Deal Middle School -- no leggings

[Anonymous]

Please don't claim people are talking about this:



when they are talking about this (girl in center):

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please don't claim people are talking about this:



when they are talking about this (girl in center):

We are going to keep talking about both presentations of leggings: 1)opaque, thick, the wearer stands in the shadows all day, AND 2) thin, see-through, person stands in sunlight, person going commando or wearing string thong

Why? because in a school of 700 females, some of the leggings worn in public will look like Girl in Shadow with Butt Turned Away from Camera, and other leggings will look exactly like Bending Over in Sunlight While Wearing Cheap Old Navy Pajama Pant Leggings

If you spent just one afternoon on the sidewalks of DC, Wheaton or Silver Spring in ~ October, you would understand. We can't pretend only one variation is going to show up at a middle school

[Anonymous]

Pp u are the definition of parents backseat driving. The school laid put a policy that they have reasonable rationale for. It doesn't convene wth your world view. Ok you have some reasons you aren't comfortable with it..but they are. Isn't that ok fir you, being that they are the educators, deal with this day in day out, and are not causing egregious harm to your kid? But by all means bother the admin with this stuff. I'm sure you'll be the first to complain in the spring when test scores dont go up (because they're spending time crafting a new and better leggings policy).

[Anonymous]

OP, we were at orientation last year when they had just rewritten the dress code to be gender neutral, which I thought was impressive. You should definitely bring up your concerns with Principal Albright rather than get riled up here. Ask him directly why the team included leggings as he is quite approachable.

My guess is they don't want bottoms showing on boys or girls. The low rider pants mean that boys butts are also similarly dressed when wearing boxer briefs. Which is also banned.

I have a son there but to show that it is also "restrictive" for boys my son had to get an entire wardrobe of pants that didn't have holes in the knees or were sports pants. And no baseball caps. We talked about it and he agreed to dress a little nicer, or more professional, which he did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, we were at orientation last year when they had just rewritten the dress code to be gender neutral, which I thought was impressive. You should definitely bring up your concerns with Principal Albright rather than get riled up here. Ask him directly why the team included leggings as he is quite approachable.

My guess is they don't want bottoms showing on boys or girls. The low rider pants mean that boys butts are also similarly dressed when wearing boxer briefs. Which is also banned.

I have a son there but to show that it is also "restrictive" for boys my son had to get an entire wardrobe of pants that didn't have holes in the knees or were sports pants. And no baseball caps. We talked about it and he agreed to dress a little nicer, or more professional, which he did.

OP here. This is solid advice and productive feedback. I'll mention something when the dust settles from the semester beginning. I am also a teacher (not DCPS) and I appreciate that until late September, all educators' lives are like a hamster wheel-- hence my statement that I probably wouldn't say anything.

Unlike many people snarking here, I have firsthand experience with the challenges of being an educator, especially when people want snowflake treatment over non-urgent things. That doesn't make thoughtful conversations less worth doing.

FWIW my own daughter dresses very tomboyish, largely non-fitted t-shirts, shorts, chucks, and hoodies. She does wear leggings a fair bit in winter, generally with a sweater that does not go to "fingertip length," which is both the standard in Deal's dress code and in the homeschool prom that made the headlines for kicking a girl out. She doesn't like revealing clothes. Like many tall girls, she doesn't like to wear things that make her stand out-- be it extremely tight clothing, overly mature clothing, or bright colors.

We're buying new stuff because she grows like a weed, and it won't be difficult to shop for different types of clothing. The fact remains-- and I'm proud of my somewhat gender-bending, free-spirited, non-fashionista child for her critical thinking-- that she took it as a signal that the school had a problem with girls' bodies. Is she miserable about it? Nope. She had a great time at orientation. Do I agree that she's onto something? You bet.

There is a vast difference between thinking critically about your school community and disrespecting it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you think this is okay for a 12 year old girl, yes, I judge you. It has nothing to do with a girl "coming into her body" it has to no with self respect for one's body. Want to wear this at the beach, idk, but don't send your kids to school like this and don't fight because the school is trying to fight this.

You don't even seem to understand the point. Girls bodies belong to them - not to the general public. Unless they ask you directly what you think of their clothes, you can assume that they (and their parents) are not interested. Telling girls what they can and cannot wear sends the message that they have to present themselves in a way that is pleasing to other people - and that's more important than pleasing themselves.

It is creepy and controlling for you to be so judgemental about what other people are wearing and I find it impossible to understand why you (and school administrators) feel justified in expressing your (unwanted) opinions.

(Also - maybe lay off on the Google searches for pictures of teenagers asses.)

THank you. What a weird obsession these scolds have with finding pictures.

Actually it's quite easy...Google "inappropriate leggings"

I have no doubt they're easy to find. Lots of demand for them from people like you.

Or lots of people wearing them getting caught on the do not wear blogs. I'm sure you and your teen daughter have a matching pair. Congrats. You won mom of the year.

I have boys. I'm teaching them that each person gets to decide what to do with his/her own body. And, most importantly, that shaming other people for what they wear is for losers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we were at orientation last year when they had just rewritten the dress code to be gender neutral, which I thought was impressive. You should definitely bring up your concerns with Principal Albright rather than get riled up here. Ask him directly why the team included leggings as he is quite approachable.

My guess is they don't want bottoms showing on boys or girls. The low rider pants mean that boys butts are also similarly dressed when wearing boxer briefs. Which is also banned.

I have a son there but to show that it is also "restrictive" for boys my son had to get an entire wardrobe of pants that didn't have holes in the knees or were sports pants. And no baseball caps. We talked about it and he agreed to dress a little nicer, or more professional, which he did.

OP here. This is solid advice and productive feedback. I'll mention something when the dust settles from the semester beginning. I am also a teacher (not DCPS) and I appreciate that until late September, all educators' lives are like a hamster wheel-- hence my statement that I probably wouldn't say anything.

Unlike many people snarking here, I have firsthand experience with the challenges of being an educator, especially when people want snowflake treatment over non-urgent things. That doesn't make thoughtful conversations less worth doing.

FWIW my own daughter dresses very tomboyish, largely non-fitted t-shirts, shorts, chucks, and hoodies. She does wear leggings a fair bit in winter, generally with a sweater that does not go to "fingertip length," which is both the standard in Deal's dress code and in the homeschool prom that made the headlines for kicking a girl out. She doesn't like revealing clothes. Like many tall girls, she doesn't like to wear things that make her stand out-- be it extremely tight clothing, overly mature clothing, or bright colors.

We're buying new stuff because she grows like a weed, and it won't be difficult to shop for different types of clothing. The fact remains-- and I'm proud of my somewhat gender-bending, free-spirited, non-fashionista child for her critical thinking-- that she took it as a signal that the school had a problem with girls' bodies. Is she miserable about it? Nope. She had a great time at orientation. Do I agree that she's onto something? You bet.

There is a vast difference between thinking critically about your school community and disrespecting it.

Very thoughtful, OP. As a future Deal parent, I appreciate that someone like you will be speaking up about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, we were at orientation last year when they had just rewritten the dress code to be gender neutral, which I thought was impressive. You should definitely bring up your concerns with Principal Albright rather than get riled up here. Ask him directly why the team included leggings as he is quite approachable.

My guess is they don't want bottoms showing on boys or girls. The low rider pants mean that boys butts are also similarly dressed when wearing boxer briefs. Which is also banned.

I have a son there but to show that it is also "restrictive" for boys my son had to get an entire wardrobe of pants that didn't have holes in the knees or were sports pants. And no baseball caps. We talked about it and he agreed to dress a little nicer, or more professional, which he did.

Uh-oh -- what does "no sports pants" mean? I didn't hear that at the orientation and don't see it on the web site? This is literally the only thing my kids wear, so I need info ASAP! We only have one pair of khaki's for church. How late is Target open?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we were at orientation last year when they had just rewritten the dress code to be gender neutral, which I thought was impressive. You should definitely bring up your concerns with Principal Albright rather than get riled up here. Ask him directly why the team included leggings as he is quite approachable.

My guess is they don't want bottoms showing on boys or girls. The low rider pants mean that boys butts are also similarly dressed when wearing boxer briefs. Which is also banned.

I have a son there but to show that it is also "restrictive" for boys my son had to get an entire wardrobe of pants that didn't have holes in the knees or were sports pants. And no baseball caps. We talked about it and he agreed to dress a little nicer, or more professional, which he did.

Uh-oh -- what does "no sports pants" mean? I didn't hear that at the orientation and don't see it on the web site? This is literally the only thing my kids wear, so I need info ASAP! We only have one pair of khaki's for church. How late is Target open?

11 PM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you think this is okay for a 12 year old girl, yes, I judge you. It has nothing to do with a girl "coming into her body" it has to no with self respect for one's body. Want to wear this at the beach, idk, but don't send your kids to school like this and don't fight because the school is trying to fight this.

You don't even seem to understand the point. Girls bodies belong to them - not to the general public. Unless they ask you directly what you think of their clothes, you can assume that they (and their parents) are not interested. Telling girls what they can and cannot wear sends the message that they have to present themselves in a way that is pleasing to other people - and that's more important than pleasing themselves.

It is creepy and controlling for you to be so judgemental about what other people are wearing and I find it impossible to understand why you (and school administrators) feel justified in expressing your (unwanted) opinions.

(Also - maybe lay off on the Google searches for pictures of teenagers asses.)

NP here. It is you, PP, who doesn't understand the point. The point is *not* about girls' bodies belonging to them. The point is there are places where certain attire is appropriate is there are places where it's not. Yes, sometimes people have to present themselves in a way that is appropriate to the situation and the community and yes, that is sometimes more important than people pleasing themselves. The fact that you don't understand that simple truth is somewhat baffling.

Assuming you're an adult, your workplace has a dress code, right? Maybe it isn't very explicit, but if you were to show up at work in see through leggings and a crop top, or a tube top and short shorts, or a bikini, you would likely be called on it and sent home to change. I know I would be, and my work dress code is very casual. By your (lack of) logic, since it's more important that I please myself and my body belongs to me and it's creepy and controlling and impossible to understand why anyone feels justified expressing unwanted opinions about how I dress....I should be able to wear a bikini to work. After all, it's hot here in the summer and it pleases me to wear a bikini, so I should be able to wear a bikini at work. Ridiculous, right? If you can't see that, you are silly.

I can't wear a bikini to work because it is inappropriate attire for the setting. Deal has decided that certain attire is inappropriate for the setting. I don't agree with all the rules (baseball caps, and fingertip length of layer over leggings), but that is what they decided is appropriate attire for the setting so if you want to be a part of that community, you follow their rules. It really isn't a big deal. Wear whatever you want in your off time. Show the world how your body belongs to you..in the appropriate setting. Be glad you're not a lawyer who has to wear a suit to court. Talk about being oppressed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

NP here. It is you, PP, who doesn't understand the point. The point is *not* about girls' bodies belonging to them. The point is there are places where certain attire is appropriate is there are places where it's not. Yes, sometimes people have to present themselves in a way that is appropriate to the situation and the community and yes, that is sometimes more important than people pleasing themselves. The fact that you don't understand that simple truth is somewhat baffling.

Assuming you're an adult, your workplace has a dress code, right? Maybe it isn't very explicit, but if you were to show up at work in see through leggings and a crop top, or a tube top and short shorts, or a bikini, you would likely be called on it and sent home to change. I know I would be, and my work dress code is very casual. By your (lack of) logic, since it's more important that I please myself and my body belongs to me and it's creepy and controlling and impossible to understand why anyone feels justified expressing unwanted opinions about how I dress....I should be able to wear a bikini to work. After all, it's hot here in the summer and it pleases me to wear a bikini, so I should be able to wear a bikini at work. Ridiculous, right? If you can't see that, you are silly.

I can't wear a bikini to work because it is inappropriate attire for the setting. Deal has decided that certain attire is inappropriate for the setting. I don't agree with all the rules (baseball caps, and fingertip length of layer over leggings), but that is what they decided is appropriate attire for the setting so if you want to be a part of that community, you follow their rules. It really isn't a big deal. Wear whatever you want in your off time. Show the world how your body belongs to you..in the appropriate setting. Be glad you're not a lawyer who has to wear a suit to court. Talk about being oppressed!

Hmmm. No my workplace doesn't have an explicit dress code and yes my coworkers and I are pretty much in agreement on what is approproate for our work environment. There are differences between my workplace and a student's school. I chose my job and am paid to do it. It's appropriate then for my employer to have some minimum standards of dress. Schools are places where the adults are employed to provide a servide to the students. A dress code for teachers and staff (even a uniform) could appropriately be required. It might even be a good idea, so that teachers could provide an example for students of professional attire. On the other hand, it makes no sense for the employees to set detailed dress code requirements for the customers (students.)

Respect breeds respect. Treat children respectfully and they will be more inclined to respect adults. Assert your right to control them and they will spend their energy looking for ways to get around your rules.

It's an issue of respect for parents too. I send my child to school to be educated, not parented. I have not asked for and do not welcome advice on how my children should dress, what they should eat and what they should do with their time outside of school hours.

Finally, no I wouldn't want my child to wear many of the pictured outfits - in school or out. I am simply pointing out that those choices are not yours or the schools to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP here. It is you, PP, who doesn't understand the point. The point is *not* about girls' bodies belonging to them. The point is there are places where certain attire is appropriate is there are places where it's not. Yes, sometimes people have to present themselves in a way that is appropriate to the situation and the community and yes, that is sometimes more important than people pleasing themselves. The fact that you don't understand that simple truth is somewhat baffling.

Assuming you're an adult, your workplace has a dress code, right? Maybe it isn't very explicit, but if you were to show up at work in see through leggings and a crop top, or a tube top and short shorts, or a bikini, you would likely be called on it and sent home to change. I know I would be, and my work dress code is very casual. By your (lack of) logic, since it's more important that I please myself and my body belongs to me and it's creepy and controlling and impossible to understand why anyone feels justified expressing unwanted opinions about how I dress....I should be able to wear a bikini to work. After all, it's hot here in the summer and it pleases me to wear a bikini, so I should be able to wear a bikini at work. Ridiculous, right? If you can't see that, you are silly.

I can't wear a bikini to work because it is inappropriate attire for the setting. Deal has decided that certain attire is inappropriate for the setting. I don't agree with all the rules (baseball caps, and fingertip length of layer over leggings), but that is what they decided is appropriate attire for the setting so if you want to be a part of that community, you follow their rules. It really isn't a big deal. Wear whatever you want in your off time. Show the world how your body belongs to you..in the appropriate setting. Be glad you're not a lawyer who has to wear a suit to court. Talk about being oppressed!

Hmmm. No my workplace doesn't have an explicit dress code and yes my coworkers and I are pretty much in agreement on what is approproate for our work environment. There are differences between my workplace and a student's school. I chose my job and am paid to do it. It's appropriate then for my employer to have some minimum standards of dress. Schools are places where the adults are employed to provide a servide to the students. A dress code for teachers and staff (even a uniform) could appropriately be required. It might even be a good idea, so that teachers could provide an example for students of professional attire. On the other hand, it makes no sense for the employees to set detailed dress code requirements for the customers (students.)

Respect breeds respect. Treat children respectfully and they will be more inclined to respect adults. Assert your right to control them and they will spend their energy looking for ways to get around your rules.

It's an issue of respect for parents too. I send my child to school to be educated, not parented. I have not asked for and do not welcome advice on how my children should dress, what they should eat and what they should do with their time outside of school hours.

Finally, no I wouldn't want my child to wear many of the pictured outfits - in school or out. I am simply pointing out that those choices are not yours or the schools to make.

Then you need to homeschool. You can set whatever guidelines you want when your kids are being educated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:



Then you need to homeschool. You can set whatever guidelines you want when your kids are being educated.

You're conveniently ignoring the fact that my child has a right to a public education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



Then you need to homeschool. You can set whatever guidelines you want when your kids are being educated.

You're conveniently ignoring the fact that my child has a right to a public education.

Your child has a right to public education AND in choosing that public education the requirement to follow school rules, whether you or your kid like it or not.

The entitlement on this thread is astounding to me.

[Anonymous]

I too am astounded that so many adults feel entitled to control other people's clothing choices.