Among the many issues connected with the ever increasing numbers of managerial women in the workplace are those concerning dress. Broadly two issues arise:
- Do women have to forgo their traditional options for dress and instead adopt more male-inspired fashion as they move into positions of power in industry and government?
- Right on the heels (pun unintended) of this question come the protests of men, who think it is unfair, even discriminatory, that women in the workplace can adopt male dress but not socially acceptable for men to adopt women's attire. Some men even claim that this “double standard” shows, by extension, that Feminism is somehow flawed and should be discredited.
What is our response? Well, Feminist scholars have long argued that women's upward mobility does not mandate they abandon any of their traditional options for dress, or anything else for that matter; women maintain all of their options. There is absolutely no need to dress like men as a condition of acquiring power in the workplace and at home. Women can cross gender lines freely and acceptably adopt male attire; although most women in the workplace see this only as a fashion statement, and definitely not as any homage to traditional male power.
Some Feminists go a step beyond stating that women should retain all the options they have for dress. These advocates of female empowerment have stated, and not casually or tongue-in-cheek, that women should offer these same options to men. The unwritten precondition here is that women make such a carte blanche offer to men only when men have ceded a significant amount of their power to women. Otherwise, women retain their options and men have no rights to them. Sorry, guys!
If women adopt male-inspired dress, they directly pay homage to male authority and sacrifice the increasing power of female attire. As women assume more and more leadership roles, how they dress is going to be associated with power and influence. And it's already happening: a skirt, pantyhose, and heels say “I'm in charge here.” I work with executive women, and none of them has forgone feminine attire. You can look like a woman and be in charge!
How a woman dresses has an impact; men pay attention and show respect. Men realize that these new symbols of corporate power are not available to them, nor (they realize) are the coveted management positions that are increasingly filled by more qualified women. Carol, the woman I work for, often says “Authority wears a skirt,” referring to the significant numbers of women in management at our company with rarely a pants suit to be seen! Yes, power wears a skirt and high heels; I find that the sound of high heels on the hardwood floors of our board room to be very intimidating! Feminine, to be sure, but also intimidating! The Queen has arrived! Shut up and take notes!
Now, for the male claim of discrimination. We've heard this in many open Feminist forums, where some man brings up this lame argument against Feminism. In open forum, if a man brings this up, we offer him a skirt and heels to wear as our way of ending discrimination right then and there; so far no man has put on the skirt.
We believe that the options for dress that women have are theirs and theirs alone. Men have no rights unless they are extended to them by women, and most women are reluctant to broadly grant them, at least for now. Society will have to evolve further for that to happen. Within the confines of individual relationships, however, a woman can do as she pleases, granting her man privileges as befit his behavior and her motives. Whatever women offer, men are advised to reverently accept—in my case a fancy apron and earrings. It’s an outward sign of my subordinate role in our relationship, one that I embrace.
d