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.

Rufus the sabotaging of straw hats makes me think of the St Trinnians

Bert I have done nothing of the sort. I have questioned what others have posted. Can you not go find another poster to bash I feel greedy having all your attention.

I'm also a little bemused that trousers are apparently restrictive and unflattering but leggings (skin tight) are somehow not.

This - if you don't like your legs, leggings will basically reveal everything. Trousers are much more forgiving.

Also, leggings aren't trousers and are basically glorified thick tights -
they're not really school uniform material.

flossy

To make matters worse the school was in the middle of town and the girls had to walk through town to get to buses (and the sweet shop) and they had to keep their boaters on the whole time

Wearing the uniform without the hat was a disciplinary offence

My dd has no issues with her legs. I can't move move in jeans type trousers with buttoned waist bands anywhere as freely as I can in leggings. Leggings are comfy.

"If child A said one school was great but they didnt like the uniform I would question what kind of values i have taught them."
This would imply that you think it is wrong to care about your appearance. Maybe you just think it is wrong for teenagers to care about their appearance but okay for you though.

I shall make it clearer for you Room (although I thought I had)
I do not think it is wrong to care about your apperance but I do think it is wrong to put apperance above education. To me it smacks of a Kardashian society where what you wear is more important than what you do and who you are.
As for me caring about my appearance, I wear the uniform dictated to me by my job roll. Outside of work I wear what I like. Just as school children wear uniform at school then their choice if clothes outside of school.

Flossy- I really would like a explanation for this

"This is what I said Surely if there is an eating disorder problem at the school then there is even more reason to give girls as much choice as possible in what they wear

This is what you appear to think I said here wear a skirt that will solve your anorexia

Bert I was being flippant but the premis of what you were saying was the same. That clothing choice will in someway solve/support/combat an eating disorder.

Eating disorders are much more complex and giving a choice of skirt or trousers wont fix that. Do you honestly not see the ridiculousness of parents putting in this much effort and angst over a skirt when the school has a problem with ED?

Flossy you have to stop this. You did not cut and paste what I wrote. You quoted me as having said that eating disorders were 'rife', when I did not. That was your word, and it is an innaccurate reflection of the true situation. By all means discuss and debate what is being said, but do not put words into other people's mouths and then argue with what was not said.

The point, anyway, is not eating disorders per se, but that the comfort and ease of a small number of trans students (if true; the school has not mentioned this to me) is being bought the expense of the comfort and ease of the 750-odd girls there. And no one has been asked what they think. And no one is listening to how people feel.

• at the expense, obviously

I shall make it clearer for you Room (although I thought I had)
I do not think it is wrong to care about your apperance but I do think it is wrong to put apperance above education.

Perhaps I should make things clearer for you too then Flossy (I thought I had but you don't seem to get it). I said that if other schools were good then I wouldn't have an issue with my child choosing not to go to one that had a uniform they really objected to. I do not see how that put "appearance above education" as I was talking about a scenerio where the schools are equal educationally.

Oops it was not showing the picture on the first post

flossy, you like arguing with people it seems.

I understood you perfectly Room hence why I said what I did.

I am standing up for myself OP and answering posts addressed to me.
You are biased though as I like many others disagree with your frothing at trousers for girls.

I understood you perfectly Room hence why I said what I did.

You may think you understand perfectly *Floss" but your posts would suggest otherwise....

I suppose everyones posts are open to interpretation Room

I suppose everyones posts are open to interpretation Room

Some posters are very prone to misinterpretation though.

Again thats in your opinion which you are pefectly entitled to have.

Is comfy a good basis for school uniform though? I couldnt wear them at work, or pajamas.
We'd also have to allow the boys to wear them, would you want the boys at the school to go around in essentially tights?

Frothing? Interesting choice of word flossy.

Is it?
Its mn term used frequently on here. I think its descriptive but I wouldn't say interesting.

Is comfy a good basis for school uniform though?

I think it's a very good basis.

Interesting in that you have chosen to use it and what it implies about your attitude and approach to other posters. Quite aggressive and goads really. But perhaps that is simply you and you probably don't see yourself in that's at. Certainly it's how you come across to me.