Apparently at my workplace it is against the dress code to wear underwear.

[darkrose50]

Apparently at my workplace it is against the dress code to wear underwear . . . I am sure that they mean as outer garments, but that is not the rule as written.

I love people.

[Vinyadan]

Apparently at my workplace it is against the dress code to wear underwear . . . I am sure that they mean as outer garments, but that is not the rule as written.

I love people.

Superman/Clark Kent joke?

[JeenLeen]

That's pretty funny.
I'm sure I've seen a couple phrasings of bureaucratic code that mean something quite different from intended, if taken very literally.

We had some rather annoying dress code changes a few years ago, and some employees were actually disobeying them in protest. Fortunately, most management agreed it was stupid so the penalties were few (as long as the highest-ups didn't catch you). I, half-jokingly, asked if I could wear a kilt. I was told yes -- technically it did not disobey the policy -- but never did as 1) pretty sure my boss was joking when she gave me permission, 2) don't own one and didn't want to buy one, and 3) probably too cowardly to actually do it even if I had one.

[Peelee]

Superman/Clark Kent joke?

I'm guessing it's "visible underwear," which would mean "don't wear translucent pants or let them overly sag."

[Rogar Demonblud]

Or low cut tops with spaghetti straps.

[Willie the Duck]

I love people.

Not sure that it says all that much about people, excepting perhaps editors or their absence in the making of such documents.

[Khedrac]

I remember news stories a few years ago that the costumes at the Disney parks were such that you had to wear the very very minimal underwear provided and not your own (this led to further complaints because of the number of people using hte costumes).
I believe the rules then changed so conditions are somewhat better now, but yes, they had very strict rules on what little underwear they could wear.

[darkrose50]

I work in an office as an insurance agent (all of our customer interactions are over the phone). Once upon a time we did not have much of a dress code policy. Someone on the second floor used to walk around in bunny slippers all day.

-----

My friend went to a high school where they had school provided bathing suits and had to toss the bathing suit into the hamper, and then walk the long way around the pool naked to the locker room (the girls and boys swam separately). The marching around naked sounds pretty damned creepy to me.

[snowblizz]

At my old elementary school the girl's showerroom was not directly connected to the girl's changingroom. The boy's respective rooms were. Go figure.
It might have been due to the building was so old it had been retrofitted and that was the only way two sets were possible to squeeze in but either way one group had a reduced privacy. Sometimes it was switched around too, so we used each other's lockerrooms (they weren't like specifically signed or anything). For whatever reason.

Sure there was a locked door closing off the "boy's side" from the antechamber the girls had to go through to their showers. Officially.

[Anonymouswizard]

My friend went to a high school where they had school provided bathing suits and had to toss the bathing suit into the hamper, and then walk the long way around the pool naked to the locker room (the girls and boys swam separately). The marching around naked sounds pretty damned creepy to me.

Probably just somebody not thinking things through, because clearly in that case you have the hamper by the door to the changing room (either side) so you can deposit the swimming costume after changing.

Although to be fair, my the schools I went to either had dedicated outdoor changing rooms or use commercial facilities (which happened to have been built right next to the school anyway), and in the outdoor changing rooms lockers weren't even an option, although as you'd be out of the pool before break there wasn't really the chance for anything to go missing. Swimming as a school thing stopped after year 7 though, as if they didn't want a bunch of boys and girls in the early stages of puberty around each other while in skintight outfits, or changing in front of each other*.

* Gender segregated, but even in year 7 some people were becoming uncomfortable with it.

[Themrys]

My friend went to a high school where they had school provided bathing suits and had to toss the bathing suit into the hamper, and then walk the long way around the pool naked to the locker room (the girls and boys swam separately). The marching around naked sounds pretty damned creepy to me.

If the school thinks this is acceptable, why not just make them swim naked?

Either it is okay for the swimming teacher (who is hopefully female) to see them naked, or it is not. I would tend toward not. Female pedophiles are rare, but presumably the boy's swimming class is organised the same way, so ... :smalleek:
As far as I'm informed, it is actually not allowed for teachers to be in the children's changing areas for safeguarding reasons, so ... :smallconfused:

Back to the dress code: It is very stupid to word things that way. Reminds me of the old joke about a skirt-wearing girl who was warned to not stand on her hands because boys would be able to see her panties. A while later she returns and tells her mother that she did it anyway but tells her mother not to worry, she took off her panties beforehand.

Employees are adults and will be able to understand what the rule is supposed to mean, but there could be those who interpret it differently just because they can.

[Anonymouswizard]

If the school thinks this is acceptable, why not just make them swim naked?

Either it is okay for the swimming teacher (who is hopefully female) to see them naked, or it is not. I would tend toward not. Female pedophiles are rare, but presumably the boy's swimming class is organised the same way, so ... :smalleek:
As far as I'm informed, it is actually not allowed for teachers to be in the children's changing areas for safeguarding reasons, so ... :smallconfused:

There are a few ways around it that I can see. If students are allowed (and encouraged) to bring a towel or dressing gown to the pool, or the teacher leaves the pool area before the stripping off occurs then it should be okay. Especially if communal changing facilities are used (which is always how it was at my school, in year 4 nobody cared if you saw somebody's penis but by year 7 it was customary to change facing the wall).


Back to the dress code: It is very stupid to word things that way. Reminds me of the old joke about a skirt-wearing girl who was warned to not stand on her hands because boys would be able to see her panties. A while later she returns and tells her mother that she did it anyway but tells her mother not to worry, she took off her panties beforehand.

Employees are adults and will be able to understand what the rule is supposed to mean, but there could be those who interpret it differently just because they can.

Yep, I technically break the dress code at my work, but as what I wear is in the spirit of the code I've never been reprimanded. The only thing that I'm in any real danger of actually breaking the rules with they'll never actually challlenge because I'd be more within the rules than most if I was female.

On that note, I see a lot of jewelry and other regulations where it's assumed that men will never wear any.

[darkrose50]

If the school thinks this is acceptable, why not just make them swim naked?

I think that this is the step after swimming naked. The generation before this was common.



Employees are adults and will be able to understand what the rule is supposed to mean, but there could be those who interpret it differently just because they can.

It made me laugh. I would never word a policy like whomever worded it. Although perhaps they worded it the way that they did in order to make us laugh.

[Willie the Duck]

If the school thinks this is acceptable, why not just make them swim naked?

Either it is okay for the swimming teacher (who is hopefully female) to see them naked, or it is not. I would tend toward not. Female pedophiles are rare, but presumably the boy's swimming class is organised the same way, so ... :smalleek:
As far as I'm informed, it is actually not allowed for teachers to be in the children's changing areas for safeguarding reasons, so ... :smallconfused:


I think that this is the step after swimming naked. The generation before this was common.

darkrose is confirming my suspicion that this might be related to era. I'm guessing this person who relayed this story is perhaps older? It depends on where in the world we are talking, but it was surprisingly recent that the idea that the teacher might be a threat to a student was considered such a rarity that protections against it were relatively unknown.

[darkrose50]

When my friends dad was in high school (Lane Tech high school in Chicago) they would swim in the nude (I am 45). I was frankly a bit shocked to hear that my friend (born on the same day no less) had this weird ritual of walking around the pool nude after turning in the school's swimsuit (Oak Park River Forest high school near Chicago).

I will have to ask my dad if he was made to swim in the nude in high school.

[Vinyadan]

There once (1920s-1960s) was a belief in the US that swimming naked was the only acceptably hygienic option. The suits were made of wool, so they assumed they carried diseases, and the fibres could ruin the filtration systems. Some schools and associations also didn't want to spend too much money to buy swimming suits. Then of course they assumed that it was manly to bond by being naked, and that people who didn't want to weren't cool.

I have no idea of how it was in Europe.

[snowblizz]

darkrose is confirming my suspicion that this might be related to era. I'm guessing this person who relayed this story is perhaps older? It depends on where in the world we are talking, but it was surprisingly recent that the idea that the teacher might be a threat to a student was considered such a rarity that protections against it were relatively unknown.

Simpler times. Simpler times.

In highschool (built early 80s) one of the showerrooms had a small window to the gymteacher's "office", so said person could keep an eye on the children. You know to stop horseplay, hazings and all kinds of stuff kids might get up to (like using very cold or very hot shower water to spray each other). Considering you might have to fight someone to avoid having you clothes thrown into the shower (not so common because that'd cause an incident) or just on the floor (if you didn't put up a fight) due to the rather cramped facility it was probably needed. Once again though, the 2 sets of changingrooms/showers had different set-up, only one of the 2 had this observation window. Once again I find myself wondering, did the original design consider the boy's and girl's versions as different and which way was it planned.
Because the boy's showers probably needed supervision from an adult. For reasons I've outlined above.




As far as I'm informed, it is actually not allowed for teachers to be in the children's changing areas for safeguarding reasons, so ... :smallconfused:


I'm actually a little shocked at the suggestion you leave schoolchildren in a poolarea with no adult supervision. We'd never have gotten into the changing rooms without several fights and at least half a dozen kids thrown into the pool.
Safeguarding the children is exactly why we'd need the adult there...

The world changed somewhere when I didn't notice.

[DeTess]

We had some rather annoying dress code changes a few years ago, and some employees were actually disobeying them in protest. Fortunately, most management agreed it was stupid so the penalties were few (as long as the highest-ups didn't catch you). I, half-jokingly, asked if I could wear a kilt. I was told yes -- technically it did not disobey the policy -- but never did as 1) pretty sure my boss was joking when she gave me permission, 2) don't own one and didn't want to buy one, and 3) probably too cowardly to actually do it even if I had one.

The dress code for teachers at my high school was fairly simple and relaxed, but specifically stated that teachers could wear pants or skirts, but not shorts or something similar, even during the warm summer months. There where two teachers that'd always protest this policy when the weather started turning warm by turning up in kilts once a year, as that technically didn't violate the dress-code.

[darkrose50]

The dress code for teachers at my high school was fairly simple and relaxed, but specifically stated that teachers could wear pants or skirts, but not shorts or something similar, even during the warm summer months. There where two teachers that'd always protest this policy when the weather started turning warm by turning up in kilts once a year, as that technically didn't violate the dress-code.

My wife's work has the same policy (she is an elementary school teacher). She asked me if I would wear a kilt. I guess I would if it was hot enough.

[Keltest]

My wife's work has the same policy (she is an elementary school teacher). She asked me if I would wear a kilt. I guess I would if it was hot enough.

Theyre surprisingly comfortable. Don't wear them traditional though, that's actually illegal. And unhygienic.

[farothel]

The dress code for teachers at my high school was fairly simple and relaxed, but specifically stated that teachers could wear pants or skirts, but not shorts or something similar, even during the warm summer months. There where two teachers that'd always protest this policy when the weather started turning warm by turning up in kilts once a year, as that technically didn't violate the dress-code.

I read a newspaper article some time ago about bus drivers who did the exact same thing. Shorts were not allowed, but skirts were (that was intended only for female drivers, but it was never specified as such), so they wore skirts to work. I can understand that, as in a bus without airco and a lot of glass it can get quite hot in summer.

[Tvtyrant]

At my college swim meets were gender segregated until the 1940s. Rather then use crappy bathing suits they just competed nude.

Frankly I think our society should encourage a lot more nudity. The idea that nudity is sexual is fairly appalling.

[Anonymouswizard]

At my college swim meets were gender segregated until the 1940s. Rather then use crappy bathing suits they just competed nude.

Frankly I think our society should encourage a lot more nudity. The idea that nudity is sexual is fairly appalling.

Eh, I wouldn't mind. I have a relatively mild nudity taboo compared to most people around here. But I think the key will have to be getting across the idea that nudity is a choice, and that people can opt out of (for example) naked pools or still wear their costume. But unfortunately the desexualisation of nudity is something that's going to take decades.

[Tvtyrant]

Eh, I wouldn't mind. I have a relatively mild nudity taboo compared to most people around here. But I think the key will have to be getting across the idea that nudity is a choice, and that people can opt out of (for example) naked pools or still wear their costume. But unfortunately the desexualisation of nudity is something that's going to take decades.

One of the things I appreciate about Portland is you can be nude on your own property, which is not the case in much of the US. You can even be nude in public under certain restrictions, and I vote for lifting those whenever they come up.

[Anonymouswizard]

One of the things I appreciate about Portland is you can be nude on your own property, which is not the case in much of the US. You can even be nude in public under certain restrictions, and I vote for lifting those whenever they come up.

I live in a country where public nudity isn't banned (although if you're causing trouble with it the police can charge you with other things), so for me it really is more to do with the societal views side than the legal side.

I've got friends who have seen me naked, and I still don't understand why it has to be a big deal.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Eh. I live in a chunk of the country where going nude means you freeze half the year and get eaten alive by mosquitoes and horseflies the other half. Nature has restrictions of its own.

[Tvtyrant]

Eh. I live in a chunk of the country where going nude means you freeze half the year and get eaten alive by mosquitoes and horseflies the other half. Nature has restrictions of its own.

Absolutely, but this easily becomes a societal prohibition even indoors. And since humans obsess over anything banned, it very quickly defeats the purpose of the prohibition. That is my opinion anyway.

Like in my high school there were banned books, so guess what everyone in my class read? I had friends who read the banned books and skipped the assigned ones, prohibitions are a great way to get people to do that thing.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Your teachers didn't have you read a banned book during Banned Books week and write a paper arguing for and against the ban? Weird.

[Tvtyrant]

Your teachers didn't have you read a banned book during Banned Books week and write a paper arguing for and against the ban? Weird.

No but we also read a lot of books that were at least as problematic. Like Woman at Point Zero.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Honestly never heard of it. From your tone, I didn't miss anything.

[Tvtyrant]

Honestly never heard of it. From your tone, I didn't miss anything.

I don't think the rules would let me talk about much in it. The writer was dealing with some very dark issues, but we had read The Color Purple, The House of the Spirits and Tess of the d'urbervilles in a row so the content lost impact and the writers poor vocabulary and choices in motifs became really obvious.

[SZbNAhL]

I read a newspaper article some time ago about bus drivers who did the exact same thing. Shorts were not allowed, but skirts were (that was intended only for female drivers, but it was never specified as such), so they wore skirts to work. I can understand that, as in a bus without airco and a lot of glass it can get quite hot in summer.

Every June/July, regular as clockwork, the British press has a story about a boy wearing a skirt to school in protest at not being allowed shorts. I'm beginning to think journalists have a special "boy in a skirt" hotline.

Anyway, back to the original topic, I'm reminded of the lab safety document I was given in undergrad:


10) Alert a technician or demonstrator to any spills.
11) Students must not:

Smoke in the lab.
Eat or drink in the lab.
Bring bags into the lab.
12) Wear appropriate safety gear (see apendix A) at all times.
13) Perform all reactions likely to generate gases in a fume cupboard.

Cue everybody removing their safety goggles for a second at the beginning of each lab so that they wouldn't be wearing appropriate safety gear at all times, since that would be against the rules.

[Peelee]

Every June/July, regular as clockwork, the British press has a story about a boy wearing a skirt to school in protest at not being allowed shorts. I'm beginning to think journalists have a special "boy in a skirt" hotline.

Anyway, back to the original topic, I'm reminded of the lab safety document I was given in undergrad:



Cue everybody removing their safety goggles for a second at the beginning of each lab so that they wouldn't be wearing appropriate safety gear at all times, since that would be against the rules.

That document is written correctly though. 12 is not 11.

[Anonymouswizard]

Every June/July, regular as clockwork, the British press has a story about a boy wearing a skirt to school in protest at not being allowed shorts. I'm beginning to think journalists have a special "boy in a skirt" hotline.

Don't forget the inevitable September 'kid sent home because trousers showed socks' headline.

I remember my school days, my school had a very casual uniform policy, but I think shorts were still banned (pretty much anything that showed your knees were). By sixth form it pretty much boiled down to 'you shall wear clothes. Thy clothes will not reveal thy shoulders, knees, or stomach'.


Anyway, back to the original topic, I'm reminded of the lab safety document I was given in undergrad:



Cue everybody removing their safety goggles for a second at the beginning of each lab so that they wouldn't be wearing appropriate safety gear at all times, since that would be against the rules.

We didn't have any safety gear. Eve in the high voltage lab (which was also the only engineering lab to have safety equipment and an airlock). To be fair, in the Other electronics labs the only times you were going to be working above milliamps was when plugging something into the wall, and we did most of our work at around the 5V milliampere current range. And you could not touch the wires in the high voltage lab.

But still, two thirds of the course hadn't ever used a soldering iron before, and were just let loose. On decent lead based solder as well, not this safer silver based stuff.

[SZbNAhL]

That document is written correctly though. 12 is not 11.

The indentation made it look like part of the "thou shalt not" list. Besides, we were chemists, not mathematicians. :smalltongue:


I remember my school days, my school had a very casual uniform policy, but I think shorts were still banned (pretty much anything that showed your knees were). By sixth form it pretty much boiled down to 'you shall wear clothes. Thy clothes will not reveal thy shoulders, knees, or stomach'.

So how many people turned up in only kneepads, pauldrons and wrestling belts?


We didn't have any safety gear. Even in the high voltage lab (which was also the only engineering lab to have safety equipment and an airlock). To be fair, in the Other electronics labs the only times you were going to be working above milliamps was when plugging something into the wall, and we did most of our work at around the 5V milliampere current range. And you could not touch the wires in the high voltage lab.

But still, two thirds of the course hadn't ever used a soldering iron before, and were just let loose. On decent lead-based solder as well, not this safer silver based stuff.

Soldering irons aren't that dangerous, just don't touch the hot end, and you'd have to solder continually for a while before you inhaled enough lead to be toxic. Now if you'd been using mercury amalgum, then I'd be worried.

[Peelee]

The indentation made it look like part of the "thou shalt not" list.

Pshaw. Ye were chemists, not grammarians. :smalltongue:

[Anonymouswizard]

So how many people turned up in only kneepads, pauldrons and wrestling belts?

None, I was just remarking on how sometimes rules are shockingly incomplete. Plus there were Othery regulations banning nudity.

Underwear was not required, but was recommended. Especially if you had PE.


Soldering irons aren't that dangerous, just don't touch the hot end, and you'd have to solder continually for a while before you inhaled enough lead to be toxic. Now if you'd been using mercury amalgum, then I'd be worried.

Oh, I'm shocked that they let us loose on them without so much as a 'do not touch the metal end'. Or shoe regulations, from my time at secondary school most problems arose when people dropped the things.

But once you know how they work they're incredibly safe. But you should give either a basic briefing or safety equipment.

[AdmiralCheez]

Me and a couple of coworkers got bored one day and tried to come up with the most absurd outfit that was technically legal by the company dress code. I think we came up with a wedding dress over a suit of plate armor, diving flippers, a welders mask, and a top hat. It's rather easy when the dress code focuses more on what items aren't permitted, instead of just saying what you should wear.

[darkrose50]

The indentation made it look like part of the "thou shalt not" list. Besides, we were chemists, not mathematicians. :smalltongue:.

This reminds me of the argument over if you can be a X, if you have a degree in X, but not a job in X.

I have a friend who has a degree in biology, but has a job in chemistry (he makes various mud things . . . muds?). I would think that he could call himself a biologist and a chemist.

Are you not a doctor if you do not have a job as a doctor?

It is all very confusing.

[Asmotherion]

That rule probably applies to the pornographic industry. Just say'in.

[SZbNAhL]

This reminds me of the argument over if you can be a X, if you have a degree in X, but not a job in X.

I have a friend who has a degree in biology, but has a job in chemistry (he makes various mud things . . . muds?). I would think that he could call himself a biologist and a chemist.

Are you not a doctor if you do not have a job as a doctor?

It is all very confusing.

I'd argue that you're an X if you work as an X or have a qualification as an X. I have a chemistry degree, so I'm a chemist. I'm working as a trainee teacher, so I'm a trainee teacher. When I stop teaching, I'll be a former/retired teacher, but I'll still be a chemist.