|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10-22-2009, 05:51 PM | #11 (permalink) | ||
Facilitator
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Where people kill 30 million pigs per year
Posts: 2,014
|
Quote:
I agree that banning certain types of clothing to reduce actions of violence is similar to banning black people to avoid racial violence...both end up punishing the victims for something for which those being violent should be accountable. If people are beng violent, then I feel a college should focus on stopping the people who react to (clothing? colors?) by being violent, since that is what the real problem is. The clothing is not the problem. I watched the video in the news item you posted, boo boo, and the feeling I got was that the interviewer and the interviewed gentlemen both have a snooty attitude that "we in our suits look well put-together and professional, and those students showing off their underpants (gasp!) are slovenly and scornful!" To me these two men smirking at others and complimenting each other on coming to work wearing "professional clothing" sound laughably shallow. Part of the history they are mired down in is that Martin Luther King and related civil rights crusaders tried to dress very professionally so that they would be taken seriously rather than have their message dismissed. Morehouse is probably afraid of African American men losing power and status in society if they don't dress "professionally." I happened to be in a book mobile last night and found a children's book all about the history of underwear and preposterous undergarments as well as preposterous views over the years about what has been considered appropriate attire. Showing underwear under baggy pants may seem silly to those not used to it...but people with that reaction should think about the fact that the T-shirt was once *only* an undergarment, and it took a movie to boost the T-shirt into mainstream outerwear.
__________________
Quote:
|
||
10-23-2009, 03:48 AM | #15 (permalink) |
nothing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 4,315
|
there's a time and place for everything. the school is not trying to enforce a lifestyle change or anything of the sorts.
a dress code is not a cause for major distress. consider it from a business perspective - where it generally applies the most. if an employee can't be personally inconvenienced enough to not show up to the job in their PJs do you really think they're going to be focusing their full attention on what anyone else wants? would any of you go into a business deal with someone who can't be bothered to wear pants? while there would obviously be a few who would, the vast majority of people would not. if i'm making a business deal with someone i expect them to be taking my interests seriously while they're working, if they can't be serious enough to dress the part then i'm not going to stick around to watch their attempt at acting the part. plus it's an all male school... i'm sure some of the older faculty really liked seeing dudes in drag. they lived through riots and discrimination and beat down at every turn so that some guy could wear a dress on their campus? pretty sure i'd object to that, like i said at the start, time and place. part of post secondary education is to prepare the student for the realities of working for a living, if a dress code is causing you major issues you'd better hope mummy and daddy didn't renovate your room. |
10-23-2009, 11:17 AM | #16 (permalink) | |||
Facilitator
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Where people kill 30 million pigs per year
Posts: 2,014
|
Quote:
While I agree that in business, people will likely wish to deal only with employees who put them at ease by wearing "professional clothing," I feel that a dress code at a college *is* a cause for distress because a code is built on, and perpetuated by, a power structure in which the majority dominate the minority. The liberal arts tradition...and education as a whole...should be about much more than simply getting and keeping a job. A dress code represents a mental limitation, an unquestioning deference to "authority," an acceptance of one's subservience to others, that are the moral opposites of the freedom of thought and inquiry I feel institutions of higher learning should support. Morehouse claims to be more than just a trade school teaching people to get jobs. Indeed, their website states: Quote:
People who "lived through riots and discrimination and beat down at every turn" should understand that they did so *exactly* so that "some guy could wear a dress on their campus." Interestingly, studies show that African Americans tend to be more homophobic than Caucasian Americans, but are more likely to support equal legal rights for people who are homosexual or transgendered (http://alligatorreport.wordpress.com...ty-homophobic/).
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by VEGANGELICA; 10-23-2009 at 11:33 AM. |
|||
10-23-2009, 06:53 PM | #17 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
^ What she said.
|
10-23-2009, 07:34 PM | #18 (permalink) | |
nothing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 4,315
|
Quote:
even finding dress code information on their site is challenging. the closest to a defined wardrobe that i found were a few classes that specified a business casual wardrobe. a collared shirt and dress pants!!! oh the humanity! no tie, no jacket, heck any office i've worked at that had a business casual dress code didn't even require you to tuck in your shirt. OPPRESSION!!! wait.... it specifies that your hair has to be combed and your shoes tied!!! NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
10-24-2009, 06:51 AM | #20 (permalink) | |
Slavic gay sauce
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 7,993
|
Quote:
__________________
“Think of what a paradise this world would be if men were kind and wise.” - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle. Last.fm |
|
|