Don’t Wear The Uniform

I realize this is politically incorrect to talk about but my reputation is no good anyway.

Dave Chappelle:

“The girl says, ‘Wait a minute! Just because I’m dressed this way does not make me a whore!’

Which is true. Gentlemen, that is true. Just because they dress a certain way doesn’t mean they are a certain way. Don’t ever forget it. But ladies, you must understand that is fucking confusing! It just is.

Now that would be like me, Dave Chappelle the comedian, walking down the street in a cop uniform. Somebody might run up on me, saying, ‘Oh, thank God. Officer, help us! Come on. They’re over here. Help us!’

‘Oh, no!!! Just because I’m dressed this way does not make me a police officer!’

All right, ladies, fine. You are not a whore. But you are wearing a whore’s uniform.”

While it is true that the way a woman is dressed does not invite rape everyone who has raised a teenage daughter has told her at least once that “You are not wearing that out of the house!”

The way we dress definitely does make an impression on other people. That’s why we dress nice for job interviews. There are appropriate and inappropriate ways to dress for work, school, court, church and shopping at Walmart.

The reason I bring this up is because of the notion that George Zimmerman wrongly profiled Trayvon Martin in part because Trayvon was wearing a “hoodie” sweatshirt.

I must confess that I don’t know what George Zimmerman was really thinking that fateful night. It’s possible he assumed that Trayvon’s hoodie was some kind of unofficial criminal uniform. But if he did, was that an unreasonable conclusion?

Where did that stereotype originate?



About Myiq2xu

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Klown Musings and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to Don’t Wear The Uniform

  1. myiq2xu says:

    Until last night I thought I could not possibly be more disgusted with the Vile Progs than I already was.

    They have proved me wrong.

  2. elliesmom says:

    How does a whore dress? Are we talking expensive call girl here or someone standing on a street corner? Are we talking Mayflower Madam or “ho”? Enquiring minds want to know.

  3. helenk3 says:

    Is it like ” if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime”
    people seem to forget that actions have consequences.

    and yes with three daughters I have had to talk to them about dressing , explaining that first impressions count

  4. angienc says:

    It was raining so Martin was wearing the hoodie — that isn’t suspicous and it was NOT what made GZ say he looked suspicious. Progs are focusing on the hoodie to deflect attention away from what GZ told the 911 operator why he thought Martin looked suspicious — it was dark & rainy out and Martin looked like he was wondering around or like he was on drugs. IOW — Martin wasn’t walking with a purpose “straight home.” Listen to what GZ says on the tape — the hoodie or “thug uniform” has nothing to do with anything despite what the prog narrative would have you believe.

  5. myiq2xu says:

    This is why my mom is the best mom in the world:

    She got a 2-for-1 coupon from KFC so she stopped by there after church and picked up 2 meal deals then dropped one off here on her way home.

    There I was, minding my own business when suddenly, KFC!

    (Too bad she didn’t have a coupon from Popeye’s.)

  6. Eh, no such thing as a “whore’s uniform.” I was on a construction site once wearing work jeans, boots, and a loose t-shirt and was standing on the sidewalk leaning in the passenger side window of a truck talking to my boss. A streetwalking prostitute thought I was one of her tribe and started to talk to me. It took me a while to figure out that she thought I was selling sex for money (is that what you mean by “whore”?). I certainly wasnt dressed in any kind of uniform other than a “work uniform.” That my boss was my father made the whole scene even more weird.

    Like probably every other woman on the planet I’ve been accosted (verbally/physically) as a whore-slut-bitch-cunt-ho wearing every kind of outfit under the sun.

    What is a whore anyway? Are you using the word to mean prostitute, or something more generally applicable? Why is Miley Cyrus’s outfit in that pic whorish? If a woman wears an outfit that is revealing or accentuating of the parts of her body that men respond to sexually, does that mean she is dressing in a whore’s uniform? If a woman wears a revealing outfit out to a club or party because she’d like to get laid or attract the attention of a man (or woman I suppose) she has her sights on, is she wearing the uniform of a whore and shouldn’t be surprised if she gets treated like one by strangers?

    And most importantly, how should we expect the world (and by “world” it appears you mean men since women very rarely if ever rape, grope, accost, or publicly insult other women no matter what they are wearing), how should, exactly, we expect men to treat a whore (or a woman wearing a whore’s uniform, the distinction is lost on me since I’m not sure what you mean, technically, by “whore”)?

    Publicly insulting/degrading her? Offering her $10 bucks for a bj? Groping, catcalling, rape?

    I don’t get it.

    • myiq2xu says:

      When I wrote this post I figured I would be hearing from you.

    • wmcb says:

      Meh, I understand that women should not be groped, accosted, etc no matter what they are wearing – and I daresay myiq would agree.

      But as for what constitutes a “whore’s uniform”, or a “thug’s uniform”, or a “slovenly person’s uniform”, it is dependent on a lot of things.

      I have lived in a beachside community where it was normal and unremarkable to stroll into the grocery store in short cutoffs and a bikini top. No one looked twice. I have also lived places where that would be inappropriate, and garner negative attention. We always teach our kids this stuff – not that there are cut and dried hard rules, but you get a sense for what is okay to wear where. And also for what is ok to wear, but you WILL be regarded a certain way if you wear it. If my husband wears a ratty stained tee and holey jeans to Lowes on a Saturday morning, no one thinks a thing. If he goes other places in that, people will make some assumptions about his level of class and civilization.

      Clothing is a LANGUAGE in many ways. It’s a form of self-expression. And I can no more give you a hard rule for what, exactly specific items of clothing “say” than I could tell you what specific words are always “kind” or “rude”. Depends on the situation. Clothing is a language. We know that, which is why people wear “power red” in business, etc. For my daughter, what is appropriate to wear to a club may not be what is appropriate to wear to go shopping. At least in this town. It may be entirely different on Rodeo Drive. Look around you. In any given environment, it’s not hard to figure out the cultural norms. Straying too far from the cultural clothing norm of the “good and law abiding and productive” people of any community will get you pegged as outside that group. Usually badly. What the norm is may vary, but not the reaction to being outside it.

      I used to tell my son this. If you want to wear what amounts to the uniform for thugs and rappers and drug dealers (and thus has become associated with them) – i.e the baggy pants and bling and untied expensive sneakers and giant tees with certain messages on them – don’t be surprised if the cops stop you more often, or the store owner watches you more closely. You are sending a message. Clothing is a language.

      And as with many things, people who say they never ever make ANY provisional internal assumptions about people based on clothing (at least until you speak with them or something, and have other info to go on) is a liar. Human brains do pattern recognition and type sorting very well. It’s innate. It’s part of our survival as a species. It’s normal. We ALL do it in some ways.

      • Absolutely, couldn’t agree with you more. The only reason I brought up the anecdote of being mistaken for a prostitute when I wasn’t wearing anything remotely “whorish” (still not sure what Chappelle or miq mean by the term, but assuming it to mean clothes that reveal sexually attractive parts of the body at a time and place not the beach on a sunny day) was to point out that being called a whore or being physically/emotionally assaulted or accosted happens to women all the damn time even when we are not wearing revealing clothes. Absolutely, clothes are a language and we’d be stupid not to read and interpret them. But what language is a woman speaking with her boring, appropriate, workday clothes when some random guy on a subway grabs her ass?

        The question of how a woman in “whorish” clothes should expect to be treated remains unanswered. I know that when I’m someplace where attractive, fit, and sexy guys are wearing clothes that show off their bodies and acting in ways that a reasonable woman would know that they are probably interested in having sex in the near future, I don’t think of those men as whores and I certainly don’t get in their space, assume they have consented to sex (or a little ass grab) with me simply because of their clothing and behavior. Why should women expect their clothing to “read” as consent to that sort of thing? Men sure as hell don’t. If I’m interested in gauging one of those guy’s interest in sex with me I, like pretty much every other woman on the planet, will simply find out by asking (subtly or unsubtly, successfully or not). If I’m alone at a bar in a sexy dress and a man sits down beside me and offers to buy me a drink or strikes up a conversation with me, I’d be an idiot and an asshole to accuse him of inappropriate or sexist behavior. If he grabs my ass and says, “But Lady, you are fucking confusing me! No fair!” then he’s a friggin pig.

        But more importantly, to me anyways, is that Chappelle’s point, and miq’s implied agreement with it, reveals something more troubling than political incorrectness. We interpret a young man wearing the “thug uniform” as a suspicious, potentially criminal, and possibly violent person because that’s what thugs ARE. Our personal property and, obviously far more importantly, our personal safety may be at risk. We absolutely depend on our wariness of people like that to stay safe, and we demand that society police thug behavior. If you dress like a thug, be prepared to be policed.

        But by what authority and for what purpose does society, in the form of Dave Chappelle and here by miq, police a woman’s law-abiding and peaceful behavior? If you dont want to be treated like a whore don’t dress in the whore uniform? Suspicion and close attention by the police to young men in the thug uniform is absolutely appropriate. Public safety is the reason. But by paralleling that appropriate read on the language of thug clothing to as yet unnamed “appropriate” responses to “whore uniforms” miq seems to be saying that either women’s (legal, peaceful) behavior (and clothing is a signal for sure, as you say) is fair game for social policing, or that women wearing whore uniforms should know that they are thereby consenting to some kind of sexual contact with pretty much any man they come across. Or both.

        • wmcb says:

          I mostly agree with you. I think that assuming any woman in “whore” clothing is fair game for agressive grabbing, whatever is wrong.

          OTOH, I have a problem with women who think they can wear “whore” clothing and then get incensed that a guy so much as made a verbal pass at them, or even looked at them lustfully. I agree that some men have a problem with interpreting clothing as consent way beyond what should be expected. But I also see, these days, women who are deliberately sexually provocative with the concerted intent to provoke the lust, then shame men for so much as looking at them. That’s not fair. Sorry, but if you are strutting about in a mini skirt and cleavage hanging out, it’s kind of stupid to get all mad at a man for asking if you are interested in hooking up.

          And yes, this has become a thing. I see it all the time. Some women have taken what was a good thing (insisting on a certain level of respect/consent regardless of attire) and turned it into “I can taunt you all I want, and deliberately send off sexual signals, then ream you out as a horrible evil pervert when you respond in an entirely natural way.” It’s cruel, and it’s wrong. But women exist who both practice and perversely applaud that kind of behavior. And they are not doing the cause of womens rights and respect any favors. At all.

        • 1539days says:

          By the same token, men who look at women aren’t all creeps trying to molest them. The clothing doesn’t always matter because men like all kinds of outfits. Unless a guy is staring more than 10 seconds, there’s not much to be done about men looking at women.

        • Totally agree, wmcb (and 1539). Lord, if women didn’t signal to men with their clothes and behavior that they are in the market for some s-e-x in the near future, we’d be long gone from the planet long ago. Our culture may in some ways condone (looking at you Dave Chappelle) groping/assault-ish/rape behavior from men toward women in “whore uniform,” but that doesn’t make it ok. But as you say, women who scream “rapist!” or “creep!” at any guy who looks at them or talks to them when she’s wearing sexy clothes is a jerk.

Comments are closed.