Please help me explain this to DS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, are there many boys who wear booty shorts in DS's high school?

Also, I don't suppose that the dress code defines "booty shorts"?

They can't be above finger tip length.

Anything shorter than finger-tip length is "booty shorts"? I'm laughing at this, and I haven't been a 15-year-old girl in 30 years.

Yeah, my son was checking my shorts the other day to see if I would comply with the dress code. (I did, of course)

We had to kneel and the teacher would measure the distance off the floor (more than 3" was deemed inappropriate)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tell your DS that we shouldn't be commenting about how others look or dress, or try to put limits/rules on them. If we do, we are making assumptions and possibly being prejudiced.

Saying that, I hate those little shorts and I wish there wasn't pressure for girls to wear skimpy outfits.

It's very hard to explain social norms when you don't believe in society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that focusing on clothing items like that highlights that there are certain ways that young ladies should dress in order not to get unwanted attention. E.g. ...

Or, in simpler form, it makes the girls responsible for the boys' behavior. Like this:

Problem: boys misbehaving. Solution: make (and enforce) rules about girls' clothing.

Whereas it should be like this:

Problem: boys misbehaving. Solution: make (and enforce) rules about boys' misbehavior.

OP here. So then couldn't guys make the argument that they are being stereotyped as individuals? That they wouldn't be able to behave properly around a scantily clad young female?

I'm trying to see this through my son's eyes and what he might say.

Exactly. That's why your son should stand with the girls on this. Trust girls to choose their own clothing and trust boys to behave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In many places, the explanation for such a rule is that the girls' manner of dress distracts the boys. I was told this point blank many times in high school...it was my responsibility to not wear spaghetti straps, shorts, leggings, etc because the boys can't help it. While yours seems to apply this to boys and girls, most dress codes are targeted at girls. This is dangerous, IMO, and contributes to the overall idea that boys are animals and it is my responsibility as a woman to dress in a way that doesn't provoke boys. Not to mention, I spent a lot of time out of the classroom getting my shorts measured.

My sixth-grade daughter got this speech just the other week. The teachers pulled the girls out of PE to tell them that boys view girls in skimpy clothing as cuts of meat instead of people, and so the girls shouldn't wear skimpy clothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, are there many boys who wear booty shorts in DS's high school?

Also, I don't suppose that the dress code defines "booty shorts"?

They can't be above finger tip length.

Anything shorter than finger-tip length is "booty shorts"? I'm laughing at this, and I haven't been a 15-year-old girl in 30 years.

This is pretty standard dress code. It was the rule when I was in high school 15 years ago.

It is a standard dress code. That still doesn't make shorter shorts "booty shorts".

[Anonymous]

You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

What is inappropriate for a high school environment about shorts that are shorter than finger-tip length but still cover the underwear, the crotch, and the rear end?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

What is inappropriate for a high school environment about shorts that are shorter than finger-tip length but still cover the underwear, the crotch, and the rear end?

Are short shorts appropriate for work? Usually not, depending on the job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

What is inappropriate for a high school environment about shorts that are shorter than finger-tip length but still cover the underwear, the crotch, and the rear end?

Are short shorts appropriate for work? Usually not, depending on the job.

But it's not a work dress code. It's a school dress code.

[Anonymous]

These kind of questions drive me crazy. Your son is a teenager. Let him learn to form his own opinions, whether you agree with them or not. The time for mind control left the barn years ago. Otherwise, he'll be calling you in college asking how he should respond to every single essay question that requires an opinionated response. You do want him to grow up, right, OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In many places, the explanation for such a rule is that the girls' manner of dress distracts the boys. I was told this point blank many times in high school...it was my responsibility to not wear spaghetti straps, shorts, leggings, etc because the boys can't help it. While yours seems to apply this to boys and girls, most dress codes are targeted at girls. This is dangerous, IMO, and contributes to the overall idea that boys are animals and it is my responsibility as a woman to dress in a way that doesn't provoke boys. Not to mention, I spent a lot of time out of the classroom getting my shorts measured.

When considered as a societal issue, toddlers are exposed to half naked women in the mall every day, and children are constantly inundated with conflicting messages of sexuality. When viewed as a piece of this big pie, dress codes are another conflicting voice in a complicated message young girls receive regarding what is appropriate, desirable, professional, womanly, sexy, etc. There is also the issue of finding clothes in the first place! Have you ever compared girl and boy shorts in the store? Even for little kids, the girl shorts are cut super short.

Fwiw I don't take issue with the dress code. I don't think students of either sex need to have their butts hanging out at school. Just relaying some of the issues people have with dress codes

I agree with this. In particular the part which I bolded.

[Anonymous]

There are articles he can read that make the point that dress codes police girls' bodies. Things like spaghetti straps and skirt length that don't affect boys. Bootie shorts would be in that category as well, unless I've missed out on a new male fashion trend.

http://jezebel.com/is-your-dress-code-sexist-a-guide-1586233366

http://jezebel.com/university-of-texas-says-womens-clothing-distracts-from-1585819117

http://jezebel.com/confusing-school-ban-over-distracting-leggings-ignite-1547616678

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There are articles he can read that make the point that dress codes police girls' bodies. Things like spaghetti straps and skirt length that don't affect boys. Bootie shorts would be in that category as well, unless I've missed out on a new male fashion trend.

http://jezebel.com/is-your-dress-code-sexist-a-guide-1586233366

http://jezebel.com/university-of-texas-says-womens-clothing-distracts-from-1585819117

http://jezebel.com/confusing-school-ban-over-distracting-leggings-ignite-1547616678

Jezebel? So you want girls to go around naked. That'll combat these sexist ideas!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

What is inappropriate for a high school environment about shorts that are shorter than finger-tip length but still cover the underwear, the crotch, and the rear end?

Are short shorts appropriate for work? Usually not, depending on the job.

But it's not a work dress code. It's a school dress code.

Isn't school the most important "job" these kids have?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't need to explain the opposing point of view because it's nonsensical. All people should dress appropriately for their environment, and that's the purpose of a dress code. You're son is right. It's particularly foolish that the girls are protesting since the rule extends to males as well.

Right on. And anyone who thinks that girls are not wearing "booty shorts" to school should swing by a high school at dismissal time. I have seen many girls with shorts so short that their ass cheeks are hanging out.