Feminist Pub XVIII, in which the Bluestocking greets the first signs of spring with a glass of something soothing

[PuffinsAreFictitious]

Just starting this one as the last is nearly full

Sorry so much spamming! But Superfit sell in the UK as well. Might be worth looking for a stockist, although I expect they are £££. www.superfit.at/en/dealer-search

I can remember my mum complaining similarly about Clarks when I was small so I don't know whether it's got worse or that's when the rot set in (or mum was unlucky!)

The approved uniform gym shorts for girls at my son's school were definitely not skimpy or tiny. If you can set aside prejudices about enforced uniforms and private schools you may find a proper school uniform supplier will have a more robust and practical selection of gym clothing.

StillLost, I'm talking about non-school shorts, not school ones.

I don't think anyone has expressed anything for or against private schools here have they?

Girls do want to wear shorts outside school too. Cycling shorts with baggy t-shirts were fashionable when I was a preteen! Not sure that's likely to come back soon but you never know...

a light brown pair with little lizards on them
These would NEVER be marketed to girls here. Anything brown, or with any kind of non-fluffy animal, HAS to be for boys.

I'm not particularly conscious of any quality issues in girls' school shoes, it's the open tops that seem ridiculous for outdoor activities. Why would you want wet socks? Though I have heard parents of school aged children say that the girls' shoes don't last as long either.

We only have Clarks where I can try shoes on the DCs unless we travel about 45 minutes which seems excessive for shoes (at least, at the moment when they are outgrown about every 3 months). I have thankfully found that Kickers fit DS and those will at least for the moment work even if DD decides she has to wear dresses.

Dd1 has sturdy lace up shoes, no problem, they're easy enough to find for teenagers, and even in upper primary I found plenty. Its young primary girls that seem only allowed Mary Jane styles. Without travelling 50 miles to get a more diverse shop or shopping online and risking a bad fit (both my DDS are awkward to fit, with stupidly wide toes) we have the choice in our town of Clark's or brantanos, neither of which have sturdy girls shoes in black (school uniform colour), they are all Mary Jane styles. I'm not even slightly worried about her shoes lasting, she'll grow before they fall apart, what annoys me is the huge hole at the top meaning that her feet get wet when it rains and cold in the winter. If we lived somewhere where it rained less, or where we had mild winters then i wouldn't care, but it annoys me that boys have warm dry feet and girls have cold wet feet with the choices available to us.

"f you can set aside prejudices about enforced uniforms and private schools you may find a proper school uniform supplier will have a more robust and practical selection of gym clothing."

Which post was this responding to, Still?

Nothing in particular in this thread other than school uniforms, particularly ones which require girls to wear skirts , seem to elicit a degree of disapproval on Mumsnet.

But MsDragons couldn't she just wear wellingtons in wet weather? My son did.

Oh, the "you" was MN in general? Not anybody here.

Thanks for clarifying.

I recall getting slated in the past for mentioning I approved of school uniforms. I like them. I thought the girls at my son's school looked very smart in their kilts. Was slated for saying that too. On this part of the forum.

But why should she have to, when there are plenty of styles of shoe that could be made that are weatherproof? All the boys shoes for her age seem to be waterproof, none of the girls shoes are. Why? I don't understand why any child should be expected to change shoes when they arrive at school, and again at playtime, and at lunchtime, and again at home time when they could have practical shoes designed for them. Wellies just add another layer of hassle.

Up to you. It was a hassle my son managed at Primary school.

Did anyone see the ITV drama tonight about the Colin Pitchfork case ? The first case which involved DNA evidence?

Two points of interest - if it's true the funding for it was due to a direct intervention from Margaret Thatcher following a conversation the scientists working on it had with Dennis.

Secondly at the end the mother of one of his victims,Dawn Ashworth, said people had said her daughter had just been in the wrong place at the wrong time. She was vehement her daughter was not in the wrong place- it was her killer who was. I don't know if this is a true quote or just part of the script but it's worth saying - the victim of a crime is never "in the wrong place"

Still Lost i watched this too. I remember the murder of Dawn Ashworth being on the news and all the DNA stuff being on the news in the 80s too.
Agree "the victim of the crime is never in the wrong place" If Mrs Ashworth didnt say this as a direct quote it could be that the scriptwriters decided to address the insidious victim blaming that is STILL ingrained in society today.

I see, Still. And was it Sera who disagreed with you previously?

Clarks shoes - it's the marketing with the toys inside them that really annoys me. And velcro. If you insist that it's your god-given right to paddle through mud pools and cut grass and everything else in your school shoes all the gung stick to the velcro and that's it. I'm training DC to wear shoes with laces now. I don't care how many times we have to retie DS2's shoes ... (Though we did have one pair of Clarks shoes that had one velcro strap snapped in about 2 weeks. How is that possible!?)

Define 'slated' too. You will get views and assumptions challenged on here of all places (I myself have used the phrase 'wrong place at the wrong time' of victims).

For instance, what makes boys' shoes ugly? Why, if boys wear them, should you feel sorry for girls also wearing them? Why is practicality considered ugly? Allowing that, why should ugly take precedence in such an important matter? Shoes are a major unsung advance of civilisation, they are very important! As we see when the fashion of the time dictated the wearing of those silly ballerina pumps that you can't walk half a mile in (ballet dancers typically go through multiple pairs in one performance just fyi!).

None of that is to challenge you, but the assumptions society puts in place.

I should add I am now carefully exorcising that phrase out of my vocabulary.

I do go a bit about "looking smart", I confess. What does that mean? I remember my little brother challenging that from when he was about 8 years old.

How is "wrong place wrong time" different to "she was raped because she was in the presence of a rapist"?

Still, i would love to know what it is that every single other poster in this section has done to make you feel personally affronted by almost everything they say (and don't say, apparently). or perhaps you're like this in AIBU too? this is a friendly thread, but it's hard to be friendly when someone has decided that you think XYZ and they will not be convinced otherwise. what can people here do to convince you that if your experiences differ from other people's then no one disbelieves you? and will you do people the courtesy of the same in return?

yonic i think it's about the fact that the victim hasn't done anything wrong - they are perfectly entitled to be in that place. i can see that POV

Gibbering my goodness you take everything so seriously. "Ugly shoes" are shoes I don't like and wouldn't wear. Simple - no need to spend hours of analysis on society's assumptions. My personal opinion.

And as for not being able to walk half a mile in ballet pumps, hmm must be imagining my walk to and from work every day. Surely what you said must be a fact and can't possibly be just your opinion can it?