Friday, May 30, 2008

Hopefully my last post on "Sex" today

Stumbled upon this article on WSJ about Sex and its role in shaping how women dress in the workplace. First off: the columnist is ass ugly. Let's just get that out of the way, because I think it needs to be said.

Now: about her column. She makes some very valid points about women's current place in the workplace in regards to pay, ceilings and perception. I find her column problematic is where she insists that while Sex was empowering to broadening the average woman's fashion outlook, it created a problem in workplace dress code. Cleavage here, short skirts there. "If Samantha can do it, so can I", says the Average Woman. (Let me just say, that this trend didn't start with Sex you can thank Ally McBeal for that.)

After mentioning one of her readers who has a problem with his psychologist's cleavage being visible during his sessions, she then quotes this guy:

Richard Billion, legal director for credit-score developer Fair Isaac Corp., wrote that distracting clothes reduce a saleswoman's credibility. "I become very suspicious of the product or service being sold if a woman representing the seller in any capacity is not conservatively dressed," Mr. Billion wrote.

Um. Thank you for my rage, Mr. Billion.

Why is the onus on women to dress in a way that doesn't warrant patriarchal oppression? If all it took for women to advance in the workplace and gain true equality was to wear a slip and thick pantyhose, bitches would be running the godddamn country by now. Seriously. cut the shit. ONCE AGAIN women are blamed for their oppression.

Hey, Lily Ledbetter, the reason you received discriminatory pay wasn't because of asshole bosses at Goodyear, it must be because you dressed like a whore at work.

And why are people afraid of cleavage anyway? Fact: humans have breasts. Female humans have ones that produce milk and that come in different shapes and sizes. Christ almighty, why are we afraid of milk glands? Oh I know: because we sexualized them to the point that any revelation or acknowledgement of them reminds us that women are sperm depositories and that makes us feel all icky.

It's almost like using that rationale that blames rape victims by asking them what they were wearing when they were attacked. Women have been subjugated in the workplace loooooooooong before Sex was on TV, hell, way before SJP was even born. Trying to explain it away by blaming too high of a heel and too low of a neckline is just sucking the giant balls of Patriarchy. And to read comments from women who think they have it all figured out with their work wardrobe just goes to prove how ignorant and complacent they are to the Patriarchy. Some of these women are in positions of authority in their workplace, yet refuse to hire young applicants who have the audacity to not care what people think of their appearance.

This isn't about respectability, this is about viewing women as sex objects. It is not my problem if a man can't keep his pervy eyes off my tits long enough to hear what I have to say. Shouldn't the fact that women even have to deal with this while men don't be enough of a sign that something is incredibly wrong here???

No comments: