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

[Anonymous]

I feel bad for the chubby girls - I was one at that time - trying to fit in and wearing their wee little skirts. Oooo, it’s so bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When we toured Holton last year, my daughter thought that the uber-short skirts and rules against wearing pants until winter contradicted the school’s messaging about empowering girls. She chose a different (co-ed) school where we see a variety of skirt and shorts lengths, as well as plenty of girls wearing sweatpants, joggers and jeans.

+1
My daughter would be so self-conscious and uncomfortable in those skirts. We are working on her personal confidence and feeling comfortable with her (tiny! cute!) body — not that I *want* her wearing skimpy clothes, but I do want her to feel confident and happy with herself, whatever she chooses to wear — but she’s not there now. She would hate those skirts.

+2, I think the uniform leads to self-selection of certain personality types at the school (and makes girls who don't have those personality types coming from the lower school want to leave). It is just not inclusive.

What kind of personality is that? And are people here agreeing that it's the skirt themselves, as provided through the clothing vendor, that are the problem? Or are acceptable uniforms being sized down or altered to make them inappropriate?

DP but the skirt itself, as shown on the website, is not appropriate for school. But it's the school that chooses the uniform, and it shows a lack of discernment to pick out some kind of hentai-inspired silhouette for pubescent students.

I see the website picture. My question is whether those skirts were altered from how they were delivered to the students.

It kind of doesn’t matter — by placing that photo front and center on its mission page, the school is explicitly condoning and even advertising any adjustments made to the skirts.

[Anonymous]

I strongly believe in women’s rights and choices and my daughter also goes to an all girls school where I do indeed make sure she abides by basic decency and follows expectations for clothes for learning. I have no idea why wanting girls not to be exposed in public is anti women’s rights, and I’m not going to be accused of being a misogynist because I don’t think butt cheeks of teen girls should be exposed in the literal streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an issue in every single Catholic high school. It is not going away unless there are real consequences at the school level.

Holton isn’t Catholic.

That's not the point idiot.

[Anonymous]

I did this 30 years ago. The difference between then and now is that then, the people complaining were old women. Now it’s women my age.

[Anonymous]

A. The school is making it impossible for parents to push back, when every other girl is wearing a short skirt and the school itself seems to be pushing for that standard.

B. The institutionalization of it, is what's gross and exploitative. They seem to want pedophiles to take a good look there.

I let my teen daughter wear short short skirts. They have a built-in self-fabric short underneath, for when she walks up any stairs. You can't see her underwear at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When we toured Holton last year, my daughter thought that the uber-short skirts and rules against wearing pants until winter contradicted the school’s messaging about empowering girls. She chose a different (co-ed) school where we see a variety of skirt and shorts lengths, as well as plenty of girls wearing sweatpants, joggers and jeans.

+1
My daughter would be so self-conscious and uncomfortable in those skirts. We are working on her personal confidence and feeling comfortable with her (tiny! cute!) body — not that I *want* her wearing skimpy clothes, but I do want her to feel confident and happy with herself, whatever she chooses to wear — but she’s not there now. She would hate those skirts.

+2, I think the uniform leads to self-selection of certain personality types at the school (and makes girls who don't have those personality types coming from the lower school want to leave). It is just not inclusive.

What kind of personality is that? And are people here agreeing that it's the skirt themselves, as provided through the clothing vendor, that are the problem? Or are acceptable uniforms being sized down or altered to make them inappropriate?

DP but the skirt itself, as shown on the website, is not appropriate for school. But it's the school that chooses the uniform, and it shows a lack of discernment to pick out some kind of hentai-inspired silhouette for pubescent students.

I see the website picture. My question is whether those skirts were altered from how they were delivered to the students.

I’m sure they were hemmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you are the problem. Let the kids be kids. They are covered up so what is the problem? Your own issues?

I think OP is saying they are not covered up. I agree that if any part of the fanny is exposed, it's too much.

[Anonymous]

The school’s promotion of young students going to school and about town in their underwear with short ruffled belts barely covering them says a great deal about the school and the parents and students that choose to go there. There’s no way around that. My daughter who is athletic, smart, and wanted a girls school said f no, what is going on? And I whole heartedly agreed.

[Anonymous]

1. There is not a single Holton girl not wearing shorts under their skirts. Not one. So settle down.

2. It’s all the schools, not just Holton. Why? Because that’s what they do. We did it 20 years ago when I was at private school with a uniform skirts. This isn’t new.

3. Mind your own business, Linda. It’s not your job to police the clothing of girls.

[Anonymous]

This entire thread is filled with misogyny. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope it gets deleted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. There is not a single Holton girl not wearing shorts under their skirts. Not one. So settle down.

2. It’s all the schools, not just Holton. Why? Because that’s what they do. We did it 20 years ago when I was at private school with a uniform skirts. This isn’t new.

3. Mind your own business, Linda. It’s not your job to police the clothing of girls.

LMAO there were six of them in a group wearing tiny undies - not a short to be seen - at the Westbard Starbucks this morning bending over and getting their drinks. I’m not policing them, but they look insane and so do you for paying $45 k a year for this privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is filled with misogyny. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope it gets deleted.

It's not misogyny to care about young girls and the image of themselves that they are projecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. There is not a single Holton girl not wearing shorts under their skirts. Not one. So settle down.

2. It’s all the schools, not just Holton. Why? Because that’s what they do. We did it 20 years ago when I was at private school with a uniform skirts. This isn’t new.

3. Mind your own business, Linda. It’s not your job to police the clothing of girls.

LMAO there were six of them in a group wearing tiny undies - not a short to be seen - at the Westbard Starbucks this morning bending over and getting their drinks. I’m not policing them, but they look insane and so do you for paying $45 k a year for this privilege.

No, actually they are paying almost $60K. But who's counting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is filled with misogyny. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope it gets deleted.

It’s not misogynistic in any way shape or form to care that young girls are sticking their as& cheeks into the faces of men and women at a coffee shop. The uniforms are objectifying the girls. Objecting to that, not any version of misogyny.