Holton parents - you have got to help your girls out with these skirts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with the photos. What is wrong is bringing them up for discussion on a public forum and forgetting that there are actual children in them who have access to this conversation and it could be humiliating for them to see where your sick mind goes.

Nobody actually said anything sick. They said it was inappropriate. And I have news for you about where people’s minds are going when you send your child dressed like this into the public domain. Wake up, moron.

Luckily I think some of the comments have been deleted but there have been some pretty gross references. When you resort to name calling on an online thread, I know everything I need to know about the person I’m engaging with. If you cannot understand that these young women didn’t do anything wrong and discussing their appearance online is not ok, I’m sorry for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with the photos. What is wrong is bringing them up for discussion on a public forum and forgetting that there are actual children in them who have access to this conversation and it could be humiliating for them to see where your sick mind goes.

Nobody actually said anything sick. They said it was inappropriate. And I have news for you about where people’s minds are going when you send your child dressed like this into the public domain. Wake up, moron.

Luckily I think some of the comments have been deleted but there have been some pretty gross references. When you resort to name calling on an online thread, I know everything I need to know about the person I’m engaging with. If you cannot understand that these young women didn’t do anything wrong and discussing their appearance online is not ok, I’m sorry for you.

+ 1000000

Leave the girls alone.

It’s hotter than it’s ever been, and girls of this next generation have way more body confidence than we did - and that is a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're spankies, like cheerleading shorts, not undies. Stop looking at kids, you perv.

:roll:

Yes sure. It’s the emperor’s new clothes. They can walk around wearing barely enough fabric to cover their privates and we are all supposed to pretend they are appropriately covered. And if you point out that they are not—then YOU are the problem. It’s ridiculous.

It’s asinine. If my son was wearing as a uniform volleyball shorts and a tight fitting t, that would be inappropriate and odd. Misogyny has nothing to do with this other than it’s misogynistic to act like girls shouldn’t be held to the same standards.

Thanks, as always, for your trenchant analysis, #boymom!

Stop policing women for having sons and opinions, #girlmom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.holton-arms.edu/about/our-mission

OMG! They actually advertise the super short skirt on their website???

I thought this was a joke but it’s the real Holton website. lol You can’t make this stuff up

They look fine. They look like lovely uniformed girls. What is wrong with everyone on here?

(boy AND girl mom, also very familiar with spankies/cheer shorts/spanks/cartwheel shorts). Throw on a pair of those and you're fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holton parent here. I showed this thread to my wise Holton senior. Her reaction: “It’s really not that deep…Why do these people care?”

Sure she did. Uh huh.

On the list of opinions these girls care about, DCUM is low. Good for them! Ignoring toxic, anxious, fraught minds.

You’re here as well.

Those girls don’t care what I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve now had the experience multiple times of sitting at Starbucks just drinking coffee with my kid and multiple Holton girls coming in to grab their drinks with skirts that do not cover their underwear in the back. Again. You can see their underwear in the back. From under the skirt. And don’t tell me that multiple people are wearing shorts this short. They are not. That would be wearing swimsuit bottoms. Look. It is unflattering and insane. Why on earth does the school tolerate this? I don’t want your a$s in my face, ladies. It’s just weird.

Looks better in Tokyo when they all do the same.

[Anonymous]

I was out at Butlers Orchard yesterday and ther was a field trip there and that is exactly what i said to another parent! lower those hems!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.holton-arms.edu/about/our-mission

OMG! They actually advertise the super short skirt on their website???

I thought this was a joke but it’s the real Holton website. lol You can’t make this stuff up

They look fine. They look like lovely uniformed girls. What is wrong with everyone on here?

(boy AND girl mom, also very familiar with spankies/cheer shorts/spanks/cartwheel shorts). Throw on a pair of those and you're fine.

The observation is they don’t wear shorts underneath the skirt.

[Anonymous]

Wearing their skirts this short is not about body confidence.

They do it because everyone else does it. It's the opposite of confidence. A truly body confident girl would wear her skirt in a way that her bare butt isn't coming into contact with everything she sits on, because a true confidence means placing your own comfort and hygiene over a dumb fashion trend.

Which is precisely why the school should enforce a dress code that is more appropriate. Because endorsing the super short skirts doesn't promote body confidence, it just increases the pressure the girls already feel to wear sexy and revealing clothes the *minute* their bodies start to develop, a weird and concerning cultural pastime.

I don't have a problem with the girls dressing this way on their own time (well I don't love it and it makes me worry for them but I also recognize they have agency and it's not my job to police their clothes all the time) but I think it's really concerning when an educational institution endorses it. Why not cancel the sports programs at Holton and send these girls to cotillion instead? Or maybe just keep the sports with sexy uniforms? Is this the brand Holton really wants to be projecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They roll up the waist of the skirt. If adults are not around to get them in trouble for this. The girls intentionally make their skirt much shorter. Clearly worse now but they've been doing it to their uniform skirts for 50+ years.

This.
Native Bethesdean here. The Holton girls always wore the skirts rolled up and slutty. It isn’t new. It’s always been inappropriate but somehow the parents give them a pass because they think that if they go to Holton, somehow it isn’t inappropriate. It is inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wearing their skirts this short is not about body confidence.

They do it because everyone else does it. It's the opposite of confidence. A truly body confident girl would wear her skirt in a way that her bare butt isn't coming into contact with everything she sits on, because a true confidence means placing your own comfort and hygiene over a dumb fashion trend.

Which is precisely why the school should enforce a dress code that is more appropriate. Because endorsing the super short skirts doesn't promote body confidence, it just increases the pressure the girls already feel to wear sexy and revealing clothes the *minute* their bodies start to develop, a weird and concerning cultural pastime.

I don't have a problem with the girls dressing this way on their own time (well I don't love it and it makes me worry for them but I also recognize they have agency and it's not my job to police their clothes all the time) but I think it's really concerning when an educational institution endorses it. Why not cancel the sports programs at Holton and send these girls to cotillion instead? Or maybe just keep the sports with sexy uniforms? Is this the brand Holton really wants to be projecting.

+1

I think the norm of wearing a mini-skirt to school (or apple picking, apparently, per PP above) is promoting the idea of a woman as a pretty thing to be looked at, not a human that does things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wearing their skirts this short is not about body confidence.

They do it because everyone else does it. It's the opposite of confidence. A truly body confident girl would wear her skirt in a way that her bare butt isn't coming into contact with everything she sits on, because a true confidence means placing your own comfort and hygiene over a dumb fashion trend.

Which is precisely why the school should enforce a dress code that is more appropriate. Because endorsing the super short skirts doesn't promote body confidence, it just increases the pressure the girls already feel to wear sexy and revealing clothes the *minute* their bodies start to develop, a weird and concerning cultural pastime.

I don't have a problem with the girls dressing this way on their own time (well I don't love it and it makes me worry for them but I also recognize they have agency and it's not my job to police their clothes all the time) but I think it's really concerning when an educational institution endorses it. Why not cancel the sports programs at Holton and send these girls to cotillion instead? Or maybe just keep the sports with sexy uniforms? Is this the brand Holton really wants to be projecting.

+1

I think the norm of wearing a mini-skirt to school (or apple picking, apparently, per PP above) is promoting the idea of a woman as a pretty thing to be looked at, not a human that does things.

Agree. Was so happy when pantsuits became trendy and I could ditch skirt suits and panty hose without being an outlier. Mini skirts are for dating/socializing. Not for staying a comfortable temperature, sitting comfortably, actively moving. If a school bothers to have an academic uniform, it should promote focus on school matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wearing their skirts this short is not about body confidence.

They do it because everyone else does it. It's the opposite of confidence. A truly body confident girl would wear her skirt in a way that her bare butt isn't coming into contact with everything she sits on, because a true confidence means placing your own comfort and hygiene over a dumb fashion trend.

Which is precisely why the school should enforce a dress code that is more appropriate. Because endorsing the super short skirts doesn't promote body confidence, it just increases the pressure the girls already feel to wear sexy and revealing clothes the *minute* their bodies start to develop, a weird and concerning cultural pastime.

I don't have a problem with the girls dressing this way on their own time (well I don't love it and it makes me worry for them but I also recognize they have agency and it's not my job to police their clothes all the time) but I think it's really concerning when an educational institution endorses it. Why not cancel the sports programs at Holton and send these girls to cotillion instead? Or maybe just keep the sports with sexy uniforms? Is this the brand Holton really wants to be projecting.

+1

I think the norm of wearing a mini-skirt to school (or apple picking, apparently, per PP above) is promoting the idea of a woman as a pretty thing to be looked at, not a human that does things.

Agree. Was so happy when pantsuits became trendy and I could ditch skirt suits and panty hose without being an outlier. Mini skirts are for dating/socializing. Not for staying a comfortable temperature, sitting comfortably, actively moving. If a school bothers to have an academic uniform, it should promote focus on school matters.

From a marketing perspective, looking at the websites of a bunch of these schools, Holton's photos really stand out as seeming to advertise something different. Like looking through a bunch of these websites (Stone Ridge, NCS, Visi, Madeira plus a handful of the co-ed schools as well), Holton is the only one featuring girls in short skirts, and their website also seems to have more photos of girls just hanging out (as opposed to in a classroom or engaged in an activity). Even Madeira, which is a boarding school and really emphasizes the social connections between its students, still mostly shows the girls actually engaged in activities. Madeira doesn't have a uniform either, and there's a broad range of outfits on the kids including some that are more and less covered up, but you don't get the sense looking at the photos that there is a cultural preference for super short skirts or more alluring clothes.

It also seems notable to me that the girls on other websites look younger than the Holton girls. I see more braces and kind of goofy, gangly kids (which matches what HS kids actually look like IME) whereas the Holton photos seem to feature more physically mature girls. And this is on the main website which includes info about the LS and MS. The photos focus on US students who seem to be older and more mature looking. It's just weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wearing their skirts this short is not about body confidence.

They do it because everyone else does it. It's the opposite of confidence. A truly body confident girl would wear her skirt in a way that her bare butt isn't coming into contact with everything she sits on, because a true confidence means placing your own comfort and hygiene over a dumb fashion trend.

Which is precisely why the school should enforce a dress code that is more appropriate. Because endorsing the super short skirts doesn't promote body confidence, it just increases the pressure the girls already feel to wear sexy and revealing clothes the *minute* their bodies start to develop, a weird and concerning cultural pastime.

I don't have a problem with the girls dressing this way on their own time (well I don't love it and it makes me worry for them but I also recognize they have agency and it's not my job to police their clothes all the time) but I think it's really concerning when an educational institution endorses it. Why not cancel the sports programs at Holton and send these girls to cotillion instead? Or maybe just keep the sports with sexy uniforms? Is this the brand Holton really wants to be projecting.

+1

I think the norm of wearing a mini-skirt to school (or apple picking, apparently, per PP above) is promoting the idea of a woman as a pretty thing to be looked at, not a human that does things.

Agree. Was so happy when pantsuits became trendy and I could ditch skirt suits and panty hose without being an outlier. Mini skirts are for dating/socializing. Not for staying a comfortable temperature, sitting comfortably, actively moving. If a school bothers to have an academic uniform, it should promote focus on school matters.

From a marketing perspective, looking at the websites of a bunch of these schools, Holton's photos really stand out as seeming to advertise something different. Like looking through a bunch of these websites (Stone Ridge, NCS, Visi, Madeira plus a handful of the co-ed schools as well), Holton is the only one featuring girls in short skirts, and their website also seems to have more photos of girls just hanging out (as opposed to in a classroom or engaged in an activity). Even Madeira, which is a boarding school and really emphasizes the social connections between its students, still mostly shows the girls actually engaged in activities. Madeira doesn't have a uniform either, and there's a broad range of outfits on the kids including some that are more and less covered up, but you don't get the sense looking at the photos that there is a cultural preference for super short skirts or more alluring clothes.

It also seems notable to me that the girls on other websites look younger than the Holton girls. I see more braces and kind of goofy, gangly kids (which matches what HS kids actually look like IME) whereas the Holton photos seem to feature more physically mature girls. And this is on the main website which includes info about the LS and MS. The photos focus on US students who seem to be older and more mature looking. It's just weird.

I'm still looking around the website, but I think it's a little weird that the exact same girl is in more than one picture. Usually whoever is in charge of the marketing will try to include a diverse set of photos of lots of different groups and ages.

[Anonymous]

^ Actually I see at least two girls repeated in the photos. Are all these website pictures taken on the same day or something?