Why are you worried about what other people’s kids are wearing? MYOB

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this at my dd's school, and while not obscene, it's trashy. No matter how thin, no one wants to watch butts jiggle.

Allow me to introduce you to some teenage boys. Hopefully, not the male teachers.

Anonymous wrote:Would you wear opaque tights with a fitted tee? That's what leggings are. They're tights without feet.

Tights are much thinner than leggings. If you don't want your kids wearing them, don't let them. It's none of your business what other kids wear. There is no language that explicitly prohibits them. Feel free to teach your kids what you think is appropriate and let other parents teach their own kids. If you're worried about your son being distracted, focus on helping him with that issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you all teaching your daughters to be ashamed of their bodies and that it is more important that they don't distract boys vs wearing comfortable clothing?

No one said anything about being ashamed of bodies or distracting boys...we just don't appreciate seeing camel toe.

Maybe don't look.

Just bought 3 pairs of thick legging for my 6th graders. She loves them and will wear long boots with them. Adults wear boots with legging too. What is the problem?

Anonymous wrote:Leggings are NOT pants -- put the word out!

So Yoga pants are OK since they're pants. I agree.

People, stop worrying about other peoples kids, worry about your own. Not your business.

Remember 2014, when Obama was president and the biggest worry we had was leggings on middle schoolers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a trend when I was in junior high and high school 25+ years ago - it's nothing new. And I'm annoyed that schools ban it, particularly when the rule is applied only to girls. What kind of message does that send? It may not be a great look for some, but unless it is affecting their performance, why do you care?

I'm guessing that if a guy wanted to wear leggings, the administration would have an issue with that too.

Except that's not how the dress codes are written - they target the girls, and I have a huge issue with that (and my DC is a boy, FWIW). Again, unless how the kids are dressing is affecting their *own* performance, it shouldn't be a matter for the school. The leggings regulations, for example, seem targeted at how others (boys, adults) interpret how the girls dress - that's wrong on so many levels.

YUP!

You are responding to a thread that is 3 1/2 years old. The pps are long gone.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why are you all teaching your daughters to be ashamed of their bodies and that it is more important that they don't distract boys vs wearing comfortable clothing?[/quote]

No one said anything about being ashamed of bodies or distracting boys...we just don't appreciate seeing camel toe. [/quote]

They imply that girls are targeted basically not to wear leggings, tank tops, skirts, or showing collarbone or shoulder. We are forced to do this so we don't distract boys. Apparently we have to cover up, hen boys don't have to. We should be able to wear almost anything.m [/quote]

Don't boys have dress codes as well that are similar? I'm not understanding the complaint. There should be requirements that don't allow exposure of certain body parts girls and boys.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why are you all teaching your daughters to be ashamed of their bodies and that it is more important that they don't distract boys vs wearing comfortable clothing?[/quote]

No one said anything about being ashamed of bodies or distracting boys...we just don't appreciate seeing camel toe. [/quote]

They imply that girls are targeted basically not to wear leggings, tank tops, skirts, or showing collarbone or shoulder. We are forced to do this so we don't distract boys. Apparently we have to cover up, hen boys don't have to. We should be able to wear almost anything.m

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a trend when I was in junior high and high school 25+ years ago - it's nothing new. And I'm annoyed that schools ban it, particularly when the rule is applied only to girls. What kind of message does that send? It may not be a great look for some, but unless it is affecting their performance, why do you care?

The trend back then involved big, long shirts that covered the butt when wearing leggings.

The first poster on this one, and no, long shirts weren't the style, at least where I lived. Leggings were just leggings, usually worn with a sweatshirt that definitely didn't cover the rear. And Uggs, always Uggs. I'm with the poster who asked why the body shaming, particularly since most of the dress codes are primarily directed at girls? Yeah, the look may not be the most attractive, but again, if it's not affecting the performance of the student in question, why do you care? If it's "distracting" to another student, that's the other student's problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you all teaching your daughters to be ashamed of their bodies and that it is more important that they don't distract boys vs wearing comfortable clothing?

No one said anything about being ashamed of bodies or distracting boys...we just don't appreciate seeing camel toe.

+1