Passive aggressive sexism
I'm kind of obsessed with the site Passive Aggressive Notes; I think it's hilarious. This one I found particularly irritating/interesting:
Apparently this woman's supervisor sent this charming note because someone had been complaining (!) about her showing a bit of cleavage. According to the sender, "as I'm currently 7 months pregnant, i could be wearing a turtleneck and still be showing 'too much' cleavage."
Ugh.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Passive aggressive sexism .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10842
Even worse is this comment a woman (!) named Aimee posted there:
"Totally valid email. Mommies should not have their 'dirty pillows' falling out all over the office".
Oh. My. God. Dirty pillows?
I read Passive-Agressive Notes too and I think that comment was meant to be tongue in cheek. In the novel "Carrie" by Stephen King, Carrie's mother, an extremely repressed fundamentalist Christian, calls women's breasts "dirty pillows". She believes women only develop them because they are evil and also humiliates and punishes Carrie for menstruating.(In my opinion this is the most horrifying scene in the book, moreso than any of the telekenisis/prom night stuff.)
I think the poster was was trying to liken the supervisor who sent the email to the shaming of women's bodies exhibited by Carrie's mother, but not everybody got the reference.
*Also PJ Harvey references "dirty pillows" in the song "Sheela-Na-Gig", which is also about shaming women for their sexuality.
Oh I never read "Carrie"... But even if she was being ironic, it didnt seem like it to me and most readers...
Thanks for the info though :)
I also read PAN and saw the dirty-pillows comment. I also associated it with "Carrie" but I got the impression that this was simply a term that the commenter actually uses 'seriously' to refer to women's breasts, especially large ones, whether or not they've read Carrie. Like some people persistently refer to genitals as "hoo-hoo-dillys" and "cha-chas" even though they are talking among adults.
I didn't get the impression from the submitter's story that her breasts were in any way falling out of her shirt, so I was annoyed by all the comments of people saying that cleavage "makes them uncomfortable." So apparently the way to right this wrong is by making other people feel equally uncomfortable by calling into question their anatomy, dress choices, and by suggesting they revamp a good portion of their wardrobe?
I mean, honestly, if someone's breasts are literally about to fall out of their shirt, to me that is obviously distracting, in the same way as a visible butt crack is distracting, or pants that are low-cut enough to inadvertently show pubes. But just plain ol' cleavage? Whatever.
I pointed out there that a large-chested friend told me that if she wears shirts that show her cleavage, people (male and female) only "talk to her boobs," whereas if she wears a high-cut shirt, she is uncomfortable due to chafing and sweat. So I guess it comes down to whose comfort should be more important (I am on my friend's side).
Well it wasn't me. :)
Even worse is this comment a woman (!) named Aimee posted there:
"Totally valid email. Mommies should not have their 'dirty pillows' falling out all over the office".
Oh. My. God. Dirty pillows?
I am also in love with this site. It's hilarious. Another one to check out is The "Blog" of "Unnecessary" Quotation Marks.
http://quotation-marks.blogspot.com/
Dammit. Why'd you have to post this. Now I'll get nothing done today because I'll be reading the site archives!
Note to fellow teacher: your gold top with all the sparkles and sequins and shit is tacky. Since it bothers ME, I am going to avoid looking at it whenever possible. After all, you shouldn't have to change your clothes because I don't happen to like what you're wearing.
Thanks!
Almost Amanda who is trying not to be an asshole!
We are simultaneously obsessed, Jessica. But yesterday I got so angry with the comments on this post! I have got to stop reading comments on anything other than feminist blogs.
It becomes even funnier if you read the e-mail in a Bill Lumbergh from Office Space voice.
that's exactly what i was thinking, i had his voice in my head while i was reading it!
so, yeah...
I wish there was a fine for excessive use of smiley faces that attempt to erase douche baggery. I hate it when someone says something ass hattish in an email, but puts a big ol' smiley at the end, as if that makes it all OK.
:)
I'm rawther large busted myself, and I get comments from time to time about my cleavage being out there. Never an e-mail though, and never one that has been CCd to two other people. THAT is the part that would piss me off.
Wow, that's incredibly unprofessional. It's amazing how much people struggle with something as ridiculous as clothing, cleavage... whatever. I could care less.
Assuming she was actually showing too much cleavage to be professional in her specific workplace - which is a legitimate issue - I'm curious how else he was suppose to word the email? The cc's are probably H/R, so it does appear that he took the step of consulting human resources on the wording of the email.
I'm guessing plenty of peeps would disagree with me here, but if there's a dress code and she's violating it, how else is management supposed to address the issue? The email seems entirely polite and well-worded to me.
How about not sending it in e-mail form and instead tell them in person? And ... I'm sure it wasn't obscene. As a large-chested gal myself, sometimes you just can't help cleavage. AND OH NO CLEAVAGE!!! And she's right: Large chests can look rather obscene in turtle necks. It's like "WOAH BOOBS." High-necks don't always look great on those of us who have large breasts, because it just makes them look even BIGGER and balloon-like.
We don't know if there was a verbal warning first, and within a corporate environment such a verbal warning would require the presence of H/R to avoid any claims of impropriety. Honestly, the email is probably *less* formal, and it's copied to others for everyone's protection.
Any shirt - like a shell, for example - that covers one's cleavage will do, it certainly wouldn't have to be a turtle neck. Heck, a scarf could cover cleavage in a professional environment. Obviously she has other things she wears to work that aren't inappropriate or the email would be about her daily attire.
My work has a no tank tops rule - all shoulders must be covered. When I started there, this knocked out half my work tops. So I bought a shrug to cover my shoulders. After all, it's true that if a guy wore a tank top to work he'd look ridiculous, and I kinda agreed that it upped my professional look.
In a corporate environment big enough for an HR department, an email seems the least intrusive. Otherwise, the supervisor (particularly if a hetero male) would need to have a witness (more embarrassing IMO) or perhaps be subject to a complaint that in the personal conference he was staring at her chest and making rude comments. Even if he has a good working relationship with the woman and could talk to her about it directly, he couldn't have one procedure to deal with this for her and another for other workers who might be more sensitive or complaint-prone.
Honestly, the whole tone is wrong. The exclamation points, the smiley, they're all incredibly condescending. If it's a professional issue, you should write the e-mail professionally. If they'd simply reminded her about the dress code, it would be much better than going "You made some uncomfortable with your body!"
When it's passive aggressive, it's not necessarily that they're saying something bad, but they sure are saying it wrong.
Women certainly don't have to wear a muumuu, but we need to look professional. I think "Chris" wrote the email, indicating that she was probably showing a LOT of cleavage, maybe even nipplage, but worded it extremely politely, so as to minimize embarrassment. His mistake was not asking HR to handle it, as they would be a neutral party.
At my old place of work, a woman would come to work wearing lingerie tops. Yes, lingerie AS a shirt. How does one address that lawsuit-laden situation? Feminism does not mean showing your boobs at work, then complaining that everyone's looking at your boobs.
At work, you sit, people come to your desk, and can see down your shirt. It's awkward. I dressed modestly at work for that reason. Of course, you can dress sexy when you go out later.
As a feminist, I want co-workers to see my intelligence, face and overall appearance, not fixate on my boobs.
I don't understand...how is this bad? The supervisor cc'd the other person (Linda) for reference, in case if she did have a question management would be on the same page. Also, if it ever came up in litigation, there needs to be records and witnesses. If the e-mail was cc'd to the whole office, or if she was brought in to the managers office for a confrontation without a witness, that would be another story.
This was a professional and tactful way of handling a wardrobe question. Although dependent on the office/workplace culture, an outfit would have to be very low-cut or less than appropriate for someone to bring it to management's attention. Pregnancy aside, the poster was, more than likely, wearing something like that to elicit a complaint. Co-workers or customers normally do not complain without hesitation.
I don't think she was being picked on. How would you have handled this differently? What would you do if the complaint was about body odor instead?
Really, you don't understand how this is bad?
Ok, looking at this from a feminist perspective, first off, enforcing a dress code is only OK if it is enforced uniformly for all employees of any gender. Whatever men can/can't reveal, the standards for women must be the same, and they must be clearly defined, like for example, "no one should wear any garment that exposes more than 2 inches of skin below the bottom edge of the collar bone." Otherwise, you get cases like this of random enforcement delivered in passive-aggressive emails that say "you're showing a little too much cleavage."
That implies that some amount of cleavage is OK, but that there is a limit. So what is the amount? How do you measure that amount? It's been arbitrarily defined by a supervisor, yet that standard has not been shared in this offensive email.
So what has happened is that this woman has been singled out and told that she is being held to a certain nebulous standard, one of being able to show some cleavage, but not "too much" cleavage. Thus, the reality of living in a perpetual state catch-22 (one of the patriarchy's strongest tools) which is inherent to having a vagina is perpetuated on an individual, personal and physical level.
And that is why this is bad.
I always hated how some business required heels, pantyhose, and makeup on women, but not for men. I always thought that requiring women to put more effort into their appearances, spend more money on products, and look generally prettier was a pretty shitty thing to do.
Oh God, I did it, I read the comments. Never EVER read the comments (except here). That note can be considered sexual harassment, much to the dismay of several Passive Aggressive commenters. There was a case, long ago, I don't know where, where a woman's female boss critiqued her clothing to the point of rediculousness, and the woman sued and won under sexual harassment statutes. The sexual harassment angle came about b/c boss' behavior was focused on her appearance.
Depending on the formality of work place, cleavage would be inappropriate. Just as a man showing up without a tie and his top buttons undone to his shirt. The smilies were a bit condescending, though.
Without a frame of reference I'm not sure how anyone could begin to decide if this was appropriate or not. We don't know what she was wearing or how she looked in it.
It doesn't matter really what this woman was wearing. If she was violating dress code that it should be addressed as such, in the framework of professionalism, not personal preference.
Exactly. Nowhere in the email does the term "dress code" or any synonym appear.
Agreed. This e-mail strikes me not only as passive-aggressive, but unprofessional as well. E-mail is generally NOT the best medium to handle delicate situations ...
One of my favorite! parts of office culture! is the overuse!! of exclamation points!!! to make yourself seem more amiable!!!! When in fact!! it just makes you seem insane!!!!!!!!
@ StellaIV
I so agree!!!!!!! LOL
I have a colleague who throws in exclamation marks with a heavy hand. I'm convinced there must be a global shortage of exclamation marks because he's using them all.
I feel for Chris, whoever he or she may be. If you're a manager, once you've gotten a complaint about an employee's cleavage or skirt length, you've got no good options. Say something and seem like a jerk, or say nothing and put your own neck on the line.
Screaming bias MikeT. I assume youre a man?
I agree with MikeT. Having been a manager of people in a corporate setting in my past, personal matters are no-win situations and manager wish they would just go away. There is no reward for handling it well. There are a million ways to handle it poorly.
This case for example, if the manager failed to act upon a complaint (assuming there was one). He/she could be accused of tolerating a a hostile sexual environment. Saying something, judging by the bulk of the posts here, is sexist. So the manager is sexist for acting and sexist for not acting.
No what astaria51 says may well be morally and factually correct. But most people do not want to be the first manager to make a stand on this kind of matter. They just wish they didn't have to deal with it at all. Running a factory floor, a sales office, a group or engineers, or an accounting group is difficult and stressful enough by itself.
This seems a bit unfair. Being a male and having an opinion on this note should not be mutually exclusive.
As a woman who has previously worked in management positions in a corporate setting, I more or less agree with MikeT (A MAN! zomg gasp!)
It doesn't mean that it is right, or that it is the way it should be, but often corporate managers have to do things like that or risk losing their jobs. Now luckily for me, I was in a position to say, "You can fire me, but I'm not doing it," but a lot of people are not.
OR of course this Chris could just be a jerk, but I think MikeT was making a valid and true point and since we definitely do not know the complete circumstances in which this email was sent, I think your comment was a little unnecessary.
I would also agree, and have an anecdote that makes me a little more open to the smiley faces. One of my first jobs ever, I purchased and wore a pair of dress shorts to work the first super hot day in July. I was promptly emailed by my manager, letting me know my shorts were too short. I was mortified, and actually snuck away from my desk to cry in the bathroom for a minute before creeping back in shame to my desk to reread the email to find out what her suggestions were. Her email read pretty much as the one above does, smiley faces and exclamation points. When she came by a few minutes later to see that I'd gotten it etc. she was extremely sweet and sensitive to the fact that this was mortifying for everyone, and a necessity from the corporate hemisphere and not her personally. I felt 200x better because she handled it in a friendly and light way, not in a professional tone. We were able to acknowledge the dress code and the need to adhere to it, but make it clear that our working relationship was just fine.
So, I don't know that cold, clinical and professional is the way to go.
Being a manager means that you have to do those things with tact. Anyone can shoot off a message saying "Cover up your tits". If you can't say that without offending or annoying the recipient, then you are a bad manager. Clearly, this man is a bad manager, and we shouldn't defend him for doing a bad job just because he has the job.
I hate things like this. A lot of bigger women, pregnant or no, don't have a choice: plus size clothing seems to assume "if you have it, flaunt it". Which I don't personally mind some of the time, but many people are uncomfortable doing.
Additionally, in some situations wrap shirts and v-necks which reveal cleavage would be considered unprofessional, or even slutty: I've gotten overt whistles from random strangers and warning "that looks a bit sleazy" comments from my own parents.
Women shouldn't have to be subjected to that kind of judgement. Body does not = sexuality does not = character. But it's particularly irritating when they have little else in the way of clothing to choose from.
Personally, I would retort that, "These are a part of MY BODY. They should not be found offensive or out of place. They are attached to me, therefore, they have to be in the workplace too!"
Additionally, "I didn't sexualize them, this society did, and apparently YOU buy into that."
By that reasoning why wear a shirt at all? If one wants/needs to work in a business environment where conservative clothing is expected either by management or by the customer base (as perceived by management) then one has to dress to fit those expectations. The expectations should be spelled out in as gender neutral a way as possible but to blame your employer or one of its managers for the fact that exposed breasts are considered provocative or sexual in our society is narrow minded in itself.
I sympathize with the idea behind it-- that is, I understand that in some workplaces, low-cut shirts would indeed be inappropriate. As a secondary teacher, I am often reminded to be aware of my clothing choices. After all, I am constantly leaning over to help students, and certainly don't want to end up flashing a teenager in the process. Would it be ideal if, as a society, we were able to get past this? Certainly. But I would not say we are at that point.
That being said, this particular note was worded poorly. As was mentioned earlier, the supervisor should have used words like "dress code", and avoided the smiley faces altogether.
I hate all the fuss about cleavage. To me, it is one of the greatest symbols of objectification. I grew up in the warm state of Florida where I and every girl I knew wore tank tops and other revealing clothing items all the time. It wasn't an attempt to be sexy, and and no one thought it was shocking or attention-seeking. The guys did not stare or harass us. But when I moved to New York, clothes like tank tops that seemed normal to were treated like they were inappropriate or sexual. Even tops that did not show cleavage per se could be treated as titillating because some of the chest and/or shoulders were exposed. Then there was all that attention paid to Hillary Clinton's cleavage and talk of her dressing sexier because of it. Some comments I read a while back in response to the fact the "This is what a feminist looks like" shirt was being offered in tank top form went something like "If it is about feminism, then why are they trying to be sexy?" Apparently, any exposure of female body parts is an inherently sexual act.
It makes me so mad. I used to put on tops without a second thought to how they would be received. Before I just saw my body. Now I have to look at myself and decide if I am being too revealing and if the exposure of certain areas of my body might seem too sexual. Even though there is nothing sexual about wearing a tank top for me, I have to look at my body through the sexualized lens of society. It bothers me that the exposure of female skin is automatically viewed as something done to entice men regardless of the actual intentions of the woman. So in order to meet levels of appropriateness, I have to view my body as something that exists solely for arousal purposes. When society starts to view women as independent individuals rather than sexual objects, then I won't have to mentally objectify myself to appear decent.
It really interests me what the different regions of the country. But what are you describing, attitudes about clothing in general, or attitudes in a business setting?
A work environment is a completely different ball game than what's out on the streets. When you're out on the street it doesn't matter what anybody thinks of your tastes or sexuality because of your clothes. Wear a shirt, something to cover your bottom, and shoes and you're good to go.
But in the workplace, formality matters, and business can hinge on it. For the workplace I don't even think it's just about being sexual. Showing skin of any sort is just seen as more casual and therefore not appropriate in the more formal settings. Shorts, short sleeve shirts, tank tops, and unbuttoned tops are no go in some business settings.
That`s exactly the point. People sexualize bodies in a way that is over the top for me.
Yesterday, it was super super hot here (I live in Brazil, so it's summer here -- and, oh my god, it is bad this year!). So I was wearing a dress. It was NOT a short dress. People could only see my leg from the knee below and EVEN SO I had men looking at them with a disgusting "me so horny" face. It's not even a part of the leg that is usually sexualized. It wasn't even a short dress!
But I'm sure some people would say "well, if you dont want to deal with that, just wear pants". I hate that I have to feel hot, cover myself and worry about my body because THE OTHERS objectify it. Just because I'm showing legs or cleavage, it doesn't mean I'm doing that because I want people to see those parts in a sexual way.
The truth is they can objectify anything -- they did that to aqnkles, back when women didn't show almost anything. So they're the ones who should change, not me.
That`s exactly the point. People sexualize bodies in a way that is over the top for me.
Yesterday, it was super super hot here (I live in Brazil, so it's summer here -- and, oh my god, it is bad this year!). So I was wearing a dress. It was NOT a short dress. People could only see my leg from the knee below and EVEN SO I had men looking at them with a disgusting "me so horny" face. It's not even a part of the leg that is usually sexualized. It wasn't even a short dress!
But I'm sure some people would say "well, if you dont want to deal with that, just wear pants". I hate that I have to feel hot, cover myself and worry about my body because THE OTHERS objectify it. Just because I'm showing legs or cleavage, it doesn't mean I'm doing that because I want people to see those parts in a sexual way.
The truth is they can objectify anything -- they did that to ankles, back when women didn't show almost anything. So they're the ones who should change, not me.
The simple and difficult fact is that, in every society, there are visual cues that denote sexuality. That doesn't mean that people have license to act on those cues at any time they wish but sex, for most of us (no offense to our asexual brothers and sisters), is a desirable thing. So, it is always the "800 pound gorilla in the the room."
That said, it is impossible for one to say, "At this moment, there is no one here who I want to be with, therefore I am not sexy and anyone who thinks I am is objectifying me. But two hours later, I will be with my partner and for him or her, I AM sexy." It begs the question, what prompted the two of you to move past simple friendship in the first place.
I don't know where you draw the line of objectification. And I truly believe that objectification is a bad thing. But drawing the line so sharply makes sexuality an even more difficult minefield to navigate. In other words, if I followed the meaning behind your comment, I would never regard anyone in a sexual manner and, as a result, never participate in this fun, beautiful, socially-affirming, rejuvenating activity.
That's kind of my life now, but that's a long story.
We don't know where she works or the kind of regulations or even what her shirt really looked like. Furthermore, for all we know one of her female co-workers was distraught about the top and notified the boss. So, I'd argue that while the note is irritating we just don't have enough information about her type of work or who actually complained.
I don't see what is the problem here.
Assuming the woman in question works in a corporate environment, showing cleavage is considered unprofessional.
I worked with one of the Big 4 Accounting Companies so I know all about how strict the clothing options are.
On the first week itself I received an email from someone in HR telling me that one of the managers had noticed that my hair was longer than what would be acceptable for a man, and thus "suggested" that I get it cut. All the while the tone was casual and friendly (no smiley face though).
I would think that in a smaller work place, this Chris might be her immediate superior or mentor, or something along those likes. I take the smiley face as trying to sound friendly about it without coming across as "DO this or ye shall be punished!". If it was me, I'd prefer to have the smiley face instead of no smiley face...at least it shows me that my superior/mentor wis just advising me, rather than admonishing me.
Agree with the above poster about sending "suggestions" via email, because in this case it is a man advising a woman. At the Accounting Company that I worked for, the male managers usually dispensed "Advice" about clothing dos and dont's to the males (quite aggressively actually), while the female managers did the same for the female employees. In my opinion, this serves as a shield for the male managers from getting complaints of sexual harassment from their female subordinates.
In regards to posters above who have said things about how this is unfair for women (women have breasts)., ie:
Whatever men can/can't reveal, the standards for women must be the same, and they must be clearly defined, like for example, "no one should wear any garment that exposes more than 2 inches of skin below the bottom edge of the collar bone.
It is not breasts that are the problem. It is exposing cleavage. No one at the company I worked for would care if you wore a turtleneck. Show, the breasts might be outlined, but hello...women have breasts? Generally speaking, office wear for women is also tighter and more form-fitting, but that is permissible (skirts worn by women can be X inches above the knees though...this is in the dress code) So in essence, the corporate dress-code is not penalizing women for being women but merely for inappropriate coverage.
Also:
first off, enforcing a dress code is only OK if it is enforced uniformly for all employees of any gender. Whatever men can/can't reveal, the standards for women must be the same, and they must be clearly defined, like for example,
...show me a corporate dress code that allows men to show ANY skin at the office and I will happily demand that the women in that office can show cleavage too. If this were the case, it would be wrong to penalize the women for showing cleavage.
But in most corporate work environments, men cannot show ANY skin at all.Even if on Casual Friday's you don't wear a tie, you are still expected to wear a long sleeved shirt, buttoned all the way to the top button. Do you see men coming into the office in tank tops or with exposed arms? Men who do expose their arms aren't even allowed to enter some bars, let alone the office.
Women already have greater freedom in terms of clothes and even at my old work place, which is corporte to the max, women were allowed to wear tops that bare the arms, even in a corporate setting. They can always use their jackets to cover up should they need to address the client in a formal meeting. And then there are wraps and shawls, something men in the office are generally not supposed to use.
If that's what you got from my comment, you missed the point. I'm not saying that women should be allowed to "show skin" while men cannot. I'm saying that the standards should be the same and should be clearly defined.
Ayla,
Does that mean that if, going by normal corporate dress code, if men aren't allowed to show any skin, that women must do the same as well (ie, wear long sleeved shirts and pants)?
Wouldn't this seem very restrictive to women? Afterall, now they have a much larger choice of attire to wear....by making them have the same standard as men, that would be taking away choice, hence I couldn't see it being a very popular change with female workers.
You could do the reverse, ie allowing men to show as much as skin as women, but I think we all know that this direction is unlikely to be chosen. The world is not ready to see male accountants, lawyers, doctors, bankers in tank tops and shorts.
I agree with you on the issue about dress codes being clearly defined. But I think there comes a point where it gets too ridiculous: ie, your skirt should not be more than 1.56584 inches above your knees, etc.
One of the "rules" they tell us when we first join is "If you have to think about it and ask whether it's appropriate, chances are it's not."
Ok, I'm sure you didn't mean it this way, but you are (somewhat offensively) not accepting the idea that I could have consistency in my opinion.
"Does that mean that if, going by normal corporate dress code, if men aren't allowed to show any skin, that women must do the same as well (ie, wear long sleeved shirts and pants)?"
Yes, that's absolutely what I mean, and I'm not sure how that would be up for debate based on what I said about uniform enforcement. I never said "only for men" did I? Was there anything in either of my comments which could POSSIBLY be misconstrued to mean that I think women and men should have different standards, particularly since I went out of my way to say they SHOULDN'T?
For the record, I think people should be able to wear any kind of outfit they want as long as it doesn't physically interfere with their job or cause danger. For example, nurses must wear scrubs. Funny thing, I've noticed that the male and female nurses at my local hospital and doctors office manage to dress virtually identically!
to be woman/human and have your appearance critiqued can be incredibly devastating. to step outside of the house every day and be socially acceptable but not sexual is a daily battle. how can you help others' definitions of what is sexualized? i am not saying men aren't included...but certainly their dress is typically more straightforward (if you will).
what is "rather... a little too much cleavage"? what is too much? a little? medium cleavage? and why is it this woman has to answer to her coworker's comfort level/approval? who is the manager really answering to? is "the cleavage" so distracting and sexually charged that work isn't done? is it affecting the woman's own work?
dress codes are typically stale and vague. women are more and more prevalent in the workforce and fashions/social norms are constantly in flux and open to interpretation. i do not feel for any manager that has the time to humilate a pregnant woman.
;)
couldn't help myself.
Wonderful post. Telling someone that they've dressed inappropriately could end really badly. I think a lot of people are assuming that she didn't notice or didn't care (a little nipple, seriously?!), but if she'd picked the shirt thinking it was okay, to get an obnoxious message like that could be a serious blow.
Particularly for a pregnant women, who is already facing a lot of public attention, and could be feeling a lot less than attractive or even presentable most days.
It saddens me to see so many people making assumptions in favor for the manager, when it's just as fair to make assumptions for the woman.
Im going to assume that Chris is a guy.
And im also going to say that no one complained.
To me this sounds like Chris got caught checking her out by either a GF or spouce whom he works with and had to send this out as a means of making himself look not guilty and get himself out of hot water.
Or hes just freaked out that hes being turned on by a pregnant woman.
Chris, dont be gei.
Hey, "Gay" shouldn't be an insult, no matter how you spell it.
That seems too convulated.
And you should not be using gay as an insult.
Im going to assume that Chris is a guy.
And im also going to say that no one complained.
To me this sounds like Chris got caught checking her out by either a GF or spouse whom he works with and had to send this out as a means of making himself look not guilty and get himself out of hot water.
Or hes just freaked out that hes being turned on by a pregnant woman.
Chris, dont be gei.
I absolutely hate stuff like this. I've had the odd comment made to me, and it was awful. Especially because I know for a fact it wasn't sanctioned by management or anything - it's just some nosy woman who is jealous that I have boobs and wants me to hide them so I won't take the male attention away from her. It's always females who complain or make comments, never men. It's ridiculous.
I'm pretty lucky that where I work the dress code is very loose generally (unless I'm meeting clients). So showing some cleavage doesn't matter. If someone did send me an email like that I would either completely ignore it, or reply back in a polite way informing the person that I feel comfortable in the outfit and think it's ok but thanks for the suggestion. I know my management would back me up.
In my experience the corporate world is passive aggressive by nature. Most often you have uncomfortable communities that do not truly benefit all members, which are cobbled together over the course of various managers and whatever silly narrative they have developed to enforce the corporate lie. With all of the discomfort and half-truths, it is not suprising that this sort of crap is common.
Enforcing the dress code is a job for HR, and HR should be damn good at their job for this exact reason: when they aren't, they are deeply offensive.
As a manager, the thing that gets me about this is that it was delivered via email. Email is for reminders, quick questions, general announcements, and distributing cute cat pictures.
Whenever I've had to deal with this issue, which hasn't been often, I quickly take the person into a private office, and as sensitively as possible discuss it with them.
But an email? For this? No way.