I probably am BU, but would this bother anyone else?

[FedRightUpWithWork]

DD goes to a girls only grammar (yr7) there is to be a Christmas disco with the boys grammar years 7 & 8 only. On reading the letter which was sent home it states 'to ensure the enjoyment and safety of the students, we are asking for your support and co-operation. Girls should be modestly dressed. Students arriving unsuitably dressed will be [...] sent home to change.'

This makes me really uncomfortable, and I can't quite verbalise why, I think it's the implication that the way girls dress can cause the boys to misbehave? That at the age of 11 they are being held responsible for how others may act? And who decides what is 'modest'? My DD loves wearing shorts and tights, but they are short so would they be unsuitable, despite no flesh on display? I'm really not explaining myself well, but would it bother anyone else?

The Head has no jurisdiction over other schools. OP has no idea what was on the letter in the boys school.
I think it highly unlikely it was necessary- I have never seen a boy that age who wouldn't wear long trousers to a winter disco and a top that wasn't covering most of his upper body. Possibly their letter would need to say no replica football shirts- other than that I can't think of anything.

The wording of the letter is at fault. 'Modest' is one of those words that now has added connotations.

My DCs school, very strict on Uniform. Has no rules for Discos/proms. Sixth formers, have to cover shoulders, midriffs, no underwear on display, no shorts, and no sandals. That applies to males and females, and boys will bare shoulders if allowed sometimes, cut away vest tops? No one does the gangster pant look thought, it's old fashioned.

I suspect that rules for discos are new- they were never necessary before.

Modest has always had sexual shaming connotations in Western societies. It has its roots in Judeo-Christian theology and attitudes (the laws of tzniut, modesty, are extensive and primarily aimed at controlling women's dress and behaviour in Judaism, one of the least lovable aspects of my religion)

I am deeply concerned by many aspects of this thread. The importance that virtually everyone seems to attach to presenting 11 and 12 year olds as naturally asexual beings, for example. This is just not an accurate description of the world. Sure, lots of boys are still only interested in football, but others want to kiss girls (or boys), and some girls want to kiss boys (or girls), and some kids that age will have done so, and lots will be starting to dress to be attractive to those they desire, and many will even be - shock horror - masturbating, and I think it's ridiculous and misconceived for us as adults to be seeking to ban any or all of that, when we could be focused on providing safe environments and support instead. This is not about being permissive and setting no boundaries, it's about us all growing the fuck up and stopping placing sexual purity on a pedestal when we could actually worry about important matters like consent, rape and rape culture, and the like.

There's more that bothers me about what's being said on the thread, but that will do for starters.

(when her father asked her to dress more appropriately, she asked whether it meant she was asking to get raped....)

Yay, Beattie's DD! She rocks :)

I'm completely with you on "clothes that appear to be testing their sexuality. I don't want her to hide herself" too. This is something to do with my reasons for finding the school's letter - and replies here - so disturbing. Girls' bodies change drastically around puberty. Surely it's more constructive to support them in experimenting with, and coming to terms with, their new shapes than to start shaming them (wittering on about modesty and crack whores) the minute they acquire some curves?