I think there is a large breakdown between what schools see and experience, and what parents choose to see and experience, with little meaningful discussion between the two.
If middle school is anything like I remember, it’s a fashion show. Students rely on the one place they can socially interact (in person) without parental supervision, in order to act like the adults they aren’t (would be nice if they tried to mimic paying bills). Parents usually think their kids are little angels, but they’re often deluded and out of touch. Dress/style isn’t so much about confidence (the way it’s been described), and more about following the latest trend kids have seen in the media, because they’re largely impressionable (interestingly enough, these kids often lacked confidence, and followed trends to mask this).
The kids who were more about individuality, were the ones who didn’t (or couldn’t afford to) dress according to a trend, and sadly, they were often ridiculed because of it (its own can of worms). So yes, confidence and enthusiasm, as the author states, have their ways of working into that complex interaction, but I don’t think it’s as she says. I think she’s largely attaching her views where convenient, perpetuating the idea where any challenge/criticism we don’t like becomes “shaming” (shirt of shame?). There are very legitimate issues with regard to shaming, and they still need a lot of attention. On the other end, there are situations being conflated where opportunity presents itself. As unfortunate as it is, sometimes schools do introduce knee-jerk reactions to dress/style, and seemingly cherry-pick arbitrary criteria to go by, until the next social shift. Sometimes it’s legitimate and warranted and sometimes it’s not.
All of those issues hit even in a school with uniforms. Its human nature to include or exclude based on attributes - and middle school girls seem to be at the peak of incivility when it comes to that. If it isn’t clothes, its weight, or your haircut, or your skin color, if if you play sports, or your grades, or who your friends are, or what side of the tracks you live on, or where you go to church, or…
We aren’t going to make all kids attend the same church. Or put in a weight requirement. Or insist that all girls be blonde with shoulder length straight hair. (My daughter cut her shoulder length dishwater blonde hair into a pixie - and it was a lot darker short than it had been long, its been getting darker with age, - and has been shamed for it - she likes it though). Clothing is just the one thing we THINK we can control in order to control this - but they’ll just move onto something else.
One of the things I find especially disturbing - its the African American girls who take the brunt of this. Their bodies tend to mature that much faster and curve in ways unusual for the White and Asian girls. Add a culture issues - they tend to dress flashier - and a socio-economic one - in our district they are the least likely to have the financial resources to buy new shorts every time they grow two inches - and its those girls most likely to be running around in their gym clothes.
What is the rationale that makes it inappropriate at work?
The bottom line is that any dress code is going to be arbitrary. So either parents put up with the arbitrary or they should push for absolutely no dress code. I guess I don’t see the problem with abiding by a simple dress code for work or school (assuming it’s not discriminatory).
Isn’t it possible that other girls may be distracted by what a particular girl is wearing? It’s not a blanket statement that is aimed at protecting boys from distraction alone - it’s to not create a distracting environment at all.
I would point out to the mother that her daughter, as shown in the picture, is a very pretty young lady about 12-13 years old. And she’s wearinghooker shorts. I would then ask mom why she thinks that is appropriate dress for her daughter.
We have a real issue in our society today with the sexualization of children. It needs to stop, and the parents are the ones who need to stop it.
She’s wearing cut offs. And its appropriate because her mother believes it to be appropriate. She isn’t showing panty. She is showing some upper thigh. Oh, my god, ankles!
I let my fourteen year old daughter dress like that all the time. (Including at school in violation of the dress code after I was told that my daughter was exempt from the dress code :)).
It’s appropriate for the mom, but not the school. Oddly enough, some people and institutions have standards that differ from our personal ones. Accommodating them isn’t “oppression”, it’s “maturity”.
There are battles worth fighting and then there’s this. That’s the sad thing about this article/debate - why can’t the mom spend this energy on stuff that matters?
However, there’s a simple solution: Homeschooling!
Of course! All of the PHDs and M.Eds in Admin are probably too dumb to understand the thorough research of a high school student! :rolleyes: It’s not like they have better things to do or worry about.
These are more strictly enforced at my son’s school than length of skirts and shorts. I never see saggy pants or hats indoors, but I do see very short shorts from time to time.
It matters. See, you don’t get to decide what matters to me, and my daughter. And what matters to me is that my daughter be able to dress how she pleases in accordance with MY values, and that she not get the message that she is responsible for the behavior of others by the way she dresses.
And I did homeschool my son. My daughter wants to be in school and the school has a responsibility to educate her. If the school is going to enforce a dress code on her, they’d better be prepared to enforce every single instance of dress code violation - because if its enforced unequally and she comes home with a single photo on her camera of “sagging” or another girl with “too short” shorts on, we have an issue.
That’s a huge damn burden for the school - not being able to consistently enforce it is the rationale behind not enforcing the no sagging. And spending too much time and energy enforcing it is the rationale behind not enforcing “no hats.” So - since it IS important to me and my daughter that she not be slut shamed by her own school administration - we will simply make it similarly difficult to consistently enforce the rules on girls.
And if the result is uniforms, we will cope. It won’t be.
I wish - I hate hats indoors and sagging. Unlike shorts that hit - say mid palm or even at the wrist - or spaghetti straps - which I have no problem with, hats indoors and sagging are against my values (but I’ve lost that battle with my son).
Also, leggings are not pants. But they are fine with the school as far as dress code goes. And pajama bottoms are not worn in public - but again - no big at school.
The strange thing is that the girls at our school change into their gym clothes - and every girl has gym shorts that are short. Because girls gym shorts right now ARE short. Boys wear the baggy basketball shorts - but we looked for hours for modest gym shorts - and frankly - the best we could do are shorts I’m not comfortable with. They are all very short, very tight or both.
I agree with much of this. However, I also don’t think the objective (dress codes) is to merely control, in the sense that you’ll eradicate the issue. It seems more like an attempt to limit individuality to a certain range which helps to commit to a refocus on education. Or in other words, it can be a crude and constant reactionary attempt to chase balance, while students try to test boundaries. Ask ten different people how successful they think that is, and you’ll likely get ten different answers.
To get to the point, kids at this age become sexually active, look to exaggerate or mimic adult behavior, and very much do use their clothing selection to further that objective. It so happens that clothing selection is very much something we have influence of control over, and it simultaneously tells the world a fair bit about us, directly or indirectly, no less dependent on situation and setting. In a school institution, we should be cognizant of rules, but also not feign disingenuousness when challenged.
I’d like to give Jennifer the benefit of the doubt, but I think she came up missing in this instance. If the rules were already established, she should have seen this coming. I’m all for fighting shaming, but I just don’t see this as an attack on “confidence and enthusiasm”. As I’m sure she’d agree, there are a multitude of ways to express both, not limited to a few inches of shorts length. Such an argument flows both ways.
Yep, but the point is, they are in favor of thinking about sex regardless of whether a girl is wearing a tank top or they are looking at a plate of potato chips.
Thinking about sex all the time is not a crime - even if you are having impure thoughts about my fourteen year old daughter. If the way my fourteen year old daughter dresses induces you to any inappropriate action - you have a huge problem - and she can’t live her life in fear of the people who have no self control. And she carries pepper spray.
We saw it coming as well. Which is why, when it came, we spoke to the administration and suddenly - our daughter was exempted from the dress code. Not much of a dress code, is it.
