• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Can the way a woman "dresses" be distracting?

Celebrity said:
Unless you know the other person well? These are people who have shown up to work long enough for you to point out a new color they wear. Don't you know guys well enough? I think women look to men for guidance on men's issues, and when they see men not commenting on other men, they think it's appropriate to not comment on men's wear.
Click to expand...

Oh, good heavenly days. I would be less likely to compliment a noob on his shirt vs a man with whom I'd worked for years. What part of this is confusing for you? Have you never undergone what seems to me to be never-ending HR training on this?

I'm not a man, and so I can't speak to the ways men communicate with other men. My guess, however, is that men would be particularly reluctant to compliment another man on his shirt or tie for fear of communicating the "wrong message."

I also don't know to what extent other women look to men for guidance on "men's issues," but I'm pretty sure that fashion choices aren't one of those issues. In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and say, generally, that most men would be well served by listening to the fashion advice of the women in their lives--wives, sisters, friends, moms, neighbors, and coworkers. :lol:

And just as a shhhh, if you think women don't comment on what guys are wearing, you're mistaken. We just don't necessarily tell you. And sometimes all we need to do is roll our eyes anyway. ;)
 
nota bene said:
Oh, good heavenly days. I would be less likely to compliment a noob on his shirt vs a man with whom I'd worked for years. What part of this is confusing for you? Have you never undergone what seems to me to be never-ending HR training on this?

I'm not a man, and so I can't speak to the ways men communicate with other men. My guess, however, is that men would be particularly reluctant to compliment another man on his shirt or tie for fear of communicating the "wrong message."

I also don't know to what extent other women look to men for guidance on "men's issues," but I'm pretty sure that fashion choices aren't one of those issues. In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and say, generally, that most men would be well served by listening to the fashion advice of the women in their lives--wives, sisters, friends, moms, neighbors, and coworkers. :lol:

And just as a shhhh, if you think women don't comment on what guys are wearing, you're mistaken. We just don't necessarily tell you. And sometimes all we need to do is roll our eyes anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

You mean you don't necessarily tell me about your backbiting gossip and lies? Dear me. :roll:
 
Your Star said:
I think you're making leaps here that aren't really connected to what I said.

People dress mainly for themselves and their own sense of self-esteem. That means dressing in ways that make themselves feel good about how they look. Of course how other people react affects things, especially people you are sexually attracted to, but this idea that women dress for men is just sexist crap. It is a mixture of things, and I don't see anywhere we disagree.
Click to expand...

It's not sexist but that's besides the point.
People dress to look good because they want other people to judge them well.
That's the basis of my point.
 
blackjack50 said:
I was reading about something and basically this is what I read. It was a complaint about a man who stated the woman made him uncomfortable the way she dressed and it was "distracting." Anyway.

So here is the question: is it perfectly acceptable for a man to be distracted by the way a woman dresses? And if this is a place of business or a place where professionalism is expected, should this be a legitimate complaint? Additionally...would it be fair for a woman to complain about a man's clothing and it being distracting?

I think it is unfair to criticize someone for noticing the opposite sex. And then you have to consider that the clothing industry exists pretty 95% due to that with the other 5% having to due with actually providing cover/utility. What is the point of a short skirt on a shapely woman, or a particularly tight t on a well built man?
Click to expand...

No. Because what a given man finds "distracting" is subject to his own maturity and nothing else. To some men, seeing ankles is distracting. It is not a woman's job to read the minds of all the men she's in a room with to determine whether her existence might be "distracting" to the least mature of them. It's their job to simply grow up.

Noticing and being distracted are not the same thing. All of us notice anything that is unusual: unusually beautiful, unusually scary, whatever. Those of us who are mature notice things, then quickly decide whether the thing we've noticed is relevant, and if it isn't, we go back to what we were doing. Because we're grown-ups and we have control over our eyes.

I live in London. I have seen people walking around in all kinds of stuff, from full-on cyborg gothic attire to loafers covered in 6-inch spikes to a woman literally walking around with her dress unbottoned to her navel flashing her underwear. We all learn not to stare, and we carry on with our business just fine. That's to say nothing of all the really hot people. Still, we carry on fine. If we can do it, you can do it.

As far as dress codes, they need to be simplified for women. Men's dress codes are usually quite general, whereas women's dress codes often dictate everything from amount of the forearm visible down to the half-inch, to entire paragraphs discussing what is being interpreted as "the knee."

Further, these kinds of dresscodes are really body-discriminatory. Skirts sit higher or lower depending on how high your hips are or how tall you are, top guidelines can be almost impossible to follow without just wearing turtlenecks every day for women with large breasts, on and on and on. It's absurd, and it's yet another subtle way that we tell women their bodies are offensive and that they are responsible for any discrimination they may suffer.

There's no reason it can't be "blouse with some kind of sleeve, and mid-length skirts" and just leave it there, like with men it's simply "dress shirt and jacket." They don't spend 2 pages scrutinizing the definition of "bottom of the buttock" and where the jacket must land on it as if they were pieces of meat, and then penalizing tall men because they can't FIND a jacket that covers the bottom of the buttock.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
No. Because what a given man finds "distracting" is subject to his own maturity and nothing else. To some men, seeing ankles is distracting. It is not a woman's job to read the minds of all the men she's in a room with to determine whether her existence might be "distracting" to the least mature of them. It's their job to simply grow up.

Noticing and being distracted are not the same thing. All of us notice anything that is unusual: unusually beautiful, unusually scary, whatever. Those of us who are mature notice things, then quickly decide whether the thing we've noticed is relevant, and if it isn't, we go back to what we were doing. Because we're grown-ups and we have control over our eyes.

I live in London. I have seen people walking around in all kinds of stuff, from full-on cyborg gothic attire to loafers covered in 6-inch spikes to a woman literally walking around with her dress unbottoned to her navel flashing her underwear. We all learn not to stare, and we carry on with our business just fine. That's to say nothing of all the really hot people. Still, we carry on fine. If we can do it, you can do it.

As far as dress codes, they need to be simplified for women. Men's dress codes are usually quite general, whereas women's dress codes often dictate everything from amount of the forearm visible down to the half-inch, to entire paragraphs discussing what is being interpreted as "the knee."

Further, these kinds of dresscodes are really body-discriminatory. Skirts sit higher or lower depending on how high your hips are or how tall you are, top guidelines can be almost impossible to follow without just wearing turtlenecks every day for women with large breasts, on and on and on. It's absurd, and it's yet another subtle way that we tell women their bodies are offensive and that they are responsible for any discrimination they may suffer.

There's no reason it can't be "blouse with some kind of sleeve, and mid-length skirts" and just leave it there, like with men it's simply "dress shirt and jacket." They don't spend 2 pages scrutinizing the definition of "bottom of the buttock" and where the jacket must land on it as if they were pieces of meat, and then penalizing tall men because they can't FIND a jacket that covers the bottom of the buttock.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but before we get carried away, let's not lump men's distractions in with women's fashion under the topic of: things men are doing wrong to women.
 
Celebrity said:
Maybe so, but before we get carried away, let's not lump men's distractions in with women's fashion under the topic of: things men are doing wrong to women.
Click to expand...

Men trying to make women responsible for their distractions IS a thing that those men are doing wrong to women.

Any man of mentally competent status is capable of controlling his own eyes. Telling women that instead of him learning basic adult maturity, she must change how she looks to appease him, is wrong.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Men trying to make women responsible for their distractions IS a thing that those men are doing wrong to women.

Any man of mentally competent status is capable of controlling his own eyes. Telling women that instead of him learning basic adult maturity, she must change how she looks to appease him, is wrong.
Click to expand...

A nude woman is responsible for distracting a whole workplace, not just men, if she dressed down that day. The threshold for me is at company policy. Unfortunately, I think it's a matter of holding oneself accountable for one's own actions while keeping in mind the way one is perceived. It's relative, so yes, men are responsible for being distracted, but not for the distraction. Saying, "it's not my problem, it's your problem" won't fix that, though this is a common tactic of women to try to shift the blame.
 
Celebrity said:
A nude woman is responsible for distracting a whole workplace, not just men, if she dressed down that day. The threshold for me is at company policy. Unfortunately, I think it's a matter of holding oneself accountable for one's own actions while keeping in mind the way one is perceived. It's relative, so yes, men are responsible for being distracted, but not for the distraction. Saying, "it's not my problem, it's your problem" won't fix that, though this is a common tactic of women to try to shift the blame.
Click to expand...

Firstly, only because Americans are not used to seeing nude people. Plenty of societies aren't distracted by nudity. It is still simply a maturity problem -- for all of us. And that is what it is.

Secondly, I never said workplaces couldn't or shouldn't have dress codes. I simply pointed out how exhaustive, humiliating, and sometimes impossible the dress codes for women often are, compared to the dress codes for men. I even gave a specific example of what I think would be an acceptable, attainable, and equitable dress code for women.
 
I agree with Smoke. I mean, look. I love my penis. And he loves me. But at no point does my penis and its wants supersede my higher faculties. Out in the world, I see a smoking hotly, I look. If she is wearing next to nothing, I look hard. Taking a mental picture. Well, sometimes, anyway, lol. Depends on a lot of factors. Can it bee distracting? Momentarily, sure. So is seeing a three legged dog chasing a cat. It's not gonna cause me to wreck my car, or get slapped by my wife. Why? Because I am capable of the discipline needed to focus. Sometimes AWAY from things.

At work, even more prevalent. Customers come in looking like they're their to snag a date. Maybe some of them are. But it ain't gonna be me, and it's not worth the trouble caused for getting busted staining. The advent of no underwear + shear yoga pants means that I have seen, and will continue to see a lot of camel toe and deep....deep wedgies. Fine by me. You want to show me what your vagina looks like, that's your business, not mine. I only ask that ladies please don't do it around kid friendly areas, like amusement parks and such. I'd like my daughter to grow up without too much pressure to feel the need to show everyone her vagina.

As for coworkers, again I agree. Simplify dress codes for women. That's a tough one, though. Words have a lot of different meanings to a lot of different people. It's easier for guys (for now) because our options for clothes are quite limited. Not so for women. They can, more or less, wear all the same things men do. 80s pant suit, anyone? Plus skorts, skirts, blouses, dresses, of a million different types, and then there's the shoes. Guys have boots, sandals and other similar open toe variants, sneakers, and dress shoes. Women's? More than I have time to list...
 
KevinKohler said:
I agree with Smoke. I mean, look. I love my penis. And he loves me. But at no point does my penis and its wants supersede my higher faculties. Out in the world, I see a smoking hotly, I look. If she is wearing next to nothing, I look hard. Taking a mental picture. Well, sometimes, anyway, lol. Depends on a lot of factors. Can it bee distracting? Momentarily, sure. So is seeing a three legged dog chasing a cat. It's not gonna cause me to wreck my car, or get slapped by my wife. Why? Because I am capable of the discipline needed to focus. Sometimes AWAY from things.

At work, even more prevalent. Customers come in looking like they're their to snag a date. Maybe some of them are. But it ain't gonna be me, and it's not worth the trouble caused for getting busted staining. The advent of no underwear + shear yoga pants means that I have seen, and will continue to see a lot of camel toe and deep....deep wedgies. Fine by me. You want to show me what your vagina looks like, that's your business, not mine. I only ask that ladies please don't do it around kid friendly areas, like amusement parks and such. I'd like my daughter to grow up without too much pressure to feel the need to show everyone her vagina.

As for coworkers, again I agree. Simplify dress codes for women. That's a tough one, though. Words have a lot of different meanings to a lot of different people. It's easier for guys (for now) because our options for clothes are quite limited. Not so for women. They can, more or less, wear all the same things men do. 80s pant suit, anyone? Plus skorts, skirts, blouses, dresses, of a million different types, and then there's the shoes. Guys have boots, sandals and other similar open toe variants, sneakers, and dress shoes. Women's? More than I have time to list...
Click to expand...

Your last paragraph as true. I think women's dress codes will always be longer for so long as men's clothing is more limited -- even my example sentence is longer. But because dress clothing is somewhat more limited, even for women, there's no reason you can't have a reasonably short dress code for women that is equitable. For more casual dress codes, like schools, I don't see what's wrong with generalized lengths or types (i.e. "mid-length," or "not sleeveless," or "no sandals," which are often the same sorts of guidelines boys have). You may have to add on a thing or two (for example, sheer fabric is generally not something seen on boy's clothes), but not really a ton. A lot of that space is taken up with obsessing over inches or body markers, which will fall different on every woman or girl, which can sometimes make the rule impossible to follow. There's just no reason it has to be so tedious, or so body type-dependent.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Your last paragraph as true. I think women's dress codes will always be longer for so long as men's clothing is more limited -- even my example sentence is longer. But because dress clothing is somewhat more limited, even for women, there's no reason you can't have a reasonably short dress code for women that is equitable. For more casual dress codes, like schools, I don't see what's wrong with generalized lengths or types (i.e. "mid-length," or "not sleeveless," or "no sandals," which are often the same sorts of guidelines boys have). You may have to add on a thing or two (for example, sheer fabric is generally not something seen on boy's clothes), but not really a ton. A lot of that space is taken up with obsessing over inches or body markers, which will fall different on every woman or girl, which can sometimes make the rule impossible to follow. There's just no reason it has to be so tedious, or so body type-dependent.
Click to expand...
The thing I always thought funny in high school was, girls couldn't wear anything shorter than their fingertips...i.e., stand up, put arms down...and where the fingertip is on the leg, is where the length needs to be.



Unless it's game day, and you're a cheat leader. Then your crotch can hang out. Or at gym, with gym shorts. Where both guy and gal crotches hang out. Or if you're on the volleyball team, women's tennis, etc.

I guess the message is, as a society, we only want you to display your body on our terms.
 
KevinKohler said:
The thing I always thought funny in high school was, girls couldn't wear anything shorter than their fingertips...i.e., stand up, put arms down...and where the fingertip is on the leg, is where the length needs to be.

Unless it's game day, and you're a cheat leader. Then your crotch can hang out. Or at gym, with gym shorts. Where both guy and gal crotches hang out. Or if you're on the volleyball team, women's tennis, etc.

I guess the message is, as a society, we only want you to display your body on our terms.
Click to expand...

Ah, ain't that the crux of it all...

Women's bodies are either a danger to be policed or a commodity to be enjoyed, depending on the desires of the viewer, but never the desires of the woman herself, oddly enough.
 
Celebrity said:
You mean you don't necessarily tell me about your backbiting gossip and lies? Dear me. :roll:
Click to expand...

Gender stereotyping ftl. I'm sorry if you think that talking about what others are wearing is "gossip." When others are dressed "outstandingly," people are going to notice and comment.
 
nota bene said:
Gender stereotyping ftl. I'm sorry if you think that talking about what others are wearing is "gossip." When others are dressed "outstandingly," people are going to notice and comment.
Click to expand...

I have yet to hear what was said, so I can't confirm that it's true. If you can't restrain from talking about people behind their back, I'm sorry that you think it will be well received. Generally, I don't like people talking about me behind my back because there is a lot of room for error and poor judgement.

gossip
/ˈɡäsəp/
noun
1.
casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
"he became the subject of much local gossip"
 
Celebrity said:
I have yet to hear what was said, so I can't confirm that it's true. If you can't restrain from talking about people behind their back, I'm sorry that you think it will be well received. Generally, I don't like people talking about me behind my back because there is a lot of room for error and poor judgement.

gossip
/ˈɡäsəp/
noun
1.
casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
"he became the subject of much local gossip"
Click to expand...

Ummm, how does "typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true" apply to commenting on what somebody is wearing (which is observably "true")?

If you're dressed appropriately, I don't think you need to worry about others talking behind your back. If you aren't, be glad that folks don't approach you to tell you to your face that your butt crack is showing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom