Sexism and school Uniform.

If schools had any interest whatsoever in putting together a uniform designed for practicality and activity, they'd have all children/teens, regardless of gender, in combats and school logo t-shirts.

DD's school is trying to trial kilts for girls as of next year, although we are miles away from Scotland. I know that boys' uniforms are policed, but the level of detail that girls are subjected to annoys me. Boys will not have to wear kilts at DD's school next year, like they do not have the length and cut of their trousers scrutinised. Some of the older boys a couple of years ago were wearing skinny-fit trousers and little was said.

They are talking about legging style trousers, you cant wear leggings at school and you cant wear trousers so tight they are in effect leggings...simple. Its not just that the trousers are a little tight so you cant wear them as some posters are suggesting....... basically a simple issue that has been conflagurated due to the usual crowd wanting to make it an issue of sexism which it isn't.

I don't see the issue at all with 'too tight' trousers. I really don't. I don't like short skirts for school because the miniskirt has a specific image of liberal sexualisation which it's had from it's first appearance.

but trousers? who cares - university students around here wear leggings as do children under 10 and my guides wear them for activities (and i wear them for running and the gym) and so long as they're not see through they don't look inappropriately sexual, so i don't see how any other kind of trousers can be too tight.

Following up FloatyBeatie's posting (but being less tactful) there have been threads on other sections in MN about schools which have declared that the uniform for girls is to be trousers, never skirts, because the girls (some fraction, at least) insist on wearing the skirt as short and high as possible, rolling up the waistband if they have to. It might be bearable if they were just looking like slobs, but it's too much sexualization for the schools to endure.

Imagine if the girls were being told to wear very short skirts as part of their uniform! The discussion here would probably take a negative tone. But if it's what the girls themselves want to do even if they're told not to (especially if they're told not to, most likely) then what's the feminist response?

It used to be so much better.
2.bp.blogspot.com/-McWJlQqPUv0/UCU1L50t29I/AAAAAAAAA8M/15KIxmSXYII/s640/Prudence.jpg

Star, do you mean styles like "wide leg", "tapered"?

I'm perhaps playing devil's advocate here, I'm not sure, but when girls' clothing is inappropriately sexualised in the shops, in advertising for clothing, in messages from the media, etc. and schoolgirls are following exactly the clothing pressures that we aim to reduce by things like the Let Girls be Girls campaign and all that, isn't there some proper rule for the school in saying No when girls show up in an environment dedicated to learning and developing their whole selves wearing clothing that is a result of pressures railroading them in to a certain image of themselves and their bodies?

Boys dress isn't subjected to the same level of sexualising pressure, so there is less of a role for the school to play towards them.

Obv I'm sure there are plenty of examples of the school getting it wrong and penalising clothing wronly, but I do like the idea of schools being a bit of a thin red line against some clothing pressures that girls are socialised into responding to.

Too tight trousers does seem quite a subjective thing - at least with skirts you could say "on the knee" or whatever.

The girls at DS2's school can turn up with their shirt untucked, no tie on and their top buttons undone, all of which are punishable for boys. Neither sex are allowed to wear tight trousers and the girls are meant to wear knee length skirts, but most of them don't.

I would say every male in the school should stop looking at schoolgirls crotches, and then they won't notice how tight the trousers or shirt the skirts are.