Using sexuality for power in the workplace
March 4, 2009
by Amy Siskind
|
Lynn Tilton
I wrote about a story for our blog in December 2008 about a former work colleague and pal of mine, Lynn Tilton. Lynn and I worked together for five year in the in the mid 1990s. The blog piece titled Say it loud, say it proud girlfriend! featured a commanding performance by Lynn on CNBC’s Squawk Box.
As background, in my last piece I described:
Lynn is the currently the CEO of Partriach Partners, a $6 billion asset management firm that she started by herself 8 years ago. Even the name of her firm is a work in irony – Lynn is one of the biggest feminist you will ever meet.
This morning, one of my pals from Wall Street sent me an article from the LA Times titled Executive gets mileage from her image. Here’s an excerpt from the piece:
Rotor blades and turbine engines were supposed to be the showcase at the annual helicopter convention in Anaheim last week, so pilot James Costa wasn’t sure what to make of the crowd surrounding a woman in a leopard-skin dress with knee-high boots.
The woman with long blond hair was signing glossy photos of herself as a line formed in front of her exhibit booth.
“I thought she was a stripper,” said Costa, a helicopter pilot from Tulare, Calif., before he found out that the woman was Lynn Tilton, the owner of one of the nation’s largest helicopter makers.
“Very cool,” Costa said in disbelief. “You know she brought that company back from the brink of destruction. She’s our rock star.”
A few years later, I’m not sure how I feel about all this. When I worked on Wall Street, out of the box type behavior was the norm in my business. The distressed trading world is full of colorful personalities, Lynn being just one of many.
But since the 2008 election and my “reawakening” I guess I look at the world differently. I know Lynn well and her point of view is that she is comfortable with her sexuality and it is part of her business persona. When we worked together this didn’t bother me. One of my friends on Wall Street used to say: “why pay for entertainment when we can watch Lynn for free.” And Lynn loved it all – it was part of the whole game. But now with The New Agenda, I’m wondering out loud whether having a woman use her sexuality is counter-productive to our way forward? Or, do we say — hey, she is comfortable with herself and is just being herself (which is true of Lynn).
What do you think?
I was just reading about a Legislator in W. Va who has proposed a Bill to outlaw the sale of Barbie dolls, saying Barbie is sending the wrong message to girls, that beauty matters more than brains. It would seem that long before Lynn’s appearance in a leopard-skin dress, she spent countless hours in the office crunching numbers and making decisions and doing all the mundane things business people do – pretty drab compared to the flamboyant boots and skirt. Then again, the quality of her product sells itself without sexuality attached. It’s just my hunch this is more of a I-don’t-give-a-damn display than anything else and the boss can do what she wants to do.
Personally, I think this woman’s shtick is just that, a publicity stunt.
That said, I’m don’t think that the workplace is the proper venue for overt sexuality. And, frankly, an attractive woman doesn’t need to dress provocatively to get attention. Witness Sarah Palin whose most flashy attire was her shoes.
Women like Sarah Palin will advance our cause, not women like the one in this article whose sexy “performance” will only advance herself.
I don’t think. (Not I’m don’t think!)
It seems that for women, sexual attractiveness generates power, whereas for men, power generates sexual attractiveness. I hope that this woman has other assets on which to base her self worth as she ages, and it sounds like she does. I wish her well, yet I wish I weren’t sending my daughters out into this kind of world.
It’s an age old argument—women’s sexuality gets everyone riled up in any context. I like the one that says “from 18–30 women can by on their looks, 30–50 on their brains, and over 50 she better get by on her investments.”
Seriously, this particular subject is one that society has been trying to wrap their brains around for time immemorial. Controlling women’s sexuality has had its horrible effects that are with us to this day. EVERYONE wants to control this power of ours. It threatens everyone, men and women alike.
I’m more on the relaxed side of it. I think we need to just let it be. It’s not a power that lasts forever, after which we as women had better be prepared to find traction in another way.
Maybe the answer isn’t even the same every time??
Here’s an article written by a friend of mine about this kind of question:
http://humanfolly.wordpress.co.....andidates/
She and I had some great back and forth on the topic – but regardless of what anyone believes is the “right” answer, I’m very glad that we’re writing and expressing ourselves about it.
For me the question isn’t whether your friend is comfortable with her sexuality (congrats to her), it’s whether implied sexual marketing is appropriate in a business setting.
It’s a bit like auto show models, where the undertone is, “If you buy this, you can have me with the deal.” Yes, your friend runs the company, but it still sends a subtle message that to succeed a woman has to be “available.”
It’s a positive for your friend now. But games like that easily backfire. And it puts pressure on business women who don’t naturally match beauty images to play the game the same way if they want to succeed.
If women had a level playing field, if we had a plethora of images to choose role models among, it would matter less what any particular woman did. But this year showed dramatically that we don’t.
Unless of course there are men at those shows dressed in skin tight pants being “comfortable with their sexuality.” That would put it in a different context altogether.
I suspect that if we had more women in business venues, your friend’s schtick wouldn’t seem sexy, but very silly.
But, hey, what do I know? It’s not a conundrum I’ll ever have to face.
I dunno Cynthia, I “got by” on my looks well into my 40s. And even now it’s still a plus that I don’t look my age. It seems to generate an odd admiration among both genders.
More to the point, there’s a difference between attractiveness and playing to sexual stereotypes. I hardly believe that being mistaken for a stripper will advance most women’s careers. It works for this particular woman because she’s getting free publicity for the company she owns.
And I’m in no way saying women’s sexuality should be controlled. I’m saying there’s a time and place for sexy attire and the workplace usually isn’t it. Unless of course you’re a stripper… or own a helicopter company.
FYI – Lynn is a 5 handle so to speak.
This is always an issue for women, because some women can look very sexy and beautiful in a suit and heels, and some look anything but. Some look great in sexy attire, and some look like a stripper. I have never met Lynn, but have seen her on television interviews. She seems to know her business, works very hard, and understands why companies either grow or fail. What I don’t want to see happen is back in the 80′s when women in the workplace felt they had to downplay their feminism in order to succeed (remember those large shoulder pads?). The other thing I don’t want to see is women feeling like they have to use their sexuality to compete against other women. As for Lynn’s sexuality – she would not be successfull without her skills and knowledge – no amount of flaunted behavior can overcome pure hard work and determination. She is way above normal on so many levels – I don’t think anyone can put her in the same category as the rest of us. I also think the public knows that.
You ask a great question. I don’t see anything wrong with a woman using her sexuality. It wouldn’t be “my” way but that doesn’t mean that it’s wrong or counter-productive.
Lynn seems to be a strong, successful, powerful and sexy woman. More power to her!
I think it will take all kinds of women who aren’t bashful about owning their own power to move our cause forward.
The fact that the pilot thought your friend Lynn was a hooker says more about him view of women than about Lynn’s view of herself. Are working women only supposed to dress in loose fitting dresses, or even pants, and tie their hair in buns? Why should a girl get a baby doll but not a barbie doll. Don’t get caught up in the image argument; it is a big distraction. Wear, do and be what you feel comfortable doing.
It isn’t appropriate for a male or a female to be “sexy,” or “use sexuality” at work – but that is a different issue.
cats – That was my initial thought too.
I’ve been the last one at the table more times than I can count when the guys left to go to the strip club!
I haven’t seen Lynn’s behavior, but many people did describe Paln’s appearance and manner as ‘sexy, hot’, etc.So just because a woman smiles and wears feminine clothes and even big hair, doesn’t mean we should buy into the label ‘using her sexuality.’
Hillary did what her age and time period required: tailored pantsuits, practical shoes and hair. Palin, younger and from a different demographic, is, we old timers used to say, ‘liberating’ a more feminine appearance. Maybe Lynn is for her demographic liberating yet another style.
Even flirting — if a woman FEELS like flirting, why not indulge herself? Why tiptoe, well not tiptoe, but flat-foot — around disguising her feelings if they are her sincere feelings. That too would be letting herself be controlled by men’s reactions.
Eventually hopefully these artificial standards will come down — the sooner the better. If she feels like making a crack in that wall, good for her.
Paglia for once had something good to say: about Palin and Hillary both sending very unusual gender signals. Yay for them!
I don’t see Palin and Hillary as ‘using their power’ but as not repressing their natural feelings.
well..saying the statement “her sexuality” is putting ownership on the woman of primarily male fantasies, and male perpetuated fantasies. Think about it. Can men use their sexuality? And yet we know there is nothing inherently “sexual” about being a woman, except through a males perception. In the oppression of women, women are made to act out these roles. Women are punished if they do or if they do not “use their sexuality” so it’s just another double bind, if you ask me, and serves no purpose to wonder whether or not women are doing something detrimental.
We could say instead of “use her sexuality” “manipulate men’s perception of women as sex objects” and in that case is it wrong to manipulate men’s perception of women as sex objects or bimbos? Is it wrong to ever appease men by playing the role of sexy woman? For some men at some times this becomes appeasement. In some other cases men disregard what they think are bimbos and this could be to the advantage of the woman who is oppressed. Is it ever wrong?
Oh crap this is the same Lynn Tilton I saw on the news a while back giving the men an earful on the reality of the Economic problem. She is an absolute genius!
Here’s an article about her, tho it seems a little slanted.
http://www.observer.com/node/39590
Just offhand, if the article has it right, it sounds like a fair way to ‘use’ one’s …. cleavage. Like Bella Abzug’s hats or Hillary’s pantsuits, a sort of lightning rod for the ‘what’s a woman doing in here?’ sort of stare. Nobody condescends to Dolly Parton, sfaik.
- imagine alot of guys only being interested in a sleek piece of powerful well built technology that can fly high and fast, called a helicopter and not being preoccupied with thoughts and images of sex – where comes this notion of total preoccupation with sex in the minds of all men??
interesting article on jezebel.com today about how appearance contributes to people’s perception of competency. They focus on the treatment of Sarah Palin in the election as an example (and the media spin doctoring of her as “hot, sexy” as a way of making her look incompetent.
http://jezebel.com/5164970/whi.....e&s=x
basically, if you are considered too attractive, too sexy, then both men and women objectify you and conclude that you are not very competent.
my mother always said, “people treat you based on how they see you. so if you look professional, you will be treated as such.”
I think there is a time and place for sexy clothes, and the workplace is not it. It also makes it harder for other women to be taken seriously when one woman dresses like a stripper (i.e., the assumption being that all women are supposed to dress like that).
as an anecdote, when I was an undergrad at an exclusive engineering school in the late ’80s, my male classmates always bemoaned the fact that their female classmates didn’t dress up more. as if we were there for the sole purpose of entertaining them, and not to get an education.
For some people (women and men), sexuality is not something that is turned on or off. Like breathing, it is part of their being. As with intelligence or humor or kindness or religion or wealth etc,, a person can exude an intensity that may not be to some people’s liking. One can be considered to be condescending or laughing too loudly or overly solicitous or a zealot or materialistic. But none of those things have the same stigma that being overtly sexy has. Shirley MacClain once said, “I want women to be liberated and still be able to have a nice a** and shake it”.
Mary, Mary. She is not sexy at all. She’s putting on a performance of sex(y), with all the notes she hits dictated by the patriarchal composer. Sec(y) for women isn’t only going through the moves to make men feel sex(y). I feel sorry for her.
I think on the way up, it doesn’t help to use blatant sexuality. Subtle sexuality, as long as it’s something that feels natural, is helpful for either a man or a woman. There are a lot of male leaders who trade on things that culture dictates men have — broad shoulders, height, V shape, good hair. Seriously, how many Presidents have been under 6′? We as women shouldn’t shut down any avenues open to men, nor should we take it to a level that suggests as women we need to rely more heavily on it.
kaija,
Different eras and demographics draw the line at different places. Palin is pushing where the line can be drawn: big hair etc that is not a sex flag. Tilton is deliberately using something she considers a sex flag (cleavage) for, apparently, a non-sex purpose.
I find it very unsettling that there is such hostility from women towards a woman who has achieved a level of success few business people (women or men) ever reach. Six Billion Dollars under management AND she gets to be who she is AND she is honest about it!
This is not a patriarchal society holding back women, it is myopic women refusing to leverage the advances of the past decades. The new generation of working females is more comfortable with their sexuality than those who entered the workforce in the early 80′s and 90′s. Back then, the criticism may have been more valid. Today, it is sad.
I think the new generation is less comfortable with their sexuality Mary. If they were comfortable with their natural sexuality, they’d just be fine with it, not twist it to the artificial porn standard displayed in the photo above.. Any woman here can do what this woman is doing with her appearance. It’s on sale at Macy’s.
And by the way *Mary*, if you’re not a dewd you’re doing a good impression of one, or at the least, flying the flag. Prog lefty troll on feminist a board defending the porn standard. Same old.
That’s the point , Sis. Anyone can have it if that’s what they want. In all that I have read about Lynn, she does not belittle people who make choices different than hers. I think there is a difference between having a complete sense of self and a sense of sexuality. Developing a multi faceted complete persona is much more difficult today. As some of the prior writers have pointed out, Lynn has used her entire self to achieve her goals.
Oh the porn is choice argument.
Stan Goff nails it, although i don’t expect you to understand. It’s here for all reading:
Sexuality and aggression:
http://www.feralscholar.org/bl.....ggression/
For the record *Sis*, I am a middle aged woman who has experienced the victimazation of the old boys club through out my career. That is all the more reason I can appreciate a woman like Lynn. She is the boss, she makes the rules and she corrects the mistakes.
Would her style work for me? No, not even in my best days.
She doesn’t make the rules.
If you are sincere please spend some time here: Feminism 101.
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/
Whether I think Lynn is appropriate for her “job” is not my comment.
She’s the boss.
She’s attracting money.
She’s saving money at her own show by being the model.
I did get a laugh at all the assets she owns.
ooos, there’s another Mary here.
I haven’t posted on this thread yet.
Going forward, I will post as MaryL
Respectfully, when managing 6 billion dollars, you make the rules, at least a significant portion of them.
I have advocated feminism since I was in grade school. That may be why I am so passionate about supporting women in their efforts to support themselves.
Yea I think the LA times article is just another example of the Patriarchy focusing on what a woman is wearing and the “message” she is giving rather than what she is doing. I think we need to focus on the real reason the article bothers us so much.
Does it reduce equality for minorities when a minority dresses up in blackface, and does a jigg? Does it make difference if the minority simply feels comfortable performing that way? But what if they rilly like picking cotton???
Gee, let’s have a discussion, because I can’t tell…
Oh, that is a nice article, thank you Sis.
I can’t be a feminist unless I dress a certain way?
My best friend from Wall Street Arleen used to joke that on any given day, at a least one Wall Street firm, there was a conversation going on about Lynn Tilton.
Looks like the TNA blog is the same.
Lynn is a magna cum laude from Yale and she surely knows how to provoke conversation. Perhaps that is the goal.
BTW, just to add it in the mix – Lynn is a big feminist and promoter of women. She also believes in controlling men through her sexuality – e.g. they “can” be controlled that way. Just explaining her MO.
I think Lynn is claiming her freedom on her own terms and I think it takes a powerful and confident woman to do so. It is what we should all aspire to as the movement goes forward.
I am so excited about what I am seeing here on TNA!
Amy,
Lynn sounds like a fascinating person that we should know more about.
That’s right Carolyn. You can’t be a feminist if your goal in life is to be a prostitute.
It makes a huge statement that a woman has achieved what TNA purports to be working towards for all women, yet she still sees herself as a sex-object, and is proud to say she will use that to ‘control’ men. Wow, what man hating that is.
Maybe Lynn should write an article for us.
Or has anyone written up an informative, sympathetic piece about her?
Amy I believe you’ve trolled us with this post. I can’t fathom your reasoning, particularly in light of the announcement you’ve just made.
Also, if you’ve changed the rules for the comments, let us know. There are heavy artillery radical feminist theorists who might like to know they’d be welcome.
Lynn does not see herself as an object. You see Lynn as an object.
It’s safe to guess that Lynn sees herself as a rockstar (as did Mr Costa in the artilce). You do not see her as a rock star.
Why is it necessary to denegrate her because you do not have the same viewpoint?
For what its worth, which I assume is nothing:
My mother, may she rest in peace, took a wagon load of ____ when she was young because she started wearing bras and was categorized as a slut for doing so. When I was young many of my peers took a wagon load of ____ because they went braless and were categorized as sluts for doing so. I remember my mother’s comment – just who the hell do these people think they are that they are entitled to condemn someone because of their choice of underwear?
Again, where to draw the line? Different men could be controlled by different amounts of cleavage. Haven’t seen many pictures of Lynn, but any man who could be controlled by, say, Palin’s cleavage, or even Dolly Partin’s — probably deserves to be controlled.
Puritan women were not viewed as sex objects — they certainly didn’t behave or dress as such. Yet one could not say they were treated equally to men or liberated in any way.
Carolyn,
I’m sorry, but when women are required to cover up so much of their skin, that is also treating them as sex objects — objects so powerful that men must be spared the sight of them or the men will be corrupted.
I agree with you Flora, was just trying to throw something into the mix to make a point. I asked the question “can I not be a feminist unless I dress a certain way” and suddenly my goal was prostitution. In fact, it looks more and more like whichever way we (women) choose to present ourselves, we are being brainwashed by male propaganda to censor it.
Do men ever agonize over what they are wearing in the work place, or how they present themselves or whether or not they seem sexy or macho? Most of the time they have a “whatever it takes to get the job done” mentality and are respected for it. Even grudging admiration if it crushes their stockholders, employees and lands them in jail.
The bottom line is, many of us are floundering here. Men are following a set of standards that have been in place for thousands of years and women are blazing new territory in terms of our freedom and equality. It doesn’t seem fair to denigrate a woman who has succeeded — ADMIRABLY — by whatever means she happened to have at hand. She, as well as the rest of us, have had an uphill climb. Lynn may look back when she’s eighty and say, ‘I wish I had done all that while wearing a business suit,’ but at least she won’t have to say she couldn’t do it.
Carolyn,
I like the idea of a lot of different women striking out in a lot of different directions against different limitations, different stereotypes. Each time it stirs things up, it gives other women a little more elbow room.
Even the negative reactions to Lynn may be useful, encouraging some mousy women to go ahead and dress mousy, if that’s what’s easiest for them.
I just want to ask to I can gauge what to write about.
Is the interest in this story to do with the economy, women in the workplace, sexuality and sexual roles?
Would readers like to see more stories about personalities on Wall Street? Women in the workforce?
Sis,
The blog sometimes automatically puts comments in moderation and if no one is here, they stay there. I’m not sure why yours was put in moderation – I’m no blog expert. Might be one word that caught it up. I was at the Big East Women’s Bball Tournament and have not been online.
Amy,
I think a lot of the interest in this story stems from the fact that, as I said above, in a lot of ways we as women ARE still floundering in this unchartered territory. And this story is still one of the issues that divides us in terms of defining feminism. Discussing this story was beneficial in that it gives all of us new ways of viewing our feminist values.
As much as we all agree we want equality that means reinventing all the ways society has defined us. I liked the way Flora put it, “gives other women a little more elbow room.”
Thanks Carolyn.
Guess I’m doing a fair bit of navigating myself. I certainly look at Lynn’s behavior differently today then when we sat in the same room for 5 years.
After the 2008 election, for better or worse, I find myself re-examining a lot of my thought processes.
I’ll keep writing about this type of stuff.
Oh interesting you were at a basketball tourney. At some point here today, I wondered what Amanda would have to say about this.
I am reminded there have been several world class female athletes who have felt it necessary to do this. Why? I wonder if they too felt it necessary to counter their success by a show of deferring to the pat standard. A kind of ‘oh I’m no threat to you boys.”
Why do women strive and succeed, and then act like they regret it, and do things to undercut it?
Carolyn, only women (and gay men) prostitute themselves. I am speaking in a wide definition of that term, not that narrow definition of the girl on the corner. Just picture a man doing that, and you’ll see how off, and silly it is.
No one here has degraded Tilton. The patriarchy has done that. She is just a pawn. Also, I have very much less respect for her now, not only because of prostituting herself, but because she openly admits to manipulating men and being proud of it. Sorry. Not my idea of a role model for young girls. If she is so out of touch with ethics in one part of her life, she will be in others. I wouldn’t do business with here, and most certainly, would think twice before getting into one of her helicopters. I betcha she cooks the books.
For the record, Lynn was always like this – well before she ran $6 billion – it’s her MO since I have known her early on.
She has a very strong belief – I forget the word or notion – witch/mystical – that women have special powers and that a lot of that power comes from a woman’s sexuality.
I’ve heard her explain to men -well to graphic to write here -I’d be putting myself into moderation – and watching each and every one of them turn pink cheeked.
I’m gonna work on Lynn for Ophelia.
No Sis. Lynn is honest and if you are not you don’t last long on Wall Street. It catches up quick (with exceptions obviously).
She actually owns a whole slew of companies – see her website. She is not playing to the partiarchy. She is the matriarcy and in her mind making the rules. I’ve heard her say to men more times than I can count: “you’re f*cking with the wrong lady” – and hey, when she said it, she meant it and enforced it. She’s not doing this to please anyone – she’s doing it because it makes her feel powerful.
I don’t admire her. If I said I did at one time, I retract it. I admire women who could do this, but don’t because they see it as cheapening themselves (and all women). Those women who won’t play aren’t worth what she is because when you don’t play the pat game, you play in the women’s league. You know, that one no one pays attention to, the one gets no funding, and has to have a bake sale for their uniforms.
Amy, I was wondering, when you were working with Lynn, did you or any other female ever feel like she made it harder for you to be successful at your job? Or do you think men in your company paid less attention to you or your ideas and thoughts because you were not using your sexuality like Lynn?
What does this mean?
Amy said: FYI – Lynn is a 5 handle so to speak.
And I’m just gonna close by repeating: this isn’t *her* sexuality. This is her performing what the patriarchy has determined will be women’s sexuality.
Amy,
Lynn sounds more and more fascinating. I’d like to hear her side of all this, not filtered through Corporate Media. And, if you worked for her, how did she treat you and other women?
As for what I’d like to read…. I like stories about very successful women who are also blatant, colorful feminists (eg Palin, Hillary, Apzug).
Also, appearance does send a message — or different messages to different people — and that’s something we need to hash out, for our own use in our own careers, as well as for our evaluation of public figures.
I think this thread of discussion has been so important because as women move into positions of leadership and authority it is something we have to consider and address.
In my experience men disagree on what is sexy just as much as we all have here. I don’t think I want to go from men deciding what is appropriate for me to having women decide what is appropriate. I guess I am sensitive because I was called into personnel at a bank once because my skirt was too short (according to them). When I pointed out three other women in equally short skirts the FEMALE personnel manager said, “Yes, but they don’t look the same on them.” It made me feel that if I didn’t look good in my skirt she was okay with it but if I did then it was inappropriate.
That was years ago, but, ironically the same thing happened in my husbands place of work just this week. An attractive young lady was singled out by personnel because of her “tight clothing” it was a turtle neck. My husband thought it ironic that an overweight co-worker was literally straining the seams on her clothing, blouse gaping open between buttons, etc. and nothing was said — I assume because she was not attractive.
I know this is not a comparison to the issue with Lynn, but I just wondered how others felt about this.
Amy, you said that it did not bother you when you worked together but something has changed since the election. Can you verbalize what is different today? I am particulary interested in why it did not bother you when she was working for someone else but does cause you concern now that she works for herself and controls thousands of main stream jobs with salary ranges from minimum wage to eight figure managers, presumably many of whom are women.
She is not doing anything differently Mary. I just look at the world differently since 2008. I was not involved in the women’s movement prior to now and didn’t see what was right there in front of my nose.
I am now re-examining some of my prior beliefs and just throwing it out there to get other’s POVs. I think Lynn should do what Lynn wants to do personally – but this comes from knowing her and knowing her MO and that she is not doing this to please others, she is doing this because that is who she is.
I guess I am older than you because I remeber when the women’s movement was about equal access not everyone being the same. One of the main goals was to have women gain control of their sexuality whether it was heter, homo, bi, a or trans, embrace it.
I am more concerned about Michele Obama’s resurgence of the Camelot mystique (and all that went with the early 60′s). Pearls and sheath dresses, ah yes, I remember it well.
Mary said, “I am more concerned about Michele Obama’s resurgence of the Camelot mystique (and all that went with the early 60’s). Pearls and sheath dresses, ah yes, I remember it well.”
[...] have had the fortune to work at some firms that were evenly split male/female. For example, Lynn Tilton and I worked together in the 1990s at a firm called Amroc Investments which was owned by a brother [...]
Very interesting, from a male’s perspective. I know Lynn too, and I’m not commenting in any way with regard to her.
However, I wonder if I behaved in business in a way that suggested that I was “comfortable with my sexuality”, if I would be so fortunate as to garner conciliatory comments as those above, like “well that’s just Steve being who he is!”?
That’s rhetorical. We know the answer.
In the same way that a woman’s behavior has had so many different reactions, a man’s behavior is subject to the same filter. Personally, I would much prefer to be around a man who is genuinely comfortable with his sexuality than a man who represses and tries to be somting he is not. That has a lot to do with how secure I am in my own skin.
Men, in businesses other than say entertainment, who try to use sexuality to advance their careers, usually meet with lawsuits and serious workplace issues, atleast in my observation. I know of none ignorant enough to try it in this day and age. Women, however, I have observed on a number of occaissions in the past 10 or 15 years, engaging in behavior in the workplace that might be viewed by most as sexually suggestive. I’ve not known anyone to complain about it, however. Except for other women who seem to take offense.
Trust me, men suppress whatever sexuality they may are comfortable with while they are the office…atleast the smart ones. It’s a career limiting strategy to do otherwise…unless, of course, you own the company and paying off your victims is just considered a cost of doing business. There are those out there, not doubt.
Best for the gents to show their sexuality comfort outside the workplace, even if the ladies seem to be able to do so with apparent impunity.
There are always exceptions, but It isn’t really comparing apples and apples, Steve. A woman’s dress might “invite” a sexual response — to be ignored or acted upon as a man decides. That’s a little different from being subjected to nasty comments, sexual innuendos etc. that are embarrassing and uncomfortable for a woman, especially when the woman is saying loudly and clearly she doesn’t like it and wants it to stop.
I would say the same thing if you were in a work environment where a woman’s clothing made you feel degraded, embarrassed, humiliated or uncomfortable. If her clothing made you feel that way I would say she would need to change the way she dresses in the work place.
Lynn sounds unusual. But in some industries I think there might be a demographic issue. In the phone book I see big ads for things like Bail Bond Service with pictures of the boss lady dressed kind of like the pictures I’ve seen of Lynn, and with big hair and lots of makeup, and in some pretty … warm poses. But I DON’T think it’s about seduction or objectifying themselves or anything creepy. I think that’s just how the Bail Bond customer base thinks normal women dress. I don’t think any customer is going to disrespect her! When dressed that way, I think a woman can act very tough indeed, without sending the men into shock. Who would dare disrespect Dolly Partin?
I think there’s a similar demographic factor in Palin’s appearance and mannerisms.
I think it’s way too complex for a simple answer. Some men think if a woman puts on lipstick she’s trying to “look sexy.” Recently I was running around in my store with my shoes off (and was even wearing socks) and a guy told me he thought that was sexy for crying out loud. On the other hand I know men who would be totally put off by the “Lynn” look. So are we supposed to sit around worrying about how men might perceive our choice of dress? I think that is a backhanded way of saying, “If I man finds us sexually attractive we must have done SOMETHING to encourage it.” And once again it must be our “fault.”
Lori
I completely agree with you
I read your article -it was interesting- I am a man- yes I agree some women do use their sexuality to their advantage at work. Lori do you think some women deliberately dress sexy to distract men at work – they enjoy using that power they have and now that men are even afraid to stare or make any comment about it because of sexual harrassment laws women nowadays are free to wear whatever they want in the office and that is why much more women now are showing more cleavage, tight blouses, push up bras – they are flaunting it more and more in the office- and men get all horny – they cant help it- I dont stare at a sexy colleague – i keep my eyes on my work- because its rude to do so. Tell me what you think- Id like to get a ladys opinion
Ross
Im a man and I dont think there should be any restriction for a woman or man to dress sexy in the office . men would get used to having lots of cleavage, miniskirts, tank tops, and skimpy clothes around them if it is a common site at work and they would get used to it and it wouldnt find it a distraction if they were very used to it – so the solution is Ladies dress sexy as often as you want to work, wear push up bras, form fitting clothes, tight blouses, high heels and lots of makeup- men will get used to it if they havent already and it will become completely acceptable in time- people wont be bothered about it eventually.
Ross
[[Image:00813_315b_122_1003lo_191.jpg|thumb|description]]
Does a woman who dresses in a halter-top, booty-shorts, and 6in. heels own her sexuality?
Does a woman who wears ankle-length baggy skirts, two shirts and a vest (to cover up unseemly protrusions) own her sexuality?
Neither of them do, because they are both viewed as objects of sexuality either way, no matter if they have both graduated with P.H.D’s or are stay-at-home moms.
I rather vividly remember a scene from when I was attending youth group. A girl who was tall and skinny had been out at the mall with her friends, and forgotten that she was attending youth group later that evening. When she showed up she was in a pair of extremely short shorts, and when she walked in the room with the youth leader standing there, making no attempt to stop them, the boys started singing the “Who wears short shorts?” song from the Nair commercials. After, they laughed and she sat down, the drama finished.
Two weeks later, a girl who was slightly overweight showed up in shorts about an inch above her knee. She told me privately before hand that she was worried that they were immodest but all of her shorts were a bit above her knee, because she had been growing, and her mom didn’t have enough money that month to buy her new clothes.
Half way through the nights sermon our youth leader, when talking about the “temptations of popular culture” and listing the usual pressures, drugs, alcohol, pre-marital sex, stopped, looked right at her, and said “And the temptation to dress inappropriately to get attention from the opposite sex” the boys, and most of the girls, including “short-shorts” nodded solemnly.
The obvious injustice bothered me right away, and for a long time afterward. The nagging doubt that took a while to formulate itself in my mind, that both girls had the right to wear what they were wearing without demeaning comments from men and boys took a bit longer.
Regardless, I do think there should be standards for places of business, and that being “the boss” in no way sets you above them.
People say that a lady with big breasts and cleavage is not taken seriously by male colleagues at work. Well- I’m not sure – have you seen the film “Legally Blonde”,starring Reese Witherspoon which shows how a gorgeous busty blonde enrols in Harvard Law school and defies scorn and ridicule to become a distinguished Harvard graduate.
Her fellow students and teachers initially laugh at her, this (supposedly dumb) sexy law student but she confounds them all when her talent for law shines through and they all finally come round to taking her seriously and it is then that her brains and talents rather than her body that the men and women are impressed with. She dazzles her professor with her ability so that he put her onto a high profile murder case.
Later her professor tries to seduce her and shocked she decides to leave law school- but she is encouraged by a guy , a classmate of hers, to stay on and so she decides to return to complete her law studies.
Soon she ends up on a defence team on a big murder case. Her professor leading the defence team is withdrawn from the case when they find out he was trying to seduce Reese and she takes his place as the main defence attorney . She then appears in the court in a low cut sexy form fitting dress with lots of cleavage and in a winning defence gets the wrongly accused defendant acquitted of the charge.
AS this film shows things are changing. So men are increasingly having to change their attitudes to ladies like Reese because in the last 20 years there are more and more Reese’s in senior positions and men have got more used to the idea.
Ross
The only reason it should be considered counter productive is if it in fact slows productivity. Beautiful people, regardless of their gender, always are noticed just like clever packaging. There are far more “normal” looking people in the workplace than there are standouts like Lynn. I think it is our problem (not people like Lynn) to get past the distraction. Her mind and her ideas shine far brighter than her looks, although in this case maybe it is a tie.
I just saw a part of a show on TV last night that I would not ordinarily have watched, but Lynn Tilton was being interviewed and the topic and her incongruous appearance caught my eye and attention. I had never heard of her and neither did my husband-who thought he knew of most personalities involved in big business. I thought what I was seeing and what I was hearing were not usually togehter in the same place. My first reaction to her was she looks like a Las Vegas Dancer, but she sounded like a smart business woman. Should these be ingongruous? I don’t make the rules, but that was my first reaction. She didn’t look the part, but if it works for her, who cares!!
Looking at her, I must say conjured up a totally different image than I got from the interview. My husband thought it was a hoax and didn’t believe she was really CEO of a a huge business. My reaction was that she didn’t fit the picture. I did not take her seriously, based on her looks, but her words gave another picture.
Reading all the comments here certainly gives us a lot to think about, but having been in the corporate world–you have to play by the rules, but the rules do change-slowly, but they do change!
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...