Dress codes in public places are going to get canceled

“A woman claims she was told to change her shoulderless corset on a flight as it could have been ‘offensive’ to other passengers.”

“An Air New Zealand passenger was left stunned after she was urged to ‘cover up’ when boarding a flight.”

“A woman has claimed that she was told to ‘cover up’ by Alaska Airlines staff when preparing to board a flight.”

Often, these stories are just excuses for tabloids to flash pictures of scantily clad TikTokers who are desperate for attention. Often, they include accusations of sexism or “patriarchy.”

At times, the stories feature legitimate complaints, such as the woman who asked why no airline employees told her that her outfit was inappropriate in the hour before she boarded when she had better access to her clothes.

And the question of “what is too revealing to wear on a flight” is inherently a subjective one.

But underlying all these complications are two bigger problems in which the official dogma of Western elites clashes with common sense and airline policy.

The first problem is that dress codes are almost always based on the premise that men and women are fundamentally different, especially when it comes to sexuality.

The deeper problem is that any public dress code is based on the premise that, frankly, we live in a society. Personal autonomy has its limits, and we naturally owe some things to the other people around us.

The latest “mortified” woman story highlights those sticking points.

The woman was braless under her white shirt and was told to put on a jacket during the flight. Again, it’s a subjective judgment as to whether she was too revealing for a flight. But her objection goes further than, “Actually, this outfit was not that revealing.”

Check out the end of this New York Post story:

“The put-out passenger said she couldn’t help but wonder aloud if her queerness had been the cause of what she felt was unjust treatment.

“It was not immediately clear if the staffer responded to the allegation at the time.

“After wearing her jacket for the duration of the flight in order to keep the peace, Archbold confronted a male member of staff to express her disappointment over her perceived ‘discrimination.’

“‘He replied verbatim, “Our official policy on Delta Airlines is that women must cover-up.” It’s pretty gross,’ she revealed. …

“‘I don’t need miles or an apology, I need Delta to be interested in the safety of their passengers,’ she told a reporter.

“‘The dress code is extremely subjective. Subjective policies are easy vessels of abuse. They are easy to shift. Let’s make everyone more safe.'”

Got that? It’s “gross” that women are expected to cover up. What’s more, she adopts the new practice of calling things “unsafe.” How the hell is it “unsafe” that someone asked her to cover up?

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER  

That only makes sense in an ideology that holds that certain people — women, “queer” people, etc. — have a total license to do whatever they want in any circumstance and that anyone expecting them to do otherwise is harming them.

The growth of this ideology is combining with the general expansion of the autonomy-as-God dogma to make any dress code untenable. Add in the fad of trying to deexceptionalize sexuality, and we will pretty soon see the media adopt the view that public nudity is basically always OK. This will not go well