School policies that encourage girls to take responsibility for male behaviour

I'm assuming the doing thing is relevant in that getting one that fits around the waist its "too short"

Personally I hate uniform.. I'm.aware it's not a fashion.parade but it makes even the skin mist if girls look and feel like a sack of potatoes. Its difficult to concentrate with such I'll fitting close that you constantly have to adjust it deal with hanging off/flapping about.

School uniform never takes into account body shapes you are particularly screwed if you are gifted in the chest area.

A school should not be implying a girls clothing is distracting fir the boys and male teachers . If there are teachers you are worried about they need their 2 weeks notice

@PositiveVibez I read the 'slim DD' comment as implying that her DD still looks child-like in her clothes (so therefore less 'distracting' than a child who has already begun to develop a woman's body). I was also a very skinny teen and never pulled up on skirt length, unlike my more developed peers.

If anyone made a comment to my DD about dressing to avoid the gaze of male teachers I would complain to the school. If the male teachers can't be trusted not to ogle children, then they shouldn't be in a position of responsibility over them

MoleSmokes
The CSE is different though. No professional should ever suggest a child brought CSE upon themselves by their dress because that's disgusting, however a child who already displays more sexual behaviour (which can include dress associated with sexuality) is one factor that makes them more at risk of CSE and grooming. It's not the child that causes anything and it's not the child who is to blame, but that those people who seek to exploit children look for signs that may make it easier to groom. A child displaying sexuality beyond their years often goes hand in hand with feeling more mature and do is very vulnerable to the "cool older boyfriend" who has criminal intentions.
When we raise safeguarding concerns for some teens, their attire and behaviour form part of that.

The shorts thing is weird, shorts are practical, especially for camping, and what the teacher said was very odd. Skirt length is nothing new, we had the policy when I was at school, there is no advantage to your skirt being short. I don't see the issue personally, as has been said a lot of it is peer pressure rather than a real want to wear it short, if it's regulated and no one can then it takes that unwanted pressure off. It is more practical as well, and if a boy wore a short skirt I am sure they would get pulled up for their boxers showing.

Ive said this many times but in my childrens school dd was told off for wearing above knee skirts as it was against uniform rules

But when she moved to incredibly tight trousers (like very many boys) she was left alone (like the boys) even though tight trousers were against uniform rules

They were shit hot on socks though...weirdly

Once got into an email discussion about socks with a teacher...at the end of it she said ‘i hope we have your support’ and i said no

Knee length skirts = might as well have them wear burkhas (What?!!!)

That said, Jessica Eaton has some good articles that are relevant, eg.

"When rape myths are applied to children"

victimfocus.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/when-rape-myths-are-applied-to-children/

(Extract)

She dresses provocatively and shows too much skin

This one is the top of my list because ‘dresses provocatively’ and ‘sexualised dress’ are actual real risk indicators used by professionals all over the UK to ‘assess’ girls. I have talked and written about CSE risk toolkits not being fit for purpose, as have Brown et al. (2016;2017), but here we are most of the way through 2018 and they are still being used in almost every region of the UK. As part of the risk assessment process, professionals are asked to tick whether they feel the way the child dresses is a factor for why they are being, or may be raped. In the midst of constant arguments over girls’ school uniforms, showing their knees, collarbones and bra colours through their shirts, its pretty clear that female children are being sexualised by us as professionals. The rape myth that men rape women and girls because of what they are wearing has been fiercely fought by womens’ services, rape centres, charities and even Amnesty International (2005) – but it is being used to assess ‘risk’ of children being raped. Why?

"5 ways we are encouraged to blame women and girls for being raped and abused"

victimfocus.wordpress.com/category/sexualisation/

(Extract)

Blame her appearance

This one is how we know misogyny is still alive and kicking. No one cares what men and boys were wearing when they were raped or abused. Similarly, no one cares what the man was wearing when he raped someone. No one cares what the victims of literally any other crime were wearing.

Except women and girls who are subjected to sexual violence. Then, clothing becomes central for some reason.

Was she wearing a low cut top? Was she wearing a short skirt? A push up bra? Lace knickers? A bikini? A backless dress? High heeled shoes? Knee high boots?

Apparently this is all relevant in blaming women and girls for sexual violence committed against them.

This is most curious, because the majority of all sexual offences against women and girls are committed by partners, ex-partners and family members and are usually committed within a residence. Therefore, the chances are that most women and girls are wearing pyjamas, comfortable everyday clothing, school uniforms, work uniforms, jeans, leggings, hoodies, slippers, trainers, sports bras, trackies and tee shirts when they are raped, abused or assaulted.

However, this doesn’t stop professionals from using clothing against women and girls. Even children are being blamed for their clothing choices.

Last year I worked with a local authority where their social workers felt strongly that girls wearing cropped tee shirts and showing their midriff were bringing CSE upon themselves and that took some serious work to challenge those beliefs.

In 2014, I was given access to case records of children being sexually abused and one of them said of a 12 year old girl who was being raped, ‘She prances around the house wearing knee high boots trying to seduce her Dad’.

In 2016, I read a missing person notification about a 13 year old girl who was being trafficked around the country; written by a police officer.

It stated that she must want it, because she had packed a small bag containing a change of underwear, a clean bra and make up.

Further, in many CSE risk toolkits used in local authorities and police forces all over the UK, there are items that ask what the child is wearing which include:

- Sexualised dress
- Wearing make up
- Revealing clothing

This means that the common rape myth of ‘only girls and women who wear short skirts get raped’ has actually filtered right down into social work and police assessments, not only of women but of children who can’t even consent to sex.

Does it really matter if the 12 year old is wearing a crop top and shorts at the time she is raped? Really? Isn’t she a victim of serious crime anyway?

And to that end, even adult women should not be scrutinised on their clothing at the time of rape, abuse or assault. Why would her wearing a backless dress change the offence that was committed against her?

Unless of course we are claiming that the bodies and clothing of the woman are causing the offences. Which we are. Which is why this is still happening.

Interestingly, the appearance of the woman or girl can also influence a police investigation and a trial. In my PhD thesis, I wrote about research that has shown that body type and body shape of women and girls can change the outcome of sexual violence trials. For example, if the woman or girl is perceived to be overweight or unattractive, they are more likely for their case to be dropped or to be found not guilty in a court of law. Researchers argue that this is because there is still an assumption that ‘fat’ or ‘unattractive’ women and girls don’t get raped or abused because the offence is about sexual desire.

However, that doesn’t mean that other women and girls are going to get an easier time in court. Oh no.

Research has also found that if the woman or girl is slim and perceived to be very attractive, she also has a high chance of her case being dropped or found not guilty in court. This is because there is still a perception that the attractive woman or girl must have either wanted it, or led the offender on with their appearance, because he can’t help it.

Blaming the appearance of women and girls for sexual violence committed against them is related to sexual objectification.

Objectification and sexualisation of women and girls as constant walking sex objects for men and boys to use and abuse will encourage victim blaming. When we look at girls and women like this in our society, we will still see them as sex objects even when they are raped and abused. In fact, we are not likely to see certain sexual offences as ‘real rapes’ or ‘real assaults’ at all because we will be socialised to believe that women enjoy them or want them to happen. Therefore, our thinking about sexual violence becomes about the sexuality and sexual allure of the woman or girl – rather than thinking about sexual violence as a deliberate act of violence and oppression.

I’ve written about research that has shown that when we objectify women and girls, we also dementalise them. This means that we assume they have no thoughts and feelings of their own, as they are an object to crave and use, not an equal human being. Therefore, objectification will also result in an assumption that sexual violence against women isn’t that serious and women are exaggerating or lying about it.

molto It's similar in my area too.

There's no need for anyone to have their underwear on show or outlines of their bum/genitals. I don't care if they're a boy or a girl.

The issue regarding male staff isn't that male staff are perverts, it's that it's not uncommon for a male member of staff to tell a student her skirt is too short and then she claims he's perving etc. Even if she doesn't mean it and isn't seriously making that claim, it's known that it can get a reaction and make him feel uncomfortable. In contrast, I've never had a male student do anything like that when I've challenged them for the super skinny jeans/chinos or told them. I've also never had a female student try to make me feel uncomfortable for challenging their uniform.

I've been on school trips where we've had to tell female students that we don't want to see their bum cheeks because their shorts were the ones that were cut to show bum (I hated buying shirts that year because half the arse was missing). We've had to tell male students it's not appropriate to have their jeans half way down their boxers too.
It's school. Pretending that teens don't dress in a way reflecting commonly pushed ideals of sexuality would be naïve and there's no reason for us to accept it in schools.

If there are any male teachers in the school who are sexually attracted to 13 year olds and find themselves ‘tempted’ to assault one because of the length of her shorts then you ABSOLUTELY need to report this to the school.

None of the teachers should be paedophiles. Obviously. And the message is very clear that some may be.

My very slim DD wears a skirt that is technically in breech of uniform rules (bit on short side) but NEVER gets challenged. Her friends often do get challenged

I don't get what you are implying here. Is it that you think because your daughter is slim, she looks good in her short skirt, so doesn't get challenged, but her friends do because they aren't slim???

As long as the camping shorts aren’t daisy dukes or otherwise showing bum cheeks, that’s unreasonable. However I’m with them on the skirts. Round here the secondaries have all moved to single supplier logoed skirts (and trousers too, to be fair) and one of the reasons was the completely inappropriate ways in which students (mainly girls) were dressing - I don’t want to see camel toes at the bus stop and some of the skirts were far too short and tight. It’s a world away from wearing a cord mini with thick tights in an adult workplace.

Yes, people should be free, to a degree to wear what they want, especially women, but it’s wrong to accept teenage girls wearing such clothing knowing that it makes them objects of sexual catcalls etc from others.

If you start from first principles, schools do need some uniform policy, whether it just rules out certain clothes or is very prescriptive. It is the same in nearly all offices.

You then get to the difference between the sexes. Personally I think skirts are entirely unnecessary and a choice of long or short trousers would remove the issue entirely. However, some on here would insist that girls need a skirt option.

Once you have a skirt, though, you need to have some rules around it. The idea of measuring skirts is distasteful but, equally, turning a skirt into a belt would be thought as inappropriate by most.

The ‘distracting’ to other pupils argument appears sexist but we do wear clothes for a reason and it is not just warmth. Not sure many would argue for going to work in underwear only, even on a warm day...

Well, here I would like to observe that my DD’s school sends the boys home for ‘skinny’ trousers but seems to let the girls wear skirts which are basically bum warmers (along with thick black tights).

Not sure what conclusion to draw there but I will also note that I must be very unprofessional as I regularly wear skirts and dresses above the knee as I do not like the feeling of material flapping around my legs. Fortunately no-one has sent me home yet.

They send girls home from primary school for wearing warm weather clothing in scorching hot weather if their shoulders show but the boys can wear their tank tops and droopy drawers with their under drawers on display 12 months out of the year.

Saying something like this to a student about a teacher is weird, weird enough that if my kid said it had happened, I might wonder if someone had been telling her fibs or that she'd misunderstood. However, anything is possible.

I don't really accept the premise though that somehow people aren't supposed to consider the impact of their behaviour on others. We don't go around living our lives in a way that is somehow isolated from others, and the things we do affect the feel and functioning of the community around us.

There are a number of things I expect young men in a school to do in order to make the environment comfortable and respectful for the young women (and I suppose the teachers as well but that is less important in some ways.) I also would say the same thing about the young women. It is an unfortunate fact that fashion and trends sexualise women's clothing but not usually men's, and if students in a school are taking the Kardashians or whatever for their models it will tend to create an environment that sexualises women in general and all the women in the school specifically, which isn't particularly nice for anyone, or good for young people developing their sense of what it means to be an adult.

As for the particular rules, putting together a good dress code seems fairly fraught, and sometimes they go wrong. But it's the nature of them that they are going to be a broad brush approach.

1st rule of misogyny, women and girls are responsible for everything that men say and do
I would tell the female teacher to fuck off, also to tell her male colleagues that they must realise that not every female is available for them to fuck.
Women and girls are not on this earth to be wank fodder for unscrupulous men.

I don't want to see someone's underwear when walking up stairs behind them. That is true for boys and girls. The rule should be knee length skirts and shorts but the reason why is it often specified skirts is because girls' are often very tight and short whereas that doesn't seen to be an issue with boys. But if I saw a boy in hot pants type shorts, that would be a problem.

I do wish our local school would require the girls to wear longer skirts - you can sometimes see the bum cheeks and crotch of their tights beneath their skirts. I don’t think the girls are freely choosing to dress like this; it is peer pressure from both girls and boys. I know practicality never features particularly high on the clothing choices of teens but these belts skirts must be cold and far from practical too.

Well the key is that expectations should be similar for both sexes. Or that there should in fact simply be a single dress code that can be chosen from e.g. trousers or knee length skirt and shirt.

it's very uncomfortable for some male teachers when dealing with girls who are wearing revealing clothes
I disagree. I've heard male teachers claim "I didn't know where to look"; actually, I think they know precisely where they should/shouldn't have been looking.
Gosh, the poor men, with those horrible little girls making accusations all the time.

(Are you lost?)
Unfortunately there is more truth is this statement. There are some children - male and female - who have learned that they can distract from their own behaviour by making malicious complaints. Luckily these complaints are usually not very well thought out, and are easily disproved. Every school I've worked in has had a few children who had "Never be alone with this student" on their record (although "never be alone with any student" is a better policy).

There is certainly some truth in this though - it's very uncomfortable for some male teachers when dealing with girls who are wearing revealing clothes. Not because of the risk of doing something inappropriate, but because accusations can happen so easily, and even accusations of looking at a girl wrong can be taken very seriously, when there is nothing in it.

Wuh?!

We live in a sexualised culture and skirt length has become associated with that. The whole culture is fucked.

children leading men on eh?

my my my

Surely burkas and chastity belts are the answer to all these pervy male teachers who can't stop lecthing at kids.

Gosh, the poor men, with those horrible little girls making accusations all the time.

(Are you lost?)