Traditionally, skirts have
been the standard wear for women. No longer now, as their demands
for 'equality' get them the right to wear pants, and along with it,
shorts. Now they seem so obsessed with shortpants that a large
majority, but not all, of them refuse to put on a skirt unless
every single article of skirt get recognised as a work attire and
allowed in the office, even the most casual and unpresentable ones.
Hence we see the evolution of miniskirts and denim hotskirts in the
office, which are probably relaxed enough for them to be wearing
them to the void decks of their own home, that seriously i doubt
they need to change their clothes between shopping/strolling and
working. Many of their 'dresses' look little better than oversized
shirts rather than a bona fide full body wear.
But then, where does this
leave us men? Lets see, we have not received our rights to wear
kilts or tunics as a mass option worldwide, let alone to hope that
they be accepted into formality at work. Our only viable option,
shortpants, which are the only articles on par with their
miniskirts, has been slammed down again and again on grounds of
'not being formal/presentable'. What a joke, considering how
corporations let women wear unsightly holey tanks and faded patchy
denim miniskirts,which could really resemble hotpants, abeit the
less perverted kinds. Even major corporations in the CBD district,
which you'd have guessed should be image conscious, have only
imposed their image requirements on men, leaving the women to
'tarnish the image' of such companies, while getting paid exactly
the same. Justifications? None.
You'd have thought, because
the men have served 2 years of grit and shit, we'd be given due
recognition and respect. But no, we still have to endure less
rights than the other half of the populations who've served not a
single minute, and why? Because the fight for 'equality'
essentially 'downgrades' the importance of male attire while
elevating those of women's to an exclusive status? Because women
wearing pants are seen as perfectly normal while men wearing skirts
are seen as perverse. Now I'm not promoting the culture of
crossdress, I'm just seeking to find out why the overglorifying of
a woman's skirt to the extend of an extremely short and casual
beyond casual one can merit equal weightage as a full length pants,
the only thing we men are allowed at work. Ask yourselves this and
see if you can answer without any resorting to prejudice reasons.
Why does every single man of this generation endure the provocative
of their opposite gender while not trying to exert the same
provocativeness back? Why does every man submit to full formal and
can still stand women going so casual before them without an
utterance of protest? Do we have less rights than them, and are we
second rate citizens? Is the age of racism over, only to be
replaced by sexism, and in a totally opposite way the feminists
always talk about?
Unless men can be given
regulated short pants as an option to a smart casual attire paired
with a shirt, or unless women's attire can be more strictly
regulated to ensure no equivalence of a singlet or shorts,ie their
tanks and miniskirts, be allowed to enter the workplace with them,
all equality rants will amount to naught. And all claims of
workplace harassment due to provocative wear statistics will be
grossly skewed and totally unreliable.
Totally ludicrous too, is
the assumption that women have more rights to hotpants than we do.
Letting women wear pants is a sharing of our rights, not a total
relinquishing of it to the other party(after all,what did we get in
return?nothing). Girls already have their miniskirts, but once
again, trying to elevate the status of their casual skirts to
formal status, they purposely wear something even more outrageous,
to make their minis even more 'exclusive'. All the while indulging
in stereotypes against men wearing any shorts just as short; and
thus now its perfectly fine to ditch the equality arguments once
they no longer need it, only to bring it up at their convenience.
Just like crossing the bridge and then destroying it before your
ally can cross it.
In fact, if equality is
taken at its purest sense, and women want equal shorts and pants
rights as we do, well, they should just ditch their dresses and
skirts, since we have no equivalence of it for the men. And of
course we wear the same of everything, no the girls getting
'hotter' than the guys. Then again women have worked on men's
desire to see women 'feminine' while still weak enough to hand them
their skewed equality, hence the elevation of skirt-casuals into
formal settings. I for one DON'T CARE for women looking feminine,
if it's equality they want, I say give em, and they can wear the
same suitpants-tie the way men do, without resorting to their 'old
clothes' as a backup to undercut standards. There are women who
have every single day worn short skirt, be it denim or not, and
never once in long pants or full jeans, let alone a proper knee
length skirt, to work.
One more fact of contention
is fashion. How low the workplaces have sunk, to be manipulated by
the whims of fashion, even bad ones, and just because fashion
focuses on women more, does it mean they get to get more options?
Nothing about this is right; fashion is meant to be a casual and
at-your-own-time indulgence, not something your bosses should give
you unconditiionally.
The only place which is
capable of challenging workplace dresscode discrepancy are devout
places of worship. I bet you less than half the working women will
make it past the main gate without being asked to put on a robe,
for the benefit of those who don't come in dressed adeqquately
modest but still intend to visit; while every single working man
will be allowed in no questions. Places of religion are one of the
diminishing few places to recognise and honour equality as it
really is. One of the most striking customer service jobs is the
concierge, where I can see both male and female concierges dressed
equally formal and professional. Not once have i seen a job where
men get away with being less formal than women; its always the
women who gets away with less. Even classy eateries practice that
on their patrons, influenced by mainstream workplaces. It is up to
us to make a stand to speak against it, in the hopes of putting a
stop to this sexism. You can start by signing the petition I
have drafted:
http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/menattire
a small step, but all significant changes start
with baby steps, have to start somewhere. The right kind of short
pants and corresponding matching top could be introduced first into
casual Fridays, before finding more use on other days as well. It
should be by choice that men wear long pants, not by force, just
like how women have been given a myriad of choices of what to wear
be it at work or play. On top of ease of moving around, having
shorter bottoms give the added advantage of ventilation and comfort
around the legs. No matter how strong the aircon is, it hit mainly
the upper body and less on the lower portion, which is usually
hidden under the table or desk.
