Lack of Male Fashion Freedom

[David]

I spent Monday through Wednesday of this week serving as a jury member at a South Carolina Judicial Center where both civil and criminal cases are processed. The written dress code states that "BY ORDER OF THE COURT YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE COURTROOM IF YOU ARE WEARING SHORTS, TANK TOPS, MINI SKIRTS OR HATS." None of my skirts are short enough to be considered mini skirts; however, I did not want to risk being refused courtroom entry because I was male in a skirt. There are serious monetary penalties if you do not report for jury duty on schedule and I did not want to take the risk. As a result, I wore the dreaded pants in court all three days.

The Bailiff announced just before roll call that the male jurors should retreat to the rest room to "tuck in" their shirts, if they had not already done so. I was wearing a "Polo" shirt with a finished elastic waistband which was specifically designed to be worn outside of my pants. My shirt hugged my waist more tightly than most of the blouses worn by the female jurors and it was shorter than many of their blouses. Nevertheless, I followed the flow of men into the restroom and "tucked in" my shirt in accordance with the verbal order which clearly discriminated against the male jurors.

I had previously noticed a tall slender woman in her 30s wearing a man's dress shirt (it buttoned left over right). It fit well across her chest and the shoulder seams were properly aligned. As a result, the sleeves were much too long and she had to roll them up 3 or 4 times in order to bring them to wrist level where they bellowed out and flopped around. Her shirt tails in the front and rear extended half way down her thighs and the shirt sides reached well below her waistline. I could not tell for sure whether she was wearing slacks intended for a man or a women because the shirt obscured my view. Her pants overlapped her shoes significantly and they contained cuffs, so I suspect that they may also have been purchased in the men's department. She made no attempt to "tuck in" her shirt tails, obviously because the instructions to do so were addressed to the men. Her appearance, in my opinion, did not meet the spirit of the published and verbal dress standards for a female juror and her attire was not suitable for courtroom entry.

I managed to cut in line about a half dozen people behind her when it was time to enter the courtroom. The Bailiff was standing at the door counting heads and checking for compliance with the established standards of dress. He didn't even blink an eye, or make a comment, when she entered the courtroom. I am fairly certain that the Bailiff would have stopped me dead in my tracks if I had been wearing a skirt, even though it complied with the dress code. I should note that many of the female jurors, and a good portion of the female court staff, wore skirts and dresses that terminated well above the knee and were much shorter and tighter than anything I would ever consider wearing. I'm sure that there are other hurdles of this nature that we will have to overcome before men obtain true fashion freedom. It is a shame that the unisex clothing movement of the 1970s suffered a premature death.

[SkirtRevolution]

You make a good observation and it is this kind of inequality and sexism that make me sick and tired of mens fashion. So much talk today about equality but people just don't see it in fashion. I think the only way today in the west that you could wear a skirt is if you are an islander that wears a formal lava lava (i am not sure if thats the correct name but looks like a straight plain buisness skirt). Then you will not be discriminated because of your national dress. At the end of the day, this is why us men are fighting for our rights and need to raise our voices louder and be seen more often in skirts. Its time for equality for men.

[crfriend]

I spent Monday through Wednesday of this week serving as a jury member at a South Carolina Judicial Center where both civil and criminal cases are processed. The written dress code states that "BY ORDER OF THE COURT YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE COURTROOM IF YOU ARE WEARING SHORTS, TANK TOPS, MINI SKIRTS OR HATS."

Good for them.

It should be recalled that court is a rather special setting, and one that is steeped somewhat in tradition (at least the horse-hair wigs are gone), and it's a place where the participants are expected to look and behave in certain ways. That very casual attire (grunge-wear) is prohibited reflects the gravitas that the legal system is supposed to convey. For instance, I would not even contemplate showing up in court without a jacket and tie.

What frosted me in the telling of the tale, however, is that the standard did not seem to be applied equally. If the standard says no shorts, it means no shorts, ditto it means no miniskirts, but then one gets into the problem of the definition of what qualifies as a miniskirt and one is quickly down a rathole. One would hope that folks know what sorts of attire (and behaviour) are appropriate in such a setting, but I believe folks are forgetting about things like that -- and that cheapens all of us.

The same applies, on a slightly more relaxed scale, in the workplace. I have worked in places that had a strict rule that men will wear shirts with collars and will wear ties, and I've worked for (and continue to) work in places that have no clue as to what a dress code is. You know what? I think I preferred the place with a dress code; at least you didn't have people showing up in beachwear (flip-flops and tatty shorts or "capris") or even pyjamas (I've seen that, too). I mourn the loss of decorum, and this applies equally to both sexes, and I've seen some pretty bad style statements from both.

[couyalair]

"BY ORDER OF THE COURT YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ..."

Well at least they make it clear -- even if they apply the rules rather loosely.

I think I preferred the place with a dress code; at least you didn't have people showing up in beachwear ...

I agree, but I don't think it is necessarily a case of "slovenly" (I think you used that word, CRF). On this side of the ocean, it is partly a question of what you can find in the shops. Unless you are prepared to go very upscale and fork out lots of money, you'll only find clothes that are not intended to be ironed smooth, to fit smartly, or even to look like new. A fellow I work with knows all about fashion and the right clothes and labels to wear. He'd never come to work in a t-shirt, but, to me, he looks a mess, because his shirt and below-knee-length "shorts" are shapeless. At least he has no visible tatous nor a chin of stubble, both of which seem to be part of today's fashion. Another man comes in plain above-knee shorts and a fitting singlet, and looks both smart and comfortable in the heat-wave we are now enjoying (or suffering through, as the case may be).

Unfortunately, it is no longer usual to look too well-dressed (in the most traditional sense of the term), but rather to wear what everyone else is wearing, as casual as possible, and not stand out.

Martin (who, with the most subdued colours, stands out in a well-pressed twill skirt)

[crfriend]

[..] I don't think it is necessarily a case of "slovenly" (I think you used that word, CRF). On this side of the ocean, it is partly a question of what you can find in the shops. Unless you are prepared to go very upscale and fork out lots of money, you'll only find clothes that are not intended to be ironed smooth, to fit smartly, or even to look like new.

Yes, I used the term "slovenly" in another post, but it could fit in this one as well. It is a strong term to be sure, but I am tiring of seeing beachwear being worn in social situations dozens of miles from the closest beach.

Your assertion that we're pretty much tethered to what's available in shops is spot on, and we have a good deal of that on this side of "the pond". It is getting increasingly difficult to find nice-looking and reasonably well-fitting items off the peg; I used to be able to get fitted shirts in the very early 1980s, for instance, and now the best ones I can find (without having them custom made) fit like tents. I have a few nice blouses, but none of those are capable of being worn with a necktie if that's something appropriate. At least my waistcoats hide the tentlike nature of my men's dress shirts. I've given up trying to find trousers that are interesting. It's all rather depressing, really.

Unfortunately, it is no longer usual to look too well-dressed (in the most traditional sense of the term), but rather to wear what everyone else is wearing, as casual as possible, and not stand out.

Also in play with this is that there aren't many venues any longer where dressing up is appropriate, or at least that's the case for mere mortals who have to work for a living. The problem with this is that since nobody dresses up any longer (save for weddings and funerals), folks forget how to do it. I find that sad as well because sometimes it's a lot of fun. As ZZ Top sang a number of years ago, "Every girl's crazy 'bout a sharp-dressed man."

[David]

For instance, I would not even contemplate showing up in court without a jacket and tie.

Having recently moved from the Washington DC area, that was my first thought also. On the Friday before my jury duty I drove to the courthouse to make sure I knew where it was located. I specifically asked the security guard whether a jacket and tie was required for male jurors. He replied that normally only the attorneys, and sometimes the defendants, wore jackets and ties. He referred me to the prohibited clothing list and stated that anything else was acceptable for jurors as long as it was clean and pressed. Before juror elimination, we had about 100 potential jurors approximately equally split between male and female, and not one of the men wore a tie, nevertheless a jacket and tie. South Carolina dress is generally less formal than that in New England. This may be partially due to the fact that in our portion of the state, August temperatures can range from 90 to 105 degrees fahrenheit and the humidity is extremely high. In looking at Carl's comment in retrospect, another thought comes to mind. An accused is entitled to a "trial by peers" and many people in this area have never owned or rarely worn a suit. Facing a jury full of suits and ties could make them feel that the the jury is not their "peers" and could serve to intimidate them during the trial. That may be why the "big city" dress standards are not being imposed.

[Taj]

I have to agree with crfriend about off the peg shirts. The fashion industry, where it applies to general middle class working males, seems to be tailoring for America's expanding girth. Stuff that fits in the shoulders, neck, and arms is big enough in the middle for two or three of me. That and being slightly taller than average the short shirt tails won't stay tucked. Proper decorum is fine, but society places far too much value on textile usage. Still, if I have to wear it I want a proper fit in ordinary priced duds.

[crfriend]

[... I]n retrospect, another thought comes to mind. An accused is entitled to a "trial by peers" and many people in this area have never owned or rarely worn a suit. Facing a jury full of suits and ties could make them feel that the the jury is not their "peers" and could serve to intimidate them during the trial. That may be why the "big city" dress standards are not being imposed.

That, sir, is one of the best one-off edits I have ever seen!

Given the millieu, you are most likely correct in modern times, and I certainly give you the benefit of the doubt. I doubt that it was always the case, but one has to live with the times one is in. To be honest, I rather suspect that many New England men don't own a suit; I don't, but admit that I ought to have one on hand in case a situation arises that I might need one! (I want a skirt option.)

The "jury of peers" is an important concept, and I'd not really thought about the aspect of clothing as it applies in that specific sense. One might wonder, then, what is actually appropriate garb for jurors (prospective or empannelled) to wear. Is it the general common uniform of jeans and a t-shirt? Dockers and polo shirts? Droopy drawers and "bling"? $5,000 suits (for "white collar" crime)?

I've been empannelled on a few of juries, and for me it's unusual as I typically get punted out of the lineup pretty quickly. I've got waist length hair and a nasty predisposition to ask questions and think on my own; lawyers don't like that much. I've not yet worn a skirt to court, but do not rule it out. Interestingly, with very few exceptions, I do not tend to be biased in most things and so would make an exemplary juror; however, I look odd and that may make all the difference.

Thanks on that amendment!