School brings in trousers only rule for all pupils - schoolgirls said to be in tears ...

That campaigning happens when females wanted to express themselves wearing pants as additional option, not as a single option. That is what is being said her is it is just as wrong to force girls to wear pants today when same happen in forcing girls to wear dresses or skirts. The issue here remains the same, not different. Dilemma is that same, just not the same article of clothing, and this is known as the true equal rights.
If this dilemma was forcing boys to wear skirts without any other option, would you still see nothing is wrong with that?
Forcing girls to wearing pants does -0- in making boys equal to them. True equality would have happened they allow boys the option in wearing skirts. If boys were force in wearing skirts, he would be understanding about his knickers are showing and learn from that experience to show more respect to his females classmates.
Unfortunately, no boy wore a skirt with the girls in a miss opportunity to be able have more choices to express themselves especially since weather is unpredictable. Just look at weather forecaster and their forecast was wrong.

I use government statics showing in 2025 their where about equal deaths related to heat in England. Then there is this fact is a person wearing a dress will be cooler than wearing pants or skirt in a heatwave. Fact is wearing trousers (pants) will cause body temperature to rise regardless of you are male or female. By that reason I agree it is wrong for school to force females to wear pants.

This sounds like something Victorian men would say:

Ladies bodies are different so they can't ride a bicycle/horse due to their different (defective) anatomy. They have to ride saddle or they will faint.

Poor girls with their defective bodies that cannot cope with trousers!

Get a grip - women in the army, police, NHS, farming & many more have been wearing & working in trousers for decades without fainting.

Yet again, that sounds like dressing children in costumes that in no way resemble what adult professional or business people wear day-to-day in the 2020s, so they look marked out as not being on their way to maturity.

In some very challenged areas around here, the little ones in primary have their sweatshirts and polo shirts for heavy washing and rolling around in, but year 5 and 6 have ties and blazers (lots of help for families in sourcing and affording them including in-school swap shops) and a thing is made about the expectation of looking smart and respecting themselves/the school and their education. It makes a difference. All the kids look the same, but their self esteem and self image is also different seeing themselves smartly dressed, in a way they never would if wearing what they usually would. It's giving them more choices and opportunities, experiences they'll take into jobs with them. I've seen the difference it's made over the last few years and I'd hate to see that lost.

I had chronic UTI from around 13 onwards which I put down to school toilet policies. After a few doses of antibiotics, I was on a thrush/UTI rollercoaster which multiple GP visits couldn't resolve. I learnt how next to manage it and I couldn't wear jeans or trousers and once old enough couldn't drink alcohol either.
I eventually fixed it in my mid 20's but not being able to wear a skirt would have really impacted me.

Most local primary schools round here (Ireland, non urban) have gone over to a tracksuit with badge and polo shirt uniform, same for both sexes. Washable, reasonably good quality, practical. Summer term ends at the end of June.

Agree. Although boys do get endless stick for uniform infringements, too. The pettiest stuff. And no shorts in summer, no matter how hot.

I taught at a socially-diverse primary school without uniform. The pluses were that uniform issues were never mentioned and there didn’t seem to be the same problem with lost clothing, because all clothes were instantly recognisable by their owner.

But the negatives were that it was immediately and visibly apparent which parents had more money than others, even at a very young age. One girl (who was in receipt of FSM) wore exactly the same ancient grey-white teeshirt and thin leggings all year round 😕. I think she had a fleece for playtime in the winter. Other girls wore an endless parade of beautiful Boden and Vertbaudet skirts, dresses and tops. It was an undercurrent but I think it contributed to peer pressure and nastiness amongst the girls over who had prettier, ‘girlier’ clothes. Meanwhile the boys sailed through it in teeshirts and trousers. It was like the Debbie Tannen ‘marked’ and ‘unmarked’ clothing theory written out on infant-aged children.

I am not sure how that was a better situation than having school uniform and I wouldn’t want to see how that would play out with teenagers.

Because boys aren't being trained to value themselves as objects of sexual desire, and don't feel compelled (by whatever force, social media, society, peer pressure, something else) to be as naked as possible in public. (not all girls, obvs; some are more resistant to this pressure than others)

If boys wore shorts with their butt cheeks hanging out, or cut-off t-shirts that exposed their abs and belly button in class, or trousers so tight we could clearly see their penises, you can believe the same fuss would be made. Why don't they wear such clothing? You tell me.

This kerfuffle over uniforms is addressing the symptom, not the cause.

British schools are abusive. We will be homeschooling. I won’t be adhering to petty uniform nonsense rules.

I encourage this policy to be adopted everywhere. It resolves a lot of issues.

Girls in female trousers do not look like boys any more than a lad looks like a girl if he puts on a skirt. You're honedtly telling me that none of these girls ever wear anything but a skirt or dress outside of school?

Of course body shape comes into play too. And im pleased your friends can all find trousers that fit. Can they find trousers that fit, fit the stupid rules schools have about styles, are within budget. Etc etc.

Maybe I've misremembered the measurement and it's more than 12 inches.

The only way that I can get swimsuits to fit properly without cutting into me is to buy two pieces. I now buy tankini pieces from Lands end - regular high-rise bottoms, but long size top and they're just right.

So far as trousers are concerned, I can take up hems but the proportions still don't seem to be quite right. I find that certain makes of sports leggings are a bit more forgiving but - of course - they don't work for formal wear.

I do look for high-rise trousers.

I recall finding a particular cut of Levi's jeans that worked for me in the late '70s, but - alas - haven't found anything in formal wear that's quite so good.

My current jeans had to be bought a bit bigger than I would have liked. I took up the hem and I wear them with a belt, but they're still not right.

I also find that I can have a problem with certain dresses and jackets - the waistline often sits too high up and just looks odd: I tend to look for the
type that just skims and doesn't have noticeable pockets. (I do like pockets, but if they have a flap, then they're noticeably in the wrong place.)

Jumpers and t-shirts intended for men tend to be a bit better for length, but then the sleeves are often too wide or too long. Yes, I do roll up sleeves where that's possible or adjust as best as I can.

Honestly someone feeling the need to tell us to alter clothes where possible is a bit insulting...As if we'd never thought of that!

And yes - I am overweight, but I had the same problem with clothes when I was the same height that I am now - nearly 5ft 9 - and 8 stone 10 lbs. Even when I was a child, I recall my mum having difficulty getting clothes to fit because I had a long back. She was good at altering things, so she'd buy bigger and take in where necessary.

Once I was 11 yrs old, however, she had problems finding clothes suitable for my age group.

I feel sorry for the girls who have been told (according to various news reports) that their brand new uniform skirts are too short. I recall having great difficulty finding midi length skirts in my size.

As a teenager, I was in a band. There were only four girls in the group - there were 5 boys - and we all went to the same shop to purchase matching black skirts. The other three girls all got identical skirts that went below the knee. Mine was just above the knee. I certainly wasn't fat - I was the same height that I am now and had a 26 inch waist.

If you're going to insist on assuming bad faith, then there's no point in engaging.

I've known plenty of women with very small waists compared to their hips, and none were unable to wear trousers. So it's a little odd.

I actually do know a fair amount about sewing (my mother sews a lot of my clothes, and I've picked up a lot from her), but perhaps I'm just less picky than you about clothing appearance. Comfort is what matters to me most.

"People keep talking about girls having their "arse" on show. I have never seen this. You'd have to be wearing a very short skirt indeed to display someone's behind"

Guess you've not worked in many secondary schools then!

Biddy's friend has a waist a whole dress size smaller than her hips. That's going to cause huge problems finding trousers. It's going to limit skirt choice too, but at least flared skirts exist.

At 10" apart, your waist and hips are the same dress size.

I'm getting a strong impression, based on your comments about trouser knee height not mattering and your lack of awareness that British dress sizes assume a 10" hip spring, that you don't have much experience making or designing clothes. I make some of mine. Trust me, knee height matters for appearance and comfort.

Well shes had a lifetime of not being able to find trousers that fit well both in look and comfort.

In the context of your sniffy disbelief that I might actually be telling the truth about my own body, yeah, I took your intent as being to use "large" as an insult.

But for a school uniform, they don't need bootcuts or skinnies (both fairly unfashionable now). Just smart trousers that fit comfortably. Which I don't believe is impossible to affordably achieve for 99.9% of people.

That's not an unusually large difference? I'm only 10 inches now, in my late 30s, and I just don't wear trousers that come to my waist if they don’t fit well. I wear a lot of trousers that sit just above my pelvic bones, as a lowish mid rise. Perfectly comfortable.
I've never encountered a woman who had difficulty wearing trousers in my life, unless it was size related, so this all seems very odd – in line with women fainting if they wear trousers, or suffering health issues, or looking like men.

Again, I do think skirts should be an option in uniform, but I really don’t think there are girls who just literally can't wear trousers, unless they have 3 legs.

Of course, it does change the shape of the trouser leg bottoms, but thats not always an issue if its just a straight leg.

It destroys bootcuts and skinnies.

people of all shapes and sizes wear trousers as part of their work uniforms every day.

Wearing them and being comfortable wearing them are two different things. I once took a bra off mid-afternoon at work because I couldn't stand the pain of the wires in my armpits any more (see also: fuck Bravissimo fitters). Until that moment, I had been wearing that bra.

My best friend has a 12 inch difference between waist and hip measurements. Well fitting trousers are almost impossible.