Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

No one here is saying you have to do cotillion. To each his / her own. We just want you to understand that too.

Well, just be aware that if it's a valued institution to you, it's going to die out if it doesn't stop with unnecessary exclusionary practices because fewer people want to be associated with that. I would appreciate a group setting that helps tweens focus on etiquette, social interactions etc. but not one that hangs onto outdated gendered roles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
He now knows proper place settings and how to do various dances like the waltz. One day he will be happy he knows these things.

I don't understand parents who need cotillion to teach table manners.

You’re just better than all of us. Congrats.

PP you're mad at, and seriously, I don't understand. It's not a brag. It's an observation that knowing how to use cutlery seems like something people need at home from an early age.

Getting help with waltzing I understand. Utensils, no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

So, my daughter will not be a non-self absorbed functioning adult because she won't wear dresses? She isn't expressing her sense of style (she wears dressy pants and shirts) but she does not feel comfortable in dresses (or showing her legs).

Please go back to Mississippi or wherever you come from.

DP. It's not about dresses or whether girls can wear other attire and it still be considered dressy or formal. They absolutely can, but that's not the point. The 'non-self absorbed functioning adult' part comes from there being an activity, with a certain uniform, and a child wanting to have an exception made for them to NOT wear the uniform because of personal preference.

Larla: I want to do cotillion.
Mom: OK, but you have to wear a dress to participate and you hate dresses.
Larla: I refuse to follow their rule and instead want you to ask that I don't have to follow it, but that they still let me join.
Mom: Of course! You should definitely be entitled to an exception of the rules for a national organization just because you want it. I'll email right away!

The correct response is for the child to recognize that this activity has rules and if she wants to participate in that activity, she must follow the rules. If she doesn't want to follow the rules, then she doesn't sign up.

What's frustrating is all these PPs who truly believe that since cotillion doesn't make individual accommodations, the entire thing shouldn't exist for anybody. The few teens who can't or won't wear gender specific clothing don't get to dictate what the other teens are able to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
He now knows proper place settings and how to do various dances like the waltz. One day he will be happy he knows these things.

I don't understand parents who need cotillion to teach table manners.

You’re just better than all of us. Congrats.

How often in your lifetime have you waltzed? I’m in my 50’s and never waltzed or was around anyone who did nor have I ever needed to but couldn’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
He now knows proper place settings and how to do various dances like the waltz. One day he will be happy he knows these things.

I don't understand parents who need cotillion to teach table manners.

You’re just better than all of us. Congrats.

Anonymous wrote:
He now knows proper place settings and how to do various dances like the waltz. One day he will be happy he knows these things.

I don't understand parents who need cotillion to teach table manners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

Really? Your grandmother has "never" worn a dress? Sorry, I don't believe you. And ladies of a certain age get a pass when their legs go south, even for formal events like weddings. You'll learn that one day.

So only younger ladies with nice looking legs need to wear dresses? You’re insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

So, my daughter will not be a non-self absorbed functioning adult because she won't wear dresses? She isn't expressing her sense of style (she wears dressy pants and shirts) but she does not feel comfortable in dresses (or showing her legs).

Please go back to Mississippi or wherever you come from.

This. Dressy formal attire can be pants, such as on: Lady Gaga, Celine Dion, Jennifer Lopez, etc. This is NOT the hill you want to die on with your kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

So, my daughter will not be a non-self absorbed functioning adult because she won't wear dresses? She isn't expressing her sense of style (she wears dressy pants and shirts) but she does not feel comfortable in dresses (or showing her legs).

Please go back to Mississippi or wherever you come from.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

No one here is saying you have to do cotillion. To each his / her own. We just want you to understand that too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our NOVA Catholic had 10-12 per year at Cotillion. There are two in the Alexandria area that we went through a few years ago. There were kids from a big mix of schools and backgrounds. DD met some kids there for the first time and they still get together. As someone pointed out earlier in the thread the biggest bonus is interacting with out electronic platforms. With my 3 DC it was harder to get them to go in the first few years but easy in MS.

And they did more than the waltz and foxtrot- a bunch of line dances, etc.

I can think of so many other activities that don't involve "electronic platforms" ... sports, scouts, debate club, best buddies, tag, biking, volunteering, and on and on

This is about conversations with others in person which is somewhat unique - even among the activities on your list. And who says there can’t be many activities that don’t involve screens?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

Really? Your grandmother has "never" worn a dress? Sorry, I don't believe you. And ladies of a certain age get a pass when their legs go south, even for formal events like weddings. You'll learn that one day.

As a child sure, as an adult, no. She's late 80s and very classy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

Really? Your grandmother has "never" worn a dress? Sorry, I don't believe you. And ladies of a certain age get a pass when their legs go south, even for formal events like weddings. You'll learn that one day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.

You're an idiot. Close minded at that. My grandmother has never worn a dress and look smashing at all of her grandkids weddings. She can also foxtrot. No Cotillion Required.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While some of the traditions are a bit outdated (such as dresses only for girls - I don't see why nice pants wont do), like with most things in life, we take in the lessons that work for us but not all. We are not mindless robots after all.


No. Things that are sexist are inappropriate, and should not be supported with your $. Would you feel the same way if the rule was that kids should only ask kids of their own race to dance? If not, what do you see as the difference?



To me the dressy clothes are the uniform for the activity. Would my son prefer to show up in athletic gear 100%, but he wears what is required and if he refused we would not go.
I imagine for a variety of reasons cotillion is not for everyone and that is OK. There are lots of activities that are not for my family. The stories I have heard about travel soccer frustrate me and sometimes even make me angry, so my family does not support it. But I don't ask other families to justify to me why they do.

That said, in terms of OPs asked I wanted to share our experience. Many people seem to be ruling it out without knowing much about it. Therefore, I thought the perspective of a family who participated would be helpful to OP.

Got it. You are ruling out travel soccer (which both my girls play) based on "stories you have heard" about it, but you are totally fine with an organization that forces girls to wear gender stereotyped clothing (which is completely different than comfortable athletic clothing that your son might prefer).

I've never understood this. If my DD likes dresses and enjoys wearing them, then why should she be looked down upon for that? It's equally OK to embrace your gender as it is to reject it. Anything else feels a lot like misogyny.

Lots of girls including mine like dresses, and its great for them to embrace their sense of style. That's not the issue. Its an issue when an organization requires a certain "uniform" like dresses for a girls. Some, even CIS kids, may not be comfortable in a dress. Even our school's chorus offers a dress AND several pants styles for females.

How can I explain this to you gently. Part of what it means to mature, to grow into oneself and to become a functioning, non-self absorbed adult, is realizing that not every occasion is an appropriate one to express one's "sense of style." Dressy, formal attire for girls and women means dresses. That is not likely to change anytime soon, simply because a group of rowdy moms on DCUM decide that it deprives their little darlings of a chance to express themselves at any time and place that they so desire.