Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11

Original poster

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

256 replies

FedRightUpWithWork · 02/12/2014 20:13

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?

OP posts:

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:00

I wonder how many times it will be necessary to say that the problem is not the issue of girls dressing appropriately- the problem is the use of the word "modest".

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:04

"Dear parent.

There have been several incidents in school recently where girls have nearly fallen on the stairs because their ballerina style pumps have slipped off. In the interest of safety, the SMT have decided that from Monday 20th, girls will be required to wear modest footwear, and will be sent home if such footwear is not worn.
Thank you for your cooperation"

SparkleZilla · 04/12/2014 09:05

personally, i am not sure how else they could have worded it, and I think (in my own view) they are right, mainly agreeing for reasons above, re body image and early sexualisation. I'm not reading it as 'modestly dressed for safety' i'm reading as 'we dont want to send anyone home who is wearing 'sexy' outfits' as they are inappropriate

MoreBonkersThanBonkers · 04/12/2014 09:07

What wrong with the word modest though? I bet it's used in lots of school uniform policies and workplace policies. The kids should dress mosestly shouldn't they?

The quote says (and it's a complete sentance) Girls should be dressed modestly.

noblegiraffe · 04/12/2014 09:07

Buffy, would you have had an issue with the letter if it simply asked that the girls dressed modestly? With no justification? Would that have been ok because there was no possibly link between modesty and safety?

OwlCapone · 04/12/2014 09:07

If they were going to a church they might be asked to dress modestly.that's about not being raped.

If they were going to church they wouldn't be asked to dress modestly for safety though, would they?

sugarman · 04/12/2014 09:10

What a load of histrionics.

Our girls get similar letters about attire for school socials. All done entirely with the girls' wellbeing in mind. No offence intended and none taken.

I swear some people make it their life's work to search for offence...

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:11

"What wrong with the word modest though? I bet it's used in lots of school uniform policies and workplace policies. The kids should dress mosestly shouldn't they? "

I bet it isn't.

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:13

"What a load of histrionics.

Our girls get similar letters about attire for school socials. All done entirely with the girls' wellbeing in mind. No offence intended and none taken.

I swear some people make it their life's work to search for offence..."

Why are the Professionally Unoffended so rude?

Which bit of the girl's well being is served by dressing modestly?

noblegiraffe · 04/12/2014 09:15

The bit, Hakluyt, where girls are free from the pressure to dress like sex objects from an early age.

NoLongerJustAShopGirl · 04/12/2014 09:23

where girls are free from the pressure to dress like sex objects from an early age.

yep - agree with this..

the wording of the letter was crap - but totally agree with the principle of - for christ's sake dress decently and safely, you are 12, no one wants to see your chest or your bum crack or the fact you are wearing a thong. If you wear stupid heels and fall over you will break/sprain/twist an ankle, or gash your head open on someone's leather studded cuff, the big hoop earrings might get caught in his eyebrow spike and get torn out and you could end up in A+E.

that is how I read it... having had experience of KS3 discos over the years....

lalsy · 04/12/2014 09:30

The word modest isn't used in a lot of uniform policies - I know because I checked it out a couple of years ago. It isn't used because it is not a neutral term - one meaning is indecent. Its use stigmatises girls and young women for their clothing choices. And not boys and young men. How can that be defensible?

All sorts of risks apply to boys and girls on the streets - schools should be teaching them how to keep themselves safe and, for an event such as this, I would expect they insist on sensible getting home arrangements anyway.

[I know some single-sex schools that do this sort of event and it always sounds as if they are compressing all the stuff that happens in co-ed schools all year round into one two-hour, over-heated, highly hormonal event - urgh! But I am happy to be wrong about that].

Number3cometome · 04/12/2014 09:35

The letter sends out totally the wrong message.

In a round about way, it says if you don't dress modestly, then you should expect unwanted male attention.

That is completely wrong.

I would certainly be complaining about the letter.

I understand they want the girls to dress modestly at a young age, but sending the message that it is because boys are there is totally wrong.

They could have just put a dress code as Smart / Smart casual.

SandorClegane · 04/12/2014 09:44

I'm always amazed at the amount of people on here who seem to take a weird pride in not thinking critically about anything and denying that anything ever has any underlying implicit meaning. I imagine it makes life a bit simpler but fundamentally I find it a bit depressing.

Yanbu OP.

tanukiton · 04/12/2014 09:44

The thing is with modestly. What about swim class? Are they modest? Are they safe? how about ballet class? Gymnastics? Ice skating? Going to At the beach ?
I dislike the word.

NoLongerJustAShopGirl · 04/12/2014 09:50

Our swim class explicitly states that only one piece swimsuits should be worn. I never had a problem with that.

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:57

"The bit, Hakluyt, where girls are free from the pressure to dress like sex objects from an early age."

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

Do you think "modest" is the best word to describe this?

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 09:59

"Our swim class explicitly states that only one piece swimsuits should be worn. I never had a problem with that."

Me neither. "Modest swimsuits" though.......

BauerTime · 04/12/2014 10:01

I haven't read the whole thread yet but I just had to ask...where does your DD go to school? Harper Valley Junior High?

BrendaBlackhead · 04/12/2014 10:09

The thing is, when it applies to boys, there is some humour. Eg when ds went to France on a school trip they had to mention that in order to go in the local water park Speedos had to be worn instead of full shorts. Opposite of modesty! And all the boys were horrified at the thought.

But for the girls, the teachers issued a warning about wearing appropriate clothes as the French in the school trip area were quite conservative and would think poorly of 20 Miley Cyrus-alikes turning up. The teacher said she took spare sensible clothes with her and had no hesitation about asking girls to wear them or be sent home at their own expense.

noblegiraffe · 04/12/2014 11:02

Hakluyt, it's a better word than chastely, demurely or virtuously.

It's better at conveying what is expected than 'appropriately'.

It's more succinct and broad than listing prohibitions where certain items could slip through.

It's less inflammatory than saying 'don't dress your girls like sex objects'

It's less fusty than 'conservatively'

The school don't want the girls dressed sexily. They have attempted to be tactful in expressing this.

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 11:04

"Hakluyt, it's a better word than chastely, demurely or virtuously."

Is it?

noblegiraffe · 04/12/2014 11:11

Yes, IMO. Less value-loaded. Because you can live modestly in a modest house without anyone thinking of sex.

Hakluyt · 04/12/2014 11:11

People might be interested in reading this.nit might help to explain why the word "modest" produces a strong negative reaction in some people. It is not a value neutral word.

noblegiraffe · 04/12/2014 11:20

Right, Hakluyt. The school doesn't want the children to dress like sex objects. Some children will definitely dress like sex objects if the school doesn't specify that they shouldn't.

How do you, as a school, tackle that in a sentence without pissing off anybody?

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11