The Iowa Supreme Court’s confirmed of its decision that employers can fire a person for the way they look. They concluded that an employee “may be lawfully terminated simply because the boss views the employee as an irresistible attraction.”The Iowa judges insisted that the woman could be fired “not because of her gender but because she was a threat to the marriage of Dr. Knight.” (Honestly, this is almost worse, but, whatever.) The episode and the normative reasoning behind the judgment aren’t isolated.
Attraction happens and is distracting. So what? People can and do control themselves every day. Sometimes, they get angry—but they don’t generally act on that anger in a professional setting. Sometimes, they are moved to sadness, and yet, refrain from crying hysterically. Hourglass figures actually “affect men’s brains” the same way drugs and alcohol do. Therefore, in schools across the nation and in Iowa, only boyish girls should work with male superiors. Men also find fertile gals more attractive. Maybe we should only work for part of the month, or only when we are prepubescent and post-menopausal? Also, work can be stressful and when it is, men are more attracted to rounded, Rubenesque-looking women, so I suggest that in Iowa, employers stagger female employees by body type to match stress-provoking work cycles.
This happens every day. Debrahlee Lorenzana, likewise fired (by Citibank) for being too luscious. She was attractive, wore professional clothing, and was fired because some men found her sexy. Lauren Odes was told to “wear a bathrobe” over her clothing before she was fired for being “too hot.” Here are some typical examples.
Girl Kicked Off Of Her Team For Distracting Boys (school thought she’d cause boys to have “impure thoughts" and “urges.")
School Bans Tight Pants Because They Distract Boys
Judge Agrees Strapless Dresses Distract Boys
Boys’ Brains So Addled That They Will Be Unable To Concentrate In Science Class
Most Popular Girls Penalized For Their Photos Being Forwarded Most In Sexts
Girl Expelled From Catholic School In Sexting Incident
The only people these policies worry about distracting are gender-stereotyped, heterosexual boys who, if they have any sense, should be and are insulted by the underlying assumption that they are little better than rutting stags who can’t control themselves and apparently grow up to be dentists who cannot control themselves and judges who don’t expect them to. And, the consequences of this widespread belief that boys and men are constantly “tempted" to the point of harm, is, of course, to punish girls and women, like the ones above. It’s easy to do when the habit starts so early.
What I tell schools and what Michael Kimmel said last week are the same thing: Girls and women are subjected for life to the male gaze and its effects: “men’s estimation of beauty is the defining feature of the category.” From luscious Lolitas to MILFS and now, apparently, marriage-wrecking hygienists.
there is a vast difference between teaching children how to dress appropriately with an understanding of context and teaching them patriarchal, sexist, faux-morality double-standards blather based on destructive gender stereotypes that lead to Iowa’s decision and discrimination in the workplace. If you doubt that this is true and that it is discriminatory, I leave you—in the spirit of snark infused with exasperation—with this explanatory montage from Hollywood because there are no words left. Read whole piece here.
Iowa, you are not doing a very good job of luring me back home.