Contentious debates are expected -- and sometimes welcome -- in the chambers of the State Capitol.
Through those debates, meaningful exchanges of ideas and potential solutions for the problems vexxing Missourians can be tackled and potentially solved.
But sometimes, those debates are simply trivial, unproductive and damaging to others. Such was the case Wednesday during a debate over a proposed dress code for women in the Missouri House.
The debate stemmed from House Resolution 11, which was a comprehensive rules package that dealt with how the House would operate this session. An amendment to that resolution sought to define proper attire for women in the chamber as "jackets worn with dresses, skirts or slacks, and dress shoes or boots." The amendment added blazers and knit blazers, while omitting sweaters from the previous version of the rule.
That's right, sweaters -- or presumably some other piece of a female legislator's attire -- could result in a serious loss of decorum in the House chambers. At least that's what the amendment seemed to suggest.
Interestingly, the concerns didn't cross the aisle and explore the fashion faux pas of male legislators that might cause a loss of decorum.
Those in support of the rules change suggested its intent was to maintain a formal and professional atmosphere on the House floor and to clear up some of the previous dress code language.
"Decorum is respect for each other, respect for the institution and respect for this magnificent building and the position Missouri state representative signifies," Rep. Ann Kelley said regarding her amendment.
In response, her colleague Rep. Ashley Aune pointed out male members of the Legislature had called her attire into question in the past, and she called the policing of clothing "ridiculous" when there are other priorities to be tackled in the Statehouse.
"Do you know what it feels like to have a bunch of men in this room looking at your top, trying to decide whether it's appropriate or not?" she asked Kelley.
Dress codes -- going back to middle school days -- have a tendency of focusing entirely too much on the attire of females and the distractions they may produce among men.
That reasoning puts the blame on females by indicating their clothing leads to distractions for males. As a result, females are lead to believe their bodies are a problem and need to be covered or hidden.
Surely, there are bigger issues facing the state than whether a woman's bare arm is exposed on the House floor. And if the goal of the amendment was to achieve greater respect for each other, targeting the way we look or dress does exactly the opposite.
-- News Tribune