re: "(c) Emily Toth"

Has Ms. Mentor considered a creative commons license for her column? It's quite in fashion nowadays amongst the younger set.

<Comment removed by moderator>

Regarding the irresponsible people who don't show up for their presentations at major academic conferences, some of them (us) put in the proposal based on the assumption that their university/department would fund their participation only to have the policy changed due to so-called budget constraints. Someone's being irresponsible there for sure, but I'm not so sure it's the individual who doesn't show up for the presentation -- unless making the decision not to fund your own conference participation is irresponsible. (In my case, I thought it was pretty responsible, since I made a choice between paying my own way to the conference or paying the mortgage.) So be careful about assuming all those no-shows are just lazy guys who didn't write their papers.

I much prefer Ms. Mentor's frumpy/stilted advice to that of Dr. Isis, and am frankly surprised that Ms. Mentor would advocate for more like Dr. Isis (I will admit that I couldn't read the advice once I saw the accompanying graphic.)

re #3: No one discovers their travel funding failed to come through on the morning of the presentation. Everyone understands the financial barrier---if notified. Those who can't be bothered to email the conference organizer or session chair in those circumstances, though, are indeed louts.

Bright mind or not, first impressions are first impressions. I believe I read that decisions regarding an individual upon first meeting him/her are established in the few seconds. I work at a university where in many cases it is difficult to distinguish faculty from students based on attire. Not sure if this a throw-back to the '60s or an attempt to fit in and feel cool or just simply "I don't care laziness."

The one time I wore a blouse that was slightly more revealing, I was exasperated to find that no one (students and colleagues, male and female) looked me in the eyes. "Blue-state-academic" might enjoy looking... but I didn't enjoy being looked at.

No if someone could just get the students to dress as if they actually gave a darn - that would be a success! The "What not to Wear" TV Show could have an unending supply of makeover candidates at almost any college in the country. A whole show of just college students!

Further, I don't hire those in my private business with nasty tattoos and/or multiple piercings in strange places, and I certainly don't give them the benefit of the doubt on grades in the classroom. You want to look like trash - then you get treated like trash.

litteach - then don't wear the blouse again. Exasperated? Yes. Surprised? You shouldn't be.

usc158 -- you've made the point much more articulately than I did. Thank you.

#8: What you consider to be "looking like trash" could be nothing of the sort for the student in question. I am one of the top performing students in my graduate program, and I have piercings, tattoos, and wear "unprofessional" clothes (t-shirts and jeans) to class. Have you ever considered that those of us who choose to eschew society's standards of beauty and professionalism may be more driven, more dedicated, more passionate, more intelligent? I feel sympathy for any student in your class whose physical identity does not meet your standards; unfortunately their potential brilliance is being wasted in your classroom.

"Further, I don't hire those in my private business with nasty tattoos and/or multiple piercings in strange places, and I certainly don't give them the benefit of the doubt on grades in the classroom. You want to look like trash - then you get treated like trash."

So basically, you insist that your students adhere to unspoken rules for dressing or you penalize them? Have you considered that your students are living on pitiful stipends that prevent them from adopting upper middle class dress standards? Or, that in addition to being classist and homogenous, your bias against "trashy" dressing is completely outdated? Or, that your less trashy students probably have tattoos and piercings as well? Or that the whole idea that what people wear on a day to day (as opposed to conferences) basis has little to do with their intellectual labor? Or that your hatred of these students is preventing you from actually doing your job--you know, teaching?

One more reason that academics are considered petty tyrants. I work at a small liberal arts school and most of my students are art majors. Few dress conventionally; most are casual (e.g., jeans, t-shirts, flip flops in summer). Sometimes they even dress in a manner that for my fellow women, seems downright trashy. Needless to say many are also pierced and tatooed in weird places. That said those with strange hair colors, piercings, tatoos, etc. often end up performing much better than their conformist peers in class. In many cases, those unconventional students who are excluded from the categories of potentional hirees and good students by others above, are my best students.

It's OK if my judgmental colleagues want to push antiquated 20th century notions of conformity, that will leave plenty of free thinking non-conformists for the rest of us to hire and promote in the future. (These persons will be innovators rather than sheepish yes-men.) I should also mention that I am one of them; though I am young, I have salt & pepper grey, non-conventionally cut hair (no dye anymore)but no piercings and tatoos. I relate to those kids in so many ways that most of you have forgotten about or dismissed as a foolishness of youth.

Last, despite their conformist, traditional appearances, Goldman executives, Blankenfeld & Sparks, succeeded in duping many into buying funds that were set up to fail in one of the biggest frauds in investment history. Looks like they'll get away with it because they own so many in Congress, but it just goes to show you can never trust a conformist.

Yes, as mentioned briefly, in addition to their obvious cosmetic benefits, braces can also be necessary for good dental health; there are numerous health issues associated with crooked teeth. A couple of unfortunate realities surface here: 1) that not all those who need such dental work can obtain it and 2)that anyone who is hard-working, clean and caring of their situation in their appearance (e.g., you wouldn't wear a suit hiking in the woods), and an asset to a university or other institution, would ever be denied a promotion due to the temporary appearance of braces. We as a society shouldn't even have to consider this second reality but should be more like the individual who doesn't notice the braces.

"Have you ever considered that those of us who choose to eschew society's standards of beauty and professionalism may be more driven, more dedicated, more passionate, more intelligent?"

Why would anyone assume this? Obviously, we shouldn't assume the opposite - but why would I automatically consider someone more intelligent/dedicated/etc simply because they wore jeans or tattoos or whatever?

when i was younger, i had a boss who was very good looking and would open doors for me with a big smile. i was young and naive and didn't think much of it. then one day in someone else's office, he came in pinned my wrists across each other and giggling, said he was going to spank me now. it was a strange thing. he was 6' 9" tall and I was 5'8" about half his size. in that instant, i thought of breaking free and giving him an elbow across the jaw since he was right there, bent over to my face. but i realized i liked him as a person and didn't want to hurt him. not knowing what to do, i took a step forward between his legs and heaved up, pushing. his leg caught the edge of a desk and he was momentarily off the ground. down he went, grabbing for a bookshelf at the top, which wasn't strong enough and broke, that fell on the one below it and he hit the floor with three shelves worth of stuff falling on him. I stepped over him and out of the office.

he came by and apologized later. i told him not to let it happen again. he invited me to a party at his house a week later that i declined.

since then i am more aware of what is going on in men's heads when they look at me. but today it isn't much of a problem. i'm no longer a good catch as a breedable female and my secondary sexual characteristics are still there, but sadly changed.

such is the fate of being a woman. in younger years we are pursued by so many, automatically. lesbians pursue young women, and so do men. it's pure instinct. suddenly, around 35, they stop noticing us and we are even more upset by that than we were by the ones who did.

biology. it's all biology. pure instinct. when i see students partying on the beach, i see grunion swarming to breed.

i suggest that the young lady relax, have some compassion for the automaticity of your professor boob starer, it's just biology. all too soon, nobody will want to look and she will feel invisible, not valued, unimportant.

@ellenhunt: first two paragraphs aside (though good for you), this was the most humane, charitable, and bittersweet thing I've ever read on this topic. It works both ways. I, a male, have reached the status of furniture: large, sometimes useful, sometimes in the way, but mostly just there, drawing no particular notice.

At some level, we exist to eat, and reproduce. I'm always somewhat bemused at women who claim to be surprised at the reaction of us pigs (men) to some of the things that they wear. They must have been experiencing this reaction since at least high school. Did they think we could actually change? We may (or may not) learn to hide it to some extent, but we are men. At bottom, we're all not much different than the guys in "Wedding Crashers" who saw the tatoo above the derrier on a wedding guest as little more than a "target". Didn't their moms warn them about us?

www.academichic.com
'Nuff said.

willismg -

As a biologist, I call bullshit. I call bullshit because women and men come from the same place. Based on comparitive organisms (i.e. many mammals and primates) females are more likely to be naturally sexually attracted to other individuals than males. Even in "monogamous" species the female is likely to "step out" on her male in search of superior genes.

Why do I bring this up? Because most human females have learned to curb their desires in social situations - it is idiotic to assume human males cannot learn the same behavior. The reason why they "cannot" is because very few people are telling them they should. Most of their peers are saying, "go ahead - it's natural. If a woman complains she is being unreasonable." In reality when a woman complains it is because she knows she can keep from eye-raping her male colleagues and knows her male colleagues should be able to do the same.

A few years ago a colleague responded to someone on a bulletin board who was contemplating asking his instructor out and told him that, as an instructor who was repeatedly asked out she thought he shouldn't - if the teacher has integrity even if she is attracted to him she will turn him down and it will be awkward for the rest of the semester. The response by many other posters who had never seen her was that she was probably being asked out because she was wearing revealing clothing. In actuality she dressed in baggy jeans and loose T-shirts so I thought this was incredibly presumptuous and insulting. Why is it never down to a male's self-restraint, it's always down to what the female is doing to lure him in? Ridiculous.

Either human males need to step up and realize they are beings capable of monitoring their own actions beyond simple animal instinct or they need to admit to being as basic as dogs and allow themselves to be treated as such, requiring tagging, registration, and leashing in public....

....Me, I would prefer the former.

@philostitute: "Few dress conventionally; most are casual (e.g., jeans, t-shirts, flip flops in summer). Sometimes they even dress in a manner that for my fellow women, seems downright trashy. Needless to say many are also pierced and tatooed in weird places.:

But they are dressed in a remarkably similar "unconventional" manner (just as I and my peers were almost identically "non-conformist" decades ago). Their clothing reflects a decision to conform to a different standard. Those who make a decision not to fit in, or to startle, should not be surprised when others are startled or feel like they don't fit into their workplace or group. One can't have it both ways -- make a statement and then insist it doesn't mean anything.

We are going through a generational and cultural change that provides for casual, yet stylish dress in business and education. Whenever Steven Jobs of Apple Computer appears for public announcements, he is usually attired in a black T-shirt, long or short, with jeans or black slacks, and sometimes a black informal sport coat. Calling people "trash" who fail to conform to an individual's perception of what constitutes style shows a close mindedness that doesn't belong in the academy.

At fifty seven years old, a few years ago I facilitated an experimental workshop at a global conference and wore a black T-shirt with a white and green Uroboros on the front, jeans and a black cotton sport coat. Many older academics were dressed somewhat similar, including a few with Chinese and Celtic symbols around their necks.

Regarding older women, I have always believed that many older women, especially over forty, have a unique beauty, both physical and inner, from their lived experience. I find their gray hair, lines in their faces, and beautiful eyes, much more attractive than the "plastic fantastic lovers" (Jefferson Airplane song lyric) that our society so values. An older woman of character and life experience is like a magnificent Autumn leaf, resplendent in her deep golds, brilliant scarlet and maroons. They are also like a great red wine, a wine that doesn't reach maturity for a long time, but has the most exquisite taste!

As a first-time contributor (who is surprised that my pen-name was not yet taken), I am truly surprised that all of you have so much time on your hands.
I really like the Ms. Mentor column, which I find always valuable and entertaining. My concern with much of this specific column and the comments on it is that it makes academia look, well, "like every other profession." In short: I agree that we should take ourselves seriously, and that may mean that we must PRESENT ourselves seriously, that is, according to the "serious norms for presentation" in non-academic communities. At the same time, as a mid-level administrator who now wears a jacket and tie every day to work, I nonetheless appreciate the NON-conformity of my (purely) faculty colleagues. Even though I am younger than Ms. Mentor, I wonder why academics must feel disposed toward imitating the culture at large. If I did not wish to work in a university community, I could find a much better-paying and conventionally satisfying managerial position elsewhere. Perhaps people at LSU have to conform more than we who are members of other (perhaps less corrupt) academic institutions?