To think this isn't appropriate or very professional from school?

[Peppapigshouse]

My child's church primary school has a special mass on an evening after school and they've asked children and parents to attend.

The school has now sent a text saying that children can wear their own clothes, but ha e stated "No tracksuits, short skirts or strappy tops".

It's not the tracksuits bit that bothers me, it's the bit about no short skirts or strappy tops.

Why not just ask for appropriate clothing for winter church? Why the need to specify about short skirts and strappy tops. These are primary school children and it just sounds like they are implying something.

I think it's really inappropriate and unprofessional coming from a school.

Plus?! Meant to say could it be...

But they're not "basically making out that that's what girls will all be wearing". They're acknowledging that some girls, or rather some parents have enabled some girls, to dress inappropriately for Mass in the past, and they're having to address it because of that. Much like the tracksuits.

If they were able to say "own clothes, appropriate for church" and have people correctly interpret that, they wouldn't have to specify.

And as said before, it may well be the CHURCH saying that they have had children dressing inappropriately in the past, please will the SCHOOL pass the message on. Is the church acting inappropriately and unprofessionally, or just upholding its standard 'dress code'?

Maybe the message is for specific parents. We've done worse.

I don't like the school basically making out that that's what the girls will all be wearing, and that girls need to be told what to wear
Except they aren't. You're determined to find some warped 'school sexualise primary aged girls' angle to this when the real story is 'some parents are too stupid to dress their children according to the event'

They are giving guidance probably because experience tells them that SOME PARENTS are seemingly incapable of dressing their children appropriately.

I did an outdoor residential. The kit list said sturdy waterproof, active trousers (think walking trousers, fast trying sports bottoms and we made it clear it was NO fashion leggings) and sensible sturdy shoes as we will be out in the rain if it starts.
One boy turned up with a cag in a bag so was soaked through within 10 mins of it raining.
Another turned up wearing converse - so no grip, not waterproof, not sturdy
At least 3 girls turned up in black leggings and whined about being cold.

Clearly 2 letters home, a student meeting and a parent meeting didn't make it clear enough.

To make matters worse, one of the leggings girls mum then was rude to the group leader and complained about the residential to the head. Apparnetly it was cruel to keep them outside on an optional outdoor residential despite all the information we gave.

I once went to a church service where the Head’s teenage daughter was standing next to the alter in a t-shirt dress which only just covered her arse, with bare legs.

Some people have no idea how to dress (or behave) appropriately for a situation and, unfortunately, need to told.

Altar

I agree OP. Loving all the handmaidens on this thread falling over each other to show how coooool they are.

Strappy tops and short skirts are very specific terms to use and we all know exactly what they mean by that. People do love to be disingenuous and tell you to get a grip, because that's far easier than sticking your head above the parapet and standing up to sexism.

falling over each other to show how coooool they are.
This feels like a great example to link to the 'cool wives' thread where posters love to use 'cool' as some sort of silly, sneery insult.

It's not sexist to expect parents to dress their children in a way that is appropriate for the situation.

One year we had to tell 6th form boys that they needed to wear trousers to ensure their boxers were covered. Another year it was telling girls that crop tops are not for school. It's not sexist. It's saying some clothes are not for 6th form.

If anything it makes me laugh on MN how quickly some people get defensive about ^how sexist it is to say that children should be dressed like children and that pre teens shouldn't wear make up or fake tan. Only a perv would have an issue with that. If they want to wear short skirts and dress for the clubs at 13 then let them. They're just children' when we all know these women probably shop at boden and would never in a million years let their children out the house like that

Maybe their expectations have been formed not by what they think girls wear in general, but by what girls at their school have actually worn on non-uniform days. In which case it's totally fair enough to pick on those particular items of clothing.

Tbh I have experienced hundreds of school trips, mufti days and events where school pupils have worn non-uniform. Boys don't seem to turn up in shorts. Lots of girls do wear inappropriately skimpy stuff.

It is certainly true that there is a lot of sexist crap aimed at girls and women about their appearance. But schools would consider it inappropriate for boys to show a lot of skin too. The reason it isn't brought up is that it just doesn't actually happen.

YABU to suggest skirts are not for boys- in this brave new world boys wear dresses

They need to stop people sending their girls in boob tubes and short shorts. I have literally seen this happen.

becotide
You're brave.
Everyone knows that girla should wear whatever they like whenever they like and to say otherwise is horribly sexist abd sexualises children. I mean, what's wrong with you.

I have also seen children dressed inappropriately for the situation.
I'd also take bets that people saying strappy tops and short skirts are fine for mass either:

1. Are the types of people who don't bother ti dress their kids properly
2. Are probably middle class and wouldn't dream of letting their child dress that way but want to show hlw tolerant and liberal they are online. Aka. I'd be horrified if my darling dressed like that, but for 'those children' it's just fine

"I don't like the school basically making out that that's what the girls will all be wearing, and that girls need to be told what to wear

Except they aren't. You're determined to find some warped 'school sexualise primary aged girls' angle to this when the real story is 'some parents are too stupid to dress their children according to the event'"

I agree

I'm not brave as such, I'm just poor and therefore live in a low SE area where people walk everywhere and I get to see what their kids are wearing. I have to have rows with my own kids about why they can't wear joggers everywhere, I imagine mums of girls have to have rows about short shorts (as I do with dsd, although she's mainly sensible now because she's 12) and those freaking pink bow things.

Once had a primary school aged girl turn up for her siblings first holy communion mass in a catsuit more suited to Halle berry, complete with mid-riff slash showing off newly pierced belly button. Have also had boys turn up in summer shorts to carol services. No inappropriate clothing would be better wording, but some parents have very strange ideas about what constitutes appropriate...

becotide
But having those battles is part of being a parent.
I feel sorry for the kids when I see them looking a mess because it's not their fault. They didn't ask for parents who don't have common sense and don't follow rules.

Boys' shorts tend to be cut longer to the knee than girls'. T-shirts do cover the shoulders. Boys tend not to wear vests/ strappy tops, so unless there's inappropriate slogans involved, there's a lot less scope for the standard clothing of boys to commit a faux pas in a conservative church environment.

But the letter hasn't specified the sex of the children, there's just a convention that girls are more likely to wear short skirts and strappy tops. The tracksuits are more neutral.

It is part of being aparent., I think the school was trying to remind the parents!

Plenty of parents don't know how to truly say no to their kids. I had one woman tellng me her 6 year old had to have a film every night in bed "or she will CRY!" as if crying is the worst possible thing that will happen to a child.

Call me harsh, but I truly don't fucking care if my children cry when they don't get their own way. It doesn't change my stance.

I think shorts for boys can be OK. My grandson is year 6, so 10 at the moment, he wears grey uniform shorts to school. They are smart, aren't very short as almost to the knee and most boys in his class wear them, I don't think they are the same as a skirt that barely covers your knickers but if they were wearing the sort of shorts Olympic runners wear then I agree they aren't appropriate either. (I don't follow sport so maybe Olympic runners aren't wearing very short shorts now but I do remember them wearing really short tight shorts that didn't leave much to the imagination.)

Haven't read the whole thread but I've been to masses where people are dressed like they were going to a night club. 4" heels, slashed tops, short skirts and so on. Men in jeans and open to near belly button shirts, football gear. I think it looks so tacky and not respectable.
We had our priest actually ask for our guests to be reminded of respectable attire for church which I thought was such a shame that even had to be said.
One of the parents gave in to letting her DD wear something more of what a grown woman would wear to save her tantrum. This was for a special end of year ceremony. It was so bad and she regretted it straight away, I really felt for her but it made her realise how much control her DD had over her. Anyway, that's another story.
As a teen I tried to go to mass in my ripped jeans and funky top and one look from my respected and devout granny made me realise I must have lost my mind to think she'd be ok with it😂. I laugh now but at the time I was not happy to be dictated to!

This is still rumbling on

It's only some church event. I'd send them in what they want to go in.

And I'd happily rock up in my sports gear.

Even saying semi formal with shoulders, midriffs and knees covered would have been a safer way for them to proceed - that's what it says on the tourist signs outside religious places in Europe for those not familiar with the appropriate attire to wear inside.

Yanbu. I get you op. It's the wording isn't it? I work for a local authority (not in a school but I work with kids from local schools a lot) and the blanket uniform policy which is online and in leaflets states 'skirts of a modest length'. Enrages me. Why cast such a value judgement? Which is very open to interpretation anyway! Why not just say 'knee length skirts'?

There's no sexism is there OP. Boys have the same dress code as the girls.

You sound like hard work.