Please help me explain this to DS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I had to stand up to see where this actually falls on me (I'm also 34 so its been a while!) I'm tall so have really long arms and legs and I was surprised to find out that my fingertip length would be maybe a 2-3" inseam at most, basically ruling out the 1-2 inch inseam.

I'm not tall, and I don't have long arms or legs, and my fingertip length is a 4" inseam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I totally disagree that schools shouldn't have dress codes. It is entirely appropriate for boys and girls to be required to wear shorts/skirts that not shorter than a certain length, to wear shoes of some sort, to cover the midriff, to not wear tank tops/spaghetti straps/muscle shirts.

Nobody has said that schools should have no dress codes at all.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I don't think I'd engage further on this topic unless he specifically asked.

Sure, there is unfair pressure upon women when it comes to clothing. Too many people feel they have the right to say what they can and cannot wear.

However, there should be a dress code in schools, and it should apply to both sexes, as this does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I don't think I'd engage further on this topic unless he specifically asked.

Sure, there is unfair pressure upon women when it comes to clothing. Too many people feel they have the right to say what they can and cannot wear.

However, there should be a dress code in schools, and it should apply to both sexes, as this does.

Do boys wear "booty shorts"?

[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?

If the standard is only that it covers underwear and crotch, why not just let them wear bikinis to school if they want? Part of school is preparing for involvement in society. That means dressing appropriately when necessary. You don't wear inappropriate attire to an office, or court, or school, or the doctor, or church, or any place such as those. You dress decently. And I wear shorts, I like shorts, but shorts that merely "cover the crotch" do not count as decent and show a level of disrespect for the school environment and any other place where they are not appropriate to be worn. Let your teen daughters wear them at their house, out with friends, in their free time. School isn't the place.

Do bikinis these days cover the underwear, the crotch, and the rear end? The ones I see don't.

Again, shat 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?

I'm not arguing with you anymore. Let your daughters dress inappropriately, I don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I don't think I'd engage further on this topic unless he specifically asked.

Sure, there is unfair pressure upon women when it comes to clothing. Too many people feel they have the right to say what they can and cannot wear.

However, there should be a dress code in schools, and it should apply to both sexes, as this does.

Do boys wear "booty shorts"?

Some do. Not to school, though. Or at least, not to yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It is closer to a work environment than not. Why is it liberating for young women to dress in revealing clothes at school? Do they want to be appreciated for their sexual attractiveness or their intellect?

You're changing the subject. This is not about young women's clothing choices. This is about high school dress codes. 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?

So would wearing a bathing suit to school be okay, too?

For Chrissake, don't you people think feminists have more important things to worry about? I weep for the future of women.

Swimsuits are for the pool and the beach. But shorts are street clothes.

[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.

Yes, this is also true. It's a reason why boys might want to protest this type of dress code, as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had to stand up to see where this actually falls on me (I'm also 34 so its been a while!) I'm tall so have really long arms and legs and I was surprised to find out that my fingertip length would be maybe a 2-3" inseam at most, basically ruling out the 1-2 inch inseam.

I'm not tall, and I don't have long arms or legs, and my fingertip length is a 4" inseam.

I'm actually in a pair of shorts right now. I'm about to wear them to a Dr appt and I guarantee no one who saw me in them would think they were 'sexy' or 'short'. In fact your teenagers wouldn't be caught dead in them because they are Mom shorts. I would (and have) worn these shorts to my kid's school that has a dress uniform and felt completely appropriate in them. I wouldn't wear them to an office job (they're jean shorts), but would wear dresses this length and would certainly wear them to work if I were a preschool teacher.

They have a 4.5" inseam and come to my knuckles. Fingertip length only if my hands are cupped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I don't think I'd engage further on this topic unless he specifically asked.

Sure, there is unfair pressure upon women when it comes to clothing. Too many people feel they have the right to say what they can and cannot wear.

However, there should be a dress code in schools, and it should apply to both sexes, as this does.

OP here, and I do agree somewhat. It's just that when DS was telling me about the dress code, I really couldn't understand why the girls were so upset. The subject line probably should have read: "Please explain to me why....", but then I wouldn't have known which forum to put it in! (because it would have been about me, not DS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had to stand up to see where this actually falls on me (I'm also 34 so its been a while!) I'm tall so have really long arms and legs and I was surprised to find out that my fingertip length would be maybe a 2-3" inseam at most, basically ruling out the 1-2 inch inseam.

I'm not tall, and I don't have long arms or legs, and my fingertip length is a 4" inseam.

I'm actually in a pair of shorts right now. I'm about to wear them to a Dr appt and I guarantee no one who saw me in them would think they were 'sexy' or 'short'. In fact your teenagers wouldn't be caught dead in them because they are Mom shorts. I would (and have) worn these shorts to my kid's school that has a dress uniform and felt completely appropriate in them. I wouldn't wear them to an office job (they're jean shorts), but would wear dresses this length and would certainly wear them to work if I were a preschool teacher.

They have a 4.5" inseam and come to my knuckles. Fingertip length only if my hands are cupped.

Funny that you mention wearing shorts to a doctor's appointment. I always dress professionally for a medical appointment because I feel the doctors take you more seriously than if you are in casual clothes. I went to a pediatrician visit once in jeans (neatly dressed, but casually) and the doctor proceeded to explain to me that there are THREE teaspoons in a tablespoon, so that we could reduce my son's medication to just TWO teaspoons. Apparently she did not think I could measure in mls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Funny that you mention wearing shorts to a doctor's appointment. I always dress professionally for a medical appointment because I feel the doctors take you more seriously than if you are in casual clothes. I went to a pediatrician visit once in jeans (neatly dressed, but casually) and the doctor proceeded to explain to me that there are THREE teaspoons in a tablespoon, so that we could reduce my son's medication to just TWO teaspoons. Apparently she did not think I could measure in mls.

Oh, I wouldn't blame that on your jeans. I'd blame that on the doctor being condescending. I've been condescended to by plenty of doctors while I was wearing professional clothes.

[Anonymous]

To those who are all offended, why would you want/allow your daughters to dress like that at school anyway?

It's not all about the boys' reaction, either. I'm a married, heterosexual, 40-year old woman, and I don't want to be subjected to teenagers dressed like that, either. Save it for the beach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To those who are all offended, why would you want/allow your daughters to dress like that at school anyway?

It's not all about the boys' reaction, either. I'm a married, heterosexual, 40-year old woman, and I don't want to be subjected to teenagers dressed like that, either. Save it for the beach.

I don't think that "I don't want to see it" is a rational basis for a school dress code.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I don't think I'd engage further on this topic unless he specifically asked.

Sure, there is unfair pressure upon women when it comes to clothing. Too many people feel they have the right to say what they can and cannot wear.

However, there should be a dress code in schools, and it should apply to both sexes, as this does.

Do boys wear "booty shorts"?

Some do.

Booty shorts are not allowed. What's the big deal? Why do we need to fight for booty shorts in our schools? There are serious issues related to gender inequality in this country. The right to booty shorts is not one of them. If the school had specifically written the rules to target female students, obviously I would understand the concern. This just sounds like a cry for attention rather than a protest with a real cause.