new thread
It always bothers me that Women get a free pass in the workplace. They have total Freedom to wear their hair any lenght or style they want. It can be out hanging loose, back, braids whatever. They are allowed virtually any dress style also.Men on the other hand are held to a much stricter standard. In most cases hair must be short. In the cases where we are allowed longer hair,it must be tied back. Why are we held to a different standard, it's not fair. What is this saying about women? They are not as important, so we will let them look anyway they want? I don't get it!
I don't know if the rules of the work place stem from an intentional bias against long hair on men so much as they do from custom. I also doubt there's an under-appreciation of women going on just as much as I doubt there's a malicious plot against long-haired men. Now, I'm only speculating here and I could be wrong, but my best guess is that those rules just formed out of convention. Traditionally, men have most widely worn their hair shorter (at least here in the west) while long hair has historically been the pride and glory of women. Seeing as how work place standards will consistently reflect culture, I'm sure the guidelines by which employees must adhere developed accordingly. Men were expected to wear their hair short while women were free to carry on wearing their hair with all the freedom of style and length that they'd always had for years. Now if long hair on men ever made a strong resurgence in popularity - and it would have to extend beyond just the media icons and figures of pop culture - to the point where a dominant hair style, then I'm sure some of the people in charge of work rules would recognize the unnecessary bias in their standards and do away with it. Not sure if that will ever happen since long hair on men seems to be a fad that comes and goes but those are just some thoughts.
Good Answer Jesua. I wonder if long hair in men will ever come back to the mainstream as it was in the time of Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. That wasn't so long ago in the grand scheme of things. My best guess is that long hair in men is associated with counter culture activities, where it doesnt have that same conotation for women.I just wish people in this society would learn to judge individuals by the content of their charector instead of things like their skin color or the length of their hair.
Preach it! You could be the spokesman of our age, paving the way to greater tolerance towards long hairs. The Martin Luther King Jr. of long haired men. :)
Good Answer Jesua. I wonder if long hair in men will ever come back to the mainstream as it was in the time of Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. That wasn't so long ago in the grand scheme of things. My best guess is that long hair in men is associated with counter culture activities, where it doesnt have that same conotation for women.I just wish people in this society would learn to judge individuals by the content of their charector instead of things like their skin color or the length of their hair.
If we teach our children to appreciate diversity, it'll only take a few generations before men can wear their hair any way they like. (Nice hair, by the way!)
It's called the establishment..lol!
I don't get it either. I've noticed the exact same thing. Sadly, this is even stricter in the southern states which are more "conservative".
Yeah, I've noticed this also. It is a double standard, and really bothers me.
Many feminists would tell you that this is exactly what it says about the attitude of society towards women.
I think a lot more can be said, though.
Firstly, blame the Romans for promoting short hair in the first place. Queen Boadicea of the Icenae tribe had the right idea what to do with them, LOL! I can't recall whether it was the Roman governor's head that wound up in the river or just a plaster bust of his head? OTOH, getting one of those chariots with the rotating knives on the wheels probably isn't the solution.
Then there was St. Paul. Another bloody Roman! I'm sensing a pattern here.
What have the Romans ever done for us? Well, there's the aqueducts... (Cut to scene with Canadian Mounties) I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK, I sleep all night and I work all day! I cut down trees, I wear high heels, suspenders and a bra (Squelched by weight marked '10 tons')...
Now what was I talking about? Ah, yes, long hair in the workplace. Probably conscription/the draft is another cause. Men were forced to go into military service and made to cut their hair to look like ... Roman soldiers. Yep, it's definitely the Roman's fault. Men who had to cut their hair as conscripts/draftees unfortunately saw no reason not to impose the same on everyone else, especially of they were power freaks, and what corporate manager isn't a power freak?\
Getting back to the feminist tack, in the past women were seen as homemakers who stayed home and tried to look beautiful, and bringing them into the workplace was a novelty in time of war. Concessions were made just to get them there, as they knew they wouldn't take jobs atall if they were stuck with the same rules as us. Who the hell would, if they had a choice?
After hostilities ended, they were all sacked/fired/given their cards, but after they fought to get back into decent jobs they never lost any of the concessions in appearance that they had before, especially as all the managers were still male and wanted them to look decorative.
So, fight for your right to go to work in high heels, suspenders and a bra ... oops! I mean your right to go to work with long hair streaming everywhere. Arise ye workers of the world, you have nothing to lose but your chains!
And here's a serious suggestion. If there's a union - join it!
Stupid Romans.
Too bad 'ol Queen Boadicea got caught in that little trap. At least she give 'em a run for their money for a short while. I'd say 70,000 dead Romans was a good start. hehehe
The Apostle Paul, I can't believe I'm named after that hair hater. That's it, I'm changing my name to Saul.
One of my favs has always been Joan of Ark. How much stuff did she overcome to lead France? Didn't the English cut her hair, what's up with that, John B?
I agree it'd be nice to one day see women free to work in high heels, fish nets and black lace bras. Ah yes... very cool.
Paul... eh Saul
Most of that depends on the economy. Employers have more power to set dress codes when the fob market is tight. Women also suffer backlashes too. They are pretty much forced back into skirts and hose. But some have successfully sued over that though.
You're not right, sad to say. I'm a longhaired teacher at highschool and people around (well, my superiors) find it a bit inappropriate to let long hair hang around loose. This is a "normal" school in a "normal" European country. But I do what I please anyway;-))))))
hi, I just wanted to say a thing.when it comes to profession women are always given an advantage - shoes are a must for men, but for women they r not.. long loose Hari is an option for them, but for men it is a strict no no..people believe that only women befit to grow hair lengthily
Not quite true - both men and women get rules (whether they are obvious or not), yknow the 'you must be smart and wear a suit' kind of thing. I know one woman who cut her waist legnth hair to a shoulder bob so she could get a job - she was told she didnt look professional enough.
It is the establishment and it is wrong. The whole hair issue is stuipid and men shouldnt be obliged to have a crew cut any more than a woman should.