Where did I say my son is less smart? He beats the hell out of her at math.
But she is generally neat and tidy leaving the house (our values), he went through a period (which seems MOSTLY passed now) where we saw more of his underwear than we wanted. I draw the line on seeing underwear (including my daughter’s bra straps). That doesn’t seem inconsistant to me, that clothes should cover your underwear.
That’s simply your reaction to her underwear.
Which she should consider in no way valid as a factor in determining whether to display it. Since, you know…
I’m not sure if this thread is shocking or just depressing, but it’s at least one of the two.
Yeah, it seems hypocritical to me. The girl should be able to dress how she wants whenever she wants yet the boy has to conform to her wishes.
Find a hand mirror and check the elevation of your eyebrows.
The difference is that the girl wants to dress the way she dresses as a feminist protest. The boy wants to hang his pants low because that’s what boys do. What he needs to do is come up with some BS explanation that low-hanging pants is in solidarity with his lesbian, feminist sisters.
If that’s the line you draw, how are spaghetti straps acceptable? They won’t cover a bra strap. Oh wait, your feminist daughter burned hers and doesn’t wear a bra. Ok then, perhaps your son should wear those low-riders commando style. That would be much better, right?
Underwear are clothes that cover skin, no special powers involved that I know, so your position is as baffling and inconsistent to me as the school’s dress code seems to be to you.
I’m just putting this up asking for it, I guess.
I don’t think it is wrong to have dress codes loosely in place to minimize distractions. There has to be a reasonable check, and it isn’t a science, but I think it is necessary.
You have boys turning into young men. I know first hand how hard it was to focus on school with young women around. I think that is very typical of young men. And while now we don’t want to encourage that behavior, it is ridiculous to act as if this isn’t fair or somehow abnormal.
Yes, the very thing that leads to procreation and the ultimate source of longevity of the species is rooted in sexual desire, and that same desire that keeps the species going also causes us males to be incredibly distracted as displays of gorgeous females. So please, have some modesty.
Sure as we are now in society we could do away with sexual attraction and physical procreation and have test tube babies…and the way I hear some talk you’d think they’d love it that way. Get out of your bubble.
Might be a good thing with regard to gender equality. Generally speaking for the past couple of decades, it’s been only young females expose a lot of skin, particularly legs; males by contrast have followed a severely modest standard, aside from the occasional six inches of exposed boxers. As a straight male I can’t complain about skimpy female attire, but I think the difference in how we dress ourselves does exacerbate the objectification of women. Dress code stipulations like this are really symptomatic of that; they are gender neutral on paper but really only impact females.
The reasons for the difference are politically incorrect, and therefore difficult to discuss with some people.
Men are more interested in the visual appearance of women than women are in the appearance of men. Everybody knows that, and it has a major effect on how women dress.
Any woman who dresses in a certain manner is going to trigger a certain amount of a certain kind of attention. This is almost unavoidable, especially with young men. Dress codes for women are set up to avoid, insofar as it is possible, this kind of thing, because it tends to be disruptive of many other kinds of activities. The problem does not exist to nearly the same degree for men, since women do not pay as much attention to how men dress.
But the issue is probably not resolvable. “I should be able to wear a dress cut down to my navel without being stared at” is unrealistic, and no real steps can be taken to guarantee that it will always be true.
Which is another reason why school uniforms are a good idea. Not only does it address the problem of the inexperienced young woman who has no idea of how to dress so as to be taken seriously, but also the brat-with-attitude who uses dress code violations to validate the chip on his or her shoulder.
I would be interested in hearing why spaghetti straps are simply an expression of a healthy self-image, why drooping pants are a values violation that needs to be snuffed out. Isn’t that gender discrimination? Aren’t we against that kind of thing?
Regards,
Shodan
What’s modest? Guys used to get turned on by a hint of ankle, now they get turned on by daisy dukes. If we walked around nude, they’d probably get turned on by the presence of clothes. Boys in highly conservative Arab states are probably getting turned on by girls’ eyelashes.
The whole thing is patently ridiculous. Any definition of modest dress is arbitrary, so far as the human brain is concerned. Ultimately, if someone wants to be provocative, they’re going to go right on and find ways to be provocative. Anyone who doesn’t is going to dress in clothes that they view as being modest.
And the policy really does disservice to the boys as well. Learning not to turn into a drooling moron when in the presence of an attractive woman or just any state of sexual interest is a valuable social and/or life skill, and way too few men in American society bother to develop it. It’s kinda pathetic that grown men seriously think reverting to a hormonal teenager at the hint female anatomy showing is acceptable behavior, and this sort of school policy endorses that belief.
That’s more than kinda. Please identify these louts by name, so that I may join you in mocking them!
If you follow “modest” Christian fundamentalist communities to any extent, you find out that they have frequent sexual scandals, commonly with a male leader doing things to modestly-dressed young girls that he ought not have done. When you make girls wear long skirts or dresses all the time, you emphasize very strongly that they are wearing long skirts and dresses for a reason, and people can be constantly reminded by this just by looking.
I’ve also heard that there are similar problems in Hasidic Jewish circles as well.
True, being able to function despite distractions is a valuable real-world skill. I’ve worked in some offices where certain foreign workers would use the office kitchen to cook I don’t know exactly what it was, but it literally smelled like stuff you would normally flush down a toilet.
OK, I’m interested. I would never consider tastes in clothing, or neatness and tidiness, to be a question of ‘values’. They can be a matter of standards, sure; but I consider ‘values’ to be issues where there’s at least a very strong moral component. If our kids shoplifted, say, or bullied, that would be in violation of our values - but unless your son’s wearing T-shirts with hate slogans on them, I can’t see any moral component to his tastes in clothing.
I don’t see anything wrong with demanding that your kids stick to your standards of appropriate dress, or anything wrong with a ‘no visible underwear’ standard. But I can’t see how those count as values.
It might sound like nitpickery, but I think the distinction’s a big and important one, and I get curious when I see it getting blurred. What’s your distinction between a standard and a value?
Worse than the people that overdo popcorn? 
You, sir (or madam), are being a colossal asshole. I’m biased, since this is my family you’re talking about.
You do realize that you’re accusing a mother of loving and valuing her adopted son less than her biological daughter, right? That’s a tremendously offensive thing to do.
I’m sure you felt clever when you were typing it all out, but maybe you’d be better off restraining that urge next time.
I don’t think it is adopted vs. biological so much as male vs. female. The daughter is brave and correct to rebel against an arbitrary dress code and doesn’t have to abide by it. The son isn’t and does.
It does not appear that spaghetti straps are any more or less arbitrary than sagging pants.
Regards,
Shodan
Eesh - it’s sort of painful to see a parent denigrate their kid like this even when it’s on a public forum and the kid may not find out. Honestly, you’re basically saying ‘my son is useless sack of shit’ and hoping that if you say he’s a useless sack of shit but not in a particularly good or bad way, you’re off the hook. Now I’m not a parent, but aren’t you supposed to keep it to yourself that you love some of your kids more than the others?
Don’t call other posters names outside of the Pit.