To think telling a child to "cover up" because of male teachers is ewwww?

[FreeeeeeeeFreeFalling]

DD and her mates were wearing fairly standard vest tops at school for an own clothes day. All dressed exactly the same. DD singled out and told to cover up (I suspect because she is slightly larger chested than the others), which she found humiliating. She was told "there are male teachers around" as the reason!
They are 16.
I kind of think if male teachers can't keep their eyes to themselves, they shouldn't be teachers, right?!

AIBU to think this is a bit off?

Yes, I don't understand why 'there are men here' is automatically taken to assume that the men are sexually aroused by seeing female parts shouldn't be visible.

If you were in a women's communal changing room, you would very likely see other women's parts that those women would not want men to see - even if they knew the men were 100% gay - but don't mind other women seeing. The same is true in reverse for men's changing rooms. It's the same principle why people very often request somebody of the same sex to give intimate care or examinations.

Obviously it depends on the garment in question and the amount on show; but if you would object to somebody of the opposite sex being in your changing room, or somehow finding yourself in the changing room for the opposite sex, why would you be surprised that it would/should be considerably more embarrassing (for both of them) for a man to see a private part of a teenage girl's body than if a woman saw it?

The rule should be no vest tops for anybody. No uniform days don't mean turn up looking as if you are going to a party or the beach, or club, or to bed, clothing should be suitable for school, just not in school colours/badged.

So you've never noticed what any of your colleagues at work have been wearing - apart from glasses, earrings, makeup or hair bands - because you know how to look at their faces and never see any other parts of their bodies? Really?

Yet despite her strangely impaired peripheral vision, she somehow intuits whether they are standing or sitting so that when she looks up or turns around her eyes land squarely upon their face and face alone ...

In my workplace, which happens to be schools, I don’t want to see anyone’s underwear, cleavage or genitals! It’s inappropriate! I can’t think of a workplace, aside from medical settings, where this would be considered okay.

Girls have the right to bare arms.

Is that right? Then the glance isn't even need is it? Those nasty, manipulative, vicious girls can make up any old crap about poor male teachers and they'll quit, right? So a vest top makes zero difference. Maybe we should just ban girls from school all together.

The clear implication is that we normally take much more care to avoid seeing private body parts of the opposite sex than those of people of our own sex.

We don't just have separate changing rooms for each sex for safety (as crucial as that is), but also for basic reasons of dignity - especially if there are communal areas where people might not be fully/properly dressed.

If you're an adult woman, would you be happy to get fully changed in front of your mum? Now would you be happy to get changed in front of your dad, even if you were absolutely positive that he would neither represent any kind of safety risk nor be remotely sexually attracted to you? That's the difference, when people go into a public place dressed inappropriately and with underwear or private parts potentially on display.

Exactly! I'd hate to be a male teacher in that situation because I couldn't focus on actually teaching when I'm trying to make sure nothing I do is open to misinterpretation and accusations.

Exactly what is wrong with that? The reason given by the school is wrong but there's nothing wrong with saying vest tops are not suitable for school. For boys and girls.

People are going to notice a woman’s body no matter what she wears. Part of the reason they stare is because we’re hung up on ‘covering up’. People don’t notice male bodies half so much because they are more normalised and less sexualised. The solution is not to make girls cover up and be ashamed of their bodies.

That's the Second Amendment!

I think they mean "the right to bear arms" not "bare arms."

So naive. Shame doesn’t come into this.

It isn't always shame.

I have a vagina that I'm not ashamed of but it is kept covered in public.

I think tying this to shame is manipulative.

Of course I’ve noticed, what a daft suggestion. In fact your point makes mine even more, I can notice what people are wearing without it being weird, or sexual in any way 😂

I avoided using that term because it's awful. It's also inappropriate for a boy to wear at school and it most certainly is inappropriate for a man to wear in an office.

Nobody’s encouraging it??!

fwiw I agree some teenagers dress at school is inappropriate and they should be more covered (ie no butt cheeks hanging out). However, there’s something really sick about the reason given in this particular scenario. It’s suggesting the male teachers would be leaving on children if they wear low cut tops or short skirts!

Under his eye!
Heaven forbid a girl tempt a man.

Either vest tops are inappropriate or they’re not. They can only be unsuitable for large chests. If the clothing choice was inappropriate then I should expect all girls in vests to have been told.

I would expect any decent adult male or female, if they do notice, to think ‘huh, kids’. And then think nothing further of it.

like a non- predator.

The shame is on the man who does anything other than that. Not on the child.

youd only think otherwise if you believe that women are responsible for male behaviour.

Anybody deliberately making false allegations of sexual assault or impropriety horribly betrays people who are genuinely victims - regardless of the sex of either of them.

That I can agree with: I don't think mentioning the male teachers was necessary. I also think if DD was told, they all should have been if the vests really were equivalent.

But asking them to wear modest clothing to school is perfectly reasonable imo.

I mean part of the issue here is we really need a photo: there are vests and vests.

Oh fgs sake are you serious? It's beach wear /going out for the evening /party wear.

What a silly comment. My point being I don’t focus on their bodies, I focus on their faces. Do you always run your eyes all over people before you look at their faces? No, I’m willing to bet you immediately adjust your focus to their face. Because I’m not hung up about bodies I’m not jarred if I don’t immediately make eye contact.
And yes, when my students are sat in my classroom I have a pretty good idea of the level their faces will be so I don’t tend to focus on their boobs then faces. I might see a neck or an arm, of god forbid, a chest, but then my eyes saccade to their faces. Hope that helps 😂

Oh is there a photo?

When I was still teaching, if anyone - male or female - turned up in vest tops the Depute sent them home to change: "You're not on the beach."