Please help me explain this to DS

[Anonymous]

DS's high school is instituting a new dress code. Apparently one of new rules is "no booty shorts for males or females". DS thinks this is appropriate for both sexes.

But, apparently the girls are staging a protest against the dress code today, stating that it "sexualizes young women".

DS feels it doesn't sexualize them because it is ensuring they dress appropriately for the school environment and I have to say I agree!

What the heck am I missing in this, so I can try to explain the opposing point of view?

[Anonymous]

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"?

[Anonymous]

Nothing. Those girls are being silly.

[Anonymous]

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. ...

http://mic.com/articles/117662/this-teen-girl-shut-down-her-school-s-sexist-dress-code-in-the-best-way

Personally, I see the point they are making, but I think the rules should be about adequate protection in the summer from the sun (not modesty). So covering shoulders and legs as much as possible to avoid skin cancer. I know I'm in the minority, though.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Do you mean, does the dress code stereotype high school boys as misbehaving oglers? Yes, it does.

[Anonymous]

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.

You could say that girls are misbehaving when they dress like hookers. Are there not all-girl schools with dress codes?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

Yeah, but seriously. You wear appropriate clothes at appropriate places, not because men/boys are animals.

Boys are not animals. Girls should wear appropriate clothes.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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)

[Anonymous]

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