The High Heels Debate – Deconstructing the Sexist Dress Code

This week, MPs debated a momentous, life-changing issue. No, not Brexit (which is officially becoming the Terminator 2 of politics), but workplace dress codes – in particular, women’s shoes.

MPs investigated the legalities of whether or not workplaces can demand women wear high heels. This debate began when a London woman was sent home without pay after she refused to buy heels for a temp job. Nicola Thorp’s online petition got 152,420 signatures, pushing it to parliament for debate on Monday.

This wasn’t just about high heels. The dress code (which has since been changed) for Portico, the agency she was temping for, had an incredible number of demands. Almost all of them were, surprise surprise, aimed at women. The expectations were extraordinary; so unbelievable, in fact, that they have to be seen to be believed.

Compulsory Make-Up

Their minimum make up allowance: foundation, powder, light blusher, mascara, eyeshadow, and either lipstick or tinted lipgloss (which must be regularly reapplied). Women were only excused from wearing make up if they had a medical reason.

Nail varnish

Colours must fall under certain guidelines. A colour chart was provided.

Tights

Tights must be ‘nude’. Not skin-colour mind you, but pale, beige tights. A black employee was told to change her dark coloured tights for ones that were ‘skin-coloured’. Apparently only white skin-colour was acceptable.

Shoes

Shoes must be heeled, with heels measuring between 2-4 inches.

Anyone refusing to meet the dress code risked losing their jobs.

The examples brought to light during the investigation are somehow even worse. They’re also not just from Portico employees, but across the board. Stories include women forced to wear high heels throughout pregnancy to others asked to dye their hair blonde. Some were even told they couldn’t apply make up on the commute; they had to wear it from the moment they left their house.

Apart from revealing the ridiculous expectations of employers, this debate brings up the age-old question of what’s an acceptable work outfit. Just this week, a woman was told mid-interview that her appearance was unacceptable and told to go home, when no dress code was stipulated. Sure, if she’d turned up in a onesie we might reasonably question her outlook and professionalism, but she was in a well-covered shirt and skirt combo.

It’s not just clothing of course. How many times have we heard that tattoos or piercings negatively affect our job opportunities? Isn’t it time these conversations and conventions got a make over? As the committee chair pointed out, these expectations would be more at home in the 1850s, never mind the 1950s.

Of course, a level of professionalism is required. No one’s asking to do away with smart clothes, but there has to be some level of leniency. Currently, it’s okay for the leader of the free world to sellotape his tie together, but women must wear make up, racist hosiery and damaging footwear to be considered ‘professional’.

Time for the government and employers to step up – in whatever shoes they damn well please.

 

The post The High Heels Debate – Deconstructing the Sexist Dress Code appeared first on Felix Magazine.

The High Heels Debate – Deconstructing the Sexist Dress Code posted first on http://www.felixmagazine.com/