Non-IT News Thread
-
@JaredBusch said:
Want to make a point and stand up for the rights of some group? Fine. But don't break the rules and call it the company's problem.
But it's not about the rules, no one said that. At least not in the article. The issue is around how women's clothing is treated, not that the rules themselves were bad. I didn't see that suggested anywhere. Are you reading a different article?
Her issue was with the combination of things - that for a girl to go buy what JCPenney's calls career clothing is recognized by JCPenney's themselves as not being acceptable. Women really are challenged by this in the workplace, this is a real issue. It's very hard for a girl to understand what is considered business appropriate and if JCPenney's markets one thing and actively doesn't agree with their own marketing it's suggestive of a problem. And that's the most that the article implies.
-
@JaredBusch said:
You want to make that argument? Fine. That is not the argument she is making. And before you make the argument, you need to go to a store and fact check the men's career section.
If she is making more of an argument that I will agree with you. But that argument was not portrayed in the news article.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
Doesn't matter where she purchased it.
Not legally it doesn't, but that's not the issue. The question she's asking is about discrimination. Does JCPenney's sell short shorts in the men's career section?
There's no discrimination there. There's nothing illegal about it. Do they sell Bikini's in the men's section either?
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
There's no discrimination there. There's nothing illegal about it.
The question about discrimination is whether the men's section also is suggestive of similar choices.
No one suggested that there was something illegal. I feel like a lot is being read into it. It's purely around suggesting one thing for women and possibly another thing for men. If they are selling similarly inappropriate attire and labeling it as career for men, then there is just an issue around bad marketing practices and nothing more. If they do not, is it not discrimination?
I see a legitimate issue either way, but not a big one. Should they really be selling shorts like that and calling them "career clothing"? Lots of people don't know what to wear at jobs and rely on that kind of "advice."
But the big question as Jared pointed out is what do they sell for men? If they don't sell shorts, aren't they treating the two differently on the sales floor (not in policy.)
-
We have plenty of women who wear shorts to work here. It's allowed. We have some men that do too (but, much fewer).
-
I know for a fact these are sold in the career section of our local store http://www.jcpenney.com/dockers-flat-front-solid-short/prod.jump?ppId=pp5003720431
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
We have plenty of women who wear shorts to work here. It's allowed. We have some men that do too (but, much fewer).
Allowed and "career appropriate" are completely different things. I can wear shorts and flip flops to the office, it's California. But it isn't business casual or anything of the sort. People working in places that allow that stuff don't need advice as to what to wear. It's people who need guidance, those with traditional entry level career points, who need some idea of what is appropriate and not appropriate to wear. Not what is allowed, there are policies for that hopefully, but what is considered business attire.
If you have a job (not a career) and don't care how it appears, it doesn't matter outside of policy. If you have a career and understand your clothing options and messages it doesn't matter because you are in command. But this is about the people who aren't sure what to wear when trying to be somewhat successful. Men have it easy, suits on one tier, button down shirts on another and khakis and polos below that. Can't go too wrong. It's so easy and obvious. Women have a much bigger challenge knowing what is appropriate to wear and when. It really isn't as easy and a retailer taking advantage of that is unfortunate.
Wearing shorts like that is not "business casual" anywhere that I know of. It's not that they are short, it is that they are shorts.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I know for a fact these are sold in the career section of our local store http://www.jcpenney.com/dockers-flat-front-solid-short/prod.jump?ppId=pp5003720431
Oh man, that's awful. They are better than the red women's shorts, sort of. But they are still bad. So that makes the overall issue nothing around discrimination but just around "bad marketing of career clothing."
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Oh man, that's awful. They are better than the red women's shorts, sort of. But they are still bad. So that makes the overall issue nothing around discrimination but just around "bad marketing of career clothing."
Which, most certainly, has nothing to do with her attention grabbing stunt.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Oh man, that's awful. They are better than the red women's shorts, sort of. But they are still bad. So that makes the overall issue nothing around discrimination but just around "bad marketing of career clothing."
Which, most certainly, has nothing to do with her attention grabbing stunt.
I agree. Worth calling attention for people to understand that stores have no interest in recommending appropriate clothing (never get advice from a reseller!!!) but they seem to do so indiscriminately (is that appropriate to say, or "without discrimination.")
-
@scottalanmiller said:
indiscriminatelyOT: Sounds like another addition to Scott's Dictionary, lol.
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
indiscriminatelyOT: Sounds like another addition to Scott's Dictionary, lol.
No, it is a very common word. I just used it in an older sense, not the sense it normally means.
-
@scottalanmiller Most folks around here don't use good words like that, so I don't tend to hear (har, har) them that often.
-
I'm surprised. I hear that one in casual conversation.
e.g. That kid is throwing water balloons at people indiscriminately.
Also, the browser has it in the spell checker so it is fairly common by their standards.
-
Valerie Harper: Actress Reportedly Rushed to Hospital Wednesday After Being Found Unconscious
The 75-year-old actress was found unconscious backstage during a performance of "Nice Work If You Can Get It," according to Entertainment Tonight.
-
All of the Mary Tyler Moore crew are getting up there now. That show was a long time ago.
-
-
That really sucks. Does anyone from the Geneseo area know how extensive the damage was and what other restaurant was caught in the fire?
-
The building that Kelly's is in, is a total loss they need to demolish it. The restaurant has only been open for a couple months and I didn't even know it was there. Now I have to go check it out when she reopens. Also A Touch of Grace (a gift and unique international wares store) had lots of smoke a water damage. Geneseo Sun on the other side had some smoke and water damage as well.
-
That really sucks. That is going to significantly change Main Street. There are so few businesses there. Losing a building or two in the middle of it all will really alter things. At least if they had insurance this means that a modern building can go in there instead of the 100+ year old one that has been there on the verge of falling down for a long time.
