to be annoyed that there will be a trousers uniform only at dc's secondary school from next year?

[bigbuttons]

DD ( dc number5) starts secondary in September. All her older sibs have gone/ are at the school. Her 2 older sisters are in years 8 and 10. Up until now the uniform has been, for girls, a blazer, skirt or trousers, white shirt and optional tie.
We got an email this week saying that after extensive consultation( I would like to know with whom because parents were not asked to my knowledge) the uniform for new year 7's would be 'gender neutral'. Both sexes will wear exactly the same uniform i.e new school jumper, no blazer, smart grey or black trousers, no skirts and all to wear a tie. Pupils currently at the school can continue with the current uniform but change of they wish.
There has been 'issue' with girls rolling their skirts up to basically just below their backsides and members of the public/parents have been complaining about this. The new trousers only uniform will help with issues of 'decency' it says.
Year 6 dd is horrified, she has never worn trousers in her life and quite frankly is not a good shape for them anyway, - leggings yes, buttoned trousers, no, although I have never said this to her of course. She is short and stocky, always has been.
I know many women who feel very uncomfortable wearing trousers because they don't like their legs/shape and always wear dresses and skirts.

What this this gender neutral crap?
I support both sexes wearing ties and I liked the blazer so am sad it has gone.

I think the girls should be able to wear skirts and am confused about the whole 'indecent' issue. If a girl wears a short skirt it's surely not her fault if people find it 'indecent'? It feels like very little has progressed for girls since I was at school. So, they now all have to look like boys?

I would be interested to hear people's views on this.

It's not really gender neutral though is it?

There is a school in New Zealand that has just gone gender neutral for all, their bottom half uniform is a kilt or long shorts or trousers. Kilts are impossible to roll up.

My issue with the girls rolling up skirts is that it isn't all of them so why should all be forced to wear trousers when it might be one child rolling her skirt up.

Shirts, ties and trousers look and feel very different on a developing girl’s body than they do on a lanky teenage boy’s bodies

How does a tie feel different on a girls body
Also shirts can be bought for girls which are cut differently to allow for their shape as are girls trousers. Is the school saying they must wear boys shirts and trousers?

As for the school having an eating disorder problem.......that cannot be tackled by a bloody uniform!!! Christ!!! Nor is the uniform the reason for the eating disorders.
Maybe you should be fighting the school on their approach to healthy eating and body attitude not whether a tie suits a boy not a girl

As for consulting the pupils erm its a school uniform shut up and wear it or move schools.
What will your little darlings do if they have to wear a uniform for their job? Get mummy to demand its changed because it makes their bum look big

I would have hated this. As a teenager I would not wear jeans or trousers as i thought my legs were too fat.

Loving the ides that all teenage boys are lanky

All three girls would like not to wear skirts actually but would rather wear leggings.
Leggings are not trousers.

It seems you have many objections that can be boiled down to 'I think girls should be able to wear their uniform as a fashion statement'. You don't see an issue with skirts so short they look ridiculous and have gone straight for the go to line of "indecent to who? If people find a stupidly short skirt a problem that's their issue".

Schools have uniforms. In my experience the school's that have the most flexibility (e.g. any black trousers/anybwhite shirt) are the ones where parents and children don't push it to stupid extents.
Where there's lots of "oh well they're trainers but they look like black shoes/ lots of excessive skirt rolling / leggings / uggs" schools go further and say it must be school specific. This pushes the price up for everyone because it's specialist but all could be avoided if people didn't enabme their kids to use uniform anybwhite a fashion statement

I emailed the head just now and he got back to me, he's good like that.
It seems it all boils down to transgender issues, wanting to make the increasing number of transgender pupils feel comfortable and not discriminated against. Those are his words.

I asked him whether the female staff would also be wearing trousers in the name of neutrality and equality.

Staff are adults. Not children.
They are at work and their job does not require a uniform.

I always think the "but staff...." argument makes you look stupid and that you cannot tell the difference between an adult and a child

I think the other problem associated with skirts is the shoes that go with them. The ballet or flat court that also restricts movement.
In one of my daughter's previous schools the skirts restricted stride length, couldn't be cycled in, run in and this combined with the stupid shoes that wouldn't stay on in similar activities was infuriating. Women / girls should not be forced to wear clothes that make victims of them ( unable to run / fight / play) unless the boys / men are to be equally physically restricted?
So yes to trousers for girls.

Mistigri
Uniform in the UK seems to be particularly focused on controlling what girls wear

Not in my experience. Boys get told to correct their dress frequently. They have to adjust it or get sent home if they: wear hoodies, non-regulation coats, loose ties, long ties, un-tucked shirts, jackets off without permission, too- short trousers, too-long trousers and even too tight trousers. Their hair also has to be not too long/short, coloured or "extreme"

I support this rule.

This is not just about the girls

Oh. One of those parents then with that stupid comment about staff.

FlossyMooToo - agree about the adults/children line! Sounds like my kids when they were at primary. "But mummy you don't have to go to bed/can watch tv late/play on your phone! Why can't I???"

I think it's a really good idea. It deals in one neat, fell swoop with all the potential issues, pitfalls and opportunities to make political/religious/ethical stands about who should or shouldn't be allowed to wear what. Everyone the same, regardless of sex, gender identity, culture or religion.

Not all girls wish to dress in a masculine way. Some girls like skirts. In my experience, most girls wear a pair of lycra shorts under skirts, but still prefer the skirt option.

Boys get told to correct their dress frequently. They have to adjust it or get sent home if they: wear hoodies, non-regulation coats, loose ties, long ties, un-tucked shirts, jackets off without permission, too- short trousers, too-long trousers and even too tight trousers. Their hair also has to be not too long/short, coloured or "extreme"
Exactly. The difference is that nobody comes online crying "body shaming" when boys get told to follow uniform rules.

Some girls and parents seem to think that insinuating anyone who has an issue with stupidly short skirts is some kid of weirdo is a get out clause to wear what they like.

Right, so the head is dosregard the preference for skirts of girls' so that around 1% of the school popularion can feel better. Who says that is what the transgendered pupils want anyway?

I agree with sahh if it were unisex then both sexes could be weraing both skirts amd trousers.

Surely being able to choose whether to wear a skirt or trousers would be more preferable to transgender pupils?

I wear a trouser suit for work. It is not masculine it would look stupid on a man as it is cut to suit a womens shape.

I think its odd that so many posters want to keep girls in skirts and label trousers as masculine

"I think its odd that so many posters want to keep girls in skirts and label trousers as masculine "

Yes that would be odd. But nobody is saying that. They arare saying that girls should have a choice and that trousers are the male norm.

What will your little darlings do if they have to wear a uniform for their job? Get mummy to demand its changed because it makes their bum look big

Well I didn't involve my mum but I did leave a bar job because we had to wear a polyester blouse tucked into black trousers and I felt dreadful dressed like that.

Uniform in the UK seems to be particularly focused on controlling what girls wear

This is definitely the case in my childrens school

Appreciate that it won't be all schools

"I think its odd that so many posters want to keep girls in skirts and label trousers as masculine "

Yes that would be odd. But nobody is saying that. They are saying that girls should have a choice and that trousers are the male norm.

"I think its odd that so many posters want to keep girls in skirts and label trousers as masculine

Yep, no one has said this

I visit our school occasionally and in a year of over 100 girls there are only two or three wearing trousers

Bert
Trousers are worn by males and females. So even though men generally only wear trousers the fact that loads of women also do pisses on that argument. They are unisex because they are worn by both sexes. Skirts are not unisex because generally they are only worn by females.
What is so hard to understand about that?

Splendid as an adult you can choose to leave a job if you dont like the uniform, the OP can choose to send her child to another school.

Not all girls wish to dress in a masculine way.

I could scroll back and paste other comments stating trousers are masculine but tbh i am on my phone and its a pain to do but there have been a few similar statements made on this thread.

I'm confused about the transgender reasoning. Is it that some transgender boys want to wear skirts but can't and that is unfair therefore no one can wear skirts?
Is it that transgender girls want to wear trousers without feeling like there stand out because basically no girls wear trousers, therefore, every girl now has to wear trousers?

This brings to mind my local village bus stop.

Said bus stop was closed for a year, it is the only bus stop for a mile, so all residents had a good old walk to the next bus stop.
The bus stop was closed for a re-vamp. It had stairs going from a bridge to the bus stop and it was decided to put in a disabled access at great expense. There are currently surprisingly no disabled/wheel chair users in the village, but no doubt they decided it was policy anyway . Everyone uses that bus stop to get into town.

Eventually bus stop reopens but some twat has not made the bus stopping area deep enough so it is dangerous for buses to actually stop there ( very busy A road) so the bus stop is immediately closed again and has remained so for another year. Millions were spent on this, for no one and for nothing and everyone else has to suffer.