Is it so hard to size this up?I just found this article a bit interesting. (ETA: Which I noticed was covered by Life on Fats too) Maybe because it gives me hope that the issue of size discrimination is making even the tiniest (hah!) of waves in the mainstream ideology.
The union that represents flight attendants who worked for Northwest Airlines before it was bought by Delta Air Lines is crying foul over Delta’s failure to offer bigger sizes for its signature red dress uniform designed by Richard Tyler.
When he was hired to create his uniform collection, Tyler said he wanted them to “look sexy and great.”
Patricia Reller, who handles grievances for the union’s executive committee, said Friday that even if there was only one flight attendant who wore a size over 18, that person should be able to wear the stylish red dress.
Perhaps this just nags at me because despite the interesting bit about weight discrimination making a headline in the light of someone actually fighting FOR increasing the available size range up to the still limited size 28; I am bothered by the fact that designers are determined to make flight attendant outfits “sexy” in this day and age, still showing that a woman’s value is best expressed in her ability to attract the hetero-male gaze and encourage thoughts of sex. Especially telling is the idea that while the designer intended to create a look that was sexy that this certainly must not translate to sizes above what union reps are calling a very small size 18.
There is also a confusing bit thrown into the article which I’m guessing was a cut version of a discussion between Delta and the unions about whether offering larger sizes was an issue of boosting morale versus fighting to keep attendants at a smaller size which would be capable of:
According to Delta, flight attendants must be able to perform the safety and security functions of their job, including being able to reach and close overhead bins, reach and close any of the aircraft doors and be able to sit on the aircraft jumpseat and fasten the flight attendants seatbelt.
So is this a cut and pasted response to some question about whether the act of offering the larger dress size (just for the “sexy” red dress mind you; all other clothing options do already appear up to the recommended size 28) encourages having flight attendants who might be so “huge” they are incapable of doing those basic functions?? Or is it a mix of that fear and the denial of this “sexy” dress option to unacceptably fat fatties (because, like, who wants to see someone that large in a smexy outfit, natch)?
I also find it intriguing that this entire issue around the red dress’ sizing is noted as a possible pre-election rile-up attempt by the union.
Lots to think about here. On the one hand, even if this is just a pre-election attempt by the union to get some hot-button issues going to rile folks up I’m excited to see such an issue even brought to light. On the other hand is this another case of airlines just being discriminatory; saying that sure you could work at Delta up to size 18 but beyond that you just get the “un-sexy” outfits, no red dress for the uber-fatties because like, dude who wants to fly and see that, right?
So, mixed feelings on this one. Anyone else?