> > --- s3raphita wrote: > > > > The line "I am a great believer in the uni-sex dress-code" was copied > over (by Yahoo not me!) from a post by Jason. I don't advocate any dress > codes. Jason can defend that view if he wishes. > --- "TurquoiseB" <turquoiseb@...> wrote: > > Just in case you were wondering, I understood that, and so my rap this > morning was a reply to Jason as much as it was Buck, who tried to > springboard off of it with more of his "gotta keep the sinners in line > any way we can" horseshit. > > I don't advocate any kind of dress code, but *especially* one that tries > to make women or men look sexless. I, for one, would love to hear Jason > defend that idea, and doubt that he could. > > I extended my rap to cover the uniforms worn by various religious groups > and cults. Historically, such "uniforms" (special dress for priests, > monks, or nuns, or even "recommended dress" for lay people) are about > mind control more than anything else. The priesthood always needed > something to *make themselves seem better or "more special," and wearing > certain robes that no one else was able to wear was one way to achieve > that, and thus achieve the control they wanted to maintain over their > "flocks." Note that in most cults or religious orders, the > robes/costumes worn by "lower class monks" are usually different and > less ornate and "special" than those worn by people higher up in the > hierarchy. (Think the ludicrous costumes worn by TMO "Rajas") This is > also about control. > > Making the monks and nuns wear costumes, period, is also an aspect of > control freakdom, because the higher-ups want to remind them at all > times that they are part of an org that is better and more powerful than > they are, and to remind them of their "vows," meaning their willingness > to follow rules laid on them by other people. > > One thing I think you'll find if you look into it is that those on this > forum recommending "uniforms" for monks, nuns, and other members of > religious or spiritual organizations have in most cases never been > actual *members* of such organizations. In other words, they're trying > to justify rules they never followed. > > Similarly, when people like Jason mouth off about "unisex" clothing, I > think you'll find that they're always talking about making the women > look more like men. That was the point of me posting my photo of the guy > from Rocky Horror wearing a corset, garter belt, stockings, and high > heels. If ALL men and women dressed like that, that would be "unisex." > But I think we all know that's not exactly what Jason had in mind. I > kinda doubt he's going to be the first in line to get his dress and high > heels and wear them everywhere. :-) >
That is exactly the point. You wouldn't dress like a woman when you go to work. Your employer just wouldn't accept it. My point is that it perpetuates gender related prejudices and bias on a very subtle level. People can dress as they want in their private spaces (homes). In public spaces, some degree of conservative uni-dress-code will enable women to break glass ceilings. It also encourages comradeship and makes them feel that they are part of the 'family'. It's important to make that distinction between private spaces and public spaces, on this dress-code issue.