back to article Hey GitLab, the 1970s called and want their sexism back: Saleswomen told to wear short skirts, heels and 'step it up'

Hot on the heels of insisting "diversity and inclusion is a core GitLab value," the code-hosting biz asked its saleswomen to wear "short but somewhat formal dress and heels" to an awards night during its sales kickoff in Vancouver next week – because the company is "trying to step it up." The request, which went out in an …

  1. A Non e-mouse Silver badge
    Joke

    Gene Hunt called...

    ...He wants his bigotry back.

    1. Kane Silver badge
      Go

      Re: Gene Hunt called...

      FIRE UP THE QUATTRO!

      1. Roland6 Silver badge
        Go

        Re: Gene Hunt called...

        What timing!!!!

        Want to "Fire up Your Quattro"?

        Gene Hunts Actual Audi Quattro From BBC's Ashes to Ashes Series

        Auction starting price £15,000

        FYI, the other Quatrro used exclusively in the first series and wasn't shot up, was sold in 2014 for £38,598

  2. James O'Shea

    bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

    I couldn't give a damn about 'non-binary' whatevers, but even little old reactionary me thinks that having the girls dress like Uhura on the bridge of that old lecher Kirk's Enterprise is going a bit far. Especially if it's Mirror Universe Enterprise, that knife looked sharp.

    1. Matthew 3

      Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

      'Non-binary whatevers'? Well done for being dismissive and offensive at the same time.

      1. Just Enough Silver badge

        Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

        There comes a point in any email where you have to stop worrying who you might be inadvertently excluding. If you're non-binary, should you feel offended by not being mentioned or considered in this email? Well not any more than amputees, both those without fingers and/or feet, those with a high tolerance for heat, those suffering hot flushes, those with a phobia about emails, those who do not drink alcohol, those who have strict dietary restriction that make social functions a minefield, those socially anxious who hate functions, those who are house bound and cannot attend, and those who must return to their kidney dialysis on Tuesday evenings. All of these individuals are totally ignored, without a second's consideration, by this email.

        All these people are different from most others. They know they are different. Sometimes that sucks. But they don't demand that the rest of us must forever look out for instances where we are not acknowledging they are different. Otherwise it would become almost impossible to say/write anything without constant caveats and qualifications.

        Please note that when I write "say", I mean to communicate in some form, and am in no way excluding those of the mute community or those who, through personal belief, choose to not speak. And when I write "write", it is not my intent to exclude those who are illiterate.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          It seems in that case, "non binary" means something as revolutionary as "women wearing trousers".

          So your rant about how difficult it is to let people wear decent clothes of their own choosing, thinly disguised as humour by not only moving, but running around with the goalposts? Wow, the stupidity.

        2. Kubla Cant Silver badge

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          Well said. But I doubt that it will appease the growing community of people whose main goal in life is to be offended.

          1. Wellyboot Silver badge

            Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

            Someone was offended and down voted you :(

            May I be the first to feel offended on your behalf for the downvote you've received :)

          2. Arthur the cat Silver badge

            Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

            But I doubt that it will appease the growing community of people whose main goal in life is to be offended.

            Worse are those who insist on being offended on other people's behalf.

            1. moiety Silver badge

              Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

              Do they offend you? *innocent expression*

              1. Claptrap314 Silver badge

                Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

                As someone who grew up with his family referring to themselves has having Indian blood--yep.

                Not that you would be able to tell by looking unless you are some sort of expert, but I'm 1/8th. Enough to be registered in most tribes. And all of the offendedness in that direction drives me crazy.

                I am SO waiting for someone to correct me when I say I'm 1/8th Indian--except that it's not the sort of thing that comes up in conversation BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATTER--unless some *#$#*$& starts pushing some BS Marxist theory of oppression on me.

                1. jake Silver badge

                  Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

                  You are a so-called "minority". Use it to your advantage.

                  All of my ancestors are Finns, from north of the Arctic Circle ... Even though I'm as white as the driven snow, there is absolutely zero so-called "Caucasian" blood in my system. So naturally, I am classified as a "minority", at least according to the fine folks in the .gov who payed my way through Uni.

                  As usual, I have no answers ... Just muddying the waters a little more :-)

        3. Mark H

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          It's simple. If your email tells men to do one thing and women to do another then chances are it's sexist.

          Not too complicated to understand I think?

          1. boltar Silver badge

            Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

            So if an email told men to have a prostate check up but told women to have a breast scan that would be sexist?

            Newsflash - in the real world, not some virtue signalling fantasy land , men and women ARE different.

            1. tfb Silver badge
              Terminator

              Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

              Did you read the 'chances are' bit? It turns out that meant something. There are, obviously, cases where it's not true: congratulations on finding one, I hope it makes you feel all good about yourself.

        4. Blitterbug
          Unhappy

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          How dare you, sir? I don't drink alcohol and feel shamed, diminished, disenfranchised and otherwise hurt and offended. Bah, humbug.

        5. Clunking Fist Bronze badge

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          "But they don't demand that the rest of us must forever look out for instances where we are not acknowledging they are different."

          Well, apart from them celiacs.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

            The real celiacs aren't the issue. It's the pseudo-celiacs, who will move on to the next fad "bad for humans" product as soon as it becomes a meme on faceb0rk, twatter & etc.

      2. WolfFan Silver badge

        Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

        Well done for being a twat.

        1. James O'Shea

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          I see that there are at least two twats in the Commentariat.

      3. James O'Shea

        Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

        So it's gone so far that simply saying that you don't give a damn is now offensive, has it? Laddie/Lassie/whatever, I don't give a damn. I really don't. If you're 2 metres tall, weigh 150 kilos, and have a beard 30 centimetres long but say that you're a girl, more power to you. I DO NOT CARE. If you look like Dolly Parton only with a bigger bust but say that you're a guy, again I DO NOT CARE. It does not affect me in the least. If you insist on using some thing not him/her to describe yourself I may insist on being addressed as Your Lordship the God Emperor Of Barsoom; should the two-metre bearded lady insist on being called 'her' I will, of course oblige her. I'm not using variants on 'they' for just one person. Even if the one person is bigger than I am, which the two-metre bearded lady would be. I'm definitely not using anything more exotic. If anyone doesn't like it, he/she/whatever can try to avoid letting the door hit his/her/whatever's ass on the way out. If this be dismissive and offensive, well, I did state up front that I'm reactionary.

        Now get off my lawn, whippersnapper.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

        Nobody with any sense thinks gender is binary in the first place, so "non-binary" is a load of cobblers. Used mainly by fat girls who would rather wear a DJ to the school prom than visit Gregg's less.

        1. moiety Silver badge

          Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

          Dinner Jacket or Disk Jockey? Just clarifying a point...

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: bah, humbug, and it's the 60s, not the 70s.

      "having the girls dress like Uhura"

      At least it's not a dominatrix getup with 'hooker boots', black leather motorcycle jacket, and a studded black leather hat... (or 'Zettai Ryouiki magic ratio' socks/skirt with a high school uniform)

    3. Steve Channell
      Joke

      Non binary?

      I find "non binary" offensive. Binary is a number system just like decimal that can represent all values, not appropriate for some humanities graduate trying to sound relevant. Analogue sexuality might be better, but could get confused with people who only watch porn on VHS

  3. TheGriz

    I love how the first part of the meeting agenda, states it's going to be COLD, so dress appropriately, because we can't control the weather, but then goes on to ask that the women in attendance wear a short dress, and high heels.

    If they are anything like my own wife, they will show up dressed in multiple layers, a long wearing sweater, with leggings under that, and two pairs of socks, and calf high boots.

    And let me state, that not all women are 5ft 11 and weigh 110 lbs, and they might feel down right uncomfortable wearing a short dress, especially with high heels. These are coders not super models, let them wear whatever they want, and be done with it.

    Sexist is still sexiest, even if it's coming from a woman dictating that they "step it up".

    All the women attending should form a solidarity group and show up in sweat pants and sweatshirts saying "Coders Unite! Sweats are pretty too!"

    1. Postscript

      I thought the same - "It's going to be Cold and maybe Icy! So please wear your short skirts and impractical shoes! Entertainment for all!"

      1. Lintfordpickle

        Where does it mention anything about ice?

        It literally sets out stating "... it's going to be cold. Please dress accordingly".

        Personally, I'm more disheartened by the fact that somebody deemed the contents of the email newsworthy rather than the actual contents of the email.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        I thought the same - "It's going to be Cold and maybe Icy! So please wear your short skirts and impractical shoes! Entertainment for all!"

        I didn't realise the event was in Newcastle-upon-Tyne!

    2. eldakka Silver badge

      These are coders not super models, let them wear whatever they want, and be done with it.
      According to the article, these are Saleswomen, not coders (though that does not preclude being a coder as well).

      Also, based on these recent stories, it would not surprise me to learn that GitLab's selection process for saleswomen was sexist by only hiring attractive women.

      1. Just Enough Silver badge

        "only hiring attractive women"

        I am offended by your assumption that there is a universal measure of attractiveness. What what you, I, any of GitLab's customers, or their interviewers, might consider attractive differs. It is therefore impossible to make it a basis of a selection process. You are insulting all those alternatively-attractive, because they don't conform to your received norm of attractiveness. Please withdraw this statement immediately.

        You've also managed to insult every existing GitLab saleperson by suggesting that they were hired based on their appearance and not on their sales acumen. Please withdraw this statement immediately.

        Avoiding possibly insulting someone is hard if people are going to pick apart your every word, and decided they're going to be offended on someone else's behalf, isn't it?

        1. Ben Tasker Silver badge

          > Avoiding possibly insulting someone is hard if people are going to pick apart your every word, and decided they're going to be offended on someone else's behalf, isn't it?

          You seem quite put out by the idea that it might not be OK to tell women they should wear short skirts and heels to a work do.

          I'd suggest that the issue isn't that the world's generally gone mad and is getting upset over every little thing, but that you're simply perceiving that to be the case based on very little.

          > decided they're going to be offended on someone else's behalf, isn't it?

          If you actually read the story, you'll note that at least one of the people objecting is in the group that were told to wear short skirts.

          1. Just Enough Silver badge

            And you seemed to have completely missed my point.

            1. Ben Tasker Silver badge

              I didn't miss your point, it's just that it's a strawman.

              No-one is sitting and pulling people's words apart in this story.

              1. Just Enough Silver badge

                Still missing it.

        2. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Trollface

          "I am offended by your assumption that there is a universal measure of attractiveness"

          Sorry, but welcome to the REAL world, in which people are regularly judged by attractive/unattractive _AND_ where "the beautiful people" are generally hired more often and with higher pay scales.

          Otherwise, why ELSE would we dress nice and clean up our appearances (decent haircut, makeup for women, whatever) before a job interview? Come on, you KNOW it is TRUE...

          To the sales staff, you ALSO know this is true, which is why SUCCESSFUL sales people dress as if they're going to a job interview, whenever they present the company products in front of potential customers.

          It just IS, no matter how ANYONE *FEELS* about it. because, HUMAN NATURE.

      2. Mad Dave

        >selection process for saleswomen was sexist by only hiring attractive women.

        Which sex is being discriminated against here?

    3. Tom 38 Silver badge

      Sexist is still sexiest, even if it's coming from a woman dictating that they "step it up".

      This is for a sales team. They all need to step it up, and be at their most attractive, because that's how sales works. The people they will be talking to that evening need to be persuaded that life would be so much better if you were riding their CI pipeline rather than that frumpy old Jenkins'.

      This is how companies get money to pay coders to wear sweatshirts to work and not shave and still be paid good money.

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        "They all need to step it up, and be at their most attractive, because that's how sales works"

        Exactly!

  4. jake Silver badge

    1920 was, like, SO last century ...

    The mind absolutely boggles.

  5. ecofeco Silver badge

    Stay classy Gitlab!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitLab

    Oh, Y Combinator alumni. I think I see the problem.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Stay classy Gitlab!

      Y Combinator - A Ponzi scheme for VC's.

  6. tanuki!

    Sexual harassment

    To be clear, asking women to wear short dresses and heels can be considered a form of sexual harassment.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: Sexual harassment

      Or, you could just NOT SAY ANYTHING except that the woman who DOES wear the short skirts and heels always seems to get the promotion and best pay...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sexual harassment

      Not for nothing, but high heels effectively hobble you while running /attempting to perform any action that requires use of your feet -ie, climbing stairs, climbing a friggin ladder, running from an assailant. I've turned down a waitering job I really needed bc it required them.

      You're already physically weaker, shorter and lighter than (let's face it most are male) most potential assailants, then they insist you either hobble yourself while running, or take your shoes off and risk getting broken beer bottle glass or junkie's needles in your feet? No thanks!

      heels make you roll your hips so you're more sexually attractive to others. That is 100% not what you're at work to do. fuck high heels and fuck anyone who asks women to wear them

  7. rcxb Bronze badge

    "I personally think it's outdated and sexist to require women to wear a short dress and heels"

    Agreed. They should have required the men to wear a short dress and heels...

    It's called equality.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I thought that was just Scotland?

      1. eldakka Silver badge
        Joke

        What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?

        ...

        A black eye.

        1. Spanners Silver badge
          Happy

          " Joke What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?"

          It all depends on what's underneath it...

          When my OTC unit went to the USA, we knew that we would be asked about this. We decided on the statement

          Everything under the kilt is covered - by the Official Secrets Act.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: " Joke What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?"

            When I was fitted for a kilt (at the request of a member of my Wife's family, was a wedding thing), I was informed by the groom that if/when asked I was to reply "Nothing is worn under the kilt. In fact, it's all in perfect working condition."

            Having been born with a bit of an evil streak, I did as advised. The person (who had the gall to ask me such a personal question, mind) was horrified at my answer! On the bright side, the twit hasn't spoken to me since ... and everybody else had a good laugh.

            1. Antron Argaiv Silver badge
              Thumb Up

              Re: " Joke What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?"

              "Nothing but the Pride of Scotland"

              Kilts were worn at my son's wedding rehearsal dinner. Turned out to be an Irish pub, day after St Paddy's. We were afraid the piper (his cousin) would get us thrown out, but the management actually enjoyed it.

            2. mr-slappy

              Re: " Joke What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?"

              Aah, the late, great Spike Milligan. Still very much missed. https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/spike_milligan_141745

          2. JohnFen Silver badge

            Re: " Joke What's the difference between a kilt and a skirt?"

            But times, they are a-changin'!

            While it's still reasonably rare, in my part of the US kilt-wearing has become common enough that it no longer raises any eyebrows.

        2. Huw D Silver badge

          Kilt. A Scottish word that means "What happened to the last person who called it a skirt".

    2. macjules Silver badge

      I believe that in the Tory Party it is known as, "Doing a Stephen Milligan"

    3. nekomoto

      In the 90's I was required to wear a suit and tie, but the engineers who happened to be female could wear just about anything, including jeans and not-quite a t-shirt. So maybe asking skirt & heels is a bit much in these "modern" times, but being told what to wear does go both ways.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Personally, anybody should be able to wear what they like - but lets remember, it's not only woman that get this treatment.. so making it about "patriarchy" is just 100% wrong.

        Until very recently (2016), my current employer required men to wear formal wear, including a suit jacket or blazer, even in summer - woman got away with short sleeved blouses/formal t-shirt and knee-length skirt...

        Thankfully there was some controversy that made the BBC, and it was slightly relaxed - I can now where jeans, but still no shorts - in mid-summer, I'm often tempted to identify as female, just to catch a breeze.

        Even today, men are still not allowed to where shorts.. i've

        1. slimshady76

          See, that's the issue. You're basically describing patriarchy here. And you are a victim of it, as many of us. You are being forced to adopt a certain dress code, dictated by someone who thinks a "proper man" should wear this or that. Excepting the women from said dress code could be based on chauvinism ("women aren't as professional/committed/essential as men, so they can dress less professionally", or "women can have a relaxed dress code because they adorn the workplace, while men should project an image of professionalism").

          1. Draco
            Windows

            >> You're basically describing patriarchy here. And you are a victim of it, as many of us.

            No, any time you compromise yourself in order to "conform" you are not a victim, you are an enabler.

            Whatever "injustice" of the "patriarchy" people mewl about is, most often, a reflection of their own spinelessness and inability to own the consequences of their actions.

            1. slimshady76
              Pint

              Great answer! I stand corrected. I was referring to the OP as a victim in the sense of him ignoring how he was manipulated. But I believe your point makes much more sense.

              Icon because a good lesson deserves a good drink in return!

          2. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Meh

            more like "women can wear what they want so that we avoid being sued"

        2. DreamEater

          Sounds like you work for the Plymouth Brethren...

      2. JohnFen Silver badge

        > but being told what to wear does go both ways.

        In my view the issue isn't that a dress code was specified, it's that "short skirts and high heels" were specified for the women. In other words, they're being told to sex it up. If they'd just said "dress is business casual" or somesuch and left it at that, there would have been exactly zero problem.

        But, really, the deeper problem isn't that short skirts & heels were specified, it's that nobody saw that this was a bad thing to do.

    4. deadlockvictim Silver badge

      rcxb: Agreed. They should have required the men to wear a short dress and heels...

      And get the men to shave their legs too. Men *never* shave their legs and it shows.

      1. MiguelC Silver badge

        I shave them using an axe, as no lumberjack ever said :)

        1. jake Silver badge

          Actually ...

          ... lumberjacks are often quite proud that they maintain their equipment in such a capable state. My axes are usually sharp enough to shave with. Here's a short clip (not of me!) demonstrating a factory edge on a good axe. Here's another, actually shaving (warning! Contains video of a man getting himself all lathered up! Might be NSFW in some jurisdictions!).

      2. phuzz Silver badge
        Trollface

        I don't shave. I wax.

        1. Arthur the cat Silver badge
          Devil

          I don't shave. I wax.

          Real Techies™ extract the lasers from optical disc drives and burn the hair off.

        2. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Devil

          until a week ago I looked like the 'Zig Zag' guy because I mostly work at home and just couldn't find the time to do the haircut thing, but now I've got a nice buzz-cut and super-short beard to match.

          Good for another year! (had to spend a day on site, too, and the hair in my eyes was bothering me, and I'd been saying "I need a haircut" for 2 months)

          But yea if the job required it, I'd do "suit and tie" with bi-weekly buzz cut and clean-shaven face. You do what you have to. Sorta like when you're in the military.... (which I _was_ for 6 years - and prior to that, I had to wear a tie to work, being a store employee for a large drug store chain)

    5. Benson's Cycle

      My old university specifies two forms of academic dress for degree ceremonies, and anyone can wear either. This seems the only logical solution.

      I am reminded of the salewoman from a semiconductor distributor years ago who would turn up in "sensible"clothes "because I happen to have a degree in engineering."

      1. A K Stiles Silver badge
        Coat

        exactly - if the invitation had said something like "Business fancy: shirt and tie with blazer and slacks / suit or cocktail dress and heels" without specifying categories to whom the options applied then maybe there wouldn't have been a reason to register complaints?

        Mine's the one with the comfy flats in the pocket, for later.

  8. GBE

    Is GitLab trying to give me an excuse to stay on GitHub?

    Now that Microsoft owns GitHub, I keep thinking I should do something about moving my (admittedly trivial) projects from GitHub to someplace like GitLab. I really don't need one more excuse for not doing that, but GitLab seems intent on providing one anyway. I suppose there are other options...

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: Is GitLab trying to give me an excuse to stay on GitHub?

      There are other options. The option I took was to self-host.

  9. coral

    Sexism in an All-Remote Company

    Isn't GitLab a fully remote company? So, what they are saying is that the first time they get people together in person in 2020, Diversity and Inclusion goes out the window? Women, no more wearing sweatpants out of view in your Zoom meetings. We need to see legs!

    1. Warm Braw Silver badge

      Re: Sexism in an All-Remote Company

      It seems to be remote in all senses of the word.

      Perhaps it's an inevitable consequence of never talking to real people.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    short but somewhat formal dress and heels

    Last time I searched for that I got oompa loompa porn, I swore never again.

    1. J. Cook Silver badge

      Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

      ...

      ...

      ...

      *brane explodiates* And I thought *I* was strange....

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

        My time on the internet has taught me my brain does not work like others. It's a blessing and a curse in life however it's amazing for problem solving. I'm probably also on some spectrum using an amstrad hifi to copy the games.

    2. Admiral Grace Hopper

      Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

      Every time I get caught out by Rule 34 it's when I'm using a work machine. Still, at least I wasn't the person who searched for Shrewsbury College of Art and Technology using its initials from a work machine. The look on his face (and his manager's when they pulled the logs) was priceless.

      1. Uncle Slacky Silver badge

        Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

        > they pulled the logs

        I see what you did there...

      2. imanidiot Silver badge

        Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

        Why in the world would you have safe search disabled on a work machine?

        1. Benson's Cycle

          Re: short but somewhat formal dress and heels

          Ask my GP. He lost count of the times he had to complain on Monday because some numpty over the weekend whose normal job was with schools, decided that "safe search" and blocking needed to be turned on for GP practices.

  11. Androgynous Cow Herd

    GitLab insists transparency is one of its six core values

    Particularly when it comes to ladies blouses...

    1. LDS Silver badge
      Devil

      'its six core values'

      Maybe it was just a typo: 'its sex core values'.... so transparency as in underwear, they mean...

  12. PhilipN Silver badge

    Women are more sexist than men

    What a load of blah. Course it is wrong for a company to propose more alluring outfits but the good ladies are quite adept at disporting their charms voluntarily. It only takes one of them to kick off the competition. Go on, girls - admit it.

    What if the company had asked "them" to dress demurely? That is precisely what the other half of humanity has been fighting against for centuries.

    Scratch my eyes out, ladies, but if the company had only hinted that they might be on display and the target of cameras ......

    ....... and, as an aside, what precisely is wrong with that?

    1. Nick Gisburne

      Re: Women are more sexist than men

      I think the point is that both of the following are sexist:

      "Wear a short skirt to show your legs"

      "Wear a long skirt to cover your legs"

      It is the act of telling a woman what to show and what not to show which is the issue. "Dress smartly" is what they should have said. That would be open to interpretation, but at least it would not be telling women how much of their bodies they should be showing.

      1. PhilipN Silver badge

        Re: Women are more sexist than men

        I know. That’s why I said it was wrong.

      2. Bullseyed

        Re: Women are more sexist than men

        Actual sexism:

        "It is the act of telling a woman what to show and what not to show which is the issue."

        If men can be told to wear pants instead of shorts, women can be told to cover their legs, you bigot..

        1. Benson's Cycle

          Re: Women are more sexist than men

          The point is who, traditionally, made the rules. And that the rulemakers made rules to make men look powerful and women sexually available.

        2. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: Women are more sexist than men

          >If men can be told to wear pants instead of shorts

          'Pants' has different meanings depending on which side of the pond you're on...

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Women are more sexist than men

            And somewhat strangely, in some parts of Leftpondia "shorts" means the same thing as "pants" in Rightpondia.

            Separated by a common language indeed. Thanks, Sam.

            1. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

              Re: Women are more sexist than men

              Also in the top-right pondia, pants are your kex.*

              *trousers

      3. Postscript

        Re: Women are more sexist than men

        "Any time you tell a woman what to wear, you are wrong"

        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Pint

          Re: Women are more sexist than men

          Beer, Sir!

      4. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Trollface

        Re: Women are more sexist than men

        At least it wasn't "wear a short skirt and tall boots to cover MOST of your legs, except for the part that naturally draws male gaze away from your face". And speak in a softer, higher pitched voice.

        "Sex Sells"

        (heh heh heh)

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I guess J-lo and Shakira aren't welcome at the event any more

  14. Winkypop Silver badge
    Joke

    "Slack channel"

    They need a "Short dress channel", clearly!

  15. vaporland

    "I personally think it's outdated and sexist to require women to wear a short dress and heels and it doesn't recognize non-binary individuals."

    I disagree. If it bothered them, they would be justified in saying "I don't feel comfortable doing that" - whether male, female or non-binary.

    Nerds like looking at sexy women - who knew? So do most red-blooded men. Everyone else can look away.

    PC used to mean an IBM 5150. Not anymore.

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge
      Trollface

      PC used to mean an IBM 5150. Not anymore.
      Indeed, now it means "Waah the world's constantly changing and I can't keep up". But at least you've got a label for it now, and can even "virtue signal" your heart out about it!

      1. sabroni Silver badge

        re: and can even "virtue signal" your heart out about it!

        Virtue signalling? Like: PC used to mean an IBM 5150. Not anymore.

        Is that the kind of statement what you're talking about or is it only virtue signalling when it's something you don't agree with?

        1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

          Re: re: and can even "virtue signal" your heart out about it!

          Using the term "virtue signalling" unironically is usually a pretty good example of virtue signalling in itself. It's also pretty much meaningless and says a lot about the person using it.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: re: and can even "virtue signal" your heart out about it!

            Folks who use the term "virtue signalling" in earnest are almost always bozo filter fodder. It's actually a handy filter, when you think about it :-)

    2. Ben Tasker Silver badge

      I disagree. If it bothered them, they would be justified in saying "I don't feel comfortable doing that" - whether male, female or non-binary.

      They would indeed be justified. But some (a lot) of people don't enjoy being put in the position of having to say that to their employer (who, after all, they rely on financially).

      The whole point is that you shouldn't be put in that position in the first place.

      Your position is like claiming it's fine to say "'ere love, fancy a fuck?" to every woman you meet because she's allowed to say "no". That's really not how this works

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        As an aside, a magazine some years ago asked a large sample of female readers about their attitudes towards various chat up lines etc by men, 6 to 10% said "fancy a fuck" got to the point quickly, cut out all the chit chat and if the guy in question was vaguely attractive then why not?

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          "As an aside, a magazine some years ago asked a large sample of female readers about their attitudes towards various chat up lines etc by men, 6 to 10% said "fancy a fuck" got to the point quickly, cut out all the chit chat and if the guy in question was vaguely attractive then why not?"

          That still leave you with a 90-94% chance of getting kicked in the balls if you try it. Personally I don't fancy those odds!

          1. moiety Silver badge

            Cricket box and ask 15 people before you're thrown out of the establishment. Theoretically that should put you on a near 100% score rate over time.

    3. John Robson Silver badge

      "PC used to mean an IBM 5150. Not anymore."

      Used to be able to tell someone's age (to the decade or so) by their response to "What does PC mean".

      Various combinations of:

      Public Convenience, Police Constable, Personal Computer, Politically Correct... Im sure there are others

      1. Arthur the cat Silver badge

        … Plaid Cymru, Privy Counsellor, Police Commissioner, Propositional Calculus, Principle Component …

      2. jake Silver badge

        Pub Crawl.

    4. hmv Silver badge

      "PC used to mean an IBM 5150. Not anymore."

      And you didn't even get that right. Before the IBM PC, the initials "PC" meant "personal computer" and referred to a computer used (and often owned) by an individual.

    5. Trixr

      1. I think you missed the word *require* in that statement, which is borne out in the original "request".

      2. The request also specifies "men" and "women", and some people don't feel they're either.

      (TBF, if I was NB, I'd be fine with that and just rock up in whatever. "Sorry, boss, the memo just specified boys and girls".)

      3. If you're a woman, apparently you have to wear a skirt. A short one. I don't even OWN a skirt and haven't for, oh, 40 years.

      Re your statements specifically:

      4. Women are nerds too, but apparently not in your taxonomy. I'm not sure what us nerds who aren't red-blooded men actually are, please explain. (Actually, please don't.)

      5. Also, are gay men "red-blooded men"? I'm sure pretty much all of them are, actually. Or perhaps they all have anemia from looking at insufficient numbers of sexy women. Perhaps someone should reveal this scientific insight to the world.

      7. I don't look at my colleagues as sexy anythings (unless we are actually in a relationship outside of work), but maybe "sexy women" don't count as colleagues?

      8. I'm sure I won't qualify as a "sexy" woman on your scale, but if I did for any of my colleagues, if they didn't leave off the staring very frigging fast, well, they wouldn't be feeling very red-blooded "male" either for a while after that. Since, you know, I'd be there for the event, not someone's leering eye candy. (Since we've already determined women aren't nerds, I wouldn't be worried about any leering from them.)

      9. Finally, I like looking at sexy women too. (Not at work events.) So am I a "red-blooded male" after all and allowed to wear trousers?

      1. Kiwi Silver badge
        Pint

        5. Also, are gay men "red-blooded men"? I'm sure pretty much all of them are, actually. Or perhaps they all have anemia from looking at insufficient numbers of sexy women. Perhaps someone should reveal this scientific insight to the world.

        El Reg should start a subscription model, only as your 'credit' grows you get some extra buttons, like 10 "credits" gets you a "+10 upvotes".

        I'd find your post quite expensive but worth it.

        FTR.. When running wiring for a couple of new "nerdy gadgets" (as a mate calls them) for my bike yesterday, I managed to cut myself. Pretty sure the blood was red, but I guess it may not have been blood after all...

  16. Blackjack

    Well... is called Gitlab

    What do you expect from a lab full of g i t s?

    The name turned to be quite appropriate, sadly enough.

    1. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: Well... is called Gitlab

      probably named because of the Linux-inspired source control system 'git' which (I bet) was named becauswe you want to "go and 'git' the latest source code from the repo". yeah it's a US'ian thing.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Well... is called Gitlab

        I think if you look you'll discover that the git in question was the bloke who revoked free use of Bitkeeper, forcing Linus to build a new distributed revision control system that could handle the needs of the fine folks maintaining the kernel. From scratch. In a hurry. git was self-hosting in 4 days, and went "live" handling the kernel in about two months.

        Note that later Linus claimed that he was the git in question ("I name all my projects after myself."), but the folks who were in the trenches at the time know better.

  17. SonofRojBlake

    "I think it's fine to say cocktail casual"

    So... specifying that women are to wear a short dress and heels IS fine, as long as you don't state it clearly and distinctly but instead use some euphemistic formulation that people not in the know might misunderstand and misinterpret?

    Make your f**kin mind up love.

    1. sabroni Silver badge

      re: Make your f**kin mind up love

      Firstly, are you new here love? You can type "fuck", no one's going to be frightened (or impressed).

      "Cocktail casual" is non-gender specific and means evening wear. That doesn't mean short or sexy, it just means smart and stylish and is gender neutral. That's why it was suggested as an alternative to saying "short skirts".

      Try and keep up sugar!

      1. baud Bronze badge
        Thumb Down

        Re: re: Make your f**kin mind up love

        > joined 24 Oct 2008

        Damn, that's a slow leaner

      2. Bullseyed

        Re: re: Make your f**kin mind up love

        Top google result:

        https://www.thetrendspotter.net/cocktail-attire-for-women/

        Cocktail attire is a standard dress code for parties and evening functions. For women, cocktail attire typically calls for a dress that finishes at or above the knees and high heels. Although cocktail looks should always appear sophisticated, they can also be fun and embrace exciting colours, embellishments, cuts, and unique accessories.

        The company gave an accurate definition of a word.

    2. Kubla Cant Silver badge

      Cocktail casual

      Presumably whatever you wear to drink cocktails in. For people getting rat-arsed on the sofa in front of the TV, I'd guess that means just about anything (or nothing).

    3. Roj Blake Silver badge

      You're no son of mine, SonofRojBlake

  18. Draco
    WTF?

    Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

    Why are so many in the comments "indignant" about women being told what to wear, but nary a peep about men being told what to wear?

    1. LDS Silver badge

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      Because it is not to expose their bodies and sexuality, and use it for marketing/commercial advantage?

      1. Draco
        Windows

        Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

        Ah, so there would have been no outrage were women instructed to wear modest clothing - i.e. no exposed shoulders, clavicles, forearms, and ankles?

        I think it is more a Pavlovian response with people getting whipped up into a frenzy at the mere hint of a suggestion that a women should comport herself in some manner, but remain silent when it comes to men being told how to be.

        1. LDS Silver badge

          Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

          The problem is you not tell people what to wear - you tell people the type of the event (i.e. formal, casual, etc.) and then let people choose what to wear.

          Morons - of any sex - will choose the wrong attire, and show what they are. There are many ways to look vulgar, and a few ones to look elegant.

          But in no way you force someone to look like sexual prizes for someone else.

          And frankly, I wold like to see some man forced to wear like Tarzan when they look far more like Cheeta.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

            @LDS

            "The problem is you not tell people what to wear - you tell people the type of the event (i.e. formal, casual, etc.) and then let people choose what to wear."

            That is one of the nightmares I hate. If I get invited to something that isnt every day wear then I wanna know what is expected (general labels dont help). I dont like those various types of clothes (I like comfortable) so I wanna know the kinds of clothes expected.

            If its taken as guidelines I dont see whats wrong with the overall message. If the intent is to dictate the exact clothing or your fired then within reasonable (still appropriate) it is sexist.

            *I am a bloke

            1. Glen 1 Silver badge

              Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

              I think they call it dress code so they can pretend it isn't uniform.

            2. LDS Silver badge

              "then I wanna know what is expected (general labels dont help)"

              Evidently, because you're not used to those labels, and those events.

              There are precise labels that define what you are expected to wear, without telling you exactly what to wear, leaving some kind of freedom to suit your style, culture, religion, etc. etc.

              I understand that many people lost this kind of knowledge as most people started to wear like a tramp, while expecting all woman to look like sex toys.

              So, in doubt, ask. But rarely you would be asked to wear a very specific style like is asked to women in too many occasion. There are a lot of very uncomfortable clothes and shoes a man too could be asked to wear - but no one is explicitly asked to.

              Note: your preferred sport or music start is not usually an example to follow. You can go to a good shop and ask for help, anyway.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "then I wanna know what is expected (general labels dont help)"

                RN officer training around 2010 had long dress code advice, including several strictly forbidden items, which you knew someone had appeared in or worn including "swimsuits with fashionable cut out sections", "hotpants", "cartoon character ties have extremely limited usage potential" "no transparent tops"and quite a few others...

                Also included "females should should ensure they include formal trousers in their non uniform wardrobe as skirts are not appropriate aboard ship" (and that was for good reason - wind, ladders, mobility etc)

                I don't know how they handle non binary, simplest solution would probably be to permit both genders to wear skirts when allowed. Heck they've updated the fitness test to cover both genders to the same standard.

                Even then they had a very simple rule "no one touches anyone" covers all bases, however I did hear a dit that a married XO on one ship was having an affair with a female able rating, seemingly known throughout the ship (news travels very very fast), playing with fire as if someone had filed a complaint his ass would be grass over it...scandalous stuff....

          2. Draco
            Windows

            Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

            I agree that it would have been far better to state the nature of the event and allow people to choose, for themselves, what to wear.

          3. Bullseyed

            Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

            > The problem is you not tell people what to wear - you tell people the type of the event (i.e. formal, casual, etc.) and then let people choose what to wear.

            The clothing descriptions provided were the literal textbook definitions of cocktail attire.

            1. Benson's Cycle

              Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

              There are no "literal textbook descriptions". It is custom and practice and varies by country. Fashion textbooks are written well after the event.

              (if you can find it read Dorothy Parker's hilarious review of Emily Post's Book of Etiquette.)

              1. jake Silver badge

                Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

                (Better yet, look up Emily Postnews.)

            2. LDS Silver badge

              Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

              No, sorry, you think cocktail dress means short ones for women, and you're utterly wrong.

              "Cocktail" means a semi-formal event, where you are expected to be elegant, but still wearing more comfortable clothes than formal ones. Women can wear long dresses as well - which could also be the choice of less young ones, or in more elegant "cocktails".

        2. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

          "people getting whipped up into a frenzy"

          Yeah, THERE's the problem.

          ("Feelers" doing all that "feeling" and being manipulated into a frenzy - who'd a thunk it?)

      2. Bullseyed

        Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

        You (false) claim is that women don't find men in suits sexy.

      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

        ask women which they prefer, men in suits, or men in "grubby casuals"...

        It _does_ work both ways. But men usually don't get offended by it.

        I once bought a funny 'porn for women' picture book for my sister, featuring men in tuxedos doing housework [as a joke of course]. the concept was BRILLIANT!

    2. Jemma Silver badge

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      The one I love is the women who whine wail and scream like professional mourners because they're getting paid 60% of the men (I entirely support equal pay)... Oh woe is us because we can't negotiate at interviews. It's not fucking rocket science - note down the maximum salary and insist on it..

      Then when the men take a pay *cut* toddle off under their feminazi rocks smirking like Ted Heath at a boys boarding school ... While the men are laughing themselves to death.

      That is NOT equality you mindless idiots. Equality is having your pay *raised to the same level* as the person with the higher pay you sub average cretin - THE WHOLE POINT OF 40 YEARS of whining, causing climate change from all the burning bras, and dungarees was not for THEM to be in equality with you. It was for YOU to be in equality with them. Quite honestly you're an embarrassment to female kind. This isn't equality - it's best described as idiot-signalling. What did you do in the great equality war mummy? Oh, I let them get away with a pointless valueless gesture *and* saved them forever from paying out what they owed. Congrat-u-fucking-lations. Not only did you make yourselves a laughing stock, but you *saved* the companies that short changed you BILLIONS. You make Gwyneth Paltrow look useful and sane.

      It's like someone cloned a couple of hundred million female Frank Spensers handed them a leaflet and told them "go forth and irritate".

      The only slight good point in all this is the fact that hopefully they were too stoned on bra fumes to breed (probably made with asbestos somehow - everything else was (including brewery beer filters would you believe, I kid you not)) - else the general IQ would have plunged even further..

      1. baud Bronze badge

        Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

        Bob, is that you?

      2. Benson's Cycle

        Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

        While some of what you write is true, the revelations about the BBC have shown that the remuneration system is geared to allowing people from the right background at various organisations to pay other people from the right backgrounds far more than they are worth. When a newsreader is somehow worth more than a Prime Minister (present one excepted), a general officer, a medical consultant or a Chief Constable, we have the right to ask why since we are paying for it. When you read about growing inequality with vast pay increases at one end while food bank use is increasing at the other (and many of the people using them are in work), you should be angry at what is effectively institutionalised theft.

        Women should be paid the same as men for doing the same job. Pay scales should reflect the real investment in training and education needed to get there, and the responsibility once there. But asking for equality with inflated salaries organised by the Old Boys Network is not progress.

    3. A K Stiles Silver badge

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      You mean like the annual round of various schools not allowing the boys to wear shorts etc on particularly hot days, so they end up coming to school in skirts and blouses, to make the point about equality quite clearly?

    4. katrinab Silver badge
      Flame

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      The men are not being told to wear shoes that are basically impossible to walk around in.

    5. Munchausen's proxy
      Pint

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      "Why are so many in the comments "indignant" about women being told what to wear, but nary a peep about men being told what to wear?"

      Because men are such stupid sheep they think being told to dress in stupid clothes (and neck accessories) is actually a compliment on their abilities to select stupid clothes.

    6. Venerable and Fragrant Wind of Change
      Thumb Up

      Re: Why isn't any one offended men were required to wear a blazer and slacks or suit?

      Simple answer - a man making the equivalent complaint would just be laughed at and ignored (see my story elsewhere on this page). And never taken seriously thereafter. I'd just treat that dress code as an excuse to stay away from the event.

      A woman can complain and get taken seriously (as this story demonstrates). This is a Good Thing, and will no doubt eventually extend to men. It's just a shame it didn't all happen long ago.

  19. Neil Barnes Silver badge

    GitLab insists transparency is one of its six core values.

    All clothes must be transparent.

    As must walls, doors, windows etc. Bank account details and passwords, browser history and favourites also.

  20. OGShakes

    Dress to Impress

    I worked for a company that would put 'dress to impress' as the requirements for the big company party. This always struck me as the right wording when you wanted people to look their best without specifying anything limited by gender or body shape, but still made it clear you should wear clothes...

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Dress to Impress

      How dare you imply that myself or my wife need to wear clothing because we aren't impressive without it!

    2. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

      Re: Dress to Impress

      I'm autistic, so "dress to impress" means less than fuck all to me. Who am I supposed to be impressing? Why am I impressing them? What is the goal of impressing these putative people? Which definition of "impress" is relevant?

      On a different but related point, why does what you wear matter? Seriously, it is a cypher I cannot decrypt - the wrapper doesn't define the person, and "dress to impress" seems to be telling me that lying is okay - why should I be comfortable about that?

      1. Benson's Cycle

        Re: Dress to Impress

        So, get someone to write down the rules and follow them; don't worry about why.

        That's what most of us who are not fashion writers or sociologists do.

        1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

          Re: Dress to Impress

          That's really my point - be specific and avoid confusion. Alternatively, if it is a work do with someone's idea of what should be worn, provide the clothes - perhaps they can have a special name to describe the commonality, or uniformity, of the appearance (which is what happens with a dress code anyway).

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Quit wearing heels

    I have worked at a number of semiconductor manufacturers that are trying to get women to quit wearing heels because they are more likely to twist an ankle which is a recordable incident.

    1. Ben Tasker Silver badge

      Re: Quit wearing heels

      I remember sitting in on a conversation between the bloke tasked with overseeing H+S and a woman in the office.

      He took the position that she needed to be issued some safety boots in order for her to go out onto the shop floor, what with it being full of (heavy) aviation stores and the like.

      She took the position that she didn't like the boots and wanted to continue wearing her open-toed sandals, and that changing in and out of the boots for her trips onto the shop floor was too much hassle.

      It was eventually "resolved" with an agreement that he'd issue the boots, and a letter explaining how important they were, and that she'd do what she felt was best and accept that the employer was going to try and deny all liability if she ended up toeless.

      She did occasionally complain of having hurt her feet too - almost always through dropping something like a bolt - easily handled by safety boots.

      To this day, I've never been able to work out what the hell was going on in her head.

      1. imanidiot Silver badge

        Re: Quit wearing heels

        I've witnessed a similar argument. However in our company the rather blunt and gruff shop foreman "don't take shit from no-one" so to speak. He quite clearly (and loudly) told the lady that if she wanted to step foot in HIS shop she would follow the damn rules and wear safety shoes. (Allegedly he at one point physically picked her up and dropped her outside the yellow lines when caught improperly heeled.)

        Nowadays if a women insists they must wear something "stylish" there aresome less than perfect options

        Those don't seem to meet S3 standards though.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Quit wearing heels

          The Wife & I are wearing matching footwear today. Ain't they purdy?

          1. Aussie Doc
            Paris Hilton

            Re: Quit wearing heels

            Same here.

            Although I'll never get used to these damn heels.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Quit wearing heels

        It amuses me that I have two daughters who occasionally have to wear uniforms. One involves a horsehair wig. The other involves a white hat, hi-vis jacket and steel capped boots worn with clothes that make it clear that someone else is digging the holes. Both are authority symbols.

        Wearing "men's" clothes in jobs which used to be men-only is a sign of status. But for office workers who have to go on shop floors, it might be seen as identifying with "them" rather than "us".

        Status signalling is complex.

  22. James 47

    "The Register has asked... whether Schulze was the author of the email"

    Why? Is the woke patrol about to be unleashed on her?

    1. Anomalous Custard

      Probably more to do with this comment just below the bit you quoted:

      "A source familiar with the San Francisco business tells The Register it is common practice for male executives to have female subordinates take responsibility when things go wrong or deliver unwelcome messages."

  23. Christoph Silver badge

    When they demanded that women wear heels, did they make a legally binding commitment to cover all medical expenses for injury to their legs and feet from wearing those ridiculously impractical things? Including injuries from tripping or losing their balance, and also long-term damage from holding the feet in an unnatural position?

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    expense claim ?

    This is evidently a requirement from the Company and not covered by my work-day wardrobe. Of course the more seriously one takes the duty of representing the organisation to the public, the more expensive the boutique one will be forced to visit.

  25. Venerable and Fragrant Wind of Change
    Thumb Up

    Not at all the same ...

    I don't much care for women dressing in silly heels, and the only time it should be required of them is for an actress whose role demands it.

    But a one-off glitzy "awards ceremony" (sounds ghastly for those of either sex who are not career arse-lickers) is not at all the same as requiring a dress code every bloomin' day at the office. Speaking as a downtrodden grunt, I know which of those battles I would pick!

    I didn't exactly pick it myself, but I had it thrust on me when I wore shorts to the office. This was just the one half-day's work, having gone directly to the office after spending the morning travelling (booked to annual leave). No meetings, just sitting in my regular office. I pointed out that many of my female colleagues routinely wore shorts (shorter than mine) and that it was direct discrimination to forbid it to me, but PHB was having none of it: they could wear shorts because they ... ahem ... had nice legs!

    I'd like to give her a thumbs-up for calling out idiocy. But I wish we chaps had the same kind of right as she exercised there when we're expected to put on a dumb show!

  26. SVV Silver badge

    it cannot discuss personnel matters out of concern for employee privacy

    Privacy of individual employees and company-wide policy are two entirely different things. If you're too embarassed to defend a company policy in public, then that's a good sign that there's something wrong with it.

    "Smart dress" would have been enough of a dress code. The idea that short skirt and heels should be worn because it will turn male customers into drooling cavemen who'll then buy anything is very outdated in my opinion, and I find it a bit cringeworthy. Detailed knowledge of what you're selling is much more important for technology.

    1. holmegm Bronze badge

      Re: it cannot discuss personnel matters out of concern for employee privacy

      "The idea that short skirt and heels should be worn because it will turn male customers into drooling cavemen who'll then buy anything is very outdated in my opinion, and I find it a bit cringeworthy. Detailed knowledge of what you're selling is much more important for technology."

      Riiight ... that's why booth babes don't exist.

    2. jake Silver badge

      Re: it cannot discuss personnel matters out of concern for employee privacy

      "The idea that short skirt and heels should be worn because it will turn male customers into drooling cavemen who'll then buy anything is very outdated in my opinion"

      You've obviously never been to CES and it's ilk.

      "I find it a bit cringeworthy."

      I do too. Doesn't mean it ain't reality, though.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cocktail Casual

    Google tells me "cocktail" is American for lounge suit (i.e. standard business attire).

    Other than what this email says, I have no idea what "cocktail casual" is supposed to mean, because it's apparently more formal than "business casual".

    1. Bullseyed

      Re: Cocktail Casual

      Cocktail attire for women is specifically:

      Cocktail attire is a standard dress code for parties and evening functions. For women, cocktail attire typically calls for a dress that finishes at or above the knees and high heels. Although cocktail looks should always appear sophisticated, they can also be fun and embrace exciting colours, embellishments, cuts, and unique accessories.

      https://www.thetrendspotter.net/cocktail-attire-for-women/

      1. LDS Silver badge

        Re: Cocktail Casual

        Sure, tell it to a woman in his seventies like my mother - or do you mean older people should not attend cocktails events Anyway, even the site you cite (is it an authority? Or maybe not) shows far longer dresses.

        You'd need to talk to more women, you may discover not all of them are like those you see on TV or on the Internet....

  28. Kubla Cant Silver badge

    Short skirts

    I wonder if there's a semantic issue here. It's possible that "short skirts" might have been a maladroit way to say "not ball gowns and not trousers", but it ends up sounding like an injunction to show lotsa leg. While the decision to tell the women what to wear is inexcusable, the resulting furore has been worse because of the implied request for a sex-show.

    1. Bullseyed

      Re: Short skirts

      Cocktail attire for women is specifically dresses that end above the knee. Also not supposed to be miniskirts, but many go that route.

      1. Benson's Cycle

        Re: Short skirts

        You need to look up the dictionary definition of "prescriptive" and "descriptive."

        Also, perhaps you need to move in sufficiently sophisticated circles to discover that women can have trouser suits too.

      2. Kubla Cant Silver badge

        Re: Short skirts

        Cocktail attire for women is specifically dresses that end above the knee

        WTF? Is Poe's Law applicable here?

    2. LDS Silver badge

      Re: Short skirts

      And why a women should not wear trousers if she feels that's what she wants to wear? There are not only jeans full of holes, to wear.

  29. JDX Gold badge

    I'd be glad they told me the dress code

    As a developer I own one suit that I bought for my wedding. I haven't worn "black tie" since university and I definitely don't have a clue what cocktail casual is.

    Is the issue they dared to suggest women should traditionally wear a dress, or that it should be a short dress? I see no outcry the men have to wear a blazer... which is equally outmoded.

    1. LDS Silver badge

      Re: I'd be glad they told me the dress code

      What a boring life....

    2. jake Silver badge

      Re: I'd be glad they told me the dress code

      I tend to pay no attention to dress codes. They make zero sense for the most part.

      The last 9-5 I interviewed for (in 1989), I was wearing my racing leathers. When the interviewer queried my choice of "uniform", I pointed out that he had asked me to drive up from Palo Alto to South San Francisco by 10AM ... and had called at 9AM. I knew I could make it on the bike, but there was no way I was driving the Bayshore without armor ... I got the job.

      The 9-5 prior to that, I wore the same outfit, for similar reasons. When queried, I responded along the lines of "are you hiring an engineer or a fashion plate?" ... They made me an offer. I counter offered, they hired me at my price point ...

      1. Roland6 Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: I'd be glad they told me the dress code

        >I tend to pay no attention to dress codes.

        However, your examples show that you have the confidence and strength of character to carry it off.

  30. Bullseyed

    Posting definitions of words like cocktail casual is now sexist?

    1. LDS Silver badge

      No, it's just you don't know what you're talking about.

    2. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

      I don't think it is a definition, but a description. The source you have cited doesn't seem to be any sort of authority (if such a thing could be said to exist in this area).

    3. jake Silver badge

      Not sexist, stupid.

      So-called "cocktail casual" is whatever the twats that drink cocktails decide is fashionable this year. Those of us in the RealWorld point and laugh at idiots who spend over half their income chasing a clothing fad that never stops moving.

      Neither my wife nor I pay any attention to such stupidity when invited to attend functions[0]. Somehow, we have never been asked to leave due to our incorrect attire ... but occasionally we do manage to stick out. Which invariably pisses off the idiot who set the supposed dress code. I wonder why?

      [0] Exceptions: weddings and funerals. The first is about the bride[1], not the guests. The second is honoring the deceased.

      [1] If you want to call me sexist for that comment, I'll cop to it ... HOWEVER, in our Western society I have never attended a wedding where the Bride(s) was/were NOT the most important person(s) in the room.

  31. codemonkey
    FAIL

    Suffice to say, if you concern yourself about what other folks are wearing ( in a non H&S setting ), then you're a dinosaur. Move over, Mx Conservative.

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's a dress code, get over it... In the modern world people are so easily offended they even get offended on other peoples behalf.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Spoken like...

      ...a really good clone. Or maybe it's just privilege. Unsure. Either way...

      You're paying close attention and acting for the conservatives: well done.

  33. NanoMeter

    If you by transparency means...

    the women should wear transparent blouses, I'm OK with that, but they should of course wear what they think it's best.

  34. John Savard Silver badge

    Surely you mean

    the 1960s. It was during the 1970s that we started to discover the existence of sexism, and to address this issue. Just look at the second season of "All in the Family", an American television series inspired by your "Till Death Do Us Part", but made milder for American tastes.

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Asymmetry

    I am genuinely stunned at the number of people here who think that "but the men have to wear pants/trousers!" is a sensible response.

    Do they really think that the situations are symmetric? That being told to wear pants is equivalent to being told to wear a short skirt and heels? Or more importantly that the power relationship is symmetric - that a company notorious for forcing out women from positions of leadership needs to be better about how it tells women to dress?

    I'm sure the MRA idiots will be along to upbraid for me my "Political Correctness" any moment. For the record whenever I hear somebody use that phrase, I mentally edit it to "Waaahhh! I can't be as carelessly sexist, racist, and bigoted out loud as I was in the old days. People need to be less sensitive about my rudeness!"

  36. Slx

    The industries you'd think should be the most progressive often are the worst!

    It's remarkable how there's endless issues with sexism in tech, when you'd think that it'd be one are that's all shiny and brand new and was initially full of women working in very high end of development, at least until it took a nose dive in the 1970s.

    Then take a look at something like creative / broadcast media / film etc which seems to be full of old-school abusive labour practices - back-to-back unpaid internships, bad wages, abusive bosses being accepted.

    Academia also seems to have huge issues with sexism, pay equality, hierarchies, failure to pay people living wages, abuse of junior academic / PhD researchers etc. Something you'd never expect, as you'd think it's the ultimate in highbrow and self-aware employers, but nope!

    You'd probably find more diversity and a better atmosphere in a stuffy old bank these days than in some of these trendy companies which is an awful reflection on the whole culture within.

  37. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How about this:

    Simplest solution : Wear heels, fall over, injure your ankle and say they instructed you to wear them and sue for millions.

    Seems like an incredibly stupid thing to instruct employees to wear.

  38. Gnoitall
    Trollface

    "Core Values"

    Never forget, the core is the part you throw away after consuming all the good stuff.

    Checks out.

  39. gitleavers

    We've not heard back from GitLab

    “We've not heard back from GitLab“

    GitLab should have their Chief People Officer issue a statement.

    Doh! She left because of GitLab’s “discriminatory practices”. What a blunder!

  40. Do Not Fold Spindle Mutilate

    British Columbia (Canada) high heels cannot legally be required.

    Was the meeting to be in Vancouver, BC, Canada or Vancouver, Washington State USA? The BC Workers Compensation Act prohibits the mandatory wearing of high heels. https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2017PREM0047-001151

    I also thought the employer could not force women to wear a dress. The women are allowed to wear pants. This was a ruling because a restaurant required the women servers to wear high heels and a black dress. (I have not heard of any discrimination law suits about guys being fired for wearing a dress.)

  41. earl grey Silver badge
    Angel

    PC

    Pissed Cthulhu

    to borrow a phrase

    “In his house at R’lyeh dead Cthulhu waits dreaming. for this to end.”

  42. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    Yeehah

    Came to the comments in the hope of seeing people being triggered by each other being triggered. Was not disappointed.

  43. IGnatius T Foobar !

    It's considered harassment to say it.

    It is well documented that attractiveness lands more sales, all other variables being equal. But it doesn't change the fact that making such a demand is widely considered inappropriate.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020