Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a boy and a girl and am pretty quick to jump on gender stereotypes. And I think you have a small point about the email, OP. The contents probably should have been completely gender neutral, with references to “children to wearing unsecured shoes” and “children not wearing clothes with big armholes,” rather than specifying gender. The principal probably should have taken more care with the wording, been more considerate of possible gender non-conforming kids, etc.

But your post is the kind of over the top, making a point of being PC for the point of being PC crap that makes common sense liberals look bad. I have no problem with the underlying content. Here in the real world, girls are the ones wearing spaghetti straps and flats, and boys are the ones wearing big armholes. Girls stay in ES through 6th grade in FCPS and usually are wearing bras, have not puberty, and are physically developed by late ES. And some parents just do not have common sense when it comes to buying clothes for their kids, or don’t set limits, or think it’s more important to let their kids been cool than to insist on appropriate dress. Some of the clothes both boys and girls wear is distracting. And does not belong in school. And it only gets worse in MS. I would have not problem with a rule that said no sleeveless shirts for either gender, period.

I think you could go to the principal and argue semantics, and poor choice of defining dress code by gender. And I think most principals would concede your point. But this is not the Hill I would choose to die on.

Boys don't wear sandals to elementary school. They just don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a boy and a girl and am pretty quick to jump on gender stereotypes. And I think you have a small point about the email, OP. The contents probably should have been completely gender neutral, with references to “children to wearing unsecured shoes” and “children not wearing clothes with big armholes,” rather than specifying gender. The principal probably should have taken more care with the wording, been more considerate of possible gender non-conforming kids, etc.

But your post is the kind of over the top, making a point of being PC for the point of being PC crap that makes common sense liberals look bad. I have no problem with the underlying content. Here in the real world, girls are the ones wearing spaghetti straps and flats, and boys are the ones wearing big armholes. Girls stay in ES through 6th grade in FCPS and usually are wearing bras, have not puberty, and are physically developed by late ES. And some parents just do not have common sense when it comes to buying clothes for their kids, or don’t set limits, or think it’s more important to let their kids been cool than to insist on appropriate dress. Some of the clothes both boys and girls wear is distracting. And does not belong in school. And it only gets worse in MS. I would have not problem with a rule that said no sleeveless shirts for either gender, period.

I think you could go to the principal and argue semantics, and poor choice of defining dress code by gender. And I think most principals would concede your point. But this is not the Hill I would choose to die on.

Boys don't wear sandals to elementary school. They just don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw the following in an email from the principal about proper dress in warm weather. This seems rife with gender stereotypes (i.e. boys can wear sandals, girls can wear shirts with large armholes).

"Be sure that students are wearing proper foot gear to play safely on the playground and during PE. Girls should wear shoes that have straps that secure their foot in the shoe. As the Air Conditioner comes on in the building, continue to send a light weight jacket or sweater to cover arms. Students wearing sleeveless shirts or shorts with sandals are uncomfortable in chilled rooms. Spaghetti straps should not be worn to school. Boys should not wear shirts with large arm holes cut out. Students need to focus on learning and not distracted by revealing clothing items."

The concept of revealing clothing causing students to become "distracted" from learning is typically and disparately applied to girls so maybe that's why it doesn't sit well for me. It also seems a little inappropriate since we are talking about an elementary school.

Very little of the reminder for appropriate dress from the principal is contained in the FCPS dress code in the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. There are some similar themes to the handbook but the handbook presents them in a genderless manner and the concept of being "distracting" by having revealing clothing items is no where to be found.

Are principals allowed to set their own dress code that goes beyond FCPS district policy? If so, would DCUM report this? If so, who do you tell? This came from the principal so I can't forward it to her and expect an open mind about why this may not be the most appropriate language.

Do you know any sixth grade boys? Have you seen the clothing some of these girls wear?

I have a 7th grade boy who is focused on his work, not how people dress, and I have NO PROBLEM with how girls dress in his school. The dress code, if there is one, has not been rammed down our throats, and as a woman, I would read it with my guard up, like OP.

Stop it, PP.

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely off-topic, but, omg, air conditioning. Such a luxury. When Los Angeles Unified School district decided to start the school year in the middle of August, the students had to wear, basically, nothing, to deal with the heat in the classrooms. The notes about the dress code came back home. The general parents' response was "are you crazy, it's 100 degrees outside and no AC, deal with the beach attire or move the start date".

Anonymous wrote:I have a boy and a girl and am pretty quick to jump on gender stereotypes. And I think you have a small point about the email, OP. The contents probably should have been completely gender neutral, with references to “children to wearing unsecured shoes” and “children not wearing clothes with big armholes,” rather than specifying gender. The principal probably should have taken more care with the wording, been more considerate of possible gender non-conforming kids, etc.

But your post is the kind of over the top, making a point of being PC for the point of being PC crap that makes common sense liberals look bad. I have no problem with the underlying content. Here in the real world, girls are the ones wearing spaghetti straps and flats, and boys are the ones wearing big armholes. Girls stay in ES through 6th grade in FCPS and usually are wearing bras, have not puberty, and are physically developed by late ES. And some parents just do not have common sense when it comes to buying clothes for their kids, or don’t set limits, or think it’s more important to let their kids been cool than to insist on appropriate dress. Some of the clothes both boys and girls wear is distracting. And does not belong in school. And it only gets worse in MS. I would have not problem with a rule that said no sleeveless shirts for either gender, period.

I think you could go to the principal and argue semantics, and poor choice of defining dress code by gender. And I think most principals would concede your point. But this is not the Hill I would choose to die on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw the following in an email from the principal about proper dress in warm weather. This seems rife with gender stereotypes (i.e. boys can wear sandals, girls can wear shirts with large armholes).

"Be sure that students are wearing proper foot gear to play safely on the playground and during PE. Girls should wear shoes that have straps that secure their foot in the shoe. As the Air Conditioner comes on in the building, continue to send a light weight jacket or sweater to cover arms. Students wearing sleeveless shirts or shorts with sandals are uncomfortable in chilled rooms. Spaghetti straps should not be worn to school. Boys should not wear shirts with large arm holes cut out. Students need to focus on learning and not distracted by revealing clothing items."

The concept of revealing clothing causing students to become "distracted" from learning is typically and disparately applied to girls so maybe that's why it doesn't sit well for me. It also seems a little inappropriate since we are talking about an elementary school.

Very little of the reminder for appropriate dress from the principal is contained in the FCPS dress code in the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. There are some similar themes to the handbook but the handbook presents them in a genderless manner and the concept of being "distracting" by having revealing clothing items is no where to be found.

Are principals allowed to set their own dress code that goes beyond FCPS district policy? If so, would DCUM report this? If so, who do you tell? This came from the principal so I can't forward it to her and expect an open mind about why this may not be the most appropriate language.

Do you know any sixth grade boys? Have you seen the clothing some of these girls wear?

I have a 7th grade boy who is focused on his work, not how people dress, and I have NO PROBLEM with how girls dress in his school. The dress code, if there is one, has not been rammed down our throats, and as a woman, I would read it with my guard up, like OP.

Stop it, PP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw the following in an email from the principal about proper dress in warm weather. This seems rife with gender stereotypes (i.e. boys can wear sandals, girls can wear shirts with large armholes).

"Be sure that students are wearing proper foot gear to play safely on the playground and during PE. Girls should wear shoes that have straps that secure their foot in the shoe. As the Air Conditioner comes on in the building, continue to send a light weight jacket or sweater to cover arms. Students wearing sleeveless shirts or shorts with sandals are uncomfortable in chilled rooms. Spaghetti straps should not be worn to school. Boys should not wear shirts with large arm holes cut out. Students need to focus on learning and not distracted by revealing clothing items."

The concept of revealing clothing causing students to become "distracted" from learning is typically and disparately applied to girls so maybe that's why it doesn't sit well for me. It also seems a little inappropriate since we are talking about an elementary school.

Very little of the reminder for appropriate dress from the principal is contained in the FCPS dress code in the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. There are some similar themes to the handbook but the handbook presents them in a genderless manner and the concept of being "distracting" by having revealing clothing items is no where to be found.

Are principals allowed to set their own dress code that goes beyond FCPS district policy? If so, would DCUM report this? If so, who do you tell? This came from the principal so I can't forward it to her and expect an open mind about why this may not be the most appropriate language.

Do you know any sixth grade boys? Have you seen the clothing some of these girls wear?

Anonymous wrote:Wait till HS. Girls wearing booty shorts and low cut tops. Not appropriate in a learning environment. I wish we had uniforms.