la_marquise (
la_marquise) wrote2016-05-11 03:47 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
But seriously...
So, I have a question for my female friends and female-presenting non-binary friends.
For those of us who present as 'feminine' in the more traditional sense (can be having longer hair, wearing skirts or other 'girly' clothing, being soft-spoken and so forth): do you find people are more ready to question your knowledge than they do that of women who are seen as less 'girly' in presentation? It was noticeable in my last academic jobs that my female colleagues with short hair who dressed in suits tended to be taken more seriously than the rest of us, and were less likely to be asked to undertake extra admin jobs and to do emotional caretaking.
I'd be interested in hearing the experiences of others about this.
Skirt of the day: Blue-tiered the 2nd (as distinct from the beloved, much worn, fragile blue tiered the first.)
For those of us who present as 'feminine' in the more traditional sense (can be having longer hair, wearing skirts or other 'girly' clothing, being soft-spoken and so forth): do you find people are more ready to question your knowledge than they do that of women who are seen as less 'girly' in presentation? It was noticeable in my last academic jobs that my female colleagues with short hair who dressed in suits tended to be taken more seriously than the rest of us, and were less likely to be asked to undertake extra admin jobs and to do emotional caretaking.
I'd be interested in hearing the experiences of others about this.
Skirt of the day: Blue-tiered the 2nd (as distinct from the beloved, much worn, fragile blue tiered the first.)
no subject
The good news: there is now a sartorial language for female power (at least for women involved with the British Establishment).
The bad news: it involves a particular style of stereotypically female clothing for the most part. The sharp suit can be a trouser suit, but is better as a skirt or dress. The elegant shoes are better with high heels. The hair need not be very long, but must be carefully styled and coloured. Both jewellery and makeup should be worn and should be on trend.
Dressing to that is a way of saying you are serious about your work. Dressing against it - whether by wearing comfortable trousers and short hair or floaty skirts and long unstyled hair - tells the opposite story. And if you are not a contender for power (promotion, next step, top job), you are overlooked and more open to exploitation.
That's my take on it anyway.
no subject
no subject
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36264229
Horribly reminiscent of instructions given to female solicitors at Freshfields, back in the 80s: wear make-up - or else. A naked face was considered 'poor grooming'. It seems power-dressing still requires those tired old 'feminine' stereotypes. (Personally, if I need to kick some serious ass, I go for the red work dress - very effective so far, and suits aren't my thing!)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
http://www.thedressforsuccesscolumn.com/
Incidentally, John Molloy who wrote Dress for Success is still alive and has a blog
http://www.thedressforsuccesscolumn.com/
John Molloy's 2016 dress for success advice -it's all about colours and jackets
While at one time the introduction of a casual dress code often killed women’s careers today that is not the case. You will notice that the president while making specific recommendations for the men he let the women define business casual for themselves. This indicates that he has thought long and hard about the subject. The female equivalent of the male suit is a jacket it says the wearer is competent and has authority. As a result if it is combined with appropriate garments it gives some women a visual advantage over men in a casual environment.
You may ask yourself why women aren’t considered casually dressed when wearing jackets. The answer is color. If a woman’s jacket is in a powerful feminine color, eg. red, maroon brown, tan, green or even yellow her dress is looked upon as casual by a majority of businessmen and women, This gives women while dressed casually the advantage of wearing a power garment..
Re: John Molloy's 2016 dress for success advice -it's all about colours and jackets
Re: John Molloy's 2016 dress for success advice -it's all about colours and jackets
no subject
no subject
no subject
I do notice that e.g. the monthly team lunch was taken over by another woman when I went on maternity leave, and the initiation of cards and other social stuff is usually by women. Those of my colleagues who actually visited me in hospital when I was sick were all women (though I did get nice messages from male and female colleagues alike).
We are a fairly long-lived team of IT support and development staff within a university IT department, most of us have been there >5 years, and we have a near-50% gender balance, so I think we are a bit of a unicorn, even within our wider department.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
I think they take the other manager more seriously on some topics. OTOH, she has been here longer than I have. OTOOH, I am certain my less-professional presentation doesn't work well with some of my boss's biases, but I work with that. I make up for it with straightforward, confident speech. There's a line I have to walk--if I raise my voice, it won't go so well--but I am not "soft spoken" and I throw data hard and fast and people listen to me.
(It helps that I am the expert on my department, and my boss is not interested in micromanaging. If I say "this is the [thing]," he knows this is the thing.)
The other manager and I work well as a team. She won't tackle some issues head-on, whereas I will just say what everyone is thinking. This gets the idea in the open, and then she often follows up with the softer approach and gets the solutions through.
As for emotional caretaking...I expect she does some of that. I wouldn't be in a position to see it. But I know I'm the go-to for when people in my company (not just my department!) are freaking out. I'm the one who explains how to approach problems with certain coworkers, how to phrase certain requests, so they will be heard and listened to. (Or pitfalls avoided.) I have tissues and chocolate in my office at all times.
But this might not be the case in a different office. I didn't take this role at my previous employer. As I say to my mother, "It says bad things about a place when I'm the socially ept one."
no subject
Our editors all frequently exhibit behaviors that can be interpreted as (1) learned helplessness, (2) an expectation that others will do things for them, (3) passive-aggressiveness, (4) cluelessness about how things work. I often say about the editors, "Well, they don't understand that they need to do work. They're handicapped by a lifetime of being well-off white dudes."
The biggest example was when we called a meeting for people to discuss how to deal civilly with slobbiness in the shared kitchen, and only women showed up. Big surprise. (I avoid the problem by simply never using the kitchen. More trouble than it's worth.)
(no subject)
no subject
That said, Estonia lags frightfully behind other Nordic countries in the numbers of women in visible positions of authority. The run-up to choosing the next Estonian President will be interesting as one of the strongest candidates, Marina Kaljurand is currently Minister for Foreign Affairs. BUT, she is opposed by Siim Kallas who was earlier Prime Minister and a VP of the European Commission. The resolution of this is going to be very challenging.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
The only women who dress in a masculine manner are the cops, and they're in uniform so it's hard to separate masculine coding from uniform/gun. They're also in a completely different job from the therapists.
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
If I lump together all my work history, from late 80s to present, I'd say the degree to which my professional knowledge and ability was directly related to the *tailoring* of my clothing.
Long and/or full skirt and loose blouse = I must be the assistant
Fitted skirt, shirt, and jacket = I just might be the one in charge.
Note that when I say "fitted," I don't mean "tight" or fitted in a way that accentuated hips and breasts. It was instead the difference between clean lines and soft lines.
Until recently, I had very long hair. If it was pulled back, I was taken far more seriously than if it was left down. As if how I wore my hair indicated the organization of my thoughts.
Now... in professional martial arts settings, clothing isn't nearly as important as one's physical manner. Things like soft speaking, stepping back, or taking up a small amount of space were taken as deference to another's authority and/or rank. Straddling the ground, arms akimbo, and speaking firmly mattered more than what I wore.
no subject
I am encouraged by all the women who speak well of the martial arts environment on this.
(no subject)
no subject
Corporate culture baffles me, the idea that I might be *better at programming computers* if I dressed in a different way (no, I'd be irritated and possibly in pain and sleep deprived and thus worse at thinking clearly) or styled my hair in a certain way (it's long, I put it 'up' most days, to keep it out of my way... it's also blue/green) is just nonsensical to me. Lucky me having a job that sidesteps all of that.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I know when I was running conventions in the early days, I used to get a faster response from hotel staff if I was in my USAF uniform fancy dress. But in more recent years (perhaps because I expected them to do as I asked, and I projected that) I got a good response pretty much whatever I was wearing.
no subject
The senior women in my organisation wear trouser suits, skirt suits, fancy Japanese designer clothes, tight dresses, loose dresses, real jewellery, costume jewellery, no jewellery, lots of make-up, a bit of make-up, and no make-up. Hair is short, long and frequently dyed, occasionally in bright colours.
Men have a much narrower scope. The boss recently issued a general ukase against the Korean boy-band look (ultra tight trousers, shrunken jackets, visible socks), which I admit does not suit anyone but extremely young and skinny men and even then not much.
Basically hierarchical status matters much more than clothes, within a fairly conservative dress code. Deference in manner or voice usually reflects relative rank rather than sex.
In my salad days I always found Jeeves an excellent model to follow.
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
Similarly, I find that pitching my voice low gets more respect than pitching it higher in my vocal range. I've seen that effect with men too--lower is higher status, just as taller is higher status.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-05-26 11:41 am (UTC)(link)Chop your hair off and put a fucking suit on, then, if that's all it supposedly takes to give you access to honorary male privilege. Stop spending all your precious time and money on primping and preening and cosmetics and clothes, sending all of your money to exploitative industries that want you insecure. Reject the socially mandated 'girly' role if it supposedly means you are taken so much less seriously than those short haired women.
But no, you won't do that. On some level you know that really, you will be even more invisible that way. You will be a figure of contempt to men and gender-conforming women if you are not beautiful or sexy. Even if you haven't experienced the homophobia and contempt that comes with being butch personally which allows you to post privileged whines like this, you know really that you have it easier than the women who don't appeal to the male gaze.
I suggest you practice what you preach if you're so bothered about women fighting each other instead of focusing on the men at the top. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about here. If you post poorly informed, anecdata-based whines like this about how much easier butch women whose experiences you don't share have it, yeah, maybe we will get annoyed with you. Maybe your little upper middle class, academic elite bubble does not actually represent the whole world, hmmmmm?
no subject
Goodbye and enjoy your spite in peace.
I owe you no explanations. But for the record, sorry, no. Not upper middle class. Not even close to it. Upper working/bottom middle, at best.
Oh, Look––A Troll Brave Enough To Be Anonymous!
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)