Jump to content

Menu

How would you implement a dress code?


Aura

Recommended Posts

Not for your home school, LOL, but for a private school. The dress code should equally applies to girls and boys. How would you implement this? How do you objectively identify what is allowed vs not allowed? Simply saying that clothes should be modest and that pants/slacks should not too tight and skirts/shorts should not be too short is wayyyy to subjective and depends on individual interpretation! How do you make an objective dress code and enforce it?

 

The skirts/shorts would not be much of an issue, from what I can see. Simple measurements. So many inches above the knee or below fingertips or something like that. It might be harder for some students to find clothes that adhere to the standards, but at least it's objective.

 

But how do you objectively identify pants/slacks that are too tight?

 

And who should enforce the dress code? All teachers? Is it okay for a male teacher to call out a girl for violating the dress code? Is it okay for a female teacher to call out a boy for violating the dress code?

 

(FTR, this is not about modesty. It is about setting standards that can be objectively upheld with minimal personal bias affecting what is allowed/not allowed.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

One way to deal with that is to require a uniform. 

Only to a degree. You can buy uniform pants that still fit skin tight (not acceptable for this school) and skirts/shorts that are too short (again, not acceptable).

 

If a school has some kids that are wearing pants where they looked like they're "poured into" them, and the school wants to avoid that, I don't see how having a uniform solves that problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would do a uniform as well. Polo shirts and khaki or navy pants. It's easy enough to see who is and isn't wearing the required uniform. I would have the teachers send the child to admin if there's a question. Polo shirts remove any issues with strap measuring.

 

The problem with measuring the length of shorts is that it requires the child to get on their knees while an adult stands over them and measures them. That's just...icky. Either don't do shorts (pants only) or give a required inseam measurement and leave it up to parents to buy the correct items. 

 

I don't think there's an objective way to measure tightness. Kids grow overnight. Pants that were baggy on Monday can be tight on Friday. Not every parent can afford to replace pants immediately. Plus chunky kids--pants are going to be too long or too tight. It's expensive to tailor them, and again, it can happen overnight. Some kids will wear things that are too tight. You simply cannot have an administrator measuring "ease" (garment term) in a child's pants. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's an objective way to measure tightness. Kids grow overnight. Pants that were baggy on Monday can be tight on Friday. Not every parent can afford to replace pants immediately. Plus chunky kids--pants are going to be too long or too tight. It's expensive to tailor them, and again, it can happen overnight. Some kids will wear things that are too tight. You simply cannot have an administrator measuring "ease" (garment term) in a child's pants.

Plus, all this obsessing over kids pants is just creepy.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Only to a degree. You can buy uniform pants that still fit skin tight (not acceptable for this school) and skirts/shorts that are too short (again, not acceptable).

 

If a school has some kids that are wearing pants where they looked like they're "poured into" them, and the school wants to avoid that, I don't see how having a uniform solves that problem.

You can specify a supplier if you really care. Some UK private schools do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can specify a supplier if you really care. Some UK private schools do.

Many local public and private schools that require school uniforms has designated suppliers that also sews on the school logo.

 

They have uniform closets too for parents to donate outgrown uniforms, which kids can take. Similar to what you have in UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the big issue is that the school feels a lot of the kids wear too tight clothing and want to standardize how tight the clothing should be?  I agree with others, that would be exceedingly hard to do.  Kids grow.  Kids have different body styles.  Different types of clothing fit differently on different kids.  I don't see how focusing on this and trying to enforce a rule in this area will easily work at all.  Forbidding things like leggings being used as pants makes logical sense for limiting how tight clothing might be but not "your khaki pants are too tight".  I don't see a way to make an objective, fair way to measure that.

 

 {There comes a point where micromanaging the clothing gets in the way of actually teaching the kids, too (which has happened locally with our public schools).}  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only to a degree. You can buy uniform pants that still fit skin tight (not acceptable for this school) and skirts/shorts that are too short (again, not acceptable).

 

If a school has some kids that are wearing pants where they looked like they're "poured into" them, and the school wants to avoid that, I don't see how having a uniform solves that problem.

 

so how is that not about 'modesty' then?  

 

Why can't someone wear clothing that's 'poured on', like leggings or a gymnastics unitard or a spandex onesie? 

 

Because I'd say to get rid of the vagueness of "that's too tight/that's too baggy", you have to go to extreme ends. Either spandex unitards for everyone, or giant billowing robes for everyone. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so how is that not about 'modesty' then?  

 

Why can't someone wear clothing that's 'poured on', like leggings or a gymnastics unitard or a spandex onesie? 

 

Because I'd say to get rid of the vagueness of "that's too tight/that's too baggy", you have to go to extreme ends. Either spandex unitards for everyone, or giant billowing robes for everyone. 

 

 

 

 

:iagree:

What's wrong with pants that are skin tight?  Those are the ones that look nice.     Does that include leggings too? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The following dress code applies equally to girls and boys:

 

Children must wear clothing.

 

Shirts, tops, upper parts of single garments:

- A shirt or top should be secured in some manner. It may not be strapless.

- A shirt or top should not expose the a student's chest area or the cups of a bra, either from the front or side. (A student who is breastfeeding an infant shall be excluded from this requirement.)

 

Pants, shorts, skirts, lower parts of single garments:

- At the waist, pants, shorts and skirts should not expose a student's posterior, or any portion of their underwear.

- At the hem, while sitting normally, skirts should provide full coverage of the student's posterior, hips and underwear. Underwear should not be easily exposed during ordinary daily activities. Skort-style skirts or 'cartwheel shorts' under skirts are reccomended for very young students.

- Shorts require a minimum 1 inch inseam.

 

Ideally, students should be able to wear almost any conventional clothing item, provided it is the right size and worn on the conventional way.

 

If "it's not about modesty" there really isn't any reason to put much thought into 'too tight' or 'too short' -- those aren't questions that enter a discussion that isn't about modesty.

 

I don't believe that what children are wearing impacts how well they learn, therefore I think schools are foolish to waste instructional time on such trivialities. A dress code should uphold any public decency laws of your area... Anything more is probably more trouble than it is worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clothing is too tight if child is unable to perform expected tasks while wearing it. 

For most school subjects, the child must be able to sit in a chair, squat or bend to pick up items from floor or a low shelf, and have a range of arm movements.  P.E. requires greater range of motion.  Otherwise, tightness is subject.

 

Perhaps the uniform should consist of buttoned lab coats or academic robes. :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for your home school, LOL, but for a private school. The dress code should equally applies to girls and boys. How would you implement this? How do you objectively identify what is allowed vs not allowed? Simply saying that clothes should be modest and that pants/slacks should not too tight and skirts/shorts should not be too short is wayyyy to subjective and depends on individual interpretation! How do you make an objective dress code and enforce it?

 

The skirts/shorts would not be much of an issue, from what I can see. Simple measurements. So many inches above the knee or below fingertips or something like that. It might be harder for some students to find clothes that adhere to the standards, but at least it's objective.

 

But how do you objectively identify pants/slacks that are too tight?

 

And who should enforce the dress code? All teachers? Is it okay for a male teacher to call out a girl for violating the dress code? Is it okay for a female teacher to call out a boy for violating the dress code?

 

(FTR, this is not about modesty. It is about setting standards that can be objectively upheld with minimal personal bias affecting what is allowed/not allowed.)

I don't see how this can NOT be about modesty, and specifically the modesty as defined by whomever is writing the rules.  Otherwise, why is the tightness of the clothing and the length of the skirt/shorts an issue?  Unless there is some sort of safety concern I am not seeing...  

 

ETA: I agree with PP, as long as the student can perform the required tasks for the day I don't think the clothing should be considered too tight.  Trying to police that kind of thing would be so subjective it would be almost impossible to enforce fairly.

 

By the way, with getting into enforcement, that can become a real nightmare.  I don't have a good suggestion.  Locally, the teachers are on rotating morning shifts and have to police the kids as they come into school.  If they aren't meeting the dress code the student is sent home (if they can get back home) so they can change clothes (they are counted tardy when they get back to school) or they are sent to detention.  Teachers are not in their classes preparing for the day, they are acting as gatekeepers and clothing police.  My SIL is one of those teachers and HATES IT, for a whole host of reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only to a degree. You can buy uniform pants that still fit skin tight (not acceptable for this school) and skirts/shorts that are too short (again, not acceptable).

 

If a school has some kids that are wearing pants where they looked like they're "poured into" them, and the school wants to avoid that, I don't see how having a uniform solves that problem.

 

I don't know.  I can't imagine this kind of micromanagement.  Sure there may be some people who buy the wrong size, but a uniform would solve a lot of the issues and make things less complicated. 

 

I've seen some where they are basic khaki pants and a polo shirt.  Those pants just don't ever really fit skin tight unless they are way too small and then they'd be hard to even button!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how this can NOT be about modesty, and specifically the modesty as defined by whomever is writing the rules.  Otherwise, why is the tightness of the clothing and the length of the skirt/shorts an issue?  Unless there is some sort of safety concern I am not seeing...

 

By the way, with getting into enforcement, that can become a real nightmare.  I don't have a good suggestion.  Locally, the teachers are on rotating morning shifts and have to police the kids as they come into school.  If they aren't meeting the dress code the student is sent home (if they can get back home) so they can change clothes (they are counted tardy when they get back to school) or they are sent to detention.  Teachers are not in their classes preparing for the day, they are acting as gatekeepers and clothing police.  My SIL is one of those teachers and HATES IT, for a whole host of reasons.

 

Of course it is about modesty.  And usually that's modesty aimed at females.  Everything short of a burlap sack (that's long of course) is scrutinized. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and, "Any writing or symbols on garments may only express (or imply) sentiments that do not violate our school values of inclusion and tolerance, and may not promote or approve activities that violate the school code of conduct."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that too much time is spend worrying about clothing choices, but for this particular school, they're making progress (from the dark ages...20 years ago!). So, yeah, modesty is the school's concern. But for the parents, the concern is an enforceable dress code that (1) does not delve into pettiness because even the teachers can't agree on what is "too tight", and (2) doesn't outrageously target the girls and ignore the boys.

 

Nearly all the parents have no problem with a requirement that excludes leggings or skin tight clothing. They have no problems with the "loose-fitting" pants.

 

They do have problems with the application and enforcement of these rules because there are no objective standards and it is being unfairly applied.

 

Breaking out the ruler may be "icky" to some, but it's better than a widely subjective view. Uniform pants are not off the table...as long as both girls and boys are required to wear uniform pants.

 

I like the idea of minimum inseams. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand dress codes regarding fit and can not think of a scenario where it *really* is about the boys.

 

Only extreme boy style I've seen is wearing pants hanging down sometimes as far as below their butt.  The rest are pretty much aimed at females. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'all are bringing great comments and thoughts here! Yeah, it's about modesty, but that's a can of worms I can't deal with right now. Right now, I'm just looking for a dress code that's objective, enforceable, and fair. I don't care if their standards on modesty are different than mine, just as long as it's applied across the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that too much time is spend worrying about clothing choices, but for this particular school, they're making progress (from the dark ages...20 years ago!). So, yeah, modesty is the school's concern. But for the parents, the concern is an enforceable dress code that (1) does not delve into pettiness because even the teachers can't agree on what is "too tight", and (2) doesn't outrageously target the girls and ignore the boys.

 

Nearly all the parents have no problem with a requirement that excludes leggings or skin tight clothing. They have no problems with the "loose-fitting" pants.

 

They do have problems with the application and enforcement of these rules because there are no objective standards and it is being unfairly applied.

 

Breaking out the ruler may be "icky" to some, but it's better than a widely subjective view. Uniform pants are not off the table...as long as both girls and boys are required to wear uniform pants.

 

I like the idea of minimum inseams. 

 

The ruler thing puts me in a rage.  If there is any concern about this, don't allow skirts or shorts.  Ya know, some people are very tall and a regular pair of shorts or a skirt will be shorter than on other people.  It's too nit picky and petty.   And this doesn't pertain to boys. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'all are bringing great comments and thoughts here! Yeah, it's about modesty, but that's a can of worms I can't deal with right now. Right now, I'm just looking for a dress code that's objective, enforceable, and fair. I don't care if their standards on modesty are different than mine, just as long as it's applied across the board.

 

school issued uniforms....measurements taken at the school and the school orders them

 

done

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it is about modesty. And usually that's modesty aimed at females. Everything short of a burlap sack (that's long of course) is scrutinized.

The question about who enforces standards gives that away. If it is simply an objective, unisex standard to maintain a quasi-professional environment, the sex of the enforcing teacher is irrelevant.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that too much time is spend worrying about clothing choices, but for this particular school, they're making progress (from the dark ages...20 years ago!). So, yeah, modesty is the school's concern. But for the parents, the concern is an enforceable dress code that (1) does not delve into pettiness because even the teachers can't agree on what is "too tight", and (2) doesn't outrageously target the girls and ignore the boys.

 

Nearly all the parents have no problem with a requirement that excludes leggings or skin tight clothing. They have no problems with the "loose-fitting" pants.

 

They do have problems with the application and enforcement of these rules because there are no objective standards and it is being unfairly applied.

 

Breaking out the ruler may be "icky" to some, but it's better than a widely subjective view. Uniform pants are not off the table...as long as both girls and boys are required to wear uniform pants.

 

I like the idea of minimum inseams. 

This is really a tricky place for you to be.  I don't envy you.  Honestly, I really cannot imagine how the school could create and enforce a "fair" standard for tightness of clothing.  I do agree that a uniform would probably work better than just whatever they happen to be wearing.  

 

ETA:  Glad the school has made progress, by the way.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you require khaki or black pants that have belt loops and aren't stretchy?

 

A lot of the schools around here have uniforms. They usually require a solid colored polo and then uniform pants/skirts/shorts. Gap, Old Navy, and Target all carry them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The question about who enforces standards gives that away. If it is simply an objective, unisex standard to maintain a quasi-professional environment, the sex of the enforcing teacher is irrelevant.

 

You know, for the longest time I couldn't understand why skirts were considered modest.  Really no which way could I understand this.  Someone here explained it to me.  Apparently it hides the form of the body better.  What the what what?  Oh no you mean females have legs?!  What the hell, I can't believe they have legs!!!  And a butt.   Legs and a butt...just like boys.  Boys have legs and butts...why do we get to see their legs and butts? 

 

Maybe boys and girls should wear burkas. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would leave off the "too tight" rule.  Maybe I would say "properly fitting."

 

Kids do grow and 9 months is a long time.  Toward the end of a school year, I am unlikely buy new clothes that they may outgrow again by fall.  I have seen kids with slightly short pant legs and slightly tight clothes as summer approaches.  I think it's best to let it go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that too much time is spend worrying about clothing choices, but for this particular school, they're making progress (from the dark ages...20 years ago!). So, yeah, modesty is the school's concern. But for the parents, the concern is an enforceable dress code that (1) does not delve into pettiness because even the teachers can't agree on what is "too tight", and (2) doesn't outrageously target the girls and ignore the boys.

 

Nearly all the parents have no problem with a requirement that excludes leggings or skin tight clothing. They have no problems with the "loose-fitting" pants.

 

They do have problems with the application and enforcement of these rules because there are no objective standards and it is being unfairly applied.

 

Breaking out the ruler may be "icky" to some, but it's better than a widely subjective view. Uniform pants are not off the table...as long as both girls and boys are required to wear uniform pants.

 

I like the idea of minimum inseams.

I'm appalled (as a parent) at the idea of a dress code excluding leggings! Leggings are an absolutely normal style of clothing for women and girls right now.

 

And, do be careful with minimum inseams. When some of your students are 19yo, and some are 4yo, there is virtually no reasonable number you can assign to the inseam of shorts -- if you are looking for 'modest' 19yo's and kindergarteners who aren't swimming in their clothes.

 

And you can't measure an inseam with a ruler on a living human being without obvious sexual harassment issues. Inseams are *not* something that can be causally and objectively monitored.

 

It's a losing battle.

 

If they just stick with a 'public decency' standard as opposed to 'avoid sexiness' standard, we'd be able to get teachers' and students' minds off of students' body measurements and onto the class.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would leave off the "too tight" rule.  Maybe I would say "properly fitting."

 

Kids do grow and 9 months is a long time.  Toward the end of a school year, I am unlikely buy new clothes that they may outgrow again by fall.  I have seen kids with slightly short pant legs and slightly tight clothes as summer approaches.  I think it's best to let it go.

The problem is that the school has this rule, apparently, but is unfairly targeting girls with enforcement since "too tight" is very subjective.  As I understand it from the combined posts of the OP, the parents are trying to find a way to word the rules where rules (whether they agree with them or not) can be more objectively enforced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I appreciate is when dress codes are not gender specific.

 

No gap between shirt and pants is applicable to boys and girls. Keeps the girls from showing bellies and the boys from showing undies. Also, specifying that garments should stay covering the body even when one moves around. If something requires constant tugging to keep in place, it probably isn't appropriate for this venue.

 

Undergarments must not be visible is appropriate for both boys and girls.

 

It steams my girls when they're nitpicked about their shirt riding up when they bent over and the boys walk around with 2 inches of underwear showing and are ignored.

 

Loose fitting tops and pants is appropriate for boys and girls. Of course, you get into who judges what is loose fitting is the thing.

 

I think dress code is a touchy subject but can be made simpler when it's handled with an understanding, KIND positive person.

 

I went to a conservative Christian school and in middle school, I grew and changed so quickly. I really appreciated the teachers who quietly pointed out that I'd probably outgrown that item and I shouldn't wear it again if I wanted to avoid demerits for dress code violations. I disliked the teachers who seemed to prowl looking for people to bark at about dress code issues.

 

As a mom, I'd prefer that a lady address girl dress code and a man address boy dress code. If a male teacher notices something, he should mention it to a lady rather than making a young girl uncomfortable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My kids' school has gender specific dress codes.  That by itself is no big deal.  The rules themselves are clear and not ridiculous.  I don't recall seeing a "too tight" rule, but maybe I just missed it since my kids are not at the age to try pushing dress code limits in that way.

 

I think if "too tight" is a problem, they need to get rid of that as a rule.  Just maybe make a statement up front that kids should be dressed in a way that is conducive to the learning environment for both the individual and the class.  And if someone misses the mark on that, what is the worst that can happen?  The other students will notice.  Oh how terrible!

 

Maybe approach the school with a list of requirements that you feel cannot be policed objectively, and ask that they be removed.  Not "clarified."

 

Sometimes, less is more.  I think this is one of those times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

school issued uniforms....measurements taken at the school and the school orders them

 

done

Yep. That would do it.

 

Followed by fittings and reorders, 'cause you know that even with measurements, not everything comes out right. And this would have to be done well in advance of school. And with checks and reorders during the school to account for growing children.

 

The school would essentially be controlling the child's wardrobe! (Yuck!)

 

And that really underscores what the focus, is doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a public school dress code that does call for good fit (no sagging) and no spandex as outerwear, but does not allow for teachers gawking at children and deeming them too sexy or inappropriate due to their pants being tight.

If you've shopped for teens lately, the fashions are very form fitting. Even school uniforms are cut on more slim lines than in recent generations past. These kids shouldn't be shamed for the way their developing bodies fit in the clothes that are available for them to wear, especially if the tone taken is that they are being indecent and tempting others, especially girls tempting boys, but equally for boys tempting female teachers. I mean, this gets gross in a hurry.

 

https://www.wayne.k12.in.us/bdfresh/dresscode.asp

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've been in three different uniform situations: no uniform, dress code and strict uniform. I wasn't unhappy with any of these: private schools have the right to set out their own values, parents can choose to send children if they agree or not if they disagree, and parents who opt for the school because of certain values should expect that they're enforced.

 

That said, I'm not sure that tightness of clothes has been an issue in any of the schools, length has always been the bigger issue. I don't see how you could regulate tightness. If modesty was the intention it would be more practical to specify a length of shirt worn over the pants to x inches below the waistline. I'm not suggesting this is a good idea, only that it would be the only neutrally enforceable approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. That would do it.

 

Followed by fittings and reorders, 'cause you know that even with measurements, not everything comes out right. And this would have to be done well in advance of school. And with checks and reorders during the school to account for growing children.

 

The school would essentially be controlling the child's wardrobe! (Yuck!)

 

And that really underscores what the focus, is doesn't it?

 

It's a definite yuck.  And it's hard on the parents.  Kids can grow fast and they might be buying clothing 2 x per year or more.  Maybe stuff does become a bit snug or short or whatever.  I just think it's too micromanaging.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want objective standards that will satisfy most peoples' notions of modesty, how about:

 

long or short sleeved collared shirts, either button-up or of knit material, and pants, skirts, or kilts with belt loops which allow freedom of movement for all school activities, must be worn by all students. Outer clothing must cover underwear, bra cups, nipples, belly buttons, and butt cracks while sitting, standing with arms raised above the student's head, and while the student is touching their toes. No writing or large pictorial images, licensed or otherwise, may be worn on clothing. Close-toed and close-heeled shoes suitable for all activities, and socks, must be worn. Belts, ties, and head coverings are optional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've been in three different uniform situations: no uniform, dress code and strict uniform. I wasn't unhappy with any of these: private schools have the right to set out their own values, parents can choose to send children if they agree or not if they disagree, and parents who opt for the school because of certain values should expect that they're enforced.

 

 

This is definitely true.  I just wonder if they get too crazy about stuff if that won't turn some people off though.  One of mine is in a choir and they have very very nit picky requirements for the uniforms.  It's almost to the point where I have moments I want to pull my kid from the choir.  I understand that they want to maintain a professional look, etc., but it's sometimes a bit much I think.  What makes it doable for me is they only do about 8-10 shows per year.  So 8-10 times of this nonsense.  If this were a daily thing...forget about it.  And I have a boy!  You'd thing there wouldn't be much to that.  Oh...there can be.  LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how they do things now, but skirts for uniforms used to come practically ankle length. When you went in to buy, they shortened the skirt to the length you wanted/needed. Most parents allowed an inch or two for growth. I can't see there needing to be much reordering, etc. The school wasn't that particular and understood kids grow.

 

I went to Catholic school for many years. Only one person ever got in trouble for the length of her skirt but no measurement was necessary because her butt was practically hanging out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harry Potter robes. Done.

 

Sorry, I can't be helpful. The issue irks me too much.

 

School uniforms with everyone wearing khaki pants and polo shirts and some sort of sweater for the winter.

 

If you decide to cut the kids a break from heat in the summer, then skirts and shorts have to be mid knee-length when standing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the local charter schools has a well written dress code.  Some of the parts pertinent to this conversation read as follows:

 

Clothing should fit appropriately and modestly, not sagging off the body to reveal undergarments, nor form-fitting so as to reveal body lines.  â€¦  Clothing should not reveal décolletage or bare midriffs.  â€¦  Pants… Should be of a “school uniform†or “khaki†style.  â€œCargo†style with extra pockets is not allowed,  Sweatpants, warm-ups, yoga pants, and the like are not allowed in regular classes.  â€¦  Tights, leggings, or shorts of any dress code color should be worn under sorts and skorts.

 

Elsewhere in the code is an "exception" clause.  Students may be waived from specific requirements as needed for body shape, etc, but they must get specific permission.

 

You can see the whole dress code here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwK0tHvC0KaqdmZkbXp0X1U4Tjg/view

 

 

One thing they used to do, which they've discontinued, is link to specific styles on vender websites that ARE allowed (Lands' End and others) who sold "look alike" uniform styles in different price ranges.  I actually liked that idea, but it must not have worked well for some reason.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you require khaki or black pants that have belt loops and aren't stretchy?

 

A lot of the schools around here have uniforms. They usually require a solid colored polo and then uniform pants/skirts/shorts. Gap, Old Navy, and Target all carry them.

 

I like this.  Rather than telling them what they can't wear, tell them what they can.  Certain style shirt, certain style pant, no graphics.  Boom, you're done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only extreme boy style I've seen is wearing pants hanging down sometimes as far as below their butt. The rest are pretty much aimed at females.

Ours is put simply as 'appropriate for court'. Males usually have to leave home: chains, wife-beaters, studded leather belts and dog collar necklaces and wristbands, nonreligious head coverings, anything with a graphic meant to intimidate or degrade another, pajama bottoms, handkerchiefs, gang regalia, gang related clothing (for ex. Overcoats, colors). The parents will object to underwear as outerwear, but that is also in the code....boxers must not be an outer layer.Also no costumes or hunting attire.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you say to a school that decided to give uniform pants to the girls, but not the boys?

 

I would say that they are sexist gits.

 

If I ran a school, the dress code would be "dress in a manner that allows you to fully participate in all school activities and that will not get you arrested on the way to school. Refrain from wearing clothing which expresses (through words or pictures) speech which would be a violation of our code of conduct if it came out of your mouth to another student or teacher/staff."

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you say to a school that decided to give uniform pants to the girls, but not the boys?

As a mom of two boys, I'd be upset. Why do the girls get something free? As a mom of a daughter, it's one less thing to buy for her. I don't think you can do it unless it is for everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a mom of two boys, I'd be upset. Why do the girls get something free? As a mom of a daughter, it's one less thing to buy for her. I don't think you can do it unless it is for everyone.

Sorry, wrong word choice. REQUIRE uniform pants for girls. They're not giving them to them. They're requiring that the girls purchase specific uniform pants, but the boys don't have to. These pants are, at best, double the cost of what I normally buy for my kids (boys or girls).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, wrong word choice. REQUIRE uniform pants for girls. They're not giving them to them. They're requiring that the girls purchase specific uniform pants, but the boys don't have to. These pants are, at best, double the cost of what I normally buy for my kids (boys or girls).

That doesn't fly with me either. Either everyone needs the same pants or no one does. They can recommend a specific style, brand, etc., but not require it only for the girls.

 

The uniform thing in and of itself wouldn't make me pull my child from this school, but it would make me wonder how else the boys and girls are being treated differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...