Subject: Females a Distraction in School?
Posted by: 13LuckyLady
Date: Oct 02 15
There is an on-going issue within schools. Female students are being declared a distraction and their attire is a subject of criticism.
Based upon what is available in stores for teens, unless you opt for making your own clothes, options are few.
Shorts and spaghetti straps...since when did school become about attire and not learning? Too many excuses already exist. What about droopy drawers?
Should we have to cover from head to toe in our own home countries? I won't do it (spontaneous human combustion) as I am a free person.
What is a girl to do?
(people, your opinions are important...please help make the thread a productive one rather than a destructive one)
Posted by: 13LuckyLady
Date: Oct 02 15
There is an on-going issue within schools. Female students are being declared a distraction and their attire is a subject of criticism.
Based upon what is available in stores for teens, unless you opt for making your own clothes, options are few.
Shorts and spaghetti straps...since when did school become about attire and not learning? Too many excuses already exist. What about droopy drawers?
Should we have to cover from head to toe in our own home countries? I won't do it (spontaneous human combustion) as I am a free person.
What is a girl to do?
(people, your opinions are important...please help make the thread a productive one rather than a destructive one)
68 replies. On page 1 of 4 pages. 1 2 3 4
postcards2go 
|
Schools should teach respect while they're teaching ABCs. All those little boys are going to grow up and have to learn to respond appropriately to women in the work place. If a school is really concerned, they can institute a uniform for both girls and boys... say, a polo shirt and long pants. Back in the day, I was taught by some young teachers... many of whom wore miniskirts... many of whom wore tight flowered shirts, and sexy beards. Captivating!! It's *normal* for girls and boys of a certain age to ogle others ;-D Reply #1. Oct 02 15, 9:46 AM |
jabb5076
|
As a high school teacher who retired just a few years ago, I have never heard female attire called a distraction. Both public and private schools in this country pretty much universally have dress codes that lay out in detail what clothes are acceptable attire. Of course,there are always those ready and willing to flaunt the rules, and how rigorously those rules are enforced varies from district to district and even from different schools in the same system. With that said, I have to wonder who singles out girls when you can walk down the hallways of virtually any non-uniform public HS and see plenty of boys with their pants halfway down their backsides so all and sundry can see who makes their underwear. Reply #2. Oct 02 15, 10:18 AM |
nasty_liar
|
Here in the UK it is pretty standard that boys wear trousers and girls wear skirts or trousers but personally I don't see why the distinction. In this modern day why is the uniform not simply shirt and trousers for all. Remembering back to school, as a boy, once I hit puberty then girls were most definitely a distraction but not one I would ever have complained about. Reply #3. Oct 02 15, 10:41 AM |
lesley153
|
Another vote for uniform. Children will always ogle each other, and girls will always roll their waistband over to make their skirts shorter, but surely we can stop classes becoming fashion competitions? I like Postie's idea of a polo shirt and trousers or a skirt. It doesn't have to be £120 blazers and £10 embroidered badges and £35.00 reversible rugby shirts from the school shop. It doesn't have to be boys getting chilblains on their knees because they're not allowed to go into long trousers till the second form = year 8. The whole time I was at school, make-up wasn't allowed, although mascara and colourless nail varnish often slipped through unnoticed. Now, teenage girls say they're bullied if they don't wear make-up. Are staff scared to say no to children? Reply #4. Oct 02 15, 10:48 AM |
13LuckyLady
|
What is missing is 'The Look'! While in school, the girls who made up in the restroom were given The Look and told to remove the makeup. If you wore pants to school under your dress, you were given The Look and told to go to the restroom and remove them before class. Boys with shirts untucked were given The Look and told to 'tuck it in'. This was also the time when 'Your Permanent Record' appeared and your parents were advised of your mistake in judgment. I do not remember being distracted by boys as I was expected to earn an A in every subject. Things have changed. Reply #5. Oct 02 15, 11:08 AM |
Blackdresss
|
Miss Lady, are you speaking strictly about high school? Junior high? Grade school? I want to be clear before I post too much, and you did mention teens. Hormone-filled and fueled teens. It kind of matters. Reply #6. Oct 02 15, 9:39 PM |
MarchHare007
|
Self respect and respect for a certain code of dress and behaviour needs more support from parents and Other responsible adults - who seem to believe parents should be responsible for 'their children' and then remove any 'right' to discipline appropriately, so they promptly give in to their darling's tantrums. Here In Oz, uniforms are not mandatory in state/public schools at All levels but are expected. Independent and Private schools provide uniform outlets at an inappropriate costing, pre-loved but well maintained items are usually available at an acceptable price. There are battles, but on the whole, the uniform code is upheld. Having set uniforms can be costly but not nearly as costly as keeping up with the rest of Year 10! Girls are a distraction? Quelle horreur! Reply #7. Oct 03 15, 12:21 AM |
| Blackdresss
|
Okay. I'm ready to post, but I probably don't have time. So, I'll come back. Reply #8. Oct 03 15, 2:46 AM |
ElusiveDream
|
When my mum was at school, she got sent home for wearing the wrong colour socks. Unless told otherwise, I always went to school in proper uniform: pants and a jumper if it was cold and a dress if it was hot. Sometimes we'd have a "Casual Clothes" day, but it didn't happen very often. Reply #9. Oct 07 15, 10:38 PM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
High School is where the issue is currently under discussion. Female students are also indicating what they 'do not wish to see'. For example, the pants of male students which hang below their underwear. There are times I wonder if the guys understand what they are conveying with those 'droopy drawers'. The rest of the time, I just give up. The only thing involving males and females I found to be distracting, after some thought, was the behavior displayed after sex education class. Immature was the only way to describe it. Listening to students, I rarely hear one complain they are distracted by what the opposite sex is wearing. Their main complaint seems to be there aren't enough hours in the day to do everything they need! I know their pain! Reply #10. Oct 08 15, 8:44 AM |
MiraJane
|
Why is it always the females that get blamed for distracting males? It goes as far as women being forced to wear burqas. Are males of all ages incapable of behaving in a civilized manner? Why don't the males take some responsibility for their immaturity? Yes, I know that 12yrs of age, maybe a bit younger sometimes, until early 20s it's nothing but ragin hormones ruling the brain and body. But guess what, teen yrs are when people learn how to behave in a more adult manner. This topic was brought up in some other thread, I don't remember which one. One poster wrote that if girls and women wear tight skimpy clothing and get harassed or attacked, well then what should they expect, dressing like that? (the obligatory "not to blame the victim ..." statement was also included in the post.). Well it is blaming the victim for the inexcusable behavior of someone else. Having school uniforms for public and private schools does remove the distractions of this discussion and, hopefully, allows the adults in charge to discuss other matters such as educating school children. My local school district has uniforms of a kind. It has rules of acceptable clothing, things like navy blue or white shirts without writing, choices of pant colors - black, beige (khaki), navy blue. Navy blue skirts to top of knee cap. There's more but they aren't uniforms that have to be bought but common clothes that can purchased anywhere. The dress code goes only from grades 6-12 but will be implemented in the lower grades as years go by. No one, even the kids, complained of the dress code when it started. Reply #11. Oct 08 15, 11:26 AM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
Here's the latest from one high school. The students intend to protest. "Students are not allowed to wear items of clothing that reveal backs, bellies, breasts, butts, or underwear. Boys are not permitted to wear tank tops of any kind. Students are not allowed to wear trench coats of any style. The following are examples of inappropriate dress (but are not limited to): shorts/skirts that are shorter than mid-thigh length; spaghetti strap shirts; sheer clothing; camisoles; any shirt that reveals cleavage; midriffs, etc." Does the list seem rather biased? I get the trench coats. However, I do not know what etc. means in this particular situation. Reply #12. Oct 10 15, 1:45 AM |
| MiraJane
|
The trench coat thing seems a. It ridiculous. My raincoat is a trench coat style. Many raincoats are. Banning them wont help anything. Reply #13. Oct 10 15, 2:00 AM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
Hi, MiraJane...trench coats are banned due to Columbine. Reply #14. Oct 10 15, 2:11 AM |
namrewsna
|
I am torn. Of course I go back to my high school experience as a first line of thought. We had no uniforms just a common decency dress code (more on the "does this list seem biased?" question in a moment) and we did fine, but I am not going to play the "back inmyday" old man and stubbirnly say "It worked then...why not now?" and call it settled. I agree there is a lot of responsibility that needs to fall on the users/their parents which isn't. "Girls are too distracting", sounds like a copout for male students not applying themselves enough. I know that is easy to say looking back vs. being 15-18 years and in the thick of it, and again I acknowledge, just seeing the way kids dress on the bus stop (and they are junior high kids, so I naturally assume the pushing the limit game gets even racier a few years later) that the game is a bit different today. Still, I had a chemistry class once where about half of the class was comprised of the cheerleading squad, frequently in uniform. I can say I was a hell of a lot more interested in them than I was in Ernest Rutherford and his gold foil...however, by some miracle I managed to not try and mount any of them on the work bench and pass the class with an A AND get enough of a solid foundation to pass a college credit (AP) course two years later as a High School senior. "Well thats different you were smart." Why thank you kind critic, I tried *blush* The argument doesnt hold up because the jocks and less nerdy males also managed to pass. further I would add on, speaking for at least myself but I assume most of the other boys there...I would have been more or less just as distracted if those girls had instead been adorned in the aforementioned burqas (maybe even moreso in some ways from the whole, "forbidden fruit is more enticing" thing. I'd seen pictures, I knew what lay beneath. Its not like I was a sedate robot as long as they had on a turtleneck but if I caught site of an accidentally exposed strip of undergarment or tender body part I would have instantly morphed into a sex crazed lunatic). It is just part of the turf for boys-men and you learned quickly to absorb it into your routine and function around it. Mandated uniforms feels like dodging the issue to me....So even if effective it seems like it is setting them up for possible greater troubles later. That is tricky though because if your education suffers in the interim you can't get that back so maybe it isn't a bad idea. Sorry for the world class waffling just trying to throw out some food for thought. As for the biased list, I acknowledge a major double standard exists here and that it must be beyond frustrating for the females who are on the bad end of that exchange. But there are some legitimate practical drivers in play there as well. Anatomically speaking, females have more visually enticing points of interest to distract one from school....so regulations get more complex. Socially speaking, girls are also generally far more diverse in attire which increases the need for more fine points of regulation. Reply #15. Oct 10 15, 7:59 AM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
"females have more visually enticing points of interest"... I cannot recount the number of times I've had to remind 'people' that my eyes are in my face and not on my chest. That kind of interest...no, thanks! I find males have more visually enticing points of interest. For example, I love beards but cannot have one of my own. ENVY! The cut of a set of guns (well-built arms) just gives me a shiver. The days of tight jeans are over....sad. Now we get to view underwear. How exciting....gag! Each gender can state they are distracted. However, it seems it's the girls who are always being told their attire isn't acceptable. Their interesting aspects are lauded yet considered to be a detriment. I suspect there is more to this 'distraction'. It seems to be more of a desire by some to keep females in they term is their place. Reply #16. Oct 10 15, 9:10 AM |
| namrewsna
|
Fair enough, how about..more traditionally prohibited points of interest. If the rest goes away the boys would focus on hair and smiles as the primary targets instead. Which is why I see this as a band-aid measure. The focus needs to be on the behavior of those letting themselves be distracted...not their eye candy. And I agree the double standard is unfair again here to the young ladies. Don't be a show all floozy, but...tell the guys the only solution is to throw on those burqas and watch all hell break loose. It is a narrow and winding path to walk. (And for once the double standard works in your favor. If I freak out because I catch you ogling my beard..I am the one who 99 out of 100 eyewitnesses says needs help) Reply #17. Oct 10 15, 9:21 AM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
You have a beard? Lucky! (as I age, I am discovering more random hairs appearing...told husband the other day that I intend to braid them together for warmth) - thank goodness he gets my sense of humor. Reply #18. Oct 10 15, 9:31 AM |
| 13LuckyLady
|
I'm also dying each hair a different color. Reply #19. Oct 10 15, 9:42 AM |
pawesome
|
This has become absolutely ridiculous. When I was in high school, we were not only prohibited from wearing spaghetti straps, but also any sleeveless shirts. I was actually sent home one day for wearing a sleeveless turtleneck! And, girls were sent to the office constantly to have the inseam of their shorts measured. I actually struggled to find shorts, because all of the shorts in the junior's section were too short. Oddly enough, I don't ever remember anyone being sent home for clothes that were too tight or too low-cut, which one would think would be a bigger distraction. I agree that there should be a dress code policy to prevent indecency, but it should be reasonable. There is nothing offensive about shorts and sleeveless shirts. Are female arms really that sexy?! If the boys are distracted and it affects their grades, that is their problem to work on. It's like blaming a woman for being raped because she was wearing provocative clothing. In the words of Trent Reznor, "Have some personal accountability." Reply #20. Oct 10 15, 11:45 AM |
68 replies. On page 1 of 4 pages. 1 2 3 4
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: