thing. They’d turn up in the conventional suit and tie, talk for a while then loosen the tie, undo the top button, remove the jacket and roll up the shirt sleeves. (Look at Obama’s usual presentation – that’s not an accident. He rolls up his sleeves but leaves the tie knotted when he’s wearing one.) Dressed for business, but relaxed at the same time.

The men complained that their options were more restrictive than ours. And they were. So long as we were clean and neat, and breasts, belly, back, and buttocks were decently covered, we had more choice. At least, once the rules against women wearing pants and against denim of any kind for anyone at all were relaxed. That took a while.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

For come reason banking and the associated industries seem to be just about the most restrictive environments as far as dress code in terms of industries that don’t technically require a uniform. Part of the reason it’s hard to give cloudiah advice is that we don’t know what kind of job she’s going for, or in what industry. Over here at least what will or won’t make a good impression is almost 100% dependent those two factors.

(For example, even at tech company with brightly shirted CEO, people turned up for interview for sales jobs in suits. Which was always funny, since almost everyone else at the office was in shorts and sandals in the summer.)

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

Well, apparently I can’t type today. Curse you, Triangle, this is all your fault!