Jackets, ties, and comparable attire: Maintaining gender norms through legislative assembly dress codes.

AuthorKorte, Kate

The existing literature on dress codes is mostly silent regarding legislative assemblies. Previous research has instead tended to focus on other institutions, such as schools or medical settings. To address this gap, this article provides an in-depth examination into the existing dress codes of Canadian parliaments and their practical applications. The author suggests that dress codes engrain gender norms around professional dress and maintain the standard for parliamentarians as a man in a suit jacket and tie. The jacket and tie aspect of dress codes is the most frequently enforced and long held. The expectations for women's attire and Indigenous, cultural, or traditional attire have been added on and are less frequently enforced. Such dress codes uphold a vision of a politician as a man in a suit and tie which conversely restricts the attire options for men and potentially those that are non-binary. Therefore, the author argues that dress codes present barriers to the full accommodation of gender and cultural diversity in legislative assemblies.

Introduction

In March 2019, the dress code at the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia was brought to light by a group of women that contested the code's characterization of sleeveless shirts as unacceptable. They claimed they had a "Right to Bare Arms"--a catch phrase that would soon become a viral hashtag in Canadian politics. In the days following, the Legislative Assembly's dress code provisions were amended to better reflect modern expectations around professional attire. The "Right to Bare Arms" incident and the following changes to the dress code opened a broader conversation about dress codes in Canadian legislatures. Although the issue of dress codes may not have been of great importance when every parliamentarian was a man in a suit, the increasing diversity in provincial and territorial legislative assemblies compels us to take a closer look at how dress codes might apply in present-day legislatures. Dress codes can be broadly defined as the codified rules and guidelines pertaining to appropriate attire in a given environment. These codes are separate but informed by unspoken norms and traditions. In Canada's provincial and territorial legislatures, dress codes typically suggest professional attire. The definition of professional attire is engendered. By convention or codified rule, most dress codes require that men must wear a suit jacket and a tie while women must wear comparable attire.

This article compares existing dress codes for members of Canada's legislative assemblies and examines available Hansard references to dress codes to determine how such codes have been applied. Most existing literature on dress codes is silent regarding legislative assemblies and instead focuses on other institutions, such as schools or medical settings. My research fills a gap in the literature by providing an in-depth look into the existing dress codes and their practical applications. I suggest that dress codes engrain gender norms around professional dress and maintain the standard for parliamentarians as a man in a suit jacket and tie. The jacket and tie aspect of dress codes is the most frequently enforced and long held. The expectations for women's attire and Indigenous, cultural, or traditional attire have been added on and are less frequently enforced. Such dress codes uphold a vision of a politician as a man in a suit and tie which conversely restricts the attire options for men and potentially those that are non-binary. Therefore,

I argue that dress codes present barriers to the full accommodation of gender and cultural diversity in legislative assemblies.

Methods

This article combines a comparative analysis of dress codes in Canada's provincial and territorial legislative assemblies with a content analysis of Hansard references to dress code from each legislative assembly. By conducting primary research into the various documents that relate to dress and Hansard references to dress code, I establish what provincial and territorial legislative assemblies deem to be as appropriate attire. My research includes two different types of documents: official orders, rules, or guidelines on dress and Hansard or media references to dress in the legislative assemblies. First, I looked for any codified dress codes in an assembly's Standing Orders, rules, or other documents, such as guidelines for members, that are intended to instruct members on what to wear in the House. I also asked legislative librarians in all provincial and territorial legislative assemblies for any documents related to attire. Legislatures varied in whether they had a codified document and, if one was present, what form that document took (rules or guidelines). They also varied on whether the dress code was explicitly gendered. Dress codes either indicated that men must wear a jacket and tie and women must wear comparable attire or broadly ask that members wear professional attire. In their application, dress codes have little variance.

Following my discussion of the codified rules around dress, I examined each assembly's Hansard for any mentions of the term 'dress code' to determine how dress codes are applied and enforced by Speakers. I removed any instances that were not related to the legislature, such as those that were part of debates about dress codes in schools or for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT