雇主凭什么让女员工穿得性感？

On my first day in my first Saturday job at a clothes chain popular with office workers, I was told to pluck an outfit off the rails and wear it. As sales assistants, we were selling the office dream.

我是在一家深受上班族喜爱的服装连锁店打的第一份周六零工。上班第一天，我被告知从衣架上取下一件衣服并穿上它。作为销售助理，我们销售的是“办公室梦”。

I was 15, had never worked in an office, my mother worked from home and I had no concept of appropriate attire for personal assistants and junior executives. So I pulled out a floral top with a matching bilge-green skirt.

我当时15岁，从未在办公室工作过，我的母亲在家工作，我完全不知道个人助理和初级管理人员应该穿什么衣服。于是，我拿了一件有着花卉图案的短袖上衣，搭配一条暗绿色裙子。

Half way through the day, my manager pulled me aside and told me to change into something tailored and slightly revealing because, in her words, I “looked frumpy”.

那天过了一半的时候，经理把我拉到一旁，要我重新挑一套考究一些、略微暴露一些的服装，因为用她的话说，我“看起来有些古板”。

Even as a young teen, I knew what she meant. She was after sexy secretary. All these years later I still feel a prickle of quiet fury at the boss who felt she had the right to tell me to look sexually alluring. I was young, junior and timid. So I found a blouse and undid a few buttons.

即便那时我只有十几岁，我明白她想说什么。她想让我穿得像是性感的秘书。这么多年后，我仍对这位自以为有权利告诉我要摆出性感迷人形象的老板耿耿于怀。我当时是个年轻的小职员，而且有点懦弱。于是我找了一件短上衣穿上，并解开了几个纽扣。

It was an arresting introduction to the world of work. But as it turns out, my former boss’s attitude has not gone the way of the shoulder pads we were punting. And at least I was not forced into stilettos.

那是一堂让我大开眼界的职场入门课。但后来的事实表明，我的第一个老板的态度并未像当年流行的肩垫那样消失。再说我至少没有被迫穿上细高跟鞋。

Unlike Nicola Thorp, the British woman who caused controversy last year when she launched an online petition to look into discriminatory dress codes, after she was sent home from her job as a temporary receptionist at PwC’s Embankment office for refusing to wear high heels. Portico, the outsourced reception services company, which hired her later said it had dropped the requirement that “female employees wear heels between two and four inches high” and announced a broader review of its uniform guidelines.

这与去年引发争议的英国女士妮古拉•索普(Nicola Thorp)的遭遇有所不同。索普在普华永道(PwC)伦敦堤岸区(Embankment)办公室担任临时前台接待员时，因拒绝穿高跟鞋而被打发回家，于是她在网上发起请愿，呼吁议会审查歧视性的着装要求。雇佣索普的前台服务外包公司Portico后来表示，它废除了要求“女性雇员穿鞋跟在2英寸到4英寸之间的高跟鞋”的规定，并宣布全面审查其着装指引。

Today, after hearing evidence from hundreds of women in response to the petition, the joint petitions committee and the women and equalities committee published the House of Commons report on high heels and workplace dress codes. Ms Thorp’s case was far from isolated.

如今，在听取了回应请愿的数百名女性提供的证据之后，联合请愿委员会(joint petitions committee)以及妇女和平等委员会(women and equalities committee)发表了有关高跟鞋和工作场所着装要求的下议院(House of Commons)报告。索普的遭遇远非孤立个案。

Women described “the pain and long-term damage caused by wearing high heels for long periods in the workplace, as well as from women who had been required to dye their hair blonde, to wear revealing outfits and to constantly reapply make-up”.

女性们描述了“长时间在办公场所穿高跟鞋导致的疼痛和长期损害，此外还有被要求将头发染成金黄色、穿暴露服装以及经常补妆的案例”。

The report said women found such dress codes to be “humiliating and degrading”, “demeaning”, while some felt “sexualised” by their employers’ insistence.

该报告称，女性发现此类着装规定“带有羞辱和贬低意味”、“有损人格”，同时一些人感觉雇主执意让她们“性感化”。

Men might complain that being told to wear a suit and tie is the equivalent. But high heels are impractical and uncomfortable. Today’s House of Commons report found that women who have to wear them for extended periods of time are “damaging to their health and wellbeing in both the short and the long term”.

男性可能抱怨，他们被要求穿西服打领带也是一样的。但高跟鞋不实用、不舒服。上述下议院报告指出，不得不长时间穿高跟鞋的女性“无论是长期还是短期都有损她们的健康和幸福感”。

It was not just the physical repercussions that were demoralising. Women who gave evidence to the committees felt that dress codes were often tilted towards sexualising women while the premium for men was to be smart and tidy — something that I knew at 15.

不仅仅是身体上的影响令人沮丧。向两个委员会作证的女性觉得，着装要求往往倾向于让女性变得性感，而对男性的要求只是西装笔挺、整洁——我在15岁的时候就知道这一点。

Dress codes, such as the one imposed on Ms Thorp, are discriminatory and breach the 2010 Equality Act. Yet often employees feel vulnerable about speaking out, as I discovered in my first job. The House of Commons report recommended reviewing the equality laws, raising awareness on discrimination, for example at schools and universities, and imposing harsher penalties on employers that break the rules.

着装规范，比如要求索普遵守的那种要求，具有歧视性，违反了2010年出台的《平等法》(Equality Act)。然而，正如我在第一份零工中发现的那样，雇员们往往觉得自己的地位脆弱，因此不敢说出来。下议院报告建议审查《平等法》，提升防范歧视行为的意识(例如在学校和大学中)，并对违规雇主进行更严厉的处罚。

Such cases were reported by women who were junior and sometimes in insecure positions, employed by temporary work agencies, who felt incapable of speaking up — rather than partners in law firms or senior bankers. Ms Thorp’s move has helped to bring the issue to the surface. Hopefully it will have the effect of making women aware of their rights and able to speak up.

此类案例是由处于初级职位、有时就业无保障的女性报告的，她们被临时就业机构雇佣(而不是律所合伙人或高级银行家)，因此不敢勇敢地说出来。索普的请愿帮助让这一问题浮出水面。但愿它会让女性意识到自己的权利并能够大胆地说出来。

Clothing might seem frivolous but these things matter. A report last year by the Social Mobility Commission found that managers placed as much importance on soft skills such as speech, accent, dress and behaviour as qualifications.

着装似乎是件琐碎小事，但它们其实非常重要。去年社会流动委员会(Social Mobility Commission)的一份报告发现，经理们对资历和谈吐、口音、服装以及举止等软技能一样看重。

Being told to look attractive by your employer is quite different to choosing to harness your “erotic capital” — the term Catherine Hakim, the UK sociologist, described seven years ago. “In the labour market, erotic capital can be more important than economic or social capital,” she wrote.

被你的雇主告知要显得有吸引力，完全不同于选择驾驭你的“性感资本”——后者是英国社会学家凯瑟琳•哈金(Catherine Hakim)在7年前提出的概念。她写道：“在劳动力市场，性感资本可能比经济或社会资本更加重要。”

Wearing high heels should be a matter of choice. Being ordered to look ornamental by your boss holds no allure.

穿高跟鞋应该是一种选择。奉老板之命打扮得性感是没有吸引力的。