AIBU to challenge the school’s wording about pupils rolling skirts up?

I gave you a pp's example of a message to parents? Please reread.
Policed in the same way as any rule break. Warnings etc? Just you know be proportionate and leave out any vague to protect the uncomfy males crap.

it wasn’t at all a vague plea to protect uncomfy male crap in the newsletter

But upthread you said that you didn’t think the newsletter should have written “not a good idea” because it was a vague reference to men’s feelings.

It wasn’t at all. For most of us it is alluding to the fact that it isn’t a good idea to dress like this because there’s unfortunately a fair few creepy men about

'Considered feelings' was clearly a typo of consider? If you want to point out errors maybe reread your own posts first?

It was you referring to creepy men. I was answering you, not 'the school'.

For me it’s a matter of standards and hygiene (having seen the bare bum look with my very own (horrified) eyes.

But the hope that creeps won’t look is a vain one. Would you @Gloriia feel it doesn’t matter if a woman wears an underwear-revealing skirt whilst working in a prison? Not as an officer, but say a prison teacher ?

Considered feelings?

what about safety? The school will be alluding to safety not men’s feelings

Do I accept there are creepy men? Yes. Do I believe women and schoolgirls should have to considered creepy men's feelings? Nope.

I agree
I suspect from men

however I don’t disagree with the newsletters turn of phrase which you also have taken issue with

Yeah I need the rest of it tbh. I've scrolled back a few pages and I've said repeatedly I support a dress code just not the blatant misogynistic comments that we've seen throughout this awful schoolgirl shaming thread.

Do you accept that there are quite a few creepy men out there op who might be turn out or even behave dangerously towards a young teen where an obscene length skirt?

Does it matter as long as not high heels and a trip hazard?!

Did I? I'll have to trawl back and see in context. I've no objections to a basic colour scheme and blazers etc. Sorry thought I'd been clear..

The school didn’t indicate their motivation was about making men feel uncomfortably

if anything the strong inference was that there are a fair number of creepy weird men out there (there is!)

Last post you said as long as no high heels or tripping hazard you’d be fine with anything

Are you a teacher? I've said repeatedly that uniform policy should be basic. So blue or black for example, correct emblem obviously and skirts/trousers. That's it.

The obsession with the correct trouser style, the correct shoes/ socks etc is tedious and surely takes up teacher's time to police when we know some struggle with their actual teaching demands.

Underwear obviously should not be visible but girls should not be singled out when this is enforced. 'Underwear not visible' suffices surely.

Less of the 'it makes men uncomfortable' enabling crap. Anyone else who asks me what my uniform policy would be I'll c&p this .

@Gloriia confirmed anything aside from high heels and tripping hazards she thinks is reasonable for a uniform @ProBonoPublico

I can’t believe it didn’t occur to us sooner that @CricketIsASport is so obviously a man. A man with very serious issues with women

I think that we're all trying to establish exactly what you personally consider to be acceptable and unacceptable. In other words, if you have a daughter yourself (or, if not, imagine a hypothetical one) would you be happy if she rolled up her skirt so that her bum and/or underwear was visible?

Assuming you wouldn't be happy, what would you say to her to persuade her not to dress like that, and what standards would you set for her?

The skirts lengths can be obscene.

But the way @CricketIsASport has described these young teen girls would indicate a man who should be kept well away from women and girls

Who either joined mumsnet to just post 100x on this thread or user name changed so that we couldn’t see that a man

You have a disturbing way of describing these girls @CricketIsASport and I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re downright disturbing generally

@CricketIsASport is a man. Guaranteed.

But it is what you and some others <now deleted thankfully> think? If you have jobs, friends and family these views will be apparent to all. If you have kids you'll influence them with your sick slurs regarding schoolkids.

Now call me a 'contrarian' again if you like, I can take it but try to learn something form what I and others have tried to tell you. Neutral inoffensive language when it comes to schoolgirls is the way forward.

That doesn’t answer my question, @CricketIsASport. Would you be happy to hear one of your dds referred to as a whore, for a clothing choice she had made - even if she didn’t hear it?

Dont you understand that every misogynistic comment adds up to a cumulative effect of a misogynistic society where people feel free to call girls vile names. I wouldn't want to contribute to that, if I had daughters - and I certainly do not want it for my granddaughters.

Thing is we aren't calling them that to their face or in front of them. We are just describing them here and expressing our views and they don't know.

Whilst I agree the length of some of these girls is obscene… your language @CricketIsASport is something I’d expect from a man with a disturbing and indeed dangerous issue with women.

are you a man?

you appear to have joined mumsnet just to post on this thread, nearing a 100x now.

Or perhaps you didn’t wish to be associated with past posts confirming you are a man woth… issues

I suspect the choice of language is schools feeling the need to "dumb down" the language.