That’s the title of this Slate article.
I post this to question one small aspect of the author’s narrative.
If I could talk to the author, I’d ask her what rationales she has used to justify rejecting an outfit.
Assuming the wearer is comfortable with what he or she is wearing and that distractions or reactions by others are off-limits as reasons, what are some other grounds upon which to veto wardrobe choices?
If the dress code is there and shorts are specifically forbidden, then what is the mother’s problem?
I suspect boys are not similarly shamed for showing too much thigh, or that their showing of flesh is not criticized as distracting girls from being able to concentrate.
Then she needs to get the dress code ended, not complain when it’s enforced
I’ll betcha that that item of the dress code is entirely gender-neutral, and that boys and girls alike are prohibited from wearing lower garments that are higher than their fingers. I suppose there might be differences in enforcement, but the burden of proof is on the one claiming that. Note that just showing the number of citations given to boys and to girls is not a proof, since there might just be differences in the rate of actual offenses.
Rick: Which I think was the point of her article, judging by her comment about “but it’s up to us parents to stand up to school administrators, to e-blast them right back.” Apparently she’s been uneasy about this since the enforcement a couple years ago and is writing this as a way to rally others.
I suspect boys are not wearing such short shorts. Short shorts are not in for boys right now. They are in for girls. At my son’s school they have a similar “fingertip rule” and it applies equally to boys and girls. In fact, the whole dress code is written “gender neutral”.
I agree with those who say she needs to work to change the dress code at the school, not let her child violated it and expect to get away with it.
The message at her school seems to be directed overwhelmingly at the girls, if you believe the author: “There is talk about clothes interfering with establishing and maintaining a “learning environment”— prompting the question of whose “learning environment” is being prioritized and at whose expense. Scripted morning announcements at my daughter’s school include daily reminders, “to the young ladies,” about the importance of wearing appropriate attire.”
Even if boys’ clothing rules are equally enforced and their show of skin equally forbidden, it still sends the message if only girls are reminded daily that the girls are the problem, girls distract boys, girls are disruptive, girls’ bodies are harmful to the atmosphere there. Do a general “reminder to our students” announcement.
I doubt there are a ton of pre-teen males showing up to school wearing short-shorts.
The article isn’t particularly clear, but I think that’s the point. The mother wants to enforce some general dress-code on her daughter, but is having trouble articulating why.
So? Girls violate the dress code more than boys. This is well known.
It is absurd to think that anyone’s environment is being prioritized at someone else’s expense. There is no “expense” to dressing appropriately. Further, it’s mind bogglingly stupid to suggest that the school system is in any way favorable to boys. If you want to pick the “who is being prioritized” fight, you’ll get trounced. Simple as that.
And I suspect that if a 12 year old boy showed up to school dressed similarly to the girl in the article he would have been sent home and if it happened again he would be suspended.
The author has an agenda. Why the fuck would I believe her?
How frequently do the young men break the dress code? Don’t you think it’s possible that the messages are directed at the young ladies because they’re the ones constantly breaking the rules?
So they should white wash it so they don’t hurt the little girls feelings? And you know how they can get them to stop? They could follow the dress code.
It is? I didn’t know that. Never heard it before. Do you have a cite?
Right. It’s rather like penalties for fighting at school…probably more boys than girls receive such penalties (or at least, my school was like that), but that doesn’t mean the rule is sexist or singles out boys.
Can I request that no-one tries to post cites to debunk this?
Eh. Back in the olden days when I was starting Junior High, mini skirts and micro minis were the style. Girls were NOT permitted to wear slacks or shorts. And this was common in most of the Jr and Sr High schools in the area. A fingertip length rule for minis was common.
Look, nowadays, boys are probably not permitted to wear their pants under their boxers. Girls aren’t allowed to show too much thigh. Outside of phys ed type activities, neither are probably allowed to show midriffs. I don’t think these are outrageous rules. But I guess I’m just an old fart now.
There are two ways to have a dress code.
The first is basically “This is a business casual environment and we expect you to conform to basic dress norms for an education setting.”
The second is “Women have a responsibility to cover their flesh lest they tempt and distract.”
The first one makes sense, and is the same logic that carries over to the workplace. The second is burka-lite. Having your body suddenly morph into that of an adult woman- and all the baggage that comes with that- is hard enough without your school reminding you that your very physical form is a danger to public peace.
Schools should approach dress codes as being a matter of professionalism, not sex.
And if it is all gender neutral, Will a boy get in trouble for wearing code passing female clothes?
Two words: School uniforms.
And I’d say the school’s policy is closer to the first.
Sure, they use the word “distraction”, but without your poisoning the well, and distraction is one reason why business dress norms exist IMO.
No, depending on exactly what we mean by gender neutral here, it is not, but that doesn’t mean it is sexist or singles out women.
At your local clothes store you will find separate men and women’s sections. The clothing styles are very different. It is not the school’s mission to try to change society on that.
Boys coming to school dressed wearing girl-associated clothes and vice versa is a statement, and a distraction, and I have no issue with that being against their code.
Meh. My school had no dress code whatsoever, and we somehow survived. Having a dress code at all is the problem. If you’d given me a dress code in those days I would’ve done anything to violate it.
For the kids I worked with we approached it more as an ongoing conversation about dressing appropriately, than as rules. That means that you wear stuff that is clean and whole as much as trying not to combine short top, short skirt and low cut. Those were my guidelines for them: pick one of the three. But again, not a rule. If I thought they looked inappropriate for a certain event or place we would just talk about it. For the boys it was often wearing a t-shirt at all, or throwing away old torn clothes.