Smh
Haha but you donât know it either. You are talking from your own family perspective. You have no insights on what is going on with other families.
Yeah but I didnât pluck a point out of thin air as if it were some sort of fact lol. So donât spin this on me.
Iâm making a point and addressing the point from what I do know to be true. Youâre making a point based on some guess work you literally invented and couldnât evidence if I asked you to
Okay fair. I will rest the argument here.
I am not completely for the ban but I can see the point of neutrality.
Out.
Not really the same thing, but got me thinking of this. A couple of years ago a group of female Muslim students sewed a Swedish university. They were all studying to be dentists or dental hygienists. The issue here is they wanted to work with their arms covered, because of their religion. Needless to say they lost. For sanitary reasons arms should not be covered in that line of work. Religion canât be allowed to decide over such important things. Maybe you should try a different career if your religion is more important?
Headscarf is another matter. Iâve had Muslim colleagues wearing one and itâs not an issue. As long as itâs safe, sanitary and doesnât put others in danger, who cares?
6 Likes
That statement applies to shit loads of different attire, which will be frowned upon at work
Well in some lines of work there are rules regarding work clothes, for good reasons too. I fail to see the problem in someone wearing a scarf, as long as it isnât a danger for themselves or others.
1 Like
You either have a dress code or you donât.
I donât understand why we have so many documented rules and unwritten rules about workplace attire but as soon as it is related to religion, all rules go out of the window.
The very concept of a dress code was to afford neutrality. It was introduced for a reason.
Itâs isnât just about safety.
A poor executive shouldnât look out of place in front of his rich executive despite both being at the same level.
You can make out a lot about a person and their background from the attire they can afford or choose to wear. A needless judgement of a person can impede work proceedings and many nuances that humans tend to have.
We already have our skin color, attractiveness, height and so much that we canât control. Those attributes manipulate behavior consciously or subconsciously. Dress code was introduced to reduce tangible means of behaviour modifiers.
A neutral environment is necessary for people from all background to collaborate together without any assumptions.
But all thrown aside for religion.
It is this lenient behaviour towards the toxic elements of the religion that I canât tolerate.
You guys think you are being very progressive about it but it is quite the opposite.
2 Likes
Youâre thinking way too hard about this.
3 Likes
And how has that worked out? I was not discussing a dress code as a whole, just that some jobs require certain work clothes, from a safety point of view. So if anything Iâm kinda agreeing with you right? 
But letâs discuss your point of view, that a dress code makes people more equal? I can agree if your in school, having the same uniform as the other kids. But whatâs more important is how you treat and talk to other people.
Maybe Iâm biased and have lived in Sweden for too long. But I do appreciate the fact weâve removed all titles when speaking to other people. Not only at a work place, but in everyday life.
We donât âsir, miss, dr, mrs, mrâ anyone here. Weâre strictly on a first name basis with each other. You can be a hobo and dress in rags, or wear a nice shiny suite and jewellery. You would still be called by your first name. If your at the doctors he introduces himself as âJohnâ, not âDr Smithâ.
I think your overanalysing the importance of clothes, because how we treat someone is more important. Sure there are unwritten rules regarding clothes, because you often âgo with the flowâ and traditionally dress similar like your colleagues.
3 Likes
Having a dress code has this exact effect.
You are neutralizing the power dynamics by removing the salutation. Similarly, you are neutralizing the economic standing of individuals by bringing in a dress code that indirectly asks everyone to wear clothes that wonât indicate someoneâs finances.
I admire that we are moving in a direction where we can treat others properly even if they are wearing rags but that doesnât change the fact that person wearing the rags may not be comfortable being seen in rags.
The white shirt purchased by a fresh graduate wonât look that different from the expensive white shirt purchased by a Senior Manager.
I am not actually. Income inequality is still there but We have abandoned the dress code that made workplace an inclusive place. Now people are spending 5-10% of their income to purchase clothes so they can fit in.
As much as we want to portray that we treat others well these days. A person who looks sharp & presentable will always make a bigger impact and relaxing the dress code has made individuals with spendable income to look better than their coworkers.
The irony aaaaaaahahahahaha
11 Likes
Genuine question, are turbans allowed in the workplace? If so, why arenât headscarfs?
Yeah what about yarmulkes as well??
Guess Jews and Sikhs are all right bro
4 Likes
It has utility as it holds the hair but if a Hindu with short hair wears a turban, he is frowned upon.
Headscarves while does hold utility is more of a religious and oppressive symbol rather than necesity.
1 Like
Canât think of a single reason to ban a headscarf cos itâs a headscarf.
The only possible caveat would be if other innocuous and religious clothing or accessory items were banned in the same work setting.
1 Like
Men are ok I guess.
Misogyny from the righteous advanced Europeans is it. 
5 Likes
1 Like
No thank you Jeff, for that time I received a broken glass in my set of 4 hi ball glasses and you replaced them all while letting me keep the 3 that werenât broken. Me and my 7 hi ball glasses are forever in your debt.
13 Likes