“In a sense”? I don’t think that is “in a sense” at all. I think that is exactly “the mere existence of the girl.” She doesn’t even have to be in the room. She doesn’t even have to exist. Your argument is that girls need to change because girls who aren’t even in the room, even fictional girls, impact boys.
No, the logic in these cases* is that a young woman’s attire can be distracting and unprofessional in the same way that young man’s attire can be distracting and unprofessional. The analogy to “blame the victim rape mentality” is intellectually bankrupt, but about on par with what I would expect from screeching harpies whose only apparent intent is to absolve girls from the shared responsibility of maintaining an environment conducive to learning.
[sub]*as far as the dress codes go, I won’t defend the principal’s statements, if true – the blogger heard them second hand apparently[/sub]
Then you haven’t read the dress code for Polk County *Public Schoolsor Haven Middle School, which is interesting because those are the dress codes being criticized in the links you provided. Neither are gender specific and I don’t believe either actually forbids the wearing of leggings, just the wearing of leggings (and other undergarments) as outer garments.
But it’s cool if you want to dodge a question. What mother would say that they were comfortable with the idea of her daughter’s male classmates wearing pants that puts their penis’ every movement, throb and bob on full lycra wrapped display?
*[sub]the second link is a PDF, but more detailed[/sub]
The very nature of a distraction is that it’s something you can’t really exert control over. Like the kids roaming the halls or talking over the teacher (whom I point blank don’t believe are never punished at your daughter’s school), inappropriate and provocative attire draws attention away from the purpose of being at school. Many schools have decided that uncovered leggings, with their propensity to be form fitting and potential to be ass cleft baring/camel-toe inducing are inappropriate. Get the fuck over it.
Bullshit. The dress codes in question are gender neutral and designed to provide distraction free learning for both sexes. As even sven points out, women frequently dress to impress other women, to which I’ll add my observation that women can be horribly judgmental of the way other women dress. Google “leggings are not pants” and you’ll find a plethora of sites and articles written by women. I’d wager that girls making cliquish, judgmental remarks about ways other girls dress are half the distractions dress codes are meant to prevent. The notion that the sole intent is to prevent boys from being distracted is shrill, obnoxious horseshit – which means it sells and is being reported as fact without much evidence to back it up.
Utter nonsense. Every dress code I’ve seen recently specifically prohibits saggy pants, requires them to wear shirts (why should they have to, it’s generally not illegal for men to go bare chested) and subjects them to the same regulations should they choose to wear tights or bike shorts – if they’re allowed to at all.
You seem to be ignoring everything that came after the “but” in that sentence. While there are some aspects of this dynamic that are completely out of everyone’s control, there are others that can be mitigated to some extent with rules about dress and behavior.
And I’m not arguing that girls need to change for any reason. I’m explaining why a dress code based on sound evidence can appear to be something of a double standard to females. I’m quite sure the same school would also not allow males to wear speedos to class, or for students to wear wearable computer monitors on their backs that display movies to the person sitting behind them.
You’re taking the question about what makes a reasonable dress code in the context of a classroom to another level - that this somehow dictates how men and women should dress or behave in other contexts. Nobody is being asked to change. They are being asked to dress a certain way in one specific place and time.
I think you and I have different definitions of “change.”
ETA: Oops. Forgot the second half.
The study you are claiming says nothing about girls dressing normally. Only that naked girls and imaginary girls both have an impact. That means there is no way to find a middle ground. The entire spectrum from naked to non-existent is implicated.
Well, if there is a rule that a student, male or female, can’t watch movies on their phone during class is that asking them to change?
How about if they aren’t paying attention to the movie but they are displaying it to other students who are distracted by it, is making them turn it off asking them to change?
What makes for appropriate rules in a classroom setting doesn’t necessarily extend outside of the classroom to daily life. If a school made a rule that after school female students couldn’t wear leggings at home or while out shopping I would understand the outrage.
These studies, and there are many not just one, say neither of those things. What they suggest is that interjecting thoughts about sex into an academic setting causes lower test scores in males but not females. Taking that and extrapolating it to mean that in life in general women are being taught they need to be ashamed of their bodies or need to make changes to accommodate males just because they are subject to a dress code in school is irrational.
So, who is doing the interjecting?
And how can you say that the studies don’t implicate an entire range from naked to non-existent when you yourself said that the impact was from pictures of naked or near-naked girls all the way up to being told they might meet a girl later?
Let me as you this. Do you think school dress codes are based on science?
It isn’t about blaming a female for ‘interjecting’ thoughts into the classroom because she likes a certain style of dress. It is about a school’s effort to lower such distractions to the minimum possible.
As noted the same school would not permit males to wear inappropriate clothing either. The double standard mentioned in this thread was something about girls being required to wear sleeved shirts while males were allowed to wear tank tops. In the rest of these examples I’m fairly sure that males wouldn’t be allowed to wear leggings or shorts that are shorter than a certain length either. The sleeve rule is probably because bra straps, if not breasts, could be visible and they would prefer the guys concentrate on their work instead of trying to position themselves at the right spot to see inside their neighbor’s shirts. Out in the real world one could very soundly argue that isn’t a woman’s problem and she can wear whatever kind of shirt she wants. In the classroom, evidence supports this double standard. Such a rule would alleviate some distraction for males that doesn’t occur in females.
What I said is that they don’t say anything about girls dressing ‘normally’ or what constitutes normal dress, nor do they say there is no way to find a middle ground.
On a case by case basis probably not always. Especially in the case of private schools, religious schools, etc. As a whole though, when considering the dynamics of coed learning environments, certainly they do. Academic research about academic environments is not in short supply.
If the girl isn’t doing the interjecting, why is she the one having to take action to prevent the interjecting?
I know. Which is why I said claiming there is a middle ground is not what the studies were saying. You quoted some studies and then said it was “reasonable” to have dress codes. But the studies you quoted said nothing about what was “reasonable,” and the impact to the boys’ cognitive ability, according to you, was from anything from imaginary girls to naked girls.
“The existence of girls impacts boys, and pictures of naked girls impacts boys, so therefore girls need a dress code to reduce the impact on boys.”
Do you see how that does not follow?
Would it be unfair to males to ban fat jokes in the classroom because 95% of anorexia cases are female? Why should the guys have to change the things they like to joke about and subjects that are comfortable for them when it is clearly a psychological problem that mostly only females have? Shouldn’t they be able to just ‘deal’ and not demand that men change their behavior to allow an environment where females feel more comfortable?
What about the point that has been echoed at least 20 times in this thread; that dress codes apply to both sexes and are generally equal in terms of what is allowed, with only a few slight differences based around anatomical and psychological differences of the sexes?
It doesn’t follow because you are presenting it out of context and with your own interpretations attached. The studies just show that males are affected academically by sexual distractions to a much higher degree than females. They make no effort to suggest suitable dress codes based on this. If a school takes this to mean that certain clothing in the classroom would disrupt the learning environment for males it isn’t slut shaming it is just the reality of a situation they need to take steps to prevent.
You don’t get to present something you pulled out of your ass as “the reality of a situation.” You are the one interpreting these studies as proof that a dress code helps anything. If you are NOT presenting it that way, why are you presenting it? You’re trying to hide behind the study until the study doesn’t actually help your case.
You guys with your idea of gender are so last decade!! Out here in CA, each child gets to choose which gender they want to dress as. And they can use whichever bathroom designated to the gender they identify as.
Not at all. I would hope that evidence that males are more affected by sexual distractions academically than females would be relevant to a discussion that isn’t about dress codes at all really, but about how dress codes are ‘slut shaming’ misogynistic inventions of men to subdue and shame women, because in a few select cases women are restricted from wearing certain styles of clothes that males are not.
If you read back into the thread at the point I mentioned the studies, I was replying to posts implying this entire issue is just a minor discomfort that men should just ‘deal’ with and women should not be asked to consider. The evidence is that isn’t the case and it is a legitimate concern.
Let’s just take the whole thing to the logical conclusion - both male and female students are allowed to attend class fully nude. In such an environment the males would not be able to learn and the females would. How can you think that isn’t relevant to choices a school administrator has to make about appropriate dress in the classroom?
You’re missing her point. Her point is that you’re making a bad inference. The study said that presenting sexual things to men can make them perform worse. Binary. You’re extrapolating this, without evidence, to say that the “more sexual” it is, the worse they perform. This is a reasonable hypothesis, but from what I understand the study made no assertion that a sliding scale was involved. There was nothing that said “a naked women makes men do worse than the promise of meeting an unnamed woman after the test.” And even if the hypothesis is correct, we have no real evidence about exactly what constitutes “more sexual” in this context.
If you and she both took what I meant to be that then I clearly didn’t communicate well. It isn’t a question of degrees it is a simple statement that males cognitive ability is diminished in the presence of sexual thoughts.
The inference is that women wearing, for example, tight leggings or sleeveless shirts in class would contribute to an environment that made it difficult for males to learn while not affecting females in any way.
If the girls in the class imagined men wearing these things, they could honestly say that would be no obstacle at all to their ability to focus on coursework, so they don’t see why they should have to change anything to suit men just because they have what females consider to be a totally irrational problem.
But to a school administrator who decides girls need to wear short sleeves but boys can wear tank tops there is some scientific basis to support that double standard. That is the only point I hoped to make by mentioning it.
It is as much a boys problem that boys just need to deal with as anorexia is a girls problem that girls just need to deal with.
Absolutely. It’s deeply weird that this is even up for debate.
Okay, but if a guy’s cognitive abilities are impaired by the mere thought of an imaginary woman, as the study suggests, then simply having a girl in the classroom is just as bad as having a naked one. Obviously that’s a bit of an absurd statement, and unlikely to be true exactly as I stated it, but it’s closer to what the article is stating. In the case where there’s no real sliding scale, and no indicator of what triggers these sexual thoughts, then a dress code isn’t justified on the basis of triggering sexual thoughts.
Now if you’re simply playing Devil’s Advocate and saying “a school administrator could extrapolate this to justify…” then okay, fair enough, but jsgoddess’ arguments still stand against this hypothetical administrator and simply repeating the point that SCIENCE can support it if you squint and tilt your head doesn’t help.
Edit: And to be clear, I’m mostly on your side in that I think a certain degree of a dress code is helpful. But I still don’t find this particular argument compelling and think jsgoddess’ logic is more correct here with the evidence as presented. The study makes a far more compelling case for gender segregated schooling than it does for a dress code.
The thought of an imaginary gourmet meal might distract someone who is trying to diet but having a rule that no french fries are allowed in a weight watchers meeting still makes sense to me.
I clearly didn’t communicate my point well - there are two, or more, questions on the table here. One is about specifics of one school’s dress code, the other is this general assumption among females that males are just big horny babies that could, if they wished, control the cognitive impact sexual thoughts have on them. In answer to the first point, it is up to the schools, parents, and state laws (in the US) to guide dress codes. The answer to the second is that disruptive sexual distraction to this degree is a genuine psychological phenomenon in males that simply doesn’t exist in females. Two separate issues but somewhat woven together in the context of this thread.
Sexual distraction is a problem for males but not females? Where did that silly idea come from?
The study Crazyhorse linked which did, in fact, find that when presented with sexual stimuli before an exam men performed worse while women remained unaffected. Of course, one study doesn’t prove anything, but it did come from somewhere at least.
Some people are in fact transgender, and they should be welcomed and accommodated.