Right to clothing

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

The proposed right:

A person shall not be required to wear clothing or accessories on the basis of a personal characteristic where people of a different personal characteristic are not equally required to wear the same clothing or accessories.

A person shall not be prohibited from wearing certain clothing or accessories based on a personal characteristic where people of a different personal characteristic are not equally prohibited from wearing the same clothing or accessories.

Protected personal characteristics include age, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, skin color, birthplace, or national origin.

Non-protected characteristics include the carrying of a disease, membership in an enemy military force, membership in a violent extremist group, and other such conditions or choices that present a danger to the public or to law enforcement.

Intent:

The right to clothing is intended to prevent discrimination based on protected characteristics including age, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, skin color, birthplace and national origin. A protected characteristic is something about a person which the person does not control. Although religion can be considered a choice, many people are raised by their parents to have certain beliefs from a young age so in practice people generally don’t actively choose their religion.

The right to clothing is intended to protect women from being required to wear high heel shoes, skirts, dresses, bras, hijabs, burqas, or any other clothing which men are not required to wear, and to protect women from being prohibited from wearing pants, shirts, or being topless where men are not prohibited from wearing pants, shirts, or being topless.

The right to clothing is also intended to protect Jews and homosexuals from being required to wear identifying marks on their clothing as was done in Nazi Germany prior to their mass murder.

The right to clothing is not intended to limit a private association from creating dress code rules, because membership in a private association is optional and is protected by the proposed right to peaceful association.

In the event of a pandemic, the government may require infected individuals to wear a conspicuous clothing accessory so that other people know to keep their distance or don personal protective equipment before interacting with infected individuals.

Discussion:

The proposed right to clothing is closely related to the proposed right to equal opportunity, but focuses on required and prohibited clothing because it is an important aspect of everyday life.

Some examples of clothing equality include: If males are allowed to be topless at a place such as a park or beach then females must also be allowed to be topless there. If males are not required to wear skirts at school then females must also not be required to wear skirts at school. If males are not required to wear bras then females must also not be required to wear bras. If a workplace requires wearing pants, steel-toe boots, and hard hats then it applies to both males and females. If a combat sport requires wearing groin protection, then both males and females must wear groin protection, and each participant may choose a shape of groin protection that works best for them as long as it meets the same minimum requirements regarding protection from impact.

The “not be required to” wording is important because many women may choose to wear a top or a bra but if they choose to go without where men are allowed to go without, they should not fear punishment from the government or their employer.

There is an overlap between the right to clothing and the proposed right to dignity in the case of forcing someone to take off their clothes or stay nude when they don’t want to be.

However, a private association may have dress code rules because membership in that association is optional. For example, a ballroom dance club may have a monthly dance event in which it requires women to wear dresses and men to wear suits. This does not violate the right to clothing because anyone who objects to those rules is not required to be there. A separate ballroom dance club could be formed to host events at which the dress code is different. However, if an association is public, such as a homeowners association that requires anyone living in a certain area to be a member, then the association cannot impose a dress code in any of its facilities such as at the gym or pool that requires men and women to dress differently.

In the case of a pandemic, although a person cannot control whether they become infected, and may not even know that they are infected, once this becomes known it is not considered a protected personal characteristic. This is because if the infected person were to approach and infect someone else, the other person’s health and possibly their life is in danger, whereas the protected characteristics of age, sex, skin color, national origin, etc. do not pose a danger to anyone else.

[Author]

Posts