Thursday 24 September 2009

The tyranny of the tie



Earlier this year, for the final weeks of The Apprentice television contest, the pretty features of contender Kate Walsh were underpinned by a tie, not a fashionably feminised one, but one that would not have looked out of place with a male ensemble of suit and shirt. Later on, during the summer’s hot spell, a City employee complained about his firm’s discriminatory policy, namely that men were bound to wear collars and ties at all times, whereas women did not have to.

In 2002, BBC newsreader Peter Sissons came in for censure when he didn’t wear a black tie to announce the death of the Queen Mum. Gordon Brown was accused of ‘bad manners’ in 1997, when as new Chancellor of the Exchequer, he failed to dress appropriately for a black tie affair at the Stock Exchange.

What is it about the neck and shoulder area of the male – equivalent to the leg zone in females – that causes so much contention and is it a coincidence that the hangman’s noose and the serfs’ collar attach themselves to the same area? In the nineteenth century, a middle-class male tied a large floppy bow about a stiff, white collar. By the twentieth century, this had morphed into the necktie that we know today. As well as adding the finishing touch to male dress, ties are often used as badges of identity. Attendees of exclusive schools hang onto their uniform ties and air them at formal reunions. Engendering this sense of belonging and subsequent networking, along with the wearing of ties, are seen as male traits. So, what was Kate Walsh trying to tell us?

In the early twentieth century, various ‘liberation’ movements gave rise to the new woman, a creature that had the right to work alongside a man, to go to school and be seen as his equal. To denote her male status, the new woman put on a tie. A century later, female school uniforms still incorporate ties – I actually wore one. By wearing a tie, the new woman was endowed with a capacity to think intellectually, and when at work to subsume her thoughts and ideas from individual pursuits into those of her corporation.

One century later, women have won the right to put their necks into the same noose that has ever been provided for men. And this brings me back to Kate Walsh. She didn’t win this year’s Apprentice. That honour went to non-tie wearing Yasmina Siadatthan. Kate is now pursuing a television career.

Wednesday 16 September 2009

Leg zone or battle zone?

It is a commonly accepted thing that female fashion is always changing, and that women are obliged to go with the trend, or else be deemed second-class citizenry. I don’t know if this has anything to do with an extraordinary event involving me, a decade and a half, ago.

I had been made redundant and was dutifully doing the round of employment agencies. To mark the occasion and to counter the frightful weather at the time, I kitted me out in navy wool jacket and brand-new, ultra-conservative black Alexon trousers, teamed with flat, black shoes. I looked every inch – I thought – the creative professional hunting for the perfect position. One spring afternoon, during yet another agency interview, a chippy female recruitment consultant told me that I might increase my chances of employment if I was to wear a skirt.

When I had recovered my surprise, I pointed out the necessity of dressing for the weather, for serial pavement pounding, and the importance of not eroding one’s redundancy pile purchasing fripperies such as nylon tights. She waved my arguments away, insisting that the non-show of leg, from knee to ankle, greatly lessened a girl’s chances of worthwhile employment. When she had finished speaking, my interviewer stood up and moved from behind her desk to reveal her feet in slippers; not the elegant, heeled kind but the good, old carpet variety with fur about the rims – what was this? Comfort for her, and pain and suffering for me.

I stared pointedly at them, trying to cause her as much discomfort as possible, in return for the put-down she had thrown at me. I still gag at the surreality of the situation and of her argument, especially when I now see a tidal wave of women going to work in comfortable, sensible garments. I have lost touch with corporate employment and sincerely hope those days are over forever – but I’m not sexist. My next feature will be on the subject of that male manacle, the collar and tie. I promise.