I became a sales consultant for
Mary Kay to play with makeup and make money. The literature and lectures you receive prior to joining Mary Kay speak to comfort, financial freedom, choice, and independence. So I was understandably taken aback when, shortly after joining, I was criticized for wearing slacks to a Mary Kay event.
Slacks.
Not capris, not jeans, not pajamas. These are pants I would wear to my day job as an academic professional, to synagogue (if I ever went), to professional conferences. They are not ratty, ill-fitting, oddly colored, or otherwise inappropriate. But I was told I was not to wear them to meetings, or any other Mary Kay events. Why?
To quote the email I received from my local director, "Mary Kay Ash started the [company] in the 60's when women always wore skirts, looked feminine and 'acted like ladies.' ['No pants'] is one of the very few MK 'rules.'"
Newsflash, Mary Kay: It's 2010. And though your skincare and makeup lines have changed with the times, apparently your definitions of "feminine" and "ladylike" have not.
While one could argue that "feminine dress" is equated to wearing a skirt or dress, it could also be argued that a
huge market exists for women's fashion,
including pants for women. These pants are specifically tailored to fit the female body, to ensure "feminine flare," and why on God's green earth isn't that acceptable to a company like Mary Kay, that is so passionate about promoting female choice and independence?
Additionally, the dictionary defines a "lady" as "a woman who is refined, polite, and well-spoken." While I'm not always these things in my personal life - The Republican has seen me belch and, yes, even fart, on more than one occasion - I certainly can and do turn them on in a public setting, like a Mary Kay event.
I think it can safely be said that the values of femininity and ladylikeness don't preclude a Mary Kay sales consultant from wearing pants. However, the company's policy does.
So this is my dilemma. As a feminist, I am appalled that they would disallow consultants to dress as they pleased within the realm of professional attire. The policy reeks of heteronormativity and seems to exclude those who would be consultants but are male, consider themselves gender queer, or even those women who
are traditionally feminine, but prefer not to dress the part. But as a consultant, someone who joined this private company by choice, I understand that the company does what it wants, dictates what it wants, operates how it wants. And wearing a skirt is the sacrifice I made by joining.
I just wish someone had been up front with me about this from the beginning.