The new work trousers introduced by the British police have stirred up quite a bit of controversy. For women, the trousers are causing infections, while men are complaining about crushed testicles. It was somewhat expected that a gender-neutral clothing package wouldn’t be a huge success. Nevertheless, more and more organizations, driven by legal regulations or moral obligations, feel compelled to offer unisex workwear. However, instead of being a means to create equality, gender-neutral workwear has become an end in itself—with all the consequences that come with it.

Gender-neutral is not actually gender-neutral

It all started in England when the Equality Act 2010 was signed. The aim of this regulation was for people to be treated equally. For example, the rules prohibit forcing a woman to wear high heels if it would make her work less comfortably than her male colleagues. A noble goal, but the British police seem to have taken it too far. They feared that gender-specific uniforms would indirectly discriminate, so they introduced gender-neutral workwear.

The common misconception is that such designs can fit both men and women, but that’s simply not the case. Rudi Gernreich was the first to introduce gender-neutral clothing in 1968. Although the Austrian-American fashion designer believed this would cater to both genders, it wasn’t a success. 

Later research showed that the clothing was only suitable for men and women with very slim, straight bodies. The average woman with more curves couldn’t fit into the clothes.

Misinterpretation of the rules

Despite the long-standing awareness that a unisex fit doesn’t work for the average woman, unisex workwear has been offered to women for years. Fortunately, more companies are becoming aware of this issue, and we’ve been working to ensure that women are provided with suitable workwear.

However, it’s too easy to say that the trend toward gender-neutral clothing is solely driven by rules requiring equal treatment. Equal treatment doesn’t mean everyone should wear the same fit. 

This was evident with Alaska Airlines when, in 2021, the company was called out by the American Civil Liberties Union. A non-binary employee had complained about being forced to choose between a male or female uniform, which was found to be illegal because it constituted gender discrimination. This problem could easily be resolved by adjusting the dress code so that anyone can wear any available attire. But instead, more airlines are opting for a gender-neutral uniform.

What’s the goal?

The goal is to treat people equally, but organizations like the British police seem to have forgotten this. More frequently, the introduction of gender-neutral clothing is becoming the goal, and as a result, we’re not moving forward but taking a step back. Men and women have different bodies, and that will always be the case. Let’s treat bodies equally by offering what they actually need—and that is clothing that fits them properly.