Fair enough. But it is clearly a lot worse for men than women.
Yeah and not just in the work place, of course.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah and not just in the work place, of course.
There are a million ways a boy can run afoul of the established matriarchal system in schools these days. Don't get me started. I just pulled my son from one that was, unfortunately, a matriarchal cesspool.
So aside from the college thing - which after 6 years should be a non-issue there was no difference between the candidates. So picking either would be reasonable in that case.
----------
Such as?
No they don't. Make-up is purely optional. I see many woman who will wear what amounts to a tee shirt (without any writing on it) where I am required to wear a dress shirt.
The only time I ever saw a woman disciplined for her appearance was when her tramp stamp was showing. But a guy would of course never have dared say anything, lest he be accused of noticing her, harrassing her or "keeping the woman down." Her female manager spoke to her about it.
I agree. With a wife that teaches and kids in school, I can see the benefits to such an environment, especially in terms of socio-economic differences. Of course, then a whole new can of worms is approached, as how does one handle skirts if a boy were to want to wear one??
I would not call it a can of worms and overall less issues than when dealing with designer labels. My politically incorrect answer is that he should be allowed to, but I don't see a real issue if the school insists on male and female attire. It's a rule and although we don't want blind comfortably to rules, we do want children to learn to respect and consider established and agreed upon rules.
BTW I see no issue with a boy who wants to carry a purse. A backpack is ok, a valise carried on one's arm is ok, but because a purse is designated "female", a boy can't carry one? What about a boy carrying a pink backpack covered with flowers- too female? I believe trying to lock children into specific sexual based profiles is a mistake and a real can of worms.
Last edited:
So one having a college education is not a qualification factor in your mind or this case how? If all things being equal across the board, except one having more/ better education does not make one a better/ more qualified candidate, then the ideal of discrimination is dead? How can you say two people are exactly the same in an instance where one is definitely more qualified? I don't see how you can say it is a non-issue no matter the time in the job. Could they both do the job the same, probably, but when determining the better candidate, education should play a role as well, if for nothing more than to show that the one candidate has the initiative and drive to start and finish projects on their own (in this case the project being a college degree, as I have heard from several HR professionals that this is exactly how they sometimes view a college education, as nothing more than an accomplishment that shows ability to follow through on things started/ attempted).
Maybe it's just your job and your managers that suck and society as a whole.
I work in an office job and am currently here at work wearing a polo (and could get away with a t-shirt), jeans and sneakers, just as casual as what the women in my office can wear, so my anecdotal evidence contradicts your anecdotal evidence.
I'll back that one up with mine: Sometimes my boss comes in wearing a UFC shirt, shorts, and sneakers. and he's the VP of IT. His boss comes in with a polo and jeans on, and he's the CIO. His boss dresses up when clients come in, otherwise he's either in jeans and a polo, and depending on the weather, shorts and a polo or shorts and flip/flops.
I'm thinking his job.
BL.
This was back in 1990. At that time within the state of IL there were quotas being placed into action to encourage diversification in the workplace. I think that they have been mostly dissolved since then, but they existed back then. There were also issue where (and I never knew this until told specifically by a recipient of such awards) that single mothers got free tuition, books, and accompanied housing (for them and their child) to attend state universities. It was an initiative to help give single mothers a way to better life through getting them an education and better future prospects. Yet if a male gets a woman pregnant, he is expected to pay child support, or marry her, and never along the way get something from the state to help him get an education. So for being in the same situation of having a child at a young age, the male is essentially punished for his part, yet the female is granted specific assistance for her part. I don't begrudge her the assistance, just feel that the male should be the beneficiary of some sort of assistance as well.
----------
Yes, but obviously your job doesn't have a dress code then. SO your anecdotal example is not fitting as no dress code exists. If your business were to say dress code is business casual, you would see the difference.
I find it also unfair that in my current company, and others I have talked to and worked for in the past have had the same issue, we were all told that the males in management were not allowed to dictate what is appropriate attire for women and that was to be determined by the women in the office solely, but that all management had a say in what was appropriate attire for men, and this acceptable clothing group was distinctly listed in the handbook, whereas for the women it just stated to be determined on each basis.
Not sure why you needed to comment on this post again? We've had several exchanges since you replied to it the first time.
Not trying to constantly hammer on a certain issue. Some of my responses weren't showing earlier for me, after the recent maintenance. as they had been lost during the outtage, which is quiet common. I am not trying to offend anyone, just feel that everyone should get a voice. I had seen a comment on here prior to the outtage that you had stated I was against you getting the right to marriage. I have never said this in any of my statements, so it was not a fair claim, and nothing more than jumping to an unfair conclusion, which several have done by calling people haters based solely on their standpoints of marriage.
Either you two are completely unlucky or the US is a totally toxic place. But I worked for 35yrs before I retired, and never had any problems like those you mention.
By the way I've been married three times.
Which is getting on for 25 years ago.
I can't really believe you are complaining about male dress codes. I mean seriously the effort women have to go to in their appearance vastly outweighs men.
I also can't seriously believe anyone will care are if you turn up at work not wearing a tie.
Agreed, but still doesn't make it any less fair. Some of the arguments here are based on religious definitions and how they have changed, and those were 100's and 1000'2 of years ago that they changed, but they are still considered valid argument points by many here, so age shouldn't be a disqualifying factor of fairness or discrimination occurring. The civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's was a heated time, but that was 60-70 years ago, so should we not refer to it and it's injustices that occurred at the time because lots have changed since then?
I was not complaining about the dress code, but the lack of fairness of the dress code as it applies to the sexes, just as several others on here have been.
Women generally want to have their appearance a certain way, so if they work harder on it, that is their prerogative. Having been in the military and various other situations, I have found that their makeup, hair, etc is not a big concern to me as commenting on such things by others has resulted in issues in the workplace. Unless one is specifically addressing an issue that is spelled out in plain terms that require no interpretation within the handbook, generally some sort of complaints tend to be filed in my experiences even for such innocent comments as "you look nice today". I saw someone dragged to HR as they thought it was a bad comment to make (they were attracted to the person that said it but had never received the same comment and were therefor "offended", which is all that needs to be said for a sexual harassment suite to be started.)
Believe what you will, but I have seen several people sent home because they were new and forgot.
And yes at time things in the US can be very toxic, just look at the current political scene today and enough said.
Seen from my perspective the major TOXIC mix in US politics, is a certain Herbal Drinks Party.
Confederate flags before the White house, that's TOXIC.
