The incident of an employee in the UK being warned by Human Resources due to her brown pantyhose sparked a broad reaction on social media. This event has reignited the discussion on why the color brown has been deemed inappropriate throughout history in the country. This color, which has been shaped by class perceptions since the 18th and 19th centuries, is still not favored in some corporate environments today.
So, why is that? Let's delve into this...
During the 18th and 19th centuries, procuring colors such as red, blue, and purple was a costly affair. Due to the limitations in dye technology, these hues became synonymous with aristocracy and the upper class.
In contrast, brown was the color of the working class, primarily because it could be dyed using inexpensive, earth-based materials. Not only was its production cheap, but it was also practical as it helped to hide the dirt on the clothes of laborers engaged in heavy work.
This cultural distinction became more pronounced during the Victorian Era. Agricultural laborers, coal miners, and railway workers became associated with brown attire. During these times, colors were indicators of one's social status. While the middle and upper classes gravitated towards brighter and more expensive colors, the lower class adopted brown as their color. This perception gradually permeated everyday life, literature, and the press.
When considering the class-based structure of British society, the negative connotations associated with the color brown have been perpetuated for generations.
In the world of finance, while black and navy blue represent seriousness, trust, and authority, brown is still perceived as a color that disrupts formality, being overly casual. According to the Social Mobility Commission's 2016 report, investment banks are less likely to hire male candidates who wear brown shoes to an interview. This is because such a color choice is interpreted as being unprofessional, even suggesting unreliability.
Cultural commentators suggest that the primary purpose of this rule is to uphold class distinctions. Historically, brown has been the color of the lower class, which is why the status symbol of 'black formal wear' in the finance sector continues to hold its validity.
The post by an employee who was cautioned on social media for wearing brown tights served as a testament to how contentious this color still is in the UK. Some companies perceive shades of brown as too casual, insufficiently professional, or an unreliable choice.
Despite renowned journalists and fashion commentators deeming these rules as overly old-fashioned, it seems that the deeply ingrained class culture of England is not about to change anytime soon.
'I was once reprimanded by the HR department during my first corporate job training for wearing a suit in a shade of brown similar to this. They told the story of how in England, brown is associated with the lower class and poverty, considered the 'poor man's color' due to being made with cheap dyes. They narrated this tale in the training room, belittling me in the process.
Just look at this nobility, they said. Look at the mindset that judges people based on color, which is, by the way, absurd. We are not in England, we are in Turkey.
I send my regards to the so-called HR that insulted me that day, specifically based on the color I was wearing.
EARTH TONES ARE NOBLE.
AND THEY WILL REMAIN NOBLE 🤎'