The Senate passed a resolution Wednesday to make business attire a requirement on the Senate floor.
The moves comes after backlash to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) directive to scuttle the chamber’s informal dress code, which was widely viewed to be inspired by Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.).
The bipartisan resolution requires that business attire be worn on the floor of the Senate, “which for men shall include a coat, tie, and slacks or other long pants.”
The bill does not spell out what the attire includes for women.
Why only men have specific requirements? This is not an attack on women but the ridiculousness of having a dress code that only specifies one gender.
I would go the malicious compliance route.
“which for men shall include a coat, tie, and slacks or other long pants.”
First up, there is no mention of a shirt…
Coat (n): A sleeved outer garment extending from the shoulders to the waist or below.
Lots of room for fun there.
Tie: (from wikkipedia) Variants include the ascot, bow, bolo, zipper tie, cravat, and knit.
Again, lots of fun.
slacks or other long pants
You get the idea by now.
Also it doesn’t say where those garments have to be worn. I’m putting on my jacket as a cape, slacks on my head, and tying a tie around my dick. Technically compliant with your stupid dress code.
“which for men shall include a coat, tie, and slacks or other long pants.”
So, puffy sports team coat, bolo tie, and pants hanging below my ass. I’m compliant!
I feel like that’s how my character looked in Disco Elysium lol. Gotta get those stat boosts!
It also doesn’t require a shirt!
Parachute pants, Dante’s trenchcoat, and a bolo tie, got it.
Bravo
Surely some tailor out there can make a hoodie styled like a suit coat with a drawstring “tie”.
Honestly something along what you’re suggesting was my first thought too but then that might hurt Fetterman when he runs for reelection. He beat Dr Oz by 3%, which is rather good, but Oz was a pretty terrible candidate. He might face significantly stiffer competition next time around and he probably wants to avoid a montage of him dressed silly on some attack ad.
Dressed the way he did, he would get Philly residents to support him more.
Yeah people that think Pennsylvania will be less likely to vote for someone like that don’t know Pennsylvania.
PA is basically 3 states in one. As someone who grew up there, don’t confuse Philadelphia (or Pittsburgh for that matter) politics with PA politics. There’s a BIG area in the middle there…
Anybody in PA can relate to athletic shorts and hoodie. Doesn’t matter the location.
Maybe. Seems like it could be a lot to risk with little gain. I don’t think it would play well in the suburbs. I’m just some schlep though what do I know?
You’re not a shlep you’re a schmo!
I’m not a schmo I’m a schmuck
You’re a schmuck, but you’re also a schlemiel. Or is that a schlemazel?
That’s a negative ghost rider. I am Hasenpfeffer Incorporated
He also suffered a stroke right before the election and was not in the most coherent state in his speeches at the time. And the ruling is only for the Senate floor, so he should be able to campaign in his own form of style outside of that.
They don’t want to piss off Kristen Sinema, I guess?
Pass a budget. Nobody should be getting paid until then. The 20 republican extremists holding the entire country hostage should be fined exorbitantly every day they refuse to work with everyone to pass a budget.
Fuck stuff like dress codes. I could give less of a shit if everyone was naked, literally doesn’t matter vs getting the government properly funded.
The Senate isn’t the chamber holding up a budget bill…
It isn’t, but they should be entirely focused on talking to their colleagues and making damn sure that the government gets funded before time runs out. It’s extremely important we don’t let this one slide.
Please, the last thing the nation needs is Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz naked on TV.
40 something and still dealing with dumb shits in office.
Yes, let’s enforce a classist dress code to remind everyone how classist we are. That’ll fix everything.
It’s the Senate, it’s intended to be the “upper class.”
The rabble is supposed to be in the House of Representatives.
It certainly makes it more likely for the rich to be able to go to the senate. Especially if you’re an especially big and tall guy like Fetterman who would have to get all of his suits tailor-made.
Only if you want them to fit. I saw no requirement for that in the memo
I’d laugh my ass off if Fetterman shows up next time in a jacket that barely reaches his elbows
Bonus points if some other Senator walks in looking like a Dick Tracy villain
Bingo bango. High-waters, hoooo!
Ah yes formal business attire, the universal dress code for those who accomplish nothing while looking very important. Very appropriate
Ya know gym shorts and a t-shirt besides being infinitely more practical and comfortable would lead to confusion with actual hard working Americans who don’t have the luxury of getting paid to do nothing.
Maybe we should switch to some type of sci-fi uniform.
I might watch C-SPAN if they were all dressed like the Martians in Mars Attacks.
That’s gold, Jerry
I always thought sci-fi uniforms were really cool, could you imagine congress in like, mass effect alliance uniforms? that would be cool as fuck.
of course, that might also be because I find business attire to be boring as fuck. So maybe most things look cool in comparison.
The tie is the most useless piece of clothing ever invented. It serves no purpose (shut up about the original function, it no longer serves it) except to constrict your airway and dip into your spaghett.
The original function of any dress code is always maintained by the aristocracy and adopted by the people to put on the same airs, never the other way around.
It serves no purpose
I’d like to see you find a better way of keeping soup off your shirt.
Can’t spill soup on your shirt if you aren’t wearing one
It serves no purpose
Autoerotic asphyxiation.
What was even the original function anyway?
To please King Louis XIII.
During the 30 year war, Croatian mercenaries fought alongside the King in battle. To keep their jackets tied they used a piece of cloth which King Louis XIII took a strong liking to. He made this smart scarf a mandatory accessory for royal gatherings. Paying homage to the Croats who introduced this scarf to him, he named it ‘La Cravate’, which is still the French name for the necktie today.
Over the ages, the cravat has evolved into the modern necktie we wear today. Since their origins in military regiments, they have been a symbol of power and respect. Throughout the 19th century, they swept through the Western world. They were found in most universities, schools, sports clubs and gentlemen clubs.
…could be the soldier in the white cravat who turns the key in spite of the fact that this is the end of the cat and the mouse who dwelt in the house where the laughter rang and the tears were spilt; the house that jack built…
…bang-bang, shoot-shoot, white-gloved thumb: lord, thy will be done…
“He was always a good boy,” his mother said, “he’ll do his duty when he’s grown.”
…yeah, everybody’s got someone they call home…
It hides your placket. You don’t want people walking around with their plackets on show do you?
That’s the first thing I check out when I pick up a nudie magazine.
Edit: I think… I have no idea what a placket is
Please don’t take this from men. It’s like 1 of the only 3 socially acceptable male fashion accessories.
As far as I’m concerned, a T-Shirt with a funny slogan and shorts is acceptable male fashion.
We already let them take the codpiece from us
👁️👄👁️ 💪-++--🤙 || /🐟\ 🦶 🦶Speak for yourself
All fashion accessories are socially acceptable male fashion accessories if you ignore smooth brained losers.
Lesson learned:
- Liking ties even though they’re functionally useless: tired
- Liking any other equally functionally useless accessory: wired
I’ll be writing my manifesto any day now
This is what’s important to these people. They don’t care about millions suffering every day, they don’t care about the climate going to shit, they don’t care about the economy. They’re up in arms because someone might not wear a full suit in their presence. These are your “representatives”.
They didn’t get into power magically. Every single one was elected. So unfortunately we get the politicians we deserve. It ticks me off that in a non presidential election it’s basically impossible to get even half of eligible voters to show up at the polls. If more Americans cared then we might get more politicians who care.
It’s ostensibly true that they were elected by the people, but after many years of observation I have to assume that no one gets into the position to be on those ballots without an entire shit-ton of shady backroom wheeling and dealing. I assume all of the top level politicians are corrupt and we aren’t given any choices for legitimately altruistic politicians.
If the American people wanted better politicians we could vote them in. Most politicians are able to get on a ballot by getting signatures on a petition. If people cared about politics as much as they cared about their entertainment (sports, movies, TV, games, etc) then there would be an entirely different class of politician running for office.
Say you don’t understand the political economy in the United States without saying you don’t understand the political economy in the United States.
I’m always willing to listen someone else’s opinion. What is your diagnosis of current American politics and what’s your prognosis?
I’m not sure we could. Who was on the ballot in the last presidential election? Not anyone whose politics i want to support. I can’t vote people who represent me into power because those people can’t get ballot access. Sanders isn’t even that guy for me but at least he’d be something. He almost broke through twice but each time he was stomped down by the status quo politicians.
This is kind of ridiculous.
You can’t win in this country without being a member of one of the two parties. They’ve seen sure to that. In addition, you can’t get the money needed to run a campaign without approval from those parties.
It’s the parties that decide who is on the ballot, not the people. And it’s the parties who control the purse strings.
No candidate on the ballot is trying to help the common people. No matter who you choose, it’s not going to help the situation. We can talk about harm reduction or lesser evils all day, but when you choose lesser evil, you’re still choosing evil and the country trends towards more evil. When you’re reducing harm, you’re still accepting some amount of harm, not cure.
We all get the politicians the worst of us deserve.
Not magically, no, but it’s no secret that the more evil the candidate, the more money they get in campaign donations and behind the scenes help from billionaires who really really want them on their side when they are in office. Americans are not getting fair elections with fair information.
Americans have more access to good information now than ever before. If Americans want to be informed they can be. Billionaires don’t have mind control rays. Too many Americans just don’t care. Not all but the vast majority of us can name the athletes on our favorite teams going back decades but don’t know the name of the men and women who represent us. Or the name of our state’s governor.
To your point, more people have access to information than ever. Good and bad. Look at all the crap around COVID. You have medical professionals releasing studies and vaccine, and some douche named Q saying “Nah, it’s poison. Drink bleach instead”. Obviously this is an easy example to differentiate what’s good and bad info. But people still tried bleach. Countering good information with a malicious, self serving narrative seems to be as easy as saying “That’s what the establishment wants you to think”, and people fall for it all the time. In huge numbers. Over every little piece of bullshit that gets published somewhere. Politics are a huge centre of misinformation and disinformation, making it very challenging to pick out what’s not total crap. And that’s the point.
If you want good information it’s easier now than ever before to access it and verify it.
Verify it against what? Additional information of dubious quality? Case in point, the whole “vaccines cause autism” thing. That finding was published by Andrew Wakefield in Lancet and cited everywhere. Only thing is that is was debunked almost immediately, but people kept citing the publication.
My point being that few people have the gumption to check sources, and if they do, fewer still are going to keep tabs on them more than once, or verify the validity against… yet additional sources. Every step in the process has the end user trying to determine if what they are reading is true, against other information they don’t know is true.
My point is that misinformation has always been here. This isn’t something new. In the past you had to do actual research to verify if something was true, half-truth, or completely untrue. Now you can easily find information. And compared to researching something in a library, easily verify it.
This could be a generational thing but it’s so incredibly easy to disprove something now. If you Google, “do vaccines cause autism” in less than a quarter of a second Google gives you government websites, scholarly articles, links to university studies, etc. It’s easier now than ever before to find and verify good information. And I’m not trying to be dismissive but I don’t think anyone will convince me otherwise any time soon.
You mean no more antler helmets?
The rules don’t specify “no antler helmets” and if Air Bud has taught me everything it is that if it isn’t banned it’s legal.
Sure seems like they’ve got a lot of free time over there…
Crisis averted! Good job senators! I know I’ll sleep better now!
How much did this process cost in taxpayer money?
You know this is just going to result in a pride suit right? I 100% expect him showing up in rainbows. Should bring in cat ears as well.
Or a Steelers style suit.
All it says is 3 piece suit right? Nothing about the condition of said suit? Slacks, cut off just below the front pockets. Sport jacket, sleeves ripped off. Shirt, top 3 unbuttoned, sleeves rolled up.
That, or straight pimpin’. Only 2 colors allowed, purple and leopard. Only 2 materials, silk and velour.
If they didn’t specify a dress code for women then he should just change his pronoun. That would get them all in a tizzy!
I love it. Although that might be considered fairly offensive to some.
Oh no! We wouldn’t want to offend pearl-clutching tone-policing bigots; that would be terrible!
👌I more meant those in the LGBTQ community.
They should know better than anyone to respect people’s chosen pronouns.
I think it’s more the disingenuous nature of “changing your pronouns” to in effect make a point.
Also it kinda gives those weirdos like “I’ll just go into the women’s restroom and say I’m a woman if questioned; love this system” some undeserved ground (granted I think gendered restrooms are a bit silly).
There is a bigmad Trump supporter downvoting the thread, I’m guessing most of us have them blocked already.
Everyone point & laugh at the stupid fascist symp.
I did notice a comment I couldn’t open to read for some reason, lol.
popularity contest for the upper class
This directive seemed like a trap from Schumer which invited Republicans and conservative Democrats to show off how out-of-touch they are with millennials and Gen Z. Looks like they fell for it.
