Check the abstract below,  your thoughts?

Psychol Rep. 2012 Jun;110(3):719-30.
Role ambiguity, employee gender, and workplace friendship.
Chen CY, Mao HY, Hsieh AT.
SourceDepartment of Marketing and Logistics Management, Chihlee Institute of Technology, New Taipei City, Taiwan. dustinchen@mail.chihlee.edu.tw

Abstract
The importance of workplace friendship is recognized by researchers and practitioners, but its antecedents with respect to work roles are not well understood. Employees' gender might moderate a relationship between work roles and friendships. Data from a survey of 221 international tourist hotel employees showed that a key aspect of job support, role ambiguity, was negatively related to having workplace friendships. However, employees' gender did not moderate this relationship. Role clarity (the opposite of role ambiguity) may facilitate workplace friendships.

In my profession, androgeny was not an issue for the FAABs.  In fact, as it was male-dominated, the more androgenous FAABs did better.

I worked in the geological sciences.

It's definitely not in my field. But then again "creatives" get a lot of leeway in the looks department

"Creatives," is that referring to people who think/create on the job as opposed to those who just show up and 'staff'?  (I think the real word your looking for is 'skilled.')   If so, then the reason is simple,  they don't have to worry about 'looks' because they are being judged by their output, the actual product of their work and not on how well they take up space.  People might care (though I'm not sure why) how some 'customer service' person is dressed - but who cares if your carpenter has a tool belt that matches his work boots, and a damn near perfect hair-cut if he can't carp for crap?

Quote from: tekla on December 01, 2012, 12:26:32 PM
"Creatives," is that referring to people who think/create on the job as opposed to those who just show up and 'staff'?  (I think the real word your looking for is 'skilled.')   If so, then the reason is simple,  they don't have to worry about 'looks' because they are being judged by their output, the actual product of their work and not on how well they take up space.  People might care (though I'm not sure why) how some 'customer service' person is dressed - but who cares if your carpenter has a tool belt that matches his work boots, and a damn near perfect hair-cut if he can't carp for crap?

Nope, I meant creatives. I'm not a fan of that word but it's what a large portion of the field I'm in calls itself. It refers to anyone working in art/graphic design/marketing.

Although closer to what you're talking about, when did a short stint in production at a rinky dink studio in L.A. no one gave a hoot what I looked like either.

I think it's retail and corporate worlds that perpetuate stuff like this.

Quote from: insideontheoutside on December 01, 2012, 01:28:19 PM
It refers to anyone working in art/graphic design/marketing.

If you're comfortable telling, which one do you do?
But yeah, I probably would've guessed you were in the art field in some way. I can definitely see that.

not sure how things will work out for me yet. so far so good, but i am worried... looking female, with a male name? eh, we will see i guess.

I have no career to stifle.

I turn up, shepherd kids, get paid a little, go home.

That said I think my androgyne self is a good thing to have with the children, they certainly respond well to me.

Quote from: tekla on December 01, 2012, 12:26:32 PM
"Creatives," is that referring to people who think/create on the job as opposed to those who just show up and 'staff'?  (I think the real word your looking for is 'skilled.')   If so, then the reason is simple,  they don't have to worry about 'looks' because they are being judged by their output, the actual product of their work and not on how well they take up space.  People might care (though I'm not sure why) how some 'customer service' person is dressed - but who cares if your carpenter has a tool belt that matches his work boots, and a damn near perfect hair-cut if he can't carp for crap?

I can see why (It doesn't mean it's right) If one is going into a high end jewelry store would you be more willing to buy from a clean cut,well dressed person as opposed to "Ralph" who come in with a scraggly beard,a cut off tee-shirt,tattoos everywhere,and just gives the appearance of being disreputable. (Not that Ralph is,Ralph may actually be the most honest and trustworthy one in the place)

I have experienced that myself when I was doing trades shows. Even though I had better prices,better stock, and was far more willing to help them find what they were looking for,they would often bypass me just because I didn't fit the traditional mold of what someone should
"look" like.

On the other hand would you want to go to get a tattoo from clean cut "Mr Smith" who doesn't have a tattoo of his own,comes in an Armani suit and Italian leathers and yet could be the best tattoo artist ever? Or would you prefer "Ralph" doing it?

Think about this has anyone ever seen a movie where "Ralph" is behind the counter waiting on customers (Outside of a pawn shop) or is "Ralph" always filmed as being the guy that robs the place?

It doesn't make it right,but it's a matter of perception. And those perceptions can mean the difference between being successful or going under.