jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (29 posts)

Women of Value and Respect

  1. realtalk247 profile image70
    realtalk247posted 3 years ago

    I know we are living in a new age and new world.  What happened to the evaluation of the quality of a woman? 
    Do you remember when younger, good girls, were taught you don't act/dress "like that" because you are to carry yourself as a quality woman of class?  Now some women show up in corporate environments with backless dresses and 6" pumps. 
    What I'm trying to say........ When is presenting yourself as a skank become traditional in this new environment?  Now there is a time and place for everything. You surely would not show up to a lounge in a suit. 
    What I'm trying to determine is when did women began presenting themselves as strippers and pole dancers?
    Are men still teaching their sons the golden rule: "Son there are women you "sleep/play with" and there are women you marry."  Just a thought.

    1. AshtonFirefly profile image79
      AshtonFireflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Cultural development. It is now more acceptable to be a sex figure than it is to be respected and valued for who you are. Societal expectation. Something we don't all have to adhere to.

      1. GA Anderson profile image82
        GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Excellent response. I am old enough to agree with the OP - in the broad sense. And to your response specifically. But not to the degree of Peeple's response.

        I think the point applies to perceptions and first impressions. I certainly would appreciate an attractive woman dressed as Peeple's says. And I would not automatically assume she was a tramp or stripper, but my opinion would certainly be initially swayed by my calculations of appropriateness.

        But, hey, I am just and old leech - not as culturally enlightened as the politically correct thin I should be.


    2. dashingscorpio profile image88
      dashingscorpioposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I heard a comedian recently tell the following joke:
      "Today church is (come as you are) while nightclubs have a dress code." :-)

      It's up to each employer to decide what their dress code is as well as enforce it.
      I believe (women are harder on other women) much more than men are hard on other men when it comes to what they wear. One of the reasons "double standards" exist is because (women attack other women). It's one thing if men are putting them down but to have their own gender to do it as well makes it "doubly' judgmental.

      Men generally do not judge other men for how they dress or their number of sexual partners.
      It would be interesting to see what it would be like if women did NOT put other women down.

      I suspect a lot of women view other women as "the competition" and they gleam some pleasure out of tearing other women down for (their) choices. Every pre-awards show has a "red carpet" stroll where women (judge) other women's gowns, shoes, makeup, and jewelry.

      Whenever photographers from People Magazine spot two female celebrities wearing similar outfits they'll post side by side photos and ask the question; "Who wore it best?"
      Can you imagine a magazine ever doing that with two men?

      Some of the biggest selling tabloid newspapers are those that feature female celebrities "caught without their makeup" or revealing cellulite  and spider veins.
      Playing the "comparison game"  leads some women to have inferiority complexes when they feel other women look better than them and it gives them (delight) when they see other women that have flaws.

      As for the statement "There's some women you sleep/play with and some women you marry" it's always been in the eye of the beholder.
      Certainly women have also dated guys who they knew were NOT "marriage material"  from the moment they met. It's not uncommon in our youth to date Ms./Mr. "Right Now" while we're waiting for Ms./Mr. Right!  In the end most men and women do get married.
      Which bolsters the old cliché There's someone for everyone". :-)

    3. psycheskinner profile image82
      psycheskinnerposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Maybe we learned to stop 1) assuming a women in high heels is promiscuous and 2) care if she is.

      I would call that progress. People's "reactions" are their own problem.

  2. peeples profile image94
    peeplesposted 3 years ago

    I'm confused, my back and high heals make me a tramp?

    1. AshtonFirefly profile image79
      AshtonFireflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not sure that was the point. What one interprets as inappropriate dress will vary. I personally don't think a backless dress and high heels make one look like a stripper, tramp, or pole dancer. I think wearing nothing makes one look like those things. But you know...

    2. GA Anderson profile image82
      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No, but when worn in an "inappropriate" setting it would certainly cause one to wonder what you are trying to say about yourself.

      As an extreme example of "appropriateness" - would you wear a bikini to business meeting? (there is an open door for you)


      1. peeples profile image94
        peeplesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, but who decides what is appropriate? The picture below shows back, so if I pair it with heals and attend a meeting it would be inappropriate? I understand that something that is obviously for swimming shouldn't be worn to the office, but when the item is seen as appropriate by some and inappropriate by others who decided? When I worked in an office heals (rather large ones sometimes) were the norm.

        1. AshtonFirefly profile image79
          AshtonFireflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Depends on who you're asking. Each person's idea of socially acceptable is different.

        2. GA Anderson profile image82
          GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Peeples, as above in my response to Cadrissa, it is the point of the example, and not the specifics used, that I directed my response. The image you used is a very attractive lady that I would not find inappropriate in almost any instance.

          As for the "who decides," it is the people in your world that decide. Whether it be the corporate business world or the Sunday going-to-church world - they all have accepted expectations. And those expectations are frequently as wrong as they are right. It is your choice to deny, accept,  or fight those expectations. But what you cannot do is pretend that they don't exist.

          To demand that others give up their expectations and accept yours is asking a lot. Would you do the same for them?


  3. Cardisa profile image91
    Cardisaposted 3 years ago

    And yet again I have another  confusion about people. Why are people so hung up on such trivial things are the way people dress? The way I dress does not define who I am.

    Who made people judge over others? We need to get past these things and try to solve real issues. Does it matter how the other person dresses? Or, why should it matter?

    So if I dress in a mini skirt with  stilettos  and scarlet lipstick, I am a hooker? Value is not placed on dress but attitude, how the person sees themselves. I don;t think less of myself if I dress skimpily (not that I do). I don;t think less of others because of the way they dress.

    1. GA Anderson profile image82
      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Are you kidding? Of course the way you dress defines who you are - as a first impression!

      If you attend a business meeting in  scarlet lipstick, a mini-skirt, and stilettos, would you not expect certain perspectives to be formed?

      Would you expect other business people to not form an opinion on you based on your appearance?

      If I came to a business meeting in a three-piece suit, but with my with pecker hanging out - would you not form a less-than-positive first impression?

      Get past these things my ass. Of course it matters. What Utopian universe do you live in?

      I am all for "dressing as you want' - but don't ask me to deny the reality that your "first impression" is the one you either live with, or spend a lot of effort correcting. That is the "real" world - whether you like it or not!


      1. Cardisa profile image91
        Cardisaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        That's just it. The value there is your opinion of me and not my actual self worth. Of course society teaches us that it's "wrong" to dress like that but in reality, it's just clothing...something you put on and take off. Your self worth it within you. Your value is not within the clothing you choose but how you see yourself as a person.

        What if I don't want to conform to society's dictates and wear my scuba-diving gear to my business meeting? What would you say to that? What if it's not a business meeting but a social black tie function and I wear jeans. t-shirt and flip flops?

        1. GA Anderson profile image82
          GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Very true. But, your, (generic "your" of course), choice, is to understand and deal with the real world we live in, or defy reality and insist that the Utopian world of non-judgement is the only world that matters.

          First impressions can definitely be wrong. And many times the fight against the injustice of them is worth the battle, but... many times it is just dumb to insist that the world abide by your standards and not the currently culturally accepted ones.

          All of my comments and intended references here are directed at the reality of "what is," and not "what should be." For instance; the OP used high heels and a backless dress to convey a point, my responses are to that point, not the specific example.

          I do not believe that the concept, of "When in Rome..." is always a bad thing, always an acquiescence of personal principles, or always an example of weakness - sometimes it is the intelligent position to take.

          Everyone isn't a John Galt. (even if we should be)


          1. Cardisa profile image91
            Cardisaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I agree that in order to have some order or professionalism that we should know what is appropriate for some occasions, but, the quality of the woman according to the OP, is a perceived quality. I don't think it's fair to judge a woman's quality by the way she dresses. It's not fair to call a woman a tramp because she dresses a certain way. It's like calling a prostitute a prude because she covers up everything. She is still a prostitute even if she dresses modestly.

            You can't really tell a person by the way she dresses, if you could, many people would be wrongfully labeled. One example (from personal experience about 20, years ago. She is now married) is a church sister of mine who slept around with some of the other sisters' husbands. Now if you should look at that young lady and how she dressed, you would never believe she was capable of such things. While the church was busy reprimanding some of the young people about wearing short skirts, this modestly dressed young lady was creating havoc in the church.

          2. psycheskinner profile image82
            psycheskinnerposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            But maybe the person having a puritanical response to a woman showing a bit of back is the one who is out of step? And the young lady is in fact doing as the Romans do.

            1. Cardisa profile image91
              Cardisaposted 3 years agoin reply to this


  4. AshtonFirefly profile image79
    AshtonFireflyposted 3 years ago

    I think another factor that we need to concern ourselves with is venue. What is appropriate for business will not be appropriate for romping about town.

    Since the OP was discussing attire within a business setting, I'm assuming that their frustration was with what they considered to be indecent or sexually suggestive attire in an otherwise professional field. In this case, I obviously have a solid opinion on what one should wear, out of respect for the business, clients, etc. Modesty is always safe in that venue.

    Now, if we discuss outside of business, in our own homes, or around other people, it gets a little tricky. I personally think we should be absolutely free to wear whatever we like. That is our freedom, is it not? HOWEVER. I don't think we can or even should expect to wear whatever we want and expect people to have zero impression of us.

    If I wear a bikini or a short skirt out in public that shows enough skin to suggest an attempt at sexual appeal, that sends a message, whether I like it or I don't.  This is why I get annoyed with women who dress suggestively and yet get upset that a guy checks them out. What the hell did you expect him to do? Think "Oh I'm sure she's not putting herself out there. I'm sure she's a lovely young woman who respects herself and just dresses like she wants sexual attention." Hell no they're not.
    Am I annoyed that they wore it? No. They can wear their underwear for all I care. But should they gripe about how people shouldn't look at them in a suggestive manner when they are obviously dressing in a way that will attract sexual attention (even if that's not their intention)? Now that's just stupid to me.

    I think dress definitely says something about a person. For example, my style is punk. Black boots, short skirts, skull shirts, dark makeup, etc. The first impression that comes to mind about one's personality who wears that style of clothing, is probably correct. Unique, expressive, a little dark, hip, etc. We choose our clothing styles to match our personalities.Can I really expect people to think I'm mild-mannered if I wear this? Uh. Not really. On another note, this style can and sometimes is perceived as sexually provocative (depending on the particular style. My style is considered to be so.) It isn't my purpose to get sexual attention,  but I realize that if I dress like this, then I'm probably going to get it because the style incorporates certain styles of clothing that one might seem "sexually provocative." So if I do wear that style, then I'd better not be bitching that someone is looking at me in a "perverted" manner. I kind of ask for it if I dress like this. Does that keep me from wearing it? Nope. Long as I'm with my fiance, I don't have too much fear. Do I wear it out in public by myself? Nope. Too dangerous. We send subliminal messages whether we know it or not and as a young woman I won't put myself in that danger.

    So I say, wear what you want, but expect a reaction.

  5. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    People aren't being deliberately contrary like that--they are just growing up in a world where skimpy clothing and moral failings are not so conflated. And I am not sure that is something to condemn. Maybe one day we will all go to work wearing no clothing at all beyond what is called for to be safe and hygienic.

  6. word55 profile image74
    word55posted 3 years ago

    You raise a very good issue here. There was a time when I was attracted to the short dresses, the tall heels, the backs out and all the sexiness. But now I prefer marriage material so, it depends on what a person is looking for. Everybody's not going to dress the same. There's a lot of commercialism out here. I think the majority of women are attractive any way they dress. It's just that they all may not do it respectably but who are we to judge that?. They don't all care about dressing to someone's expectations unless they are desired by it and then again, they feel comfortable natural. We should accept women dressing as they want to be without judging. Finally, I know a lady that dresses very attractively and sexy but she does not act the way she dresses. She wears it comfortably, naturally and well.

    1. Cardisa profile image91
      Cardisaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So if I dress in short skirts, heels and backless dresses I am not marriage material?

  7. word55 profile image74
    word55posted 3 years ago

    Yes, you can still be marriage material. My bad, please, forgive me :-)

  8. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    Companies that have strong feelings about this make a dress code.

    1. GA Anderson profile image82
      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Do you think it was the business world that was the point of the OP? Do churches have dress codes? Bar Mitzvas? Grocery stores?

      How about taking a shot at the point of the topic that, (my interpretation), current trends of dress and behavior appear to devalue the dignity and integrity of women?

      Of course I realize I am vulnerable in this area because I am an old fashioned contrarian that believes ultra-feminism has hurt women. I think there are a lot of males that think like I do - women are the better half of our species, and have strengths and values that we can only envy.

      Why in the world would you want to convey the image of a "skank," even if it is wrong, just because it is wrong?


      1. psycheskinner profile image82
        psycheskinnerposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Yes: "Now some women show up in corporate environments with backless dresses and 6" pumps."

  9. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    Can you judge a book by its cover?  Benjamin Franklin advised, "Eat to please yourself. Dress to please others." Instead, a lot of women today just like showing off their stuff. This is self-orientation to the max. We read you loud and clear. (Smart guys will steer clear if they know what is good for them….which they don't.)
    Many teachers dress this way. Poor kids. The kids dress just like their overly attractive teachers and their overly attractive moms. This is why the shame factor is missing in todays girls, teens and young adults.

    Mothers teach by example and give the message: "We can wear what we like and no one should judge us. No one should be affected if we show cleavage as a teller for the bank, If I wear an outfit perfect for night-clubbing as a school secretary, etc.
    I knew an assistant principal who looked like a blond barbie doll. She was always dressed in tight skirts and heels. She could hardly walk. Believe me she commanded VERY LITTLE respect from anyone. She was eventually transferred and then later fired. She was a major distraction. Who was she trying to impress besides herself?  Do I sound like Dana Carvey's Church Lady yet? 
    Is the modern women under the influence of...

    1. psycheskinner profile image82
      psycheskinnerposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think it is any more self-oriented than ever.  Conventions of dress have just changed.  Young woman are pretty much the same as they have ever been.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
        Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        We look kinda sluttish if you ask me. But no one is asking me. I used to shop at Carlotte Ruess. I could always find great clothes that were stylish and current and not sluttish in the least. Not any more!
        Now the skirts are ten inches above the knee, and made to wear with the highest of gaudy heels.

        The podiatrists are happy. And the men too. So thats good.

        I really am bugged by outfits that appear as if the women forgot to put on their skirts over their so called leggings. Usually we get to see more than we ever wanted to, silhouette wise… How dare I?
        I know!!!
        Thanks for chance to vent.

        (…if the term, "slut," is politically incorrect. Oh well.
        Actually "...in recent times, there have been attempts to "reclaim" the word, while some individuals embrace the title as a source of pride."  Thesaurus.  Does that explain anything? LOL)