Congress Misogyny Is Standing In The Way Of Journalists Doing Their Job
Start writing a post
Politics

Congress Misogyny Is Standing In The Way Of Journalists Doing Their Job

The "appropriateness" of women's clothing is too often subjective, so too often it stands in the way of productivity

30
Congress Misogyny Is Standing In The Way Of Journalists Doing Their Job
freedomworks.org

A number of women reporters have had an unfortunate run-in with one of the rules of Congress, newly enforced under the Trump administration. That rule? Dress code.

Congress has always had a standard of dress, but in the last few months the number of women reporting being denied access to certain parts of the Capitol because of their clothing has risen. Most recently, a young woman tried to enter a guarded room outside the house chamber, known as the Speaker's lobby, but was turned away because of her sleeveless dress. The Speaker's lobby is a popular location for reporters to wait when they are hoping to conduct brief interviews with lawmakers. So in this case, the dress code interfered with this young woman's work.

We've all been hearing stories of girls getting sent home from school to change clothes for years. Debates abound about the fairness of these policies, with many pointing fingers to the sexism of disrupting a girl's learning to make sure she doesn't disrupt a boy's. It's true that in schools dress codes are far more lenient for boys, who never have to think about the "fingertip rule." In Congress, however, things are a little different.

In the Capitol, men are held to an extremely rigid standard of dress. Even in the intense summer heat of Washington D.C., every man who enters the building is expected to show up wearing a suit, complete with jacket and tie. In this case, the rules of dress for women are actually the more lenient set.

And yet this still creates a problem. The only guidelines women have been given about their clothing choices are that "they're not allowed to wear sleeveless blouses or dresses, sneakers or open-toed shoes." Everyone also received a vague reminder from speaker Paul Ryan that "Members should wear appropriate business attire during all sittings of the House however brief their appearance on the floor may be." There are no signs anywhere with guidelines listed, and the rules are only enforced on the House side of the Capitol, not the Senate, making everything more confusing.

It is no wonder so many women reporters have gotten called out for not following the dress code. "Business attire" means something very specific for men, but this same level of specificity does not exist for women. Our choice of clothing is always a judgement call made based on where we are going, what we have to do there, who we're going to see, and even what gender most of the people we are likely to interact with will be. We women are pretty savvy at navigating the murky waters of women's business attire, but sometimes even the best of us get it wrong.

The "appropriateness" of a woman's clothing is always subjective. Even on Capitol Hill, hence why the rules are more strictly enforced by the House than the Senate and why some Speakers double down more on the rules than others.

This subjectivity leaves women at a disadvantage. Because it means that it is not ultimately our call whether our clothing is appropriate. It's someone else's. Which means someone else gets to decide whether our appearance will disrupt our workday or not, which takes away some of our autonomy.

The recent incidents on Capitol Hill are far from the worst instances of women having their clothing and bodies policed by others. But they are still part of a larger epidemic of hoops women have to jump through to make it in this world. We need to work on getting rid of these hoops. On Capitol Hill and everywhere else.

Report this Content
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
Featured

An open letter to my father

What you did sounds dumb to me

287
An open letter to my father
The Truth About My Parents' Divorce

Considering im 18 now & you're one of the best men i've ever met since you have a child; me. I want you to know that I love you, more than anyone, I love you. I don't forgive you for the way you hurt my mother. I'm hurt because you broke our family. Thing went down hill the day you found Laquita. You we're distant & shortly after my mother turned into the coldest, saddest women to walk past me. She's my best friend & so are you. Not one day goes by where I don't wonder what she did wrong. How on earth could you trade your family & the women who loved you unconditionally for a home wrecker? Sounds dumb to me.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Is God Reckless?

Exploring the controversy behind the popular worship song "Reckless Love"

1073
Is God Reckless?


First things first I do not agree with people getting so caught up in the specific theology of a song that they forget who they are singing the song to. I normally don't pay attention to negative things that people say about worship music, but the things that people were saying caught my attention. For example, that the song was not biblical and should not be sung in churches. Worship was created to glorify God, and not to argue over what kind of theology the artist used to write the song. I was not made aware of the controversy surrounding the popular song "Reckless Love" by Cory Asbury until about a week ago, but now that I am aware this is what I have concluded.The controversy surrounding the song is how the term reckless is used to describe God's love. This is the statement that Cory Asbury released after many people questioned his theology regarding his lyrics. I think that by trying to clarify what the song was saying he added to the confusion behind the controversy.This is what he had to say,
"Many have asked me for clarity on the phrase, "reckless love". Many have wondered why I'd use a "negative" word to describe God. I've taken some time to write out my thoughts here. I hope it brings answers to your questions. But more than that, I hope it brings you into an encounter with the wildness of His love.When I use the phrase, "the reckless love of God", I'm not saying that God Himself is reckless. I am, however, saying that the way He loves, is in many regards, quite so. What I mean is this: He is utterly unconcerned with the consequences of His actions with regards to His own safety, comfort, and well-being. His love isn't crafty or slick. It's not cunning or shrewd. In fact, all things considered, it's quite childlike, and might I even suggest, sometimes downright ridiculous. His love bankrupted heaven for you. His love doesn't consider Himself first. His love isn't selfish or self-serving. He doesn't wonder what He'll gain or lose by putting Himself out there. He simply gives Himself away on the off-chance that one of us might look back at Him and offer ourselves in return.His love leaves the ninety-nine to find the one every time."
Some people are arguing that song is biblical because it makes reference to the scripture from Matthew 28:12-14 and Luke 15. Both of these scriptures talk about the parable of the lost sheep and the shepherd. The shepherd symbolizes God and the lost sheep are people that do not have a relationship with God. On the other hand some people are arguing that using the term reckless, referring to God's character is heretical and not biblical. I found two articles that discuss the controversy about the song.The first article is called, "Reckless Love" By Cory Asbury - "Song Meaning, Review, and Worship Leading Tips." The writer of the article, Jake Gosselin argues that people are "Making a mountain out of a molehill" and that the argument is foolish. The second article, "God's Love is not Reckless, Contrary to What You Might Sing" by author Andrew Gabriel argues that using the term reckless is irresponsible and that you cannot separate Gods character traits from God himself. For example, saying that God's love is reckless could also be argued that God himself is reckless. Reckless is typically not a word that someone would use to describe God and his love for us. The term reckless is defined as (of a person or their actions) without thinking or caring about the consequences of an action. However, Cory Asbury is not talking about a person, he is talking about God's passionate and relentless pursuit of the lost. While I would not have chosen the word reckless, I understand what he was trying to communicate through the song. Down below I have linked two articles that might be helpful if you are interested in reading more about the controversy.


Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

10 Signs You Grew Up In A Small Town

Whether you admit it or not, that tiny town will always have your heart.

1269
The Odyssey

1. You still talk to people that you went to elementary school with.

These are the people you grew up with and the people you graduated high school with. The faces you see in kindergarten are the same faces you’ll see for the rest of your life.

Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

150 Words For Anyone Who Loves Football Games

Why I love high school football games, even though I don't like football.

2382
Dallas News

When most think of high school they think of friend drama, parties, getting your drivers license, and best of all foot ball games.

Keep Reading... Show less
Politics

10 Greatest Speeches In Modern American History

The United States is a relatively infantile nation, but its legacy of spoken rhetoric is one of the richest in the world.

4958
flickr

Rhetoric, in all its forms, arrives under the scrutiny of historians both for its historical impact and literary value. Dozens of speeches have either rallied the nation together or driven it drastically apart –– the impact of speeches in politics, social movements, and wars is undeniable.

Keep Reading... Show less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Facebook Comments