To have an allergic reaction to this letter from school - is it misguided?

[Somethingtodo]

I am fully supportive of a uniform policy and enforcing it - but fond the language below offensive for some reason - like to girls are to blame for sexual predators....how should I respond - want to make a point in a reasonable rational way...

Dear Parent/Guardian,
Urgent: Appropriate Uniform Standards
Unfortunately, I am forced to write to you again to request that you support our drive for every student to
attend school appropriately dressed. We must ask you to review the uniform your child has to ensure, for
instance, that skirts are of the appropriate length of decency. The school policy has always been that the
skirt needs to be knee length but some of our female students are not dressed appropriately with a normal
and reasonable standard of modesty. This is unacceptable and a safeguarding concern as some are
indecently placed halfway up the thigh. From next Monday 26th January 2015 I will strictly enforce this
basic expectation and any student wearing a skirt at an inappropriate length above their knee will be
issued with a serious sanction for flouting school expectations. I appreciate your full support in this as we
are work together to keep students safe.

I have to agree - the letter is really poorly written. It doesn't sound like something I'd expect to come from an education professional. Are you sure it isn't a prank by 14-15 year olds? I can imagine a bright 14 year old thinking that's how formal letters are phrased.

And, really, "indecently placed half way up the thigh"? You'd think it was deliberately intended to be offensive. Why not "unsuitably" or "inappropriately"? There's nothing indecent about a skirt which is half way up a thigh, any more than it's indecent to wear shorts which are half way up a thigh, or a swimsuit. Lots of occasions when they are inappropriate, but indecent? No.

If you think a short skirt means a teenager is dressed like a hooker I think you need to get yourself some help ASAP as you have some very disturbing views about children.

Teenage girls' bodies are not indecent or a safeguarding issue. It is not up to teenage girls to cover themselves up so that they are "decent". If they are not sticking to the uniform policy then that is a different issue.

YANBU OP, well done on your complaint to the school.

Ok, what is going to happen to a hypothetical 11 year old boy who sees too much flesh?

Halfway up the thigh is really rather restrained, anyway. My skirt's shorter than that today. And I am 51 (and in thick ribbed woolly tights and unlikely to incite inappropriate lusts in anyone, frankly).

I do think the safeguarding thing is a shame to have added in at the end - but its quite difficult to frame a letter that says

"Dear Parent
We are inviting in a range of potential employers for careers week and I would ask that you make sure that your children come in appropriately dressed to continue to project a good impression of the school in the community.

I realize that it is the minority who don’t follow the rules but I have noticed there do seemed to be just a a few minor point that keep coming up and I know you will be keen to help the school present a good image to the local community.

So do make sure your son or daughter wears their tie next week!

There are also a couple of other minor issues.
I do appreciate that girls should indeed have the right to roll up their skirts to any level they like, (and as an aside I would like to congratulate you parents on your support of the local Primark lingerie department). It has been pointed out to me that I should not notice things like this in spite of having perfectly good eyesight. But the good news is I have eventually managed to achieve this by wearing some old very dark sunglasses with only tiny holes drilled in the middle.
(True there was a certain amount of rioting around the edges of the classroom and I did not notice one student had been locked in a cupboard until some hours later but I feel I effectively preserved my students modesty. )

I must also apologise for the poor state of the garment industry in this country, as it would seem it is not possible to buy any bra in a fluorescent colour which does not show through a school blouse.

It would also seem that we have woefully failed to teach literacy to a standard where the boys are able to read the size labels on trousers as as more that half of the boys trousers are so low in the rear, due to huge waistbands, that the majority of their pants were visible - (On a hygiene note could I also request that it would be nice if you encouraged them to change said pants just a little more often - but god forbid we should prevent them expressing their protest about the state educations system by showing several yards of greying undies. I do understand the validity of this as a form of self expression.)

I have recently found that I am perhaps not being as an effective teacher as I might be, as apparently the students do not relate well to my prudishness about not wanting to be confronted with their poorly covered genitalia as part of my job. However - good news !!! we scraped together some money from the staff doughnut fund for some retraining.So I have been sent on a desensitization course recently, and just wanted you to know that I shall be attending school in a lime green thong bikini for the next two weeks as the final part of this training.
Many thanks for all your support as usual
Mr Smith - head of Geography"

It is not up to teenage girls to cover themselves up so that they are "decent

I think it is.I don't think they should dress in school in a way that makes staff or other students feel uncomfortable.And displaying underwear falls into that category

Not only that, dressing like a tart inappropriately reflects badly on the school and so the other pupils going there

No one's debating whether they should be wearing short skirts in school.

It's the letter that's the problem. I would have no problem following a reasonable uniform policy.

but skirt length is not a safe guarding issue. and you feeling uncomfortable is your problem not everyone else's.

The letter was indeed very wrong. girls are not at risk through skirt length.

So you would be happy with your sons year 6 , female teacher turning up in a too tight, semi-buttoned shirt , bare legs and miniskirt so high you can see her knickers? And you would just accept that it was your problem? I don't think so!
So why is it ok for 16/17/18 yr old girls to come to school like this?

Most of the prostitutes in the city I used to live in wore trackie bottoms

I personally liked Caili's response of:

I think it would be perfectly fine to say "as we are preparing our students for the world of work, we would like to teach them about appropriate dress. Short skirts are not appropriate for a work environment and as such will not be allowed in the school."

It's not about safeguarding, wearing a longer skirt will not make you 'safe' it's about what is appropriate for the environment you are in. OP I think you're response was quite emotional and could perhaps of done with being more rational but I support your distaste for the letter.

You are missing the point.

It is not appropriate professional attire for work / school

there are dress codes.

that has nothing to do with safeguarding which is what the debate is about!!!!

and yes. not liking how something looks on someone is my problem. and I will not look and I will teach my children that a person is the person they are regardless of their clothes or hair.

what I will not teach them.is "don't wear that you will get a poor man who can't look away in trouble"

Choclover no-one says it is acceptable, for teachers or students. It is not acceptable because it is unprofessional and inappropriate. To say it is not acceptable because it is a safeguarding issue issue is out of order.

And please don't refer to CHILDREN - (secondary girls are aged between 11 and 16 by the way, not 16 - 18) as hookers or tarts.

Of course secondary schools have 16 to 18 yos - never heard of a sixth form? They do wear clothes sometimes uniform sometimes not

TychosNose post yesterday @10.11 - captured my feelings exactly

"Please complain. I would be very concerned that whoever wrote the letter has an unacceptable attitude towards the victims of sexual assault, as many people do, sadly. They need to be challenged."

I am also concerned that they communicate this attitude to the children.

I fully support the uniform policy and the need for adherence on the basis of appropriate attire for the time and place.

Their decency/immodesty take to skirt length doesnt follow through logically, as they should then demand that PE skirts are knee length and swimming costumes are wetsuits - otherwise they would be tolerating immodesty on the playing fields and in the swimming pool but not tolerating it in the class room.

Has the school got back to you yet, OP?

YANBU about the letter but you might want to take a look at your thread title as you are so keen on people using appropriate phrases for the situation.

if female teenage children are 'hookers' then the male teenage children are rapists or what?

many schools do not have sixth forms. We do not know whether the OP's does. Most sixth form students however do not wear uniform, and the letter was clearly talking about uniform. It is therefore reasonable to assume it was referring to 11 - 16 year olds. 11 year olds wear skirts as short as 16 year olds.

It doesn't really matter whether the 6th formers where uniform (although many do) the same issue arises.
mousmous can you not read!? dressed like hookers is not being a hooker.I think you can read actually but are just trying to be goady.

goady? that's hilarious coming from the one person able to miss the most important point people have made on this thread.

Genuine Question- why do girls want to show so much naked flesh in January?

I haven't missed the point.I just don't agree with it.The way you dress sends out messages about yourself.

True it does send out a message about yourself. In the case of the 11 - 16 year old CHILDREN that message is 'I'm a sheep and do the same as my peers' not 'I'm a tart or a hooker'.

And they don't generally have flesh on show - they generally wear tights.

Do you have a secondary age girl chocolover?

And that's part of the problem choc

you are laying the responsibly of a person's actions on the person wearing the clothes not the people attacking them.

I am quite shocked at the insistence from some that safeguarding does not include staff.

Spend a week in our shoes, you will soon find out why it does and should.

There are always misunderstandings, misinterpretations. Allegations are not always malicious. Staff MUST be safeguarded, they must ensure that they act professionally and, in turn, the school MUST ensure that the working environment is safe... and, like it or not, that includes staff being safe from the students.

It's not about the clothes it's about the attitude of the head.

who either feel his pupils or male teachers can't be expected to control themselves or that the girls are going to get attacked and it's their own fault.

I'm sure all teachers on here who have regular seen more than they would wish too of their students will tell you it's more than. possible to control yourself.