There still seems to be a gulf between discourse and reality when it comes to sexism

Of course, customer-facing and public roles demand a level of presentability, but there is a fine line between acknowledging this and persisting with outdated stereotypes, writes Caroline Bullock

The recent slur seems to have followed a prolonged crescendo of scrutiny and judgement of Rayner’s appearance (PA)

It’s been an interesting time for gender politics in the workplace. As Virgin Atlantic’s new advert marks a progressive departure from the brand’s usual stereotypes, we have the fallout from Angela Rayner’s skirt-wearing, leg-crossing wiles causing mass distraction at the despatch box.

It’s a reminder of the gulf between the discourse and the reality, which is a shame if not predictable. Virgin’s campaign feels significant. This is a brand that, for many years, and however tongue-in-cheek the sentiment, has basked in depicting defined gender roles: the pilots suave and male; the cabin crew female and sexualised, hanging off a man’s arm, model-slim and attractive. The tight red suits have always been unapologetically glamorous, the subtext being that they are there to catch the eye, peddling a fantasy of something beyond the reality of serving gin and tonic in a very cramped space.

All of which is absent in the bold, if bandwagon-jumping, revision – which is compelling all the same. The big reveal is a capable-looking female pilot, but I was more struck by the cabin-crew member who, poised to apply lipstick, decides against it, heading to her shift with bare lips free of the usual slick of bright red. This is an interesting point; a rejection of one of the more excessive details of an exacting dress code, which dictates that female cabin crew must wear specific shades of make-up.