Dress Code - Bare Legs OK or Not?

[shootingstar]

I disagree on generational, I am only 28 and I like wearing hose and think they look better. My legs are very pale, when cold they get purply I think it looks hideous on myself and others. Otherwise I think I have nice looking legs. For me hose are a more polished look, I wear bare legs to go to out to dinner in which I wear a skirt. I have a skirt suit and I would NEVER go to an interview without hose. I am in hot Texas but I love hose the right kind support your legs and reduce fatigue while still not looking like support hose. I used to sell panties, bras and hosiery and learned why a good pair of hose it worth the tag.

I have seen plenty of companies that require hose, it does not seem weird at all to me. Of course at my work they are not required but I will not being wearing skirts because we can't have visible tattoos and I have one on my ankle.

Like several others here, I wear pantyhose to any interview for any job that particularily if you expect to be paid well/decently or negotiating a good salary. Particularily jobs that require you to meet clients who themselves are professionals also or you are expected in pull at least $$$$ revenue for the company.

And I notice myself...the interviewers are wearing pantyhose themselves.

Sure, many of us have nicely shaped/toned cycling legs, but my legs bruise easily and I also have leg skin that tends to be dry even if I've put on lots of body lotion several hrs. before. Pantyhose gives my legs an overall smooth look for a dressier outfit/skirt. I don't own any casual skirts at this time in life, only dress skirts.

After the job interview and if you get the job, if the work culture permits it, sure bare legs under a skirt that hits just above the knee for work or longer, looks ok.

A concession to wearing pantyhose even in hot climates, is incredibly small, folks. It's not like being asked to wear a head covering in an fundamentalist Islamic country.

Or being a firefighter wearing rubberized turnout gear jackets in hot climates, fighting a fire... many other situations where people in certain jobs work in FAR more difficult environmental conditions.

[OakLeaf]

It's not like being asked to wear a head covering in an fundamentalist Islamic country.

Ahem. Is it like a French woman being asked to wear something above the waist when she sunbathes on American beaches?

Okay, discussions about hijab are pretty far beyond this thread... but it raises my hackles when people suggest that OUR standards of modesty are reasonable and properly enforceable by law, and OTHER cultures' standards of modesty are not reasonable and should not be enforced by law.

[Crankin]

I do not "look under the table" and peek at people's socks. What I described is just available to view, when people sit down.
I *do* care how I look. I love living in my athletic type clothes when not in a professional situation and I like being outdoors and getting dirty. But, when I am at work, I like looking a certain way. For 30 years I worked in a profession where the range of acceptable dress was wide. When I was young, I looked really young. In my second job, the lunch lady tried to stop me from going behind the counter to buy the teacher's salad. This was in a school that only went up to sixth grade! So, I wore suits, dresses, or dressy skirts. And hose. I found both students and parents reacted in a different way, as opposed to when I was dressed down.
In the last 15 years I changed my style to more business casual. But, I rarely wore jeans to school. I like buying clothes, so be it. But now, I spend more on my cycling and running stuff...
Now that I am in grad school full time, I have observed that the younger students actually dress better than most of the ones closer to my age. I was surprised to see that many of them wear skirts. I am not talking about prim, dressed up clothes, but stylish skirts and pants that look quite fashionable.
Wow, this thread has morphed a bit. To me, it's like the make up discussion that comes up every so often. Yeah, I wear make up, get my hair highlighted, wear nail polish. And I like to dress up. I guess I don't get why people think this is so horrible. I am not really a girly-girl, but even if I was, so what?
Those lawyers asking those questions !

[ZenSojourner]

Crankin, caring about how you look is fine. But extending the same standards to other people - not so much. Again, I wonder how you can tell the difference between "ski socks" and any other socks. But then maybe it's socks altogether you find objectionable? I'm really not sure, maybe you were only speaking for yourself after all, it just seemed you were setting a standard for everybody. I actually did not remember who said that, so it was a response to content and not person, and may very well have been taken out of context.

Anyway. One time in my life I have run up against someone I considered hypersensitive on the issue of modes of dress, and she justified it for similar reasons that you give - being short, female, and very young looking, she became overly concerned with appearing "professional" at all times, which for herself might have been fully warranted, but as a university professor, she turned around and tried to apply these same standards to her students. Some of whom (me for example) were significantly older than her.

Now keep in mind that she was not an employer, she was a university level professor at a small regional public college, and we are not talking about comportment and dress at work, but in class settings, not by employees, but grad students. She actually made whether or not she approved of your dress part of your grade.

The fact is that in a therapy setting, dress is appropriate or inappropriate IN CONTEXT. There are settings where you'd better dress to the nines if you want your client's trust and respect, and there are settings where you'd better NOT show up dressed to the nines if you want your client's trust and respect. You need to use a little common sense.

This woman believed and tried to enforce the idea that her standards of dress were ALWAYS appropriate in all situations, and took it a step further in my case to the point where she was downgrading me in class for wearing sandals (not flipflops but sandals) OUTSIDE of class. Then she gave me a C (the graduate level equivalent of a flunking grade) because, she told me, "the profession needs to be protected from you".

Guess who didn't teach that class anymore by the time I was done with her?

Harkening back to another thread, if my only choice in job hunting was a job that required a standard of dress I didn't like, I'd take the job, I'd conform, and I'd keep looking for something better. It's all arbitrary anyway.

But doing so (or not) doesn't change my personal standards. Pantyhose? Haven't worn them in almost 25 years, won't ever wear them again. When I first left home I was so self-conscious of my bare legs I wouldn't wear SHORTS without pantyhose. I got over it, and so has most of society, as time has passed.

I don't wear makeup, and I never will. If I came upon an employer who tried to require me to wear makeup you'd see a lawsuit shortly. IN CONTEXT; there is no job I'm going to be applying for that would have any excuse for making such a requirement.

As far as the hijab and purdah being compared to full frontal nudity, we don't stone women for going topless on the beach. Women in certain areas of the world where Islamic law is trumping secular law are beaten, raped, and killed for so much as showing a strand of hair. It's not even mandated by the Qu'ran. It's something that's barely mentioned in the Hadith, based on varying translations of 3 different sentences.

That's hardly the same thing as going topless and getting fined and maybe arrested.

[OakLeaf]

we don't stone women for going topless on the beach.

First of all, the comment I was responding to was one about women being "asked to" cover their hair. In the context of a discussion about what women are "asked to" wear on the job. Not what we're being stoned for doing.

Second, although it's certainly true that some of the behavior you mention is sanctioned by law in some countries, most of it is extrajudicial. A woman in the United States who was raped after walking topless down the street would get very little sympathy from most quarters, either, I'm sorry to say.


And I still think there's a strong chance that asking those questions in a job interview is a test, not a real search for the answers.

[Jolt]

Wow, this thread has morphed a bit. To me, it's like the make up discussion that comes up every so often. Yeah, I wear make up, get my hair highlighted, wear nail polish. And I like to dress up. I guess I don't get why people think this is so horrible. I am not really a girly-girl, but even if I was, so what?

It's perfectly fine if someone *chooses* to do those things because they like it. The issue is with making it a requirement or an expectation and "forcing" people to do it in order to be acceptable. Especially for impractical, uncomfortable and potentially unhealthy things like hose and heels (and neckties for guys--especially in a clinical setting where they have been SHOWN to be an infection control problem). As for people thinking bare legs (in good condition and under a skirt of a decent length) are "gross", I still don't get it.

[ZenSojourner]

Ahem. Is it like a French woman being asked to wear something above the waist when she sunbathes on American beaches?

Okay, discussions about hijab are pretty far beyond this thread... but it raises my hackles when people suggest that OUR standards of modesty are reasonable and properly enforceable by law, and OTHER cultures' standards of modesty are not reasonable and should not be enforced by law.

I was responding to what is enforced by law, not what is "asked".