Having a (gorgeous) sister in med school, I'd not be too worried about a doctor dressing all sexylike. At least, not more worried than I am knowing that doctors party harder and sleep less than anyone else I've ever met and are probably running on eight cups of coffee and two hours' sleep.
My sister actually told me straight up never to go to hospitals in June if I can avoid it because they're crawling with new-minted trainee doctors and nervous med students. Scary stuff!
...I don't think it's a big deal if a doctor is sexy. Look at all the George Clooney type doctors that are out there. Is it because she is FEMALE-sexy, that she shouldn't be taken seriously? Why are sexy men taken seriously and sexy women aren't? In order to be serious about your profession as a woman, you have to be ugly and dress frumpy?
@amowls: There's a HUGE gap between being "ugly and dressing frumpy" and posing in a suggestive pinup shot like this. Let me make it clear that there's nothing "wrong" with pinup shots, and this woman has every right to be a model and an M.D. at the same time, and to be respected for both choices. But don't expect me to take her seriously as a doctor when she tries to use her sex appeal to gain credibility or business in the medical profession. A good doctor doesn't need to do that.
If a good doctor happens to be beautiful, that's nice but it should be irrelevant to his or her practice. That's the message we're trying to promote here. Your looks, your body, and your sex should have nothing to do with your professional success as a woman, nor as a man.
@euterpe35: But how many women would find a guy in a cropped top sexy (post 1979)? I find a man in scrubs sexy. I find a man in a suit sexy. Why should they get to set the default? Don't they know they're giving me and millions of other women a total boner with their confidence and charm?
@spamanda: Because guys' boners prevent them from thinking. If a man is clearly sexy and charming it is like some sort of accident, and doesn't really matter anyway since most women don't have sex drives they just want security and snuggling.
@spamanda: because we live in a patriarchy? Same reason people were commenting that Palin showed "too much leg" in RW yesterday, or that Meghan McCain asked for all the negative comments by posting that twit-pic where you could see she had (gasp!) boobs. We are constantly being told by OTHER WOMEN to cover up our disgraceful bodies, let alone men.
@bluebears: well... if a male polititian posed with his shirt unbuttoned or shirtless we'd wonder why he was showing so much skin. There'd be a slightly different reaction probably but we'd still think it was odd.
I don't think its about not being beautiful or womanly/manly but I think it's about how we percieve people in certain jobs and how they should act.
@KentuckyBabe: we can agree to disagree but I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be histrionic articles written about such a man and how he was setting back an entire political movement.
(#tips) <-- why does this keep appearing automatically under my comments?
@Myrna_Minkoff: I didn't even mean this exact photo necessarily. And I'd have a hard time taking her seriously, too -- though the website is just ridiculous and I don't think I could get past that. I merely meant in general, we are definitely taught that Serious, Professional (TM) women don't look sexy.
@bluebears: I thought we had a discussion about male politicians who'd been in centerfold-type photo shoots? Dammit, I'll never be able to find the link again....
@bluebears: Wait, there was something on Gawker about a political candidate that posed for Playgirl or Cosmo in the '80s. Totally naked, on a bear skin rug or something. Does anyone else remember this?
Mine too! I have chosen to assume that it means that the commenting gremlins have decided our comments are advice-worthy.
@bluebears: I mostly agree with you, and I think she should wear whatever she likes while out being social. But I wouldn't take a doctor or other professional (male or female) seriously if he or she showed up to examine me all scantily clad. Of course she has the right to do it, but it just doesn't seem like she takes her work very seriously.
@ytuhermanotambien: I mean honestly I wouldn't take her very seriously either if I saw the ad in passing but I also am not like shocked and appalled and feel like she's single handedly dooming the cause of medical marijuana. Also I really don't take any doctors that advertise seriously in the sense that I think, hm I should go see this person. I always try to get recommendations from friends and family and even then I take a wait and see attitude. I am not easily impressed by doctors.
@justcallmeangel: Yeah, I found the link and posted it above. I cannot look at that photo without descending into a fit of giggles. I mean, all that's missing is the sniffer of brandy, the roaring fire and some Dean Martin on the stereo. The picture is just...sigh. I don't know. Excuse me while I go giggle some more.
@Tchotchke: Oh, sorry, I didn't see it! I know, isn't it funny? He used to keep a copy of the magazine in his State House office too, and he is a conservative Republican so it always struck me as odd.
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: That's some circular logic: Criticism of her ad is sexist, because someone commented on it, saying it's sexist, which proves it's sexist because they wouldn't say that of a man.
People in this very thread have commented in similar ways on the Dr. 90210 dude.
You can criticize a woman without it being sexist, or slut shaming, or a refusal to acknowledge her choosing her choosy choice.
I'm torn. My gut hates pics like this. But then I wonder – Is everyone allowed to profit off of sexy women, from Photography magazines to car companies, except actual sexy women?
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: Pretty much. If you're sexy and try to make money for yourself, you clearly are bad at your job. But making money for Budweiser is OK!
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: This is a great point! There really is MUCH more vitriol directed at "sexy" woman than directed at the companies that utilize sexy women in their advertising and products. In fact, if you point out barely dressed women in advertising, the most common response is a blase "Sex sells." But god forbid if a woman sells sex!
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: Good point. It seems like she should be able to promote her business in any reasonable way she likes, a lot of unsexy things are sold to us using sexy images.
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: I see what you're saying, but in the end women who make money (or profit in some way) by objectifying themselves still lose because they are still seen as less than human.
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: That is a great point. I just wish that we could somehow reach a cultural epiphany where womens' sexuality isn't considered primarily as a commodity.
@Tiger_Eye: The difference would be, I imagine, that while Jezebel writers might post about it for discussion (a site using a sexy female model to promote their product or cause), if it was brought up anywhere else it would get the aforementioned shrug and 'Sex sells' comment.
Sorry, you can't pose for pictures in shorty-shorts and a midriff-bearing top and expect me to take you seriously. I would feel exactly the same way if she were a male doctor posing in teenage-boy clothes.
@Diziet_Sma: Ah, that is a really good point! I wouldn't want to go to a doctor wearing cargo shorts (unless we were in the wilderness) and an aberbrombie t-shirt with a shell necklace.
For what it's worth, I don't take Dr. Rey and his sleeveless scrubs seriously either.
That said, the harsh reality is that most professional fields have a great deal of bias against women and an inclination to take them less seriously than their male counterparts if they are good-looking--the two fields that I think this is most evident from my experience is medicine and law.
To use the legal field as an example: I've only worked in corporate law, which is a heightened old boys club if there ever was one. For job interviews, my schoolmates and I have been told by other female attorneys to dress as dowdy as possible and keep hair and make-up to a minimum. The supposed logic of this maxim is that if you are too attractive and care too much about your appearance, you are clearly not serious about law, business, or as intelligent as your frumpy peers.
The stereotype is that female attorneys should be plain, serious, and driven. And I'm sure it is probably similar with female doctors. For women in some fields, attractiveness can be something that holds them back, while attractive men are considered an asset.
As far as this doctor is concerned, I don't know. I think her case extends beyond just taking care of her appearance to blatantly advertising herself as a sex object--which has nothing to do with her capability as a doctor, but is a little unorthodox.
@bluebears: I've made it a goal not to dress like a sexless drone just because some man won't take me seriously if you can discern that I have breasts. If the senior partners don't like it, they can kiss my grits.
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: They love it. Attractive men are considered an asset in corporate law. It's an extension of that whole "Captain of the Football Team" personna. Finance is the same way.
@Tchotchke: good for you! I work in a small laid back firm so most times I don't worry about it. Unless I'm going to be in court (because judges...ugh).
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: I have heard men in big law firms talk about X partner who wins big in jury trials because of how good looking they are, in a totally admiring way.
@Tchotchke: The flip-side, of course, are all those studies that suggest that you won't get ahead if you aren't attractive enough. I mean, as if we can all totally control our level of hotness--don't be too pretty or feminine, but for god's sake make sure you look pretty enough to hire!
I sometimes wonder if our advice to younger women about anticipating sexism does more harm than good because it perpetuates the idea that women ought to play by those rules if they want to get ahead. It's one thing to encourage women to dress professionally, but I think the conventional wisdom does a lot to incite prejudices against the women who don't follow it.
@theKP: Yeah, that is definitely a fair point. I'm not sure, to be honest. I think that it probably does perpetuate unfair stereotypes and sexism among professionals. On the other hand, when you look at the break-down of most law firms--especially the ones that tout themselves as equal opportunity employers--you notice that while the number of male to female attorneys may be pretty even, the number of male partners to female partners is very disproportionate. So, in some respects it is a catch-22. If you dress frumpily, you play into the sexism, but may improve your chances of making partner. If you don't dress in shapeless suits, you buck the stereotypes, but may be hurting your chances of advancement. I don't know, I really don't.
In the early '80s, my mother worked for Guerlin's offices here in New York. At the time, unless you were an executive, you worked at desks in the center of the floor. Unattractive women were put in the middle of the pack and had plants strategically-placed in front of their desks. (I am not making any of this up.) So, I guess the cosmetics industry is the exact opposite of what we're discussing.
@theKP: "The flip-side, of course, are all those studies that suggest that you won't get ahead if you aren't attractive enough. "
That's the part that always confused me. I mean, "damned if you do/don't" has always pretty much been a static rule for corporate women, but what about that woman - Ann something, wasn't it? At Price Waterhouse? Who had to sue to make partner when it came out there were some memos circulating that the principal reasons she didn't were because she wore boxy suits and "not enough" makeup?
@Rooo sez BISH PLZ: sometimes I feel like the thinking is just, we didn't promote this women because we're sexist but that wont fly so lets make up an excuse. If she wears makeup and dresses in a non dowdy way, she's too sexy and if she's dowdy she's not attractive enough. Pick column A or column B.
@Rooo sez BISH PLZ: I was called about an interview for a hedge fund a year ago. At the end of the phone call, the guy on the other end (one of the partners), wrapped up our conversation by reminding me to "dress the part" when I came in the next week. I never showed up.
@bluebears: @tchotchke: this conversation makes me happy to be a legal services attorney-- who cares if I don't get paid much, if I get to wear whatever I want? (Exception: court.)
@Tchotchke: My wife, who's a nurse, is driven crazy by the way that some young female doctors/med students seem to compensate for a perceived lack of femininity in their profession by dressing like the hospital floor is a cocktail reception. She's seen doctors unable to run to a coding patient because their wearing heels, and breasts spill out into the face of a patient while the doctor is bending to examine them.
@ytuhermanotambien: yeah I feel like its worth it making (much) less money because I KNOW working in a big firm would make me so unhappy (for a lot of reasons).
@Rooo sez BISH PLZ: I think the idea is that you have to look beautiful in order to succeed, but you can't spend any time making yourself look beautiful, or you're a bimbo. It just has to happen naturally.
I believe doctors do have a broad responsibility to patients that goes beyond just the patients they treat. If what they are doing within their professional work puts treatment for other patients at risk, then I think a doctor is shrugging that responsibility. I see that responsibility to include not writing opiate prescriptions for known addicts because it makes that leads to harsher regulations and more investigations that make it more difficult for people in pain to access necessary pain medications. I see that responsibility to include not making other patients think there is a miracle cure out there that really isn't because you are advertising or writing on the internet that you can cure cancer and MS with a saline solution. I also see that responsibility to include not putting medical marijuana at risk if you are medical marijuana specialist.
I'm not bothered for a couple of reasons. First, she's branded herself this way - she's doing this because she wants to and she appears to be owning it. She's absolutely allowed to be sexy and smart and a doctor and a marijuana advocate, just like I'm allowed to be a smart and sarcastic and shlubby freelancer.
Second, people have never gone broke using sex to sell stuff or ideas. A man using a woman's sexyface(footnote to Hortense) to sell stuff or ideas is different than a woman using her own sexyface to sell stuff or ideas. The latter is much less irritating to my delicate ladybrain.
Will she hurt her cause? Maybe. I've learned never to underestimate the potential for outrage about women's sexuality, especially against women who aren't afraid to express it freely. She could get her message out to a lot of people who wouldn't have heard it otherwise, too.
The Governator once posed nude for a magazine when he was younger, you can see him and his penis with some googling.
...but I take the Governator seriously, because he takes his /work/ seriously.
If Dr.Patel is a good doctor, she pays attention to her patients, and her attire has never created a hazard (like jewelry falling into a patient during surgery) or got caught on machinery, she's a good doctor. She can show all the cleavage she wants because boobs don't breathe out germs the way the mouth and nose does.
As a woman and a queer, I'm aware of the double standards and I'm careful about the way I act, however unfair it is, I'm not going to waste time every hour of my day in argument after argument when I can just, not Act Too Queer, and when it's hot, I don't take off my top even though it's legal in Canada, because I don't want to deal with the attention. ...those are MY choices, my self-preservation...because I just don't want to deal with crap.
...but for the women who do what they will in spite of negative attention, that's their choice too, and as a society, we have a greater responsibility to deal with those who give them the unwarranted negative attention, then to police their harmless behaviour.
@bluebears: @JohnAgamemnon: Seconding the love. Well said, especially "as a society, we have a greater responsibility to deal with those who give them the unwarranted negative attention, then to police their harmless behaviour."
@JohnAgamemnon: Yeah, but the Governor is not wearing a Speedo while signing a bill. He did that while he was an entertainer. I mean, societal rules on when you are allowed to wear certain things and what signals are associated with them are pretty arbitrary, and I like people who are willing to let their freak flag fly. If she wears sexy clothes while on a date or elsewhere, it is one thing. It is another thing when she is using her sex appeal to sell her medical services. So yes, it is her choice and we don't need to police her, but it is hardly a double standard that people are taking her less seriously because of it. If my doctors had pictures of themselves in bikinis on their website, I might be less likely to think that was a good practice to go too.
@JohnAgamemnon: I agree that there's a double standard, but this still bugs me. We put such a high premium on appearance in our culture, especially for women. It's like you're not worth being noticed - no matter how smart or skilled you may be - unless you're pretty. I hate seeing women buying into and perpetuating that mindset. Here, the attention may actually hurt her professional reputation, but I guess being recognized as pretty and sexy is so important that it's worth the sacrifice. That makes me sad for women. It's true that your skills and smarts shouldn't automatically be questioned just because you happen to be pretty or sexy. But it's also sad to me that this highly educated, skilled professional seems to believe that a woman's greatest selling point is her looks, even though how she looks has nothing whatsoever to do with how good she is at her job.And for the record, I'd feel the same way about a male doctor who advertised his services with pictures of his six-pac abs, or whatever. I'd love to get to a place in society where people didn't feel so compelled to conform to a narrow standard of attractiveness in order to be worthy of attention for their non-looks related skills and knowledge.
11/18/09
I'm guessing that this doc does dress appropriately in the office, and that this is just an advertising gimick. Color me unimpressed and unconcerned.
11/18/09
My sister actually told me straight up never to go to hospitals in June if I can avoid it because they're crawling with new-minted trainee doctors and nervous med students. Scary stuff!
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
If a good doctor happens to be beautiful, that's nice but it should be irrelevant to his or her practice. That's the message we're trying to promote here. Your looks, your body, and your sex should have nothing to do with your professional success as a woman, nor as a man.
11/18/09
11/18/09
So agree. No FAIR.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
I don't think its about not being beautiful or womanly/manly but I think it's about how we percieve people in certain jobs and how they should act.
11/18/09
I would be equally disdainful of a male doctor who chose a similar photo for his ad.
11/18/09
(#tips) <-- why does this keep appearing automatically under my comments?
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
11/18/09
Mine too! I have chosen to assume that it means that the commenting gremlins have decided our comments are advice-worthy.
11/18/09
11/18/09
[gawker.com]
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
I generally would agree with you but in this instance I think a member of either sex would be considered ridiculous for this.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
11/18/09
People in this very thread have commented in similar ways on the Dr. 90210 dude.
You can criticize a woman without it being sexist, or slut shaming, or a refusal to acknowledge her choosing her choosy choice.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
My gut is with you, as well, though.
11/18/09
11/18/09
I hate it too. But seriously, why shouldn't she use her brain and braun? Guys would.
Plus, to your point, if this were a male run institution using this pic, who'd be up in arms? Not Steve Lopez I'm sure.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
I work in marketing actually. If I got paid every time a man used that excuse I'd be rolling in it by now.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
That said, the harsh reality is that most professional fields have a great deal of bias against women and an inclination to take them less seriously than their male counterparts if they are good-looking--the two fields that I think this is most evident from my experience is medicine and law.
To use the legal field as an example: I've only worked in corporate law, which is a heightened old boys club if there ever was one. For job interviews, my schoolmates and I have been told by other female attorneys to dress as dowdy as possible and keep hair and make-up to a minimum. The supposed logic of this maxim is that if you are too attractive and care too much about your appearance, you are clearly not serious about law, business, or as intelligent as your frumpy peers.
The stereotype is that female attorneys should be plain, serious, and driven. And I'm sure it is probably similar with female doctors. For women in some fields, attractiveness can be something that holds them back, while attractive men are considered an asset.
As far as this doctor is concerned, I don't know. I think her case extends beyond just taking care of her appearance to blatantly advertising herself as a sex object--which has nothing to do with her capability as a doctor, but is a little unorthodox.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
@Pizza!Pizza!Pizza!: I have heard men in big law firms talk about X partner who wins big in jury trials because of how good looking they are, in a totally admiring way.
11/18/09
I sometimes wonder if our advice to younger women about anticipating sexism does more harm than good because it perpetuates the idea that women ought to play by those rules if they want to get ahead. It's one thing to encourage women to dress professionally, but I think the conventional wisdom does a lot to incite prejudices against the women who don't follow it.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
In the early '80s, my mother worked for Guerlin's offices here in New York. At the time, unless you were an executive, you worked at desks in the center of the floor. Unattractive women were put in the middle of the pack and had plants strategically-placed in front of their desks. (I am not making any of this up.) So, I guess the cosmetics industry is the exact opposite of what we're discussing.
11/18/09
That's the part that always confused me. I mean, "damned if you do/don't" has always pretty much been a static rule for corporate women, but what about that woman - Ann something, wasn't it? At Price Waterhouse? Who had to sue to make partner when it came out there were some memos circulating that the principal reasons she didn't were because she wore boxy suits and "not enough" makeup?
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
Second, people have never gone broke using sex to sell stuff or ideas. A man using a woman's sexyface(footnote to Hortense) to sell stuff or ideas is different than a woman using her own sexyface to sell stuff or ideas. The latter is much less irritating to my delicate ladybrain.
Will she hurt her cause? Maybe. I've learned never to underestimate the potential for outrage about women's sexuality, especially against women who aren't afraid to express it freely. She could get her message out to a lot of people who wouldn't have heard it otherwise, too.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
...but I take the Governator seriously, because he takes his /work/ seriously.
If Dr.Patel is a good doctor, she pays attention to her patients, and her attire has never created a hazard (like jewelry falling into a patient during surgery) or got caught on machinery, she's a good doctor. She can show all the cleavage she wants because boobs don't breathe out germs the way the mouth and nose does.
As a woman and a queer, I'm aware of the double standards and I'm careful about the way I act, however unfair it is, I'm not going to waste time every hour of my day in argument after argument when I can just, not Act Too Queer, and when it's hot, I don't take off my top even though it's legal in Canada, because I don't want to deal with the attention. ...those are MY choices, my self-preservation...because I just don't want to deal with crap.
...but for the women who do what they will in spite of negative attention, that's their choice too, and as a society, we have a greater responsibility to deal with those who give them the unwarranted negative attention, then to police their harmless behaviour.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09