Challenging Norms: Why is a long blouse and leggings any better than a short skirt with thick tights - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Dressing

Welcome! Read about what to wear and how to wear it on the YLF Blog. Join the YLF Forum to ask specific questions or just chat about fashion and personal style. Or check out the curated list of things we love in YLF Finds.

Outfits Ensembles Trends Advice

Challenging Norms: Why is a long blouse and leggings any better than a short skirt with thick tights

trekkiegirl

Veteran

I must be feeling rebellious today - blame it on the knee high combat boots I'm wearing. There are often double standards in how women are "supposed" to dress, or confusing "rules" that seem completely arbitrary to me.

Case in point: I have a coworker who regularly wears very tight leggings with knee high boots and a long blouse that just covers her tush and front similar to the pictures I've included below. The effect is, to me, basically she has on a VEERRRY short dress with thick tights. Yet I am 100% certain her "glance up and down" at my skater skirt and patterned tights was in disdain. It was all over her face. My skirt is longer than her shirt. What gives?

Now, this girl is very sweet, we get along, and I like her. It's not a catfight waiting to happen, just in my mind another set of "fashion rules" being challenged that she doesn't quite comprehend. She wears mostly very trendy things, what is hot RIGHT NOW kind of stuff. Maybe anything outside of that seems too odd for her. Or maybe it's the fact that it's a skirt and therefor it cannot be too short, never mind how short a blouse can be.

Anyone have any thoughts?

This post has 3 photos. Photos uploaded by this member are only visible to other logged in members.

If you aren't a member, but would like to participate, please consider signing up. It only takes a minute and we'd love to have you.

Dressing

26 replies

Latest reply was from Echo

Jules

Veteran

Are you sure her reaction was about coverage/appropriateness? Your skirt and patterned tights look had a lot going on, in the best way IMO, but someone more conventional (boring) might not get it esthetically?
I think these looks you posted are very casual, and one would have to be under 30 to get away with these at work. This is just my opinion, ... not a fashion rule - I give more leeway to the young, and took plenty as well in my day, but these days at 40 those outfits would feel like gym/loungewear to me. I also generally find skater skirts to be on the young side but the way you wore it worked for you.

trekkiegirl

Veteran

Hmm Jules that is a very good point. I am over 30, most of the "kids" I work with are not. Just turned 34 to be exact. I don't think I should have to change how I dress just because I have a few more years on me though, am I delusional? It's such a fine line... do I dress to be their "role model" of an older professional woman, or do I dress to keep my identity, my uniqueness, and defy the rules I despise? (that last part is a more recent development, apparently because of my age, not because I'm dressing much differently than I did in my 20s)

crutcher

Veteran

I guess I fail to see the problem...You and this person get along...Why is what she wears a problem?...Forgive me...I just don't see it..

Marilyn

Veteran

To me those legging pics read very casual. It's basically a gym pant with a long top and boots. Great for weekends and casual days but I would not have worn this to work at any age.

trekkiegirl

Veteran

HA Crutcher, I love your response. I don't care what she wears either. I just wonder how much judgement on women's outfits stems from "generally accepted norms" and used today's situation as an example.

Jules

Veteran

No, don't change! Except for, don't even bother to interpret the sideways glances of the unstylish at your stylin self I just honestly doubt it was about coverage or age-appropriateness. Either way it's her issue not yours, right?

trekkiegirl

Veteran

And Marilyn - we work in a very casual office, so I supposed that is why people feel comfortable dressing like this. Granted, her blouses are bit more "dressy" but it's still the same outfit.

Anonymous

Promise you'll never give up your Wednesday Addams Cheerleader side because someone gave you the old up-and-down look at work. That's why I'm glad I don't go to school or work in an office anymore ... the daily scrutiny.

Anonymous

Agreeing with Jules that it seems more likely to be the vibe of the outfit than exposure. It is kind of a defiant look and not everyone responds well to the perceived challenge. I'm thinking you may already have a real presence, because of your overall attractiveness and personality. Package that in unfamiliar fashion and the result can be intimidating. I wouldn't expect you to change your style because of your age in years, but it's possible it'll evolve because you'll want to express something different, or connect with a different crowd?

Liz

Veteran

I always think it's shaky ground to draw firm conclusions about someone else's thought process from a facial expression. There is no way of knowing that she was comparing your skirt length to her shirt length and judging you while considering herself OK.

If she's sweet girl whom you like and with whom you get along, why not give her the benefit of the doubt and ask her what was happening? Maybe she was just having a bad day, is worried or anxious or angry about something, and she reacted way more strongly than she would ever have intended to and actually has zero opinions about the length of your skirt.

trekkiegirl

Veteran

The funny thing is, my personality is actually quite quiet. I'm socially awkward and have trouble speaking to groups of more than 2 people at a time. Because of my job I have to force myself to be more outgoing which is sometimes emotionally draining. I wonder if I'm trying too hard and coming off stronger than I should. I try not to think about attractiveness as a factor in interpersonal interactions, whether that is realistic or not I couldn't say.

K.M.

Veteran

I have often thought about this double standard on skirts vs. leggings with a short blouse. I see a lot of people wearing blouses that look way too short for my eyes--as in, they barely cover the butt and sometimes DON'T cover the butt. I don't think even these same people would walk around with skirts that short showing their tights and underwear! Maybe it's a kind of conceptual poison eye. Or perhaps a skirt is inherently flirty, while leggings are sportier or less overtly feminine?

annagybe

(website)

Veteran

http://www.refinery29.com/2015.....2015#slide

Caro in Oz

Veteran

Just my opinion - take it or leave it

I don't believe dressing for work has anything to do with what your colleague wears or doesn't wear. If I were you & wanted to be successful at work, I'd be looking at how the women (& men) above me dressed.

Also, I feel it's important to make the point that you don't actually know what your colleague was thinking. Again if I were you, I'd be thinking about why my interpretation of the way she looked at me seemed important.

rachylou

Veteran

Too funny, anna! I was just thinking *someone forgot her pants.* It's interesting why it looks fine on, oh say, Star Trek, but not IRL.

Jules does have a good point about conventionalism. Also, people like to be invisible. They fear just standing next to someone who isn't, in case they're accidentally noticed. People are interesting a natural history kind of way. Emperor Penguins rotate, so everyone takes a turn on the outer perimeter in the dead of winter. People don't.

Day Vies

Veteran

Not that I accept it as fact that one is necessarily better than the other -- however I think women generally feel "safer" in pants (even if those pants happen to fit like a second skin and leaves nothing to the imagination). A stiff breeze could blow and all one would see would be the outline of a butt covered by thick tights.

A short skirt by contrast suggest that the wearer has on nothing but hosiery and undies (let's accept this as true for the sake of my argument). Hosiery and undies if exposed by a similar stiff breeze is far more bare than a butt covered by leggings (thick tights).

Personally I think both can be equally acceptable or equally egregious. Appropriateness depends on the shape of the woman in question and the setting in which she finds herself.

Appropriateness tends to get most women up in arms -- but both of these outfits are the same level of appropriateness the way you describe them. That then leaves the stiff breeze scenario and the hypothetical "safety" of leggings vs. "immanent threat" of exposure one imagines with short skirts.

I do believe that women get catty where another woman's outfit is more "exposed" even if the silhouette is essentially the same. Yes it's irrational but there it is.

trekkiegirl

Veteran

Some very good points made here. Particularly, of course I can't know what what was going through someone's mind and I shouldn't speculate.I suppose if had wanted the focus of the post to be on societal norms I should have left that part out.
Day - I especially like your explanation using a "stiff breeze" as an example lol that totally makes sense

trekkiegirl

Veteran

Oh, for the record, the "dress for the job you want" doesn't apply to me in the slightest. I have no intentions of rising any higher than I am now. It would require working longer hours and possibly traveling, both of which I have no desire to do as they would take time away from my family.

Laura (rhubarbgirl)

(website)

Veteran

The distinction between leggings and slim pants has always seemed like a fine one to me, speaking of. And unfortunately it seems to be affected by your build/weight too. I, for example, would never wear the ON pixie pants or similar stretch pants without a long tunic over, but I see people doing so all the time, and if you are slim and fit you can 'get away with it' easier than the rest of us can.

A lot of workplaces used to have dress codes that excluded stretch pants, skinny jeans, and skirts above the knee - I still don't think that's a crazy stance to take, but it's getting rarer and rarer.

Anonymous

My banking career glasses and age (44) makes me think that none of these are appropriate for work, IMO, but as I said, I'm a banker. Anyone without a dressy jacket like sweater or blazer is considered 'dressed down'. We can't even wear these outfits on dress down Friday

If you liked your outfit, just smile back at her, she will be totally thrown off

Echo

Veteran

I strongly agree with Liz. It is dangerous to draw the conclusions you have from a facial expression that may or may not have had anything to do with you.

In the outfits presented in the pics here, I only take issue with #1, and that is primarily because the leggings do not look like leggings to me. They look like tights. I am sure there is only a very slight difference between the fabric in #1 and #2, but visually it makes all the difference in the world.

As for the double standard with a long top/tunic and a skirt, Day Vies is correct, at least in my mind. Not to open up another can of worms, but this is my issue with skirted leggings much (but not all) of the time. The PERCEPTION of the third piece - the skirt - changes the outfit in so many ways. Skirts can be too short, regardless of what is worn under them, and even with the same leg/bum coverage, they can take an outfit from slouchy-casual (the leggings with a longer top) to flirty-sexy in the blink of an eye.

Other people may or may not agree with me, and that's fine. We don't all see things the same way. But IMO, shorter skirts will always get a side-eye from many people while a top with leggings won't. It may not be logical in terms of coverage, but it is the difference in how the outfits are perceived for many people.

Brooklyn

Veteran

Hello. This discussion is interesting. I have a pair of ponte pants that I wore to work with a long tunic top. They are pants - they are thick, have a fly and panels. But they are fitted. A colleague referred to me as "getting around in a mini skirt". Since then I have been paranoid about wearing them. I am tall and over 40 but the top was loose and mid thigh. I have another colleague (younger than I) who wears very similar pants with short tops. No comments for her - as far as I know.

Anonymous

I can't add anything to this conversation that hasn't already been said, but it has been fascinating to follow.

I agree with everything said....especially Day Vies comment about a stiff breeze and another posters comment about age appropriateness. I would like to add that age appropriateness doesn't really apply in this case. You look totally appropriate IMO.

trekkiegirl

Veteran

Brooklyn - this is sort of the opposite of your situation but I've wondered if another (completely different) employee - who is younger but significantly taller than me and "big boned" as in she's not what one might call fat, she's literally just larger in proportion all over (and I'm reminded of another poster who described herself this way but can't remember who) who wears the exact same type of outfit but usually all black and puts her hair up in a plain pony tail every day - has been the subject of similar scrutiny, or if her outfit would be overlooked because of the difference in body proportions affecting, whether consciously or subconsciously, external viewers perceptions of attractiveness and sexuality. Because whether we like to talk about it or not, that can be a factor in perception... Even if it shouldn't be

Brooklyn

Veteran

I agree with that. Height and build can affect perceptions of appropriateness. When I wear a short silhouette (to go back to your theme) I think it might look more statement-ish than when a petite person wears the same silhouette because I am tall and showing a lot of leg, even though the proportions are the same as the petite person. I wish I could just not worry about the perceptions of others!

Echo

Veteran

I am not sure we can ever dismiss perceptions of attractiveness or sexuality. It may not be fair, but a person with a larger bust will always receive more scrutiny with a low-cut blouse than will a woman with almost no bust. In one case there is cleavage, and in the other there is not. That makes a HUGE difference in perception, whether it should or not. Likewise, when a taller person wears a shorter skirt or tunic, it can expose more leg and make things look more risque than if a shorter legged person wore the same outfit. All of these things may not be "fair", but they are reality. Just like a man with small arms might wear a sleeveless shirt and look "average" at best, while a man with muscular arms would look show-off-ish in the same top. This is the way people perceive the wearer. It has nothing to do with "fair" and everything to do with what overall societal perceptions are.