In Italy too, to visit the churches your knees and shoulders should be covered. Men and women alike.

I'm not opposed. You wouldn't visit the president dressed like a stripper; you shouldn't visit a church dressed informally.

Depends on the president, in fairness.

Unless the president happens to be Trump I guess you're right

When in Rome do as the Romans do, as they say.

At least where I am, you're not supposed to visit temples dressed liberally because it needlessly tempts the monks who have taken a vow of celibacy. Same decency would apply to priests / churches.

I'm sorry but if a lifelong commitment to your religion and completely basing your entire life and lifestyle around said religion is not enough to quell your temptation, then maybe temptation is such a fundamental, core component of being a human being that we shouldn't be trying to suppress it so aggressively in the first place.

See: Catholicism

In some temples in Kerala, India, men have to remove shirt to enter inside :)

To be fair, there are, if not mostly rules, at least generally accepted behaviors for men as well especially in many religious settings. And culturally more broadly such as wearing shorts in many circumstances.

Men's clothing used to be interesting, then there was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Male_Renunciation

The same thing arguably happened to cars, where women appropriated the color red and in process of doing that to the color orange.

That's strange because to me orange is definitely a bro color. It's the "Look at me, I have a fart can and aftermarket turbo" color.

That and lime green

As the (male) driver of an orange car, I've definitely not experienced that perception. (specifically straight) women are the number one hater of the paint job. Nothing but compliments from my guy and lesbian friends.

Subaru?

Nah. Sleeper mid-90's Acura. Paintjob was aftermarket.

I don't really understand this claim (maybe I'm thinking too much "Ferrari" red and less "Rav 4"?) but if anything will make more manufactures make orange cars my male ass is all for it...

Men's clothing is also getting more interesting again, with attendant public hand-wringing in certain circles.

In most of the western world if a man wants to visit the office he has to hide his knees whereas it is accepted for women to wear clothing suitable for hot temperatures.

For better or worse, in most western business settings--tech only loosely qualifies--men historically had a uniform (and now have maybe a few potential uniforms--but they had lots of tie options, I have a closet full of them). Women have/had a lot more options which I assume is both a blessing and a curse.

Shoulders and arms as well. Never understood why men can’t wear short sleeve button ups in an office that requires dress shirts. Or shorts.

I wear shirt sleeve button up oxfords to work all the time. I have never heard anyone say anything about them.

I'm just guessing by the demographics of this site that you work in tech. I don't, unfortunately.

wow a not [dead] comment, what did you do dan?

I once visited a Hindu mandir in the US during July, wearing shorts. They asked me to wear a big skirt thing over my shorts, which I did. Their house, their rules!

For a brief time in metropolitan cities it did exist. At least as one can see over on reddit in the frequently viral posts about women's fashion back in the 60s/70s in Lebanon/Iran/Afghanistan.

It's not even the clickbait posts: talking to (legitimate) refugees from these countries was eye opening. In less than a generation, they went backwards a century.

"The future is here it's just unevenly distributed."

There’s a huge difference between:

1. a national culture/laws that restricts women’s freedom of dress, and 2. a private religious place that has a dress code

Bingo. The latter has nothing to do with rights.

Dress codes on private property, what a world!

Large parts of Europe are extremely conservative when it comes to clothing rules. In many countries it is forbidden to hide your face in public. I think forcing people to show certain body parts is as offensive as the opposite.

> I think forcing people to show certain body parts is as offensive as the opposite.

it is basic human instinct to wanna see a face...

You could make the same argument about other body parts...

The face thing is more about safety rather than some of those other parts. Closest similarity would be wanting hands visible.

it's anti-terrorism laws

In the US, men still don't have the right to wear miniskirts.

Sure, the cops might not come after them, but the rest of society would.

There are definitely places where the cops would come after them, and Republicans are doing their best to increase that number of places by making it illegal to be gender-nonconforming (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-lawmakers-a...).

To pile on with my own anecdote:

I used to work at a mega investment bank, and most days, I saw at least one woman dressed like a hooker. Classy and expensive ones, I guess, but still, I could basically see right up their asscracks through their skintight legging-pants or microdresses. Obviously this kind of sexual display is going to have an effect on the monks, bankers, or whoever's trying to get some goddamn work done around them - that's why they do it. Hence, dress codes.

In some parts of the world an adult male wearing shorts is extremely frowned upon.