4 ms·
Because it implies that only women were given a suggested dress code when in reality both sexes were given a suggestion. Outrage culture is out of control. Peop
by derision 7y ago
Because it implies that only women were given a suggested dress code when in reality both sexes were given a suggestion. Outrage culture is out of control. People are too damn sensitive
- krapp 7y ago>Because it implies that only women were given a suggested dress code when in reality both sexes were given a suggestion. You know perfectly well that is not what is being implied, nor is it what people take issue with.
- derision 7y agoI don't see any difference between asking a man to wear a suit and asking a woman to wear a skirt.
- gremlinsinc 7y agoWhat if that woman has a scar on her leg and is self-conscious? Why isn't a dinner gown acceptable? Why specifically is showing off legs and sexualizing the woman a requirement? What if they are trans f->m or non-binary and they would rather where a pant suit, or a tuxedo? Gowns can be just as business professional, so can pant suits.
- derision 7y agoIt was just a recommendation. Those things would be fine too in any business setting
- BrandoElFollito 7y ago"short" as in "it can be short of you want, but make it formal" . Longer if always ok