Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am actually bothered a lot by the fact that the girls are the ones that are really in violation of the dress code. They are the ones that are not wearing a lot. The boys dress very comfortably for school. Because I have a hard time believing that it is comfortable to have your ass cheek, stuck to a seat because there is no material to your shorts. And nobody wants to talk about why that is. Why do the girls need to dress like that? Or what is being marketed to them specifically?

I’m so relieved that other parents had the same reaction that I did! I was getting really worried about the state of parenting in America!

Oh great. The AEM crazies are here.

I think you misunderstood me. I’m glad people think there should be a dress code. The folks on AEM are all for letting it all hang out. Somehow that equates to body positivity??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of those girl private school uniform skorts leaving not a lot to imagination. Those Christian kids, y'all.

a lot of those girls scream Dios Mio as well before, during and after school....

Well that's relevant.

the public school boys like visiting the catholic school girls...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am actually bothered a lot by the fact that the girls are the ones that are really in violation of the dress code. They are the ones that are not wearing a lot. The boys dress very comfortably for school. Because I have a hard time believing that it is comfortable to have your ass cheek, stuck to a seat because there is no material to your shorts. And nobody wants to talk about why that is. Why do the girls need to dress like that? Or what is being marketed to them specifically?

I’m so relieved that other parents had the same reaction that I did! I was getting really worried about the state of parenting in America!

Are there any all girls schools without uniforms? What do they wear? What do girls wear at privates like GDS?

Madeira doesn’t have uniforms. Shirts must cover “cleavage and midriffs” and skirts and shorts should be longer than fingertips at your side. No undergarments should be visible. Pajama pants also aren’t allowed.

Note to all the people claiming dress codes are sexist - this is an all girls’ school. It’s about respect for your self and the community.

Anonymous wrote:I have a 15-year-old girl and I can vouch that manufacturers do in fact make shorts that cover teenage ass cheeks. You just have to make your kid buy/wear them.

I didn't win the crop top battle today, though. To be fair, I didn't really try.

Are you and I the same person???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of those girl private school uniform skorts leaving not a lot to imagination. Those Christian kids, y'all.

a lot of those girls scream Dios Mio as well before, during and after school....

Well that's relevant.

Anonymous wrote:Some of those girl private school uniform skorts leaving not a lot to imagination. Those Christian kids, y'all.

a lot of those girls scream Dios Mio as well before, during and after school....

Some of those girl private school uniform skorts leaving not a lot to imagination. Those Christian kids, y'all.

those girls at O'Connell push the limit with those skirts for sure....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crazy town AEM post about it earlier today.

It’s body shaming and sexist to ask that parents not let their daughter go to school with her asscheeks out, apparently.

Parents responding on that are the usual crazytown suspects.

I’m as liberal as they come but I’m secretly a MAGA fascist because I want my kids to recognize that you should dress for the occasion and that means no asscheeks at school.

Those parents are nuts. No one on earth believes that skin tight, super short denim shorts that result in butt cheeks on full display are worn for comfort. Half of them look like they’re cutting off circulation. The complete lack of coverage results in turning classroom seats into toilet seats FFS.

But, yes, it’s imperative that girls be allowed to come to school in the equivalent of a bikini or they are oppressed.

And if a boy wears something similarly cut, I have a problem with that, too.

Agree. The issue isn't that the dress code "targets" girls it's that why are girls conveniently always the ones who are half naked while boys are fully dressed? Hello folks wake up. You are not empowering them by cheering for them while their boobs and asses hang out and lecturing us about how boys should be taught not to look.

There are some rather low-hanging pants on boys that need to be covered in the code, too. I think that falls under the undergarments being covered part of the code.
Short shorts and short skirts that don't cover anything when you sit or bend over are clearly an issue with the girls; but why is no one complaining about the exposed chests and midriffs? The girls are "targeted" by the dress code more because there are so many more things that are inappropriate. I honestly don't get the "body shaming" argument. I don't think anyone should be ashamed of their body; but respecting one's self and one's body is demonstrated by dressing appropriately for the occasion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crazy town AEM post about it earlier today.

It’s body shaming and sexist to ask that parents not let their daughter go to school with her asscheeks out, apparently.

Parents responding on that are the usual crazytown suspects.

I’m as liberal as they come but I’m secretly a MAGA fascist because I want my kids to recognize that you should dress for the occasion and that means no asscheeks at school.

What happened to everyone just wearing pajamas to school, like loose, fitting, comfortable bottoms, and a baggy tshirt?

Oh, sadly, they wear pajama bottoms, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crazy town AEM post about it earlier today.

It’s body shaming and sexist to ask that parents not let their daughter go to school with her asscheeks out, apparently.

Parents responding on that are the usual crazytown suspects.

I’m as liberal as they come but I’m secretly a MAGA fascist because I want my kids to recognize that you should dress for the occasion and that means no asscheeks at school.

Those parents are nuts. No one on earth believes that skin tight, super short denim shorts that result in butt cheeks on full display are worn for comfort. Half of them look like they’re cutting off circulation. The complete lack of coverage results in turning classroom seats into toilet seats FFS.

But, yes, it’s imperative that girls be allowed to come to school in the equivalent of a bikini or they are oppressed.

And if a boy wears something similarly cut, I have a problem with that, too.

Agree. The issue isn't that the dress code "targets" girls it's that why are girls conveniently always the ones who are half naked while boys are fully dressed? Hello folks wake up. You are not empowering them by cheering for them while their boobs and asses hang out and lecturing us about how boys should be taught not to look.

Anonymous wrote:I got sent home from high school because my shorts weren’t 2 inches past my fingertips!

🙄🙄🙄

Anonymous wrote:I am actually bothered a lot by the fact that the girls are the ones that are really in violation of the dress code. They are the ones that are not wearing a lot. The boys dress very comfortably for school. Because I have a hard time believing that it is comfortable to have your ass cheek, stuck to a seat because there is no material to your shorts. And nobody wants to talk about why that is. Why do the girls need to dress like that? Or what is being marketed to them specifically?

I’m so relieved that other parents had the same reaction that I did! I was getting really worried about the state of parenting in America!

Oh great. The AEM crazies are here.

Anonymous wrote:And to be fair, APS dress code does actually say "APS defines “inappropriate” as clothing that does not cover the buttocks or genitals, underwear worn without any clothes covering (visible waistbands or straps on undergarments worn under other clothing are acceptable), swimwear as standalone apparel (outside of pool areas), and clothing with language or images that are vulgar, discriminatory, derogatory, or obscene."

This really does sound like kids just need to wear clothes, not underwear or swimwear to school.

I remember struggling to find shorts that were long enough under my HS dress code because I was thin and long legged. But shorts that cover the bum are widely available and make sense from a hygiene perspective alone.

Anonymous wrote:Sadly it needed to be said that your “buttocks and genitals” should be covered, and that undergarments are not clothes. Also an outfit consists of both a top and a bottom. Most of these are directed to the girls, hence the sexist backlash. But when I take my kids to school and see some girls wearing shorts that look like thongs, I see where they are coming from.

When boys start wearing speedos or things to school then we can talk about that.