Thank God it’s Casual Friday
“Shirts must be tucked in at all times” If you were part of the British school system, you’re probably familiar with dress codes. Dictating the length of your tie and skirt and reprimanding you for your acts of teenage rebellion, we’re talking nose rings. As we age out of higher education and thus uniforms, dress codes become more arbitrary and continue to change as they have done throughout history.
One of your earliest lessons as a kid was how to recognise members of the emergency services. Kid’s books were and still are adorned with illustrations of officers in uniforms. A fireman’s hat and a doctor’s outfit continue to be a staple in the costume boxes of those aged two-to-six.
Uniforms serve a fundamental purpose. How else would you differentiate a doctor from a chef? A pretty important distinction if you ever find yourself choking on the flaky pastry of a Greggs sausage roll. Needless to say, we need uniforms. But in our current decade, when changes in moral values edge closer towards inclusivity and freedom of choice, are dress codes holding us back?
In the 1/10th of a second, before you first meet someone, psychologists believe we’ve already begun forming our first impressions, judgements are formed on factors such as attractiveness, trustworthiness, and competence. These preconceived notions inevitably extend beyond the face and unto our clothing which today, continue to act as signifiers of one’s social status; religion; gender identity; politics; sexuality etc.
In 2019, actress Zendaya graced the Oscars’ red carpet in a white satin gown and waist-length dreadlocks, despite the captivating style she was critiqued by Guiliana Rancic as possibly smelling like “patchouli oil and weed”. This remark, which later led to a detailed apology from the E! journalist is a mirror for the demonisation that occurs when someone is perceived as deviating from the “norm”.
Rancic’s comments stem from a view that at best, associates dreadlocks with a “hippie” archetype and at worst bridges dreadlocks, a hairstyle tied to Rastafarianism with the Jamaican stereotype of marijuana-smokers. Dress codes are an opportunity for those in a position of power to create a false standard of normal and through corporate uniformity discriminate against those in marginalised groups.
A popular piece of advice often passed down encourages individuals to avoid tattoos in visible placements such as your arms, face or neck because it is believed that tattoo stigma will impede your ability to gain employment. The theory holds up as a 2018 survey conducted by LinkedIn found that 88% of recruiters considered tattoos to limit a candidate’s career prospects.
For many, the instance of being offered an interview is close accompanied by a deep dive into their wardrobe as they search for that “perfect” interview outfit, however, The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants was only a movie. We know that in real life, interview outfits are hardly a one-size-fits-all, least of all when dress codes change from office to office.
If you find yourself in a workplace that encourages a uniform of dress shirts then you might be familiar with the concept of Casual Friday. A salient step in the popularisation of “business casual”, the global trend first appeared in Hawaii in 1962. “Aloha Friday” as it was first known, acted as a means of promoting Hawaiian shirts in a bid to boost the Hawaiian garment industry.
The effort dubbed “Operation Liberation” argued in favour of Aloha Friday as a solution to the discomfort of conventional business attire in the hot climate. Introduced to the mainland by Hewlett-Packard, Aloha Friday triggered confusion regarding the parameters of “casual” in the workplace. In a 1992 Guerrilla marketing campaign Levi’s rectified this, shipping brochures entitled “A Guide to Casual Businesswear” to 25,000 businesses across the US and thus we arrive at office wear today.
In 2021, where Casual Friday is every day, we’re less commonly inundated with the gender binary of conventional businesswear. We once visualised men in suit & tie, and women in stockings and a skirt silhouette, however, this has been replaced by tech moguls dressed in normcore; creatives in Doc Martens and a personal favourite, stylists with a suitcase (although that’s more of a tool than a fashion choice). Primarily, gender no longer dominates our outfit choice.
Today in the 21st century, office wear style tends towards the ambiguous label of business casual. The workplace is increasingly fashion-conscious with large companies such as Buzzfeed acting as an example of a relaxed approach to work attire. Staff at Buzzfeed tend to err on the side of casual more than business. Buzzfeed Channel As/Is regularly features fashion challenges that see employees approach the workplace in school uniforms, lingerie as outerwear and most daringly body glitter – not that we’d recommend this. Suffice to say, casual Friday is the norm in the offices of this media company.
As a whole, creative workspaces have allowed employees greater autonomy over their workwear; showcasing a more open-minded approach. This begins during the early stages of further education. It isn’t news that art students tend to dress in more avant-garde pieces, sporting ‘sad clown shoes’ and taking inspiration from ‘biblical parables’. The creative knows no boundaries.
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CK4LL0Fng5T/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Whilst dress codes appropriately enforce a level of sensibility in offices around the world, historically they’ve built a reputation of reinforcing a framework of racism; sexism; homophobia; transphobia; ableism etc.
Over the years we’ve witnessed cases of prejudice against black women that manifest in both micro-aggressions and reprimand against their natural hairstyles; whilst women wholly have found themselves under pressure to toddle around in 5″ heels. The act of enforcing dress shirts deviates from the inclusivity many brands claim to preach. Those within the neuro-diverse community may lean towards looser fitting clothes to avoid sensory overload and so rigid workplace dress codes inherently limit career progression in some areas.
A recent example of workplace prejudice was the discrimination against New Zealand MP Maori Party Leader Rawiri Waititi, who was ejected from the UK parliament for his lack of a necktie. It begs the question of how the absence of fabric fashioned around the collar prohibits one from performing their role as a state elective. Waititi went on to refer to the tie as a “colonial noose”, a comparison that pokes at Britain’s violent history of colonisation and their relationship to indigenous cultures.
The concept of business attire raises the question, do we need to be uncomfortable in order to be productive? PR agent Rick Miller, who worked on Levi’s Guerilla brochure campaign stated that “People were showing up in Hawaiian print shirts or sandals and shorts. Frankly, there were concerns on the part of management that work might become too much fun.”
Does the sting of your feet in pointy-toed Louboutins keep you alert? Does the rigidity of a well-starched dress shirt encourage the correct posture at your desk? Although there are many arguments against the case for dress codes, they have some supporting factors. We can’t deny our role as brand representatives for our place of work, no sooner than deny a man walked on the moon? Wait, actually…
Looking to the future of office wear, as we leave social distancing behind we can expect to enter a new era of workwear as a returning workforce emerges from their sofas in recently popularised loungewear. The fashion forecast predicts a high chance of comfy cloud-like sweaters with a 10% chance of crocs.