No Right Answer: Is Sexy Bad?

[Lightknight]

Does it bother you that this scientist didn't dress the same as all the other kids? Maybe you and people like you should respond by bullying him to tears because he didn't dress in a way you approve of. In fact, let's do this to everyone who behaves differently than what we expect. Let's just go ahead and plunge the world into a pseudo-high school environment where the superficial cheerleaders are the ones that win every time.

Basic standards of workplace attire giving you flashbacks to high school drama is your own issue; I'd advise some counseling if you've been out of high school for more than a summer and still obsessing over the time a cheerleader called you a weirdo. In the real world, professions have standards of what employees wear to work. This guy clearly violated those standards or A) it wouldn't have been an issue and B) he wouldn't have apologized. Appropriate workplace attire is not a vast conspiracy to create an Orwellian nightmare, it's a basic fact of working for a company pretty much since the creation of companies. Again, I'd invite you to list professions wherein this would be appropriate work clothing.

Basic Standards? Whose standards? Yours?

I'm telling you that IT and high-end development companies have different dress codes than the typical company. They are on the cutting edge of allowing casual attire as a perk of the job.

Right now, I'm wearing tennis shoes, jeans, and a t-shirt (albeit a nice one). It isn't casual Friday, there is no casual Friday because every day is casual. I can wear this kind of stuff any day of the week. What's more is that I'm probably the most dressed up person here. People here wear shorts and flip flops and heavy metal t-shirts just like him. Why? Because that's what nerds do and it's not right for you to judge us for it just because you have some sort of preconceived notion that people have to wear slacks and a button up for the company to succeed. We are a far happier workplace and I have turned down job offers for higher pay because I value the level of comfort this provides more than a few thousand dollars a year.

In short, casual dress codes are a form of compensation. It attracts and maintains talent.So try to think outside of the box the traditional workplace has put you in and consider that other people do things differently and it's their prerogative to do so. It is entirely petty of people to fashion police this guy. Was he poorly dressed? Sure. But it isn't any of our fucking business, is it?

 

[Belaam]

Basic Standards? Whose standards? Yours?

Okay, I'm starting to think this is just willful ignorance and a dead end to respond. Yes, business casual is my own personal invention. I'm quite proud of how well it's caught on and the royalties do well for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_casual

I'm telling you that IT and high-end development companies have different dress codes than the typical company. ... We are a far happier workplace and I have turned down job offers for higher pay because I value the level of comfort this provides more than a few thousand dollars a year.

And thanks for the info on IT. I spent years at an international engineering firm and our IT was always in those amazing business casual guidelines I created. I am currently teaching and doing IT in a major school district. Our IT also follows "my" business casual guidelines. Part of the reason we have dress codes at those places is because we interact with the public often. Contractors, bidders, and the people running the projects we were bidding on were regular visitors at the CH2M sites and schools, obviously, are full of public interactions. I'm guessing whoever mainly works with clients in your office also probably follows "my" standards. That's awesome that you are willing to give up money for the ability to wear a T-shirt. But like with defining when people can be offended, your personal experience does not dictate others.

And clearly, I am just anti-nerd. Because escapist forums are THE hangout for ignorant jocks. e.e

 

[Lightknight]

Basic Standards? Whose standards? Yours?

Okay, I'm starting to think this is just willful ignorance and a dead end to respond. Yes, business casual is my own personal invention. I'm quite proud of how well it's caught on and the royalties do well for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_casual

You said "Basic Standards", not business casual. Implying that you are the sole definer of the "standards". You're not though. And please understand that I'm not saying that I am either. If you owned a business then all of your employees would conform to whatever the heck you said as though God demanded.

But the way you or I think people should or shouldn't dress is absolutely irrelevant except anywhere in which you have authority to impose your beliefs. No amount of experience that you've had in any IT company or regarding any dress codes has any impact on the standards of other companies. Sorry, it just doesn't. There is no, "Space engineers must dress for success to succeed!" requirements. That's all superficial nonsense.

Times are changing and your ideals just aren't coming along with it. Not in the tech industry anyways.

And clearly, I am just anti-nerd. Because escapist forums are THE hangout for ignorant jocks. e.e

If you are pro-the people who bullied this man to tears for how he dressed, then sure. Because social awkwardness in multiple ways including dressing in out of fashion ways is basically our (nerds) shtick. Maybe they should go after women who wear "demeaning" bikinis or something if they're upset about women being depicted with a lot of skin. Surely showing real skin is a lot more harmful than mere depictions of it. Something that sexualizes actual women rather than drawings of them. But hey, that would also be puritanically insane and feminists have made good progress in stopping people from judging them based on how they dress. So instead we need to abuse and harass a guy that wore a tacky shirt that a friend of his made him to progress absolutely no cause. Yeah, that's totally justified.

 

[Entitled]

You don't get it. What does a man wearing a shirt have to do with feminism? He wasn't oppressing women with his shirt.

It's not that I don't get it, it's that I don't care.

Rose Eveleth made a single comment ("No no women are toooootally welcome in our community, just ask the dude in this shirt.").

Maybe she was correct to imply that even shirts like this can demonstrate an old boys' club mentality. Maybe she was off the mark, and it really is just a whacky shirt. Or more likely, this is all a subjective cultural issue with many ideological viewpoints and.... No Right Answer.

But that's not the point. The point is, that where you see abuse, there is only opinions, and if there is abuse, it's all over the place in all directions, not organized by a huge group attacking a single person.

How does does people getting offended at people insulting a man who just played a major role in human history because of what he's wearing translate into showing that feminism is even more needed than before?!

Because "insulting a man" consisted of a one-liner with a rather mild feminist stance on male-centric workplace culture, and the people "getting offended" at that included lots of sexualized or misogynistic slurs being thrown at her, and their "cause" being picked up by sites like MGTOW, that also called this controversy "as tragic as when NASA put a female in space", and recommended to "Never, never, ever apologize to women", since "Only in a woman?s deluded mind will she conjure up ANY other beliefs before even admitting a man somewhere is totally awesome."

What you think about the original statement's accuracy, is irrelevant, even this Stormfront-for-misogynist wouldn't spend an article on every case of a random woman on twitter being incorrect, this issue has passed into the ritual of good old gender warring, long ago, with it's usual cycle of abuse.

Controlling what other people can do? That's just fascism and even censorious

On the other hand, describing what other people should do, is not. Otherwise, your post that says SJWs shouldn't have argued against that shirt, would also be fascist and censorious, along with Rose Eveleth, and every other person who ever commented on anyone else's behavior.

Look, this was a bunch of people just bullying a nerd. F-em.

No, this is a bunch of people bullying a bunch of other people in both directions, along with a few people writing negative op-eds about a few other people.

It's irrelevant what you think about who is CORRECT, your original narrative that people just randomly "mobbed this poor guy far beyond anything a person could possibly deserve", is certainly incorrect. There was no NEED for this to become a big damn controversy, it could have easily stayed a single tweet of someone's opinion, if not for anti-feminists turning it into another gender war, that escalated until even the ESA heard about it, and then some more.

 

[Lightknight]

your original narrative that people just randomly "mobbed this poor guy far beyond anything a person could possibly deserve", is certainly incorrect.

Certainly? He deserved to be harassed and vilified like this for a shirt he wore?

 

[Entitled]

your original narrative that people just randomly "mobbed this poor guy far beyond anything a person could possibly deserve", is certainly incorrect.

Certainly? He deserved to be harassed and vilified like this for a shirt he wore?

I haven't said wrong, I said incorrect. Misrepresenting the truth of the situation. Didn't happen that way. Based on a misunderstanding of the various stances, the participants' identity, the degree and content of their writings, and the motivations.

You have taken a situation where a single twitter post referencing the effects of a male-centric workplace recieved an abusive mob, then some op-ed articles defended the twitter post, and others criticized it. Then you have reinterpreted it as a bunch of op-ed articles "bullying" some guy by having negative stances on the male-centric workplace.

 

[default]

Go away with your pathetic little tacky human constructs. Suits are fucking stupid.

Judging ANYONE by what they are wearing at ANYTIME is fucking stupid.

In their free time, I agree; but he wasn't on his own time - he was on company time. ***** about the constructs all you want but we have created them to serve a purpose; and that purpose is to avoid these very situations where a load of old piss-whiffle overtakes the achievement being announced. Hell he could have been met halfway and just worn a lab coat over the shirt, made the announcements, basked in all his very deserving adulation and glory, then gone to the after party and taken the coat off.

When you're on paid time, the boss gets to dictate how you're dressed. This is why Google and Microsoft employees wear jeans and tee's, and civil/public servants wear suits - their bosses make it so.

If the constructs didn't exist in the first place wearing inappropriate clothing for the situation wouldn't even be a concept. As long as it is a piece of material that covers up the majority of you and keeps you warm it should NOT matter what clothing looks like, but this is deconstructing thousands of years of (frankly bizarre) human thinking.

 

[blackrave]

It was painful to read this one, but let me explain what is wrong with post.

Sex isn't bad. Sexy isn't bad. Sexualization is. People really need to start seeing this distinctions. That shirt wasn't sexy and it didn't depict sexiness. One might say however that the images on the shirt were an example of sexualization of women. I don't think the guy is a sexist or even intended to convey such thing. However, one can commit a sexist act without being a sexist. Wearing a shirt that seems like it falls under the sexualization of women could be argued it's an act of sexism.

Somewhat true, unwanted sexualization is bad, but there is such thing called lust.
Sexualization is big part of lust.
And love without lust is friendship.
So no, there are times and circumstances when sexualization is good and desired.

What's the distinction between "sexy" and "sexualization" one might ask. It has to with subversiveness, subjectivity and agency. Some one who is "sexy" has agency, it's about making the choice and acting upon the intention of feeling sexy. "Sexualization" takes away agency and forces sexiness upon the person in question, which is the very essence of objectification. The act of stripping people of their agency and reduce to a mere object. Sexualization falls in to this. A woman or a man can be sexy if they make the choice themselves, giving them agency. Pushing the perception of sexy upon someone on the other hand is sexualization.

This is the part when I felt sad.
Do you really believe this?
Do you think that half-naked women on my t-shirt can somehow rob any agency of anyone?
Unless I use said t-shirt to tie someone up, no, it can't.
If I whistle at your ass, there is no fucking way it can rob your agency to do anything.
If it does however, then it indicates that you simply lack willpower and confidence.
And frankly, it is your problem not mine.
So no, unless my sexualization leads to drugging you, then handcuffing you in my basement, my sexualization in no way can diminish your agency.

If you would look at the character Bayonetta which tend to pop-up during these discussions. Her character falls under the "sexy" epithet, she has chosen her sexual expression. However, the camera is sexualizing her, the quite intimate shots of her body and weird angles is the reason. So she's stripped of some of her agency and is reduced to mere object despite a character design set out to give the impression of sexy. A character design intended to convey agency over her sexuality.

Remember when I felt sad?
Yeah while reading this I became angry, but not at you- I felt angry at people who say shit like this.
"she's stripped of some of her agency and is reduced to mere object"?
The fuck is this?
Do you understood what you wrote?
You know how much agency Bayonetta (or any other character) has?
None.
My chair arguably has more agency.
My dog definitely has more agency.
You and I have more agency.
Why?
Because she (or any other character) IS NOT REAL.
I know she may seem real, after all you have seen her on TV talking, kicking ass, sucking lollipop and spanking enemies, but still she is not real.
There is no real person behind her character.
Anything she does on screen is something her creators decided.
She is property of her creators.
Bayonetta is object that looks like "she" to begin with.
So no, you can't strip agency of something that lacks agency to begin with.
And no, you can't objectify objects.

The last part is what REALLY worries me.
You're not the first who said this and you won't be the last.
And every time my brain struggles to understand their thought process.
How people can't see things THAT obvious?
When did people stopped noticing what is real and what isn't?

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

To be honest, how I feel? I feel like the dude did nothing wrong really. I've got nothing to say on the shirt itself. Part of me feels that we're becoming way too uptight about shit and need to loosen up before people pop. I'm not denigrating the equality struggle but I don't feel that shirt (ok I had something else to say, sue me) lessened women's equality in any way.
Also I think we can allow for some eccentricity here and there with our rocket scientists, just not if they're spouting gender-biased epithets and/or racist slurs. Focus less on ephemeral shit and more on what was accomplished.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Getting directly to the question at hand, "sexy" is a tool. Like a hammer, maybe? You can build bridges with it, or you can smash in someone's skull. It can be a symbol of hope, or one of oppression. It's all in how it's used, and who it's used for.

Honestly, if people are upset, then maybe you're swinging it at people a bit too much.

What was it Odin said in Thor? "The hammer Mjolnir has the power both to destroy, and to build. It is a fit companion for a king".

It's a fitting comment. I feel similarly to sexuality. It's good for everyone, IMO. Men, women. Well, maybe not so much children. Still, everyone should feel good about themselves to the extent they want. I think that's what helps really define sexy. How good you feel about yourself, not so much how you try to make others.

 

[SAMAS]

Anyone else think that landing a rocket on a fucking comet should give you the right to wear whatever you damn well please the the press conference?

Short Answer: No.

Long Answer: If you're going out in front of the world as a representative of your team, your workplace, and arguably your profession, you need to show some goddamn pride in your appearance.

Is the shirt sexist? Well.... kinda, yeah. Maybe or maybe not in and of itself, but as it reflects on you to wear it? Ans especially to wear it on that occasion? It doesn't speak very well on how you view women if you think that shirt is appropriate.

 

[Pinky's Brain]

Humanity lands a satellite on a comet and all anyone could talk about was a tacky shirt.

No, you.

 

[Norithics]

It's irrelevant what you think about who is CORRECT, your original narrative that people just randomly "mobbed this poor guy far beyond anything a person could possibly deserve", is certainly incorrect. There was no NEED for this to become a big damn controversy, it could have easily stayed a single tweet of someone's opinion, if not for anti-feminists turning it into another gender war, that escalated until even the ESA heard about it, and then some more.

And here's the irony of the anti-feminist movement. Decrying the methods they use while using those methods and turning it up to 11. Like, I don't understand how someone can call people 'Social Justice Warriors' while they're obviously jockeying to advance their own social ideals.

Also man-splaining is absolutely a thing. I'm a dude and I witness it all the time. If you don't think it exists, well that's probably because you're a dude and of course you don't. Nobody wants to believe they can be condescending to others unintentionally. Does it work in the other direction? Absolutely. But the other existing doesn't make it all a wash.

 

[maninahat]

snip

Do you think perhaps that people crying that this guy is discouraging women by the clothes he wears are making much to do about nothing? That they've basically mobbed this poor guy far beyond anything a person could possibly deserve in some effort to combat an unrelated issue?

I don't think they are crying or mobbing him. What they are doing is writing articles or tweeting or blogging about how the guy's shirt was sexist. No individual article I've read comes across as a ravenous hackjob or a "demonisation" of the guy, but a statement of how, regardless of his achievements, he made a mistake with the shirt. It was the volume of articles and blog posts, rather than any viciousness of individuals that made it so hard for the guy. I feel bad for him, and no doubt he found all the negative attention really disheartening over what was a daft mistake...but I don't think I should blame bloggers or journalists for criticising what a person did, unless they genuinely harassed, threatened or abused the guy (which I haven't seen).

It is still an inappropriate thing to wear in most work places, and I could easily imagine how it could be an ugly reminder for women employees that they are in a boy's club, rather than a place of work that expects women and accommodates for them accordingly. It doesn't even have to be an arbitrary specified dress code; I think it is likely that if 50% of that guy's co-workers were women, it probably would have occurred to him to not wear that shirt to work.

Tattoos are also an inappropriate thing to have in most work places. The tech/IT/engineer industry is different. Girls and boys are allowed to express individuality. Him wearing that shirt and having those tattoos isn't a sign of the patriarchy. It's a sign that the company wants their employees to feel like they can be individuals...Take my tech office for example. People are wearing flip flops and hoodies with skulls on them and all sorts of different forms of self-expression. So what if someone wears a shirt with girls on it? He's incurring the risk of being seen as socially awkward or whatever and potentially isolating himself from his coworkers. That's his cost, not us demonizing him or demanding he dress more like us. Just like in social circles.

You are arguing that the kookie shirt is no different from a tattoo or a pair of flip flops or any other item of casual attire. I don't agree. It is specifically that shirt which is bothering people, not his tattoos (which the same critics even praised). People are normally fine with employees having relaxed rules about dress, but only to the point that they are still responsible about what they choose to wear, and show some consideration to their colleague's sensibilities. The fact that this didn't happen with the guy's shirt demonstrates the lack of women co-workers to have to consider in the first place. That's why his shirt that was socially acceptable within his comparatively homogeneous workforce, but unacceptable for a more diverse outside world. It's fine to talk about protecting people's freedoms for personal expression, but it is also fine to talk about their responsibility too.

 

[loa]

Short Answer: No.

Long Answer: If you're going out in front of the world as a representative of your team, your workplace, and arguably your profession, you need to show some goddamn pride in your appearance.

Is the shirt sexist? Well.... kinda, yeah. Maybe or maybe not in and of itself, but as it reflects on you to wear it? Ans especially to wear it on that occasion? It doesn't speak very well on how you view women if you think that shirt is appropriate.

He wore that shirt to give a shoutout to his female friend who made it.

 

[maninahat]

Similarly, the all male building sites I've worked on have a lack of women, and consequently, there are much more open displays of casual sexism (pornography, nude calenders, conversations about prostitutes etc) that won't exist in a better mixed work place.

Could you maybe explain how these things are sexist?
I don't agree that titillation or nudity is sexist, these models are self-sufficient people and their consumers appreciate their work.

Yes, some models consented to sell naked pictures of themselves, but no, the discussion doesn't begin and end there. I recommend you read around sexual objectification, specifically about how women's appearance or sexuality tend to be seen as a commodity in society, and the ultimate adverse effects of those stereotypes.

 

[Captain Capra]

In the end: the real looser here is fashion.

And everyone who´s not a fashion-person should calm their tits. On either side of the argument.

 

[Dollabillyall]

This shirt debate is not about sexism or gender issues.

It's about the anti sexuality movement.

Humans are sexual beings.

Humans are violent beings.

Sometimes those two collide.

When it does, another anti-sexual person is brought into existence.

Those are the people who make a fuss about this.

They are always heard on the issue of men+woman+sexuality, but never on actual discussions about the place of gender in society or the gender differences.

If you are going to spend time debating gender roles.. focus on real issues like the income gap or the housewife stereotype instead of some dude's shirt depicting women in a more-or-less sexual way.

Sexuality is a part of the human experience. If you can't deal with that you should be in therapy, not public debate.

I will retract this entire statement if anyone can point out any type of lesson from this entire shirt debate other than "when sex is involved, some people get pissed the fuck off".

Because I believe there isn't one. This entire debate is just butthurt and bullshit. No advancements in the field of gender and society have been made in this debate.

 

[SAMAS]

Short Answer: No.

Long Answer: If you're going out in front of the world as a representative of your team, your workplace, and arguably your profession, you need to show some goddamn pride in your appearance.

Is the shirt sexist? Well.... kinda, yeah. Maybe or maybe not in and of itself, but as it reflects on you to wear it? Ans especially to wear it on that occasion? It doesn't speak very well on how you view women if you think that shirt is appropriate.

He wore that shirt to give a shoutout to his female friend who made it.

Yep, good thing it had a label clearly pointing that out for all to see. Oh wait...

Which comes back to my previous point about tacky-ass clothes that can be taken the wrong way. If you gotta explain or justify the clothes you're wearing to the whole world, DON'T.

 

[Ariseishirou]

The problem here is not that he had a shirt with people with bikinis on it.

The problem is that YOU ARE A GODDAMN SCIENTIST WHO JUST LANDED A GODDAMN PROBE ON A GODDAMN COMET. AND YOU ARE GIVING A PRESS CONFERENCE. WEAR A GODDAMN SUIT.

Yeah, it's this kind of shit that makes everyone who works in science - myself included - look like socially impaired oblivious neckbeards. See all of those journalists interviewing you in business attire? Maybe you should wear a fucking suit too, genius.