Gender neutral school uniform = Trousers

Actually we rolled our skirts to make it easier to run. No surprise males think they are the main character in every girls life story and the motivation for everything we do.

"I will take your rather obviously cast fly. "

WTF does this mean? I was asking you because I hoped you didn't mean that girls shouldn't wear skirts because their sexy legs will distract the boys.

And oh look that's exactly what you meant.

My DD starts secondary school in September, she's 10. If she goes out in a skirt, it's appalling to me that men like you will "read" this as her being "deliberately sexy".

The solution to MEN adn BOYS sexualising SCHOOLCHILDREN is not to force girls to cover up for fuck's sake.

What a revolting post.

"takes ages to dry after school"

swimming! not school.

Sardines,

I will take your rather obviously cast fly.

It means not showing off one's body in a deliberately sexual or in any-other-way distracting way. Why do you think girls roll their skirts up? Clearly a lot of this is peer pressure (as it even happens at girls' schools). However, it started somewhere and that somewhere was girls wanting to show their upper legs off to (mainly) boys.

Same if a boy came in ridiculously tight trousers showing off his bulge, or a string vest. He is clearly giving out a signal. It is not appropriate for any working environment and the reason is pretty clear to anyone not viewing it through a very narrow angled lens.

Clothes are designed to send out messages. Clothing companies spend a lot of money selling the clothes, along with the messages. If you see any bunch of young people choosing clothes for a night out, it is clear they are not 'just clothes'.

Hair can be a problem with girls dying it, wearing complex styles, it's often distracting for the boys and men with it's lovely swishy gorgeousness, the girls are always wearing expensive bows and stuff in it and then they lose them or are fiddling with them, takes ages to dry after school + it's harder to treat for lice.

Proposal. School hair rules >> styles should be short and natural colour. No shorter than grade 3, no longer than below the collar. 98% of our boys wear their hair this way and it does not invite the same kind of attention that girls hairstyles do. Also, some girls do choose to wear their hair short, and with boys and girls both, there are practical reasons. The suspicion is that girls have their hair long to compete for boys attention and that's another problem.

So. short hair all round. Makes perfect sense.

Skirts just are not ideal for either sex in many ways

A man's opinions on the ideality of trousers v skirts for women is irrelevant. Unless you've been a teenage girl coping with heavy periods in school you simply don't have a clue.

Same here sardines

Blazers are worn at our school

Unisex...so cut for a boy

Having said that dds blazer had to be big to allow for her boobs so she wore the same one for 5 years...saved me shedloads

I am fucked off to the fucking nuts with male = default.

To the nuts I tell you.

What does "non distracting" mean in your post, Larry?

It sounds really sensible to me.

School is a learning environment and, at least until 6th form, there are many many reasons to have a uniform (the clue is in the name). This should be non distracting and not allow people to ostentatiously display wealth (or for those without it to be shown up embarrassingly).

Skirts just are not ideal for either sex in many ways and teachers don't want to spend their time enforcing stupid skirt length rules. Trousers are a unisex garment and have been for many years. The phrase 'I was wearing trousers' would give nothing away about the sex of the speaker, proving this.

Think of the girls schools example as a sort of control group - what do they choose when they're not particularly subject to the negative influences you assumed? Answer - a mix but more skirts than trousers. Some would vary according to the weather.

So if that's the situation when they're fairly unconstrained, what is the justification for not allowing the same choice to all? Penalising all girls because some might choose for reasons we don't approve of?

Idea of removing girls option to wear skirts as they will be more modest / can't roll them up / less option for upskirting etc is the exact idea behind "modest" religious attire for women of various degrees of coverage.

This idea that girls bodies are inherently problematic so they need covering.

When a boy goes to school in shorts or trousers that he's grown out of a bit, no-one thinks ooh look at him showing his legs off, look at the bum on that, he's asking for sexual attention from older men with that gear on etc etc

For a girl, I say all the time on these threads, it's not about the clothes not at all, it's about teh body underneath. It's about our bodies as they change at puberty becomming sexual objects, our parts becoming separate entities apart from ourselves "the legs on that", the same pair of trousers fitting at the waist will be fine on a boy or a slender girl but woe betide the girl with a bit of a curvy bum, with more womanly hips, all of a sudden it's sexy, obscene, showy, eye-catching, and what can she do? So many posts on here with girls getting in trouble for wearing the correct uniform because of how their bodies underneath make it appear to a society that sexually objectifies girls from puberty up. For a short curvy girl what's she going to do? Trousers are often a worst choice, making them feel exposed, uncomfotable, all at once too long and too tight. Short are great for all. Really? How many short and generous women choose to wear shorts? Not many. Because they don't fit, they look shit, and they feel very exposing.

I am really angry about these choices being removed. It's one step forward and 2 back. We have just got to a point where most schools probably allow girls to wear trousers - which was a FIGHT - and now we get the other choice taken away?

Gender neutral = here's the uniform, trousers, skirt, short, anyone can choose what they like out of it.

So angry.

No worries happy

Though dds are TIGHT

Having said that so are most of the boys in her year as well

@Rufustheyawningreindeer Yes sorry, you're right about that. I should have explained better I really was meaning that the pants should be closest to the loose male ones rather than the fitting female ones. So will be comfy no matter your shape.

When you typed 'male trousers' i read it as male trousers not loose trousers if you see what i mean

And trousers made and designed for males are not comfortable for most females

Loose trousers designed for females are probably lovely

@ErrolTheDragon All girls school obviously have no female competition to gain male attention, so I don't see your point there.
Also, I'm sorry but I don't think girls are having choice nowadays when all girls in television are wearing skirts and dresses and portrayed as sexy. My friend told me the other day her daughter of 4 years old didn't wanted to wear leggins to go to the park because she was going to "look like a boy"

@Rufustheyawningreindeer By male shorts or trousers I mean loose one (not the fitting females), so I don't see why do you think they're not comfy for girls, I don't understand. It's not like we have one leg.

That doesn't chime with my observations.

My DD went to an all girls school which had a choice of trousers or skirts. More did choose skirts than not, but a sizeable minority chose trousers. It wasn't to do with peer pressure, it wasn't to do with looking boyish or being attractive to boys. It was their choice. They were perfectly able to be active (and of course had PE kit for sports).

I wear jeans virtually all the time

male trousers or shorts? are dreadfully uncomfortable on most women

Not all obviously

First of all, apologies for my really bad English, it's not my native language.

I've been reading posts for months, and I've just created an username just to comment on this because the opinions here got into my nerves so much, and make me question if this is really a feminist chat.

I was really happy to see this news. Finally kids of 11 years old can play, jump, fall, fight and sit with legs open (still my mother says I can't sit with open legs as I am a lady, you see).

I went to secondary school in Spain, a public one, so not uniform but there was a ban in skirts. However every girl was happy about this, none of them ever complain as it was cool because we could rest from the competition of who was wearing the shortest skirt (still having it outside, of course)

I'm really tired of hearing people saying a girl (I'm referring to kids now, not the grown ups) shouldn't be told what to wear. So I want to ask you: what do you think society is doing? Why do you think in schools where girls can choose between skirts or trousers they still wear skirts? None of them want to be the one outstanding or be told she look like a boy or loose the possibility to be liked by the boy she likes. So do you think these girls at a very early age are choosing uncomfortable dressing that doesn't allow them to play like the children they are, because they like it?

If we continue to go with the separated uniform telling that girls should wear restrictive clothes because they're girls, we're making a really awful point here.

To the women saying skirts are more comfy, have you ever tried male trousers or shorts? They're heaven, not like the female options that seems they've made to torture us. So if the uniforms are going to be like that, at least our girls are going to be comfortable at least half the day.

To make things clears, I don't hate skirts or dresses and I wear them sometimes.

Also looking at small girls in winter with blue legs makes me really sad. Don't you?

Like others, I'm so utterly fucked off that choices are being taken away from young women in the name of trans rights.

Girls and women who have heavy periods and/or can't use tampons, or those prone to thrush etc do not find trousers and shorts 'practical'. It's been said many times over the years on threads like this. There's nothing feminist about restricting women and girls from wearing clothes that make their lives easier.

It's got nothing to do with 'hating' skirts . I don't hate skirts any more than trousers.

For me it's got little to do with 'men thinking young girls' legs are indecent' either.

It's simply that it seems fairer and less complicated (particularly with the minefield of blurred gender lines) for all pupils to have the same options - trousers or shorts (neither of which are specifically boys' garments, both of which are practical, neither of which get rolled up, neither of which risk flashing underwear).

But even if you hate skirts, some women and girls don't, so let them have the choice.

Everyone should be able to choose attire that they feel comfortable and confident in.

Oh yeah because men think a young girls legs are indecent, because they would rather blame girls attire on why they're harassed by boys then deal with the boys doing the harassing

That and some feminists who seem to hate skirts and dresses so much that they will piggy back along with it.