I am not talking about comfort, at all. In some professional environments, panty hose are questionable, like in federal court in the area where I practice. If it is considered an essential part of a professional wardrobe in the field and area where you work, wear them. If it is neither a plus nor a negative, you choose. If it is a potential negative, don’t wear them. It varies from place to place and profession to profession.

That’s my last word on the subject – who would have thought it a subject so freighted with emotion for some? But, clearly it is. Bill, I am sorry you felt attacked. I didn’t intend to upset you, just let you know there is no objective right answer to this question, as you appear to be laboring under that misunderstanding.

Regards,
Helen

I also find it funny that women who complain about hosiery being uncomfortable never complain about wearing 4-5″ heels for hours being uncomfortable. Why spend all that time in front of the mirror doing your make up and hair and complaining about something like hosiery? Sorry but, it’s just not a valid argument to me when you are in a competitive professional business with a dress code. Nothing looks worse than a lady made up to the 9’s with bare legs versus a lady who is wearing them. It just doesn’t go together with the make up on your face and the rest of your presentation.

One last thing. I can attest that wearing pantyhose for all of these years have held the rest of my body in place. A droopy jiggly behind in a tight dress looks terrible. Gravity will win whether you like it or not. Just my opinion.

The problem is defining “professional”. It obviously varies from region to region and field to field. I hire lawyers. I wouldn’t disqualify a female interviewee for wearing pantyhose, but she would strike me as less familiar with professional norms in my region than a bare-legged one (if I even noticed).

Reporting back from federal court in Amarillo, TX. There were 11 female legal professionals: 1 federal judge’s court coordinator : no hose

2 law school students/clerks: one no hose, one wearing white hose with a navy suit.

1 United States probation officer: no hose

7 female attorneys (including me) 6 no hose 1 with hose under pants (so might have been knee high rather than pantyhose.)

so: in Amarillo federal court: 9 out of 11 do not consider hose required for professional apparel. Don’t know how many of those feel hose are undesirable for a professional appearance. 2 out of 11 do not feel hose are inappropriate in this professional setting.

Bottom line, context is everything. You can’t create a universal rule. Standards vary from setting to setting.
(the female atty with hose looked to be in her 60’s or older)

HTH,
Helen

Hi Bill,

BTW, Anonymous was me as well – I just didn’t put my name in, by mistake.

I am on my way to federal court in Amarillo right now – bare-legged. Every other woman will likely be bare legged as well. I appear in federal court in Amarillo, Lubbock, San Angelo, Abilene – always bare legged.
I would think if someone is close enough to tell I’m not wearing panty hose, they are probably way too close to my legs.

Can we agree there is no universal rule – and you should probably observe professional women in your field and geographic location to learn what is considered professional for that context? I am a little uncomfortable with the idea of a male boss requiring a female underling to wear any article of clothing because he thinks it makes her legs look “nice”.

There is also the health issue, of course. I imagine I’m not the only woman whose doctor has told her panty hose are not a good idea, except sparingly worn.