ganns@hound.UUCP (R.GANNS) (10/29/85)
Hey, I've got it! Since the corporate culture is loath to
dispense with its inane uniforms, why not just alter the standard
a bit and require BOTH women AND men to wear:
1. neckties
2. high-heeled shoes
3. vests and suit coats
4. skirts
5. boxer shorts over pantyhose
Like, talk about uni-sex! ...and it would end any acrimonious
debate about who has to put up with the more uncomfortable,
unhealthy, and ridiculous uniform!
Rich hound!gannsfsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (11/02/85)
In article <1446@hound.UUCP> ganns@hound.UUCP (R.GANNS) writes: > > Hey, I've got it! Since the corporate culture is loath to > dispense with its inane uniforms, why not just alter the standard > a bit and require BOTH women AND men to wear: > 1. neckties > 2. high-heeled shoes > 3. vests and suit coats > 4. skirts > 5. boxer shorts over pantyhose > Like, talk about uni-sex! ...and it would end any acrimonious > debate about who has to put up with the more uncomfortable, > unhealthy, and ridiculous uniform! When I was in Jr. High School, the dress code required girls to wear either dresses or skirts. Slacks and shorts were not tolerated. I often wondered why the administration thought it so necessary that the girls occasionally show their underpants (the natural result of dressing in such a manner). Mind you, I certainly was not complaining. However, I DID notice the inconsistancy of the administration's position. In most other decisions they seemed quite puritanical. Frank Silbermann