Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I need to ask you good people if you feel I am being overly intolerant or judegemental about a situation at work.
I have a co-worker. A female. A lesbian. A proud, self-proclaimed lesbian who makes no qualms, indeed, even flaunts who she is and what her sexual proclivities are. First: she goes by a man's name: Mickey.
She looks and dresses like a man; has hair styled like a man: short, parted on the side. Her girlfriend--who looks equally butch comes by often at closing time and hangs around for 15-20 minutes waiting for Mickey to get off.
So..yeah, yeah, to each their own and live and let live and all that. But here is my question:
Now, Let us for a moment switch the tables. My name is Tim. So..let's say I am a very, very effeminate gay guy. Let's say I dress like a woman; wear make-up and wear my hair in an effeminate style. I go by the name "Tina." I have my equally femme and obviously-gay boyfriend come by work once in awhile. Would this be tolerated in most workplaces, do think? Would I have ever even gotten the job? (I work in a public-contact environment.)
So, if you think the "Tina" thing would not fly, then is it sort of unfair that a "Mickey" is allowed? Is thisnot discriminatory? Unfair? Or should both types be allowed? Again, in a job where the general public is served all day long?
I am of the opinion that Tina would certainly not be allowed at my workplace. He just would not get hired in the first place. Also, I believe this "Mickey but not Tina" dynamic is fairly commonplace. And my opinion is that this is unfair to the male gays.
What say you? And is you agree with the "Mickey but not Tina" thing is goin' on, why do you think it is tolerated more?
Thank you for your thoughtful opinions.
It might not be the norm in "Priskit" AZ, but neither scenario would even raise an eyebrow in coastal CA.
Adam & Eve, NOT Adam & Steve...
(there goes my rep points! but it's what I believe.)
Ready for the hate mail....
All righty then. If one is going to quote fairy tales to base their beliefs on, one might look for an author who is relevant to our lives today, perhaps say Dr. Seuss?
What, btw, does the bible and this drivel have to do with the topic?
I need to ask you good people if you feel I am being overly intolerant or judegemental about a situation at work.
I have a co-worker. A female. A lesbian. A proud, self-proclaimed lesbian who makes no qualms, indeed, even flaunts who she is and what her sexual proclivities are. First: she goes by a man's name: Mickey.
She looks and dresses like a man; has hair styled like a man: short, parted on the side. Her girlfriend--who looks equally butch comes by often at closing time and hangs around for 15-20 minutes waiting for Mickey to get off.
So..yeah, yeah, to each their own and live and let live and all that. But here is my question:
Now, Let us for a moment switch the tables. My name is Tim. So..let's say I am a very, very effeminate gay guy. Let's say I dress like a woman; wear make-up and wear my hair in an effeminate style. I go by the name "Tina." I have my equally femme and obviously-gay boyfriend come by work once in awhile. Would this be tolerated in most workplaces, do think? Would I have ever even gotten the job? (I work in a public-contact environment.)
So, if you think the "Tina" thing would not fly, then is it sort of unfair that a "Mickey" is allowed? Is thisnot discriminatory? Unfair? Or should both types be allowed? Again, in a job where the general public is served all day long?
I am of the opinion that Tina would certainly not be allowed at my workplace. He just would not get hired in the first place. Also, I believe this "Mickey but not Tina" dynamic is fairly commonplace. And my opinion is that this is unfair to the male gays.
What say you? And is you agree with the "Mickey but not Tina" thing is goin' on, why do you think it is tolerated more?
Thank you for your thoughtful opinions.
I have to agree with you on this. I have almost the exact same situation on my job and I have often wonder the same thing as well. We have this very masculine female who is very open about who she is and dress and act like one of the guys. The thing here though, seem like all the girls love her as well as many of the guys. If this was a very feminine guy, most of the guys would have nothing to do with him and I'm not so sure if they would even hire him. It personally doesn't matter to me because I have no issue with gay people, but I do believe the double standard is there though.
OP, my youngest is now in college, but for over a decade when the younger 3 were in high school there were several boys who wore dresses or skirts and carried purses. A lot more were wearing make-up. I personally like guys in eyeliner, but that's just a personal preference of mine since I am into darker, edgier rock and I've been seeing it pretty much forever.
We live in an extremely redneck, backwards hick place. Not saying anything anyone who has been to the bible belt in south central Arkansas doesn't already know.
Change comes slowly, but it does come.
I don't think there should be discrimination for any group, and perhaps as an experiment you can put on make-up one day and see what the reaction was. Maybe this Mickey (my little middle's mil's name is Mickey, and she's nothing close to butch or gay or whatever it is you were trying to imply) is given special treatment, and maybe she is not. If you are secure enough within yourself, try out that little experiment, or putting on a dress, or carrying a bag or whatever and see how it flies, then you would know for sure if there is a double standard or not.
You should probably make it a point to explain this to them at every opportunity. I'm sure they would love to hear what a sweet deal they have because they can use a men's room at a nightclub.
I also want to clear-up a misconception: an earlier poster said I was comparing apples and oranges because a gay man would not dress like a woman. Well, maybe true. What I meant was a very effeminate gay man who had openly gay friends come by his work place, and acted, well, Gay around each other.
And the man walked and talked and lisped in an effeminate way. Let's say he wore a flower in his hair or on his shirt. And wore tight silk pants. and slippers. I think this is a fair counterpart example to Mickey with her knife and boots and men's carpenter pants. (Oh, and he wore lip gloss--which too I think is a fair counter to Mickey's Skoal (really? Skoal? come on people--throw me a bone here! LOL)
And he dressed like this in a place where others dressed far more casual, in jeans and tees. (this too: a fair comparison to Mickey dressing way more down than the rest of us.)
So..would he fly in the work place? Or get hired in the first place? Mmm, maybe, but I really doubt it. So then, why Mickey and not swishy Tommi? or Gale?
A couple of people have actually made good attempts to answer my OP, the one idea thus far I think being the most likely probably, from Okie, who opined that it is just more common to see women dressed masculinely than it is to seem men dressed flamboyantly/femininely and acting feminine.
Well, the super "butch" look and mannerism, and the flaming femme gay guy looks , do have a double standard of tolerance. Without question. Why this is, I don't know. It seems, in general, that lesbian relationships are tolerated more readily than gay men as well. Straight men and women , both, are not as put off by female/female relationships as they are male/male.
My own, soon to be wife, tells me that two women together doesn't bother her, but she is completely nauseated by the thought of two men. This doesn't seem to be an uncommon view. The extremes of "expression", or whatever term is appropriate, may be tolerated more on the female side of things , because of this. Idk. I am put off by those extremes, as is my lady, and all of my friends , as well, most of which are women. I have more women friends than men, and my fiance has more guy friends than women too.
Its been said here, a few times, that these extremes are just examples of people being secure in their sexuality, however, on closer examination, I question that. To me, it smacks more of insecurity, as if these extreme examples feel they have something to prove, and the "in your face" or whatever, manners of dress and demeanor are being used as the , proverbial, chip on the shoulder. To my mind, it makes , phsycological, sense.
Regardless of the rationale behind it, it is inappropriate, for the workplace. Or for any public venue, not geared, specifically, to that lifestyle. Oh, I can care less about holding hands or even kissing, hugging, whatever, within the bounds of just general affection. I kiss my lady, in public, but we don't swallow each others tounges, or fondle private areas. Just keep things within the borders of having some class, ya know.
There is no call for the projection of sexuality, in the manner we are discussing here, and that should apply across the board. Not just for gays and lesbians, either. I don't know of any company's that tolerate crass and "in your face" expression of sexuality by heterosexuals. Blatantly displayed tattoos of sexual scenes, or classless sayings on t shirts A man and a woman wagging their tounges at each other, at work, would result in a visit to HR , at the least, and displays of this type around co workers, in full view would be, swiftly, rebuked.
So, it seems the crux of the matter, here, is, plainly, JUST HAVE SOME CLASS, for Petes sake! You can dress and act however you want, in the appropriate settings. Work is not such a setting.
I think the key is the word "flaunting". She's allowed to say she's a lesbian, she can use a man's name if she wants, she can dress and look however she wants, but the "Flaunting" is where the line might be crossed. I'm going to assume nobody really cares what she does behind closed doors, so when you say "flaunting" what do you mean? I think all the other stuff is ok, but if you're pushing your sexuality into the faces of people who don't want it pushed, that's unnecessary.
Who's to say what constitutes "flaunting"? It sounds like some people consider Mickey to be "flaunting" her sexuality simply because she dresses in a way that most people associate with lesbians.
But if a straight woman wore a modest dress and makeup, would the same people complain that she was "flaunting" her sexuality?
Hmm. Maybe there is a double-standard in effect here, after all.
Female clothing is by nature more "costumy". Male clothing more "practical". Women paint themselves with makeup, men do not, they are natural. When a woman goes practical and natural it's not as unusual since that's pretty much how everyones normal state. An obvious male painting themselves up and wearing costumy clothing doesn't look right because it's probably not right for anyone, we just have come to expect it one women.
Who's to say what constitutes "flaunting"? It sounds like some people consider Mickey to be "flaunting" her sexuality simply because she dresses in a way that most people associate with lesbians.
But if a straight woman wore a modest dress and makeup, would the same people complain that she was "flaunting" her sexuality?
Hmm. Maybe there is a double-standard in effect here, after all.
There are double standards for LOTS of things, in fact almost every item of contention could have a double standard!
It doesn't matter if male/female/straight/gay/lesbian/gayman/ man/woman/boy/girl/republican/democratic/capitalism/democracy/government/ruler/rich/poor/top/bottom/in/out/etc/etc/etc
SO, yes, there IS, but the Difference IS:
CAN WE ADAPT AND ACCEPT these differences in the SAME MANNER We accept The "standards".
For all of human kind?
Differences and unacceptance leads to violent attitudes and hatred, and hatred often leads to aggression and aggression can lead to death.
Steven Hawking said if he could fix one "human failing trait" it would be aggression. Why? because he thinks aggression will be the undoing of the human species as a whole.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
