Gender neutral school uniform = Trousers

[ItIsOnlyAnOpinion]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5906031/Girls-banned-wearing-skirts-40-schools-insist-gender-neutral-uniforms.html

No more skirts.

Not actually read the thread then?

Yes I have, but my comment was based on previous, similar threads, where a number of posters generally post "skirts should be banned, I hate them, trousers should be mandatory" (paraphrased).

As I said, recognising that people have the wrong motivations for banning skirts shouldn't result in throwing the baby out with the bathwater

It's very convenient for those like you who are incapable of comprehending any different views. You get to tag along with it
.
As for "wrong motivations" - I would count yours in there as well.

Interesting. My first thought when I read this news item was that it was a typical knee jerk stunt which forces girls and women to fit in with what is normal for boys and men. That’s always the way with gender neutral bollocks. (Can you have gender neutral bollocks??)

Then I read the headteacher’s statement about trousers being more decent and the abuse comment. Sounds like he is implying girls need to change how they dress if they don’t want to be abused? Naughty.

But you know what? I don’t like to say this but where I live the girls at the local comp have their skirts pulled up so high you can virtually see their cervix and I actually don’t think that’s a very decent way to dress for a day of learning. It’s as old as the hills of course, girls did it in my day too. But to have a skirt on that is folded over so many times at the waistband that your bottom cheeks are visible if you bend over? Well, maybe everyone is better off in trousers.

Funny really because in my day (not that long ago!) we wanted to be allowed to wear trousers and they were banned. We used to mutter that the headteacher was sexist for keeping us in skirts.

As a feminist, I was delighted when my school finally allowed trousers for girls.
There is a phrase: “Who wears the trousers in that relationship?”, meaning who has the power.
Trousers are a sign of power and domination, that traditionally supported the patriarchy. Skirts or petticoats (as in the sneering phrase “petticoat government”) were a sign of submission and inferiority.
Striding around in practical trousers is way better than hobbling about in silly heels while hoping the wind doesn’t blow one’s skirt up, or having to be careful how you sit to avoid exposure of underwear.
I hope that years of wearing the trousers at school will encourage a powerful mindset in girls, and make them less likely to meekly defer to men in suits in the workplace.

Am I the only one on here who didn't roll her skirt up? I couldn't see the point in it, I already resented being forced to wear a garment that made me cold, forced me to shave my legs or face bullying, and affected how I could sit, there was no way I was making myself colder and exposing even more of myself.

No I didn't. Pleated skirts or kilts don't lend themselves to that.

There are some appalling attitudes to girls on this thread.

I didn't roll my skirt up either as I went to a 'progressive' school with no school uniform (in the 80's), Most girls wore jeans.
Why not give all the kids a choice of trousers, skirts, shorts (the smart sort, like city shorts).
I live in jeans and trousers but I think that everyone should have a choice and not have unnecessary restictions (like school uniform ).
This is taking away girls autonomy.

I haven't met a teenage girl that possesses not a single pair or trousers/jeans/shorts/sweatpants/ in her wardrobe. Girls already wear trousers and they are not a 'boys' garment.

The schools won't let them wear jeans or sweatpants though will they, and shorts are only an option in the summer unless they allow them with tights. The girls will be made to wear trousers, which alot of girls, me a tall girl included, find ill fitting, uncomfortable and unflattering.

I think we've established that some women and girls prefer trousers and some skirts for various readons so why not give them the option? Why force girls who prefer skirts into trousers? Oh yeah because men think a young girls legs are indecent, because they would rather blame girls attire on why they're harassed by boys then deal with the boys doing the harassing.

Oh yeah because men think a young girls legs are indecent, because they would rather blame girls attire on why they're harassed by boys then deal with the boys doing the harassing

That and some feminists who seem to hate skirts and dresses so much that they will piggy back along with it.

But even if you hate skirts, some women and girls don't, so let them have the choice.

Everyone should be able to choose attire that they feel comfortable and confident in.

It's got nothing to do with 'hating' skirts . I don't hate skirts any more than trousers.

For me it's got little to do with 'men thinking young girls' legs are indecent' either.

It's simply that it seems fairer and less complicated (particularly with the minefield of blurred gender lines) for all pupils to have the same options - trousers or shorts (neither of which are specifically boys' garments, both of which are practical, neither of which get rolled up, neither of which risk flashing underwear).

Girls and women who have heavy periods and/or can't use tampons, or those prone to thrush etc do not find trousers and shorts 'practical'. It's been said many times over the years on threads like this. There's nothing feminist about restricting women and girls from wearing clothes that make their lives easier.

Like others, I'm so utterly fucked off that choices are being taken away from young women in the name of trans rights.

First of all, apologies for my really bad English, it's not my native language.

I've been reading posts for months, and I've just created an username just to comment on this because the opinions here got into my nerves so much, and make me question if this is really a feminist chat.

I was really happy to see this news. Finally kids of 11 years old can play, jump, fall, fight and sit with legs open (still my mother says I can't sit with open legs as I am a lady, you see).

I went to secondary school in Spain, a public one, so not uniform but there was a ban in skirts. However every girl was happy about this, none of them ever complain as it was cool because we could rest from the competition of who was wearing the shortest skirt (still having it outside, of course)

I'm really tired of hearing people saying a girl (I'm referring to kids now, not the grown ups) shouldn't be told what to wear. So I want to ask you: what do you think society is doing? Why do you think in schools where girls can choose between skirts or trousers they still wear skirts? None of them want to be the one outstanding or be told she look like a boy or loose the possibility to be liked by the boy she likes. So do you think these girls at a very early age are choosing uncomfortable dressing that doesn't allow them to play like the children they are, because they like it?

If we continue to go with the separated uniform telling that girls should wear restrictive clothes because they're girls, we're making a really awful point here.

To the women saying skirts are more comfy, have you ever tried male trousers or shorts? They're heaven, not like the female options that seems they've made to torture us. So if the uniforms are going to be like that, at least our girls are going to be comfortable at least half the day.

To make things clears, I don't hate skirts or dresses and I wear them sometimes.

Also looking at small girls in winter with blue legs makes me really sad. Don't you?

I wear jeans virtually all the time

male trousers or shorts? are dreadfully uncomfortable on most women

Not all obviously

That doesn't chime with my observations.

My DD went to an all girls school which had a choice of trousers or skirts. More did choose skirts than not, but a sizeable minority chose trousers. It wasn't to do with peer pressure, it wasn't to do with looking boyish or being attractive to boys. It was their choice. They were perfectly able to be active (and of course had PE kit for sports).

@ErrolTheDragon All girls school obviously have no female competition to gain male attention, so I don't see your point there.
Also, I'm sorry but I don't think girls are having choice nowadays when all girls in television are wearing skirts and dresses and portrayed as sexy. My friend told me the other day her daughter of 4 years old didn't wanted to wear leggins to go to the park because she was going to "look like a boy"

@Rufustheyawningreindeer By male shorts or trousers I mean loose one (not the fitting females), so I don't see why do you think they're not comfy for girls, I don't understand. It's not like we have one leg.

When you typed 'male trousers' i read it as male trousers not loose trousers if you see what i mean

And trousers made and designed for males are not comfortable for most females

Loose trousers designed for females are probably lovely

@Rufustheyawningreindeer Yes sorry, you're right about that. I should have explained better I really was meaning that the pants should be closest to the loose male ones rather than the fitting female ones. So will be comfy no matter your shape.

No worries happy

Though dds are TIGHT

Having said that so are most of the boys in her year as well

Idea of removing girls option to wear skirts as they will be more modest / can't roll them up / less option for upskirting etc is the exact idea behind "modest" religious attire for women of various degrees of coverage.

This idea that girls bodies are inherently problematic so they need covering.

When a boy goes to school in shorts or trousers that he's grown out of a bit, no-one thinks ooh look at him showing his legs off, look at the bum on that, he's asking for sexual attention from older men with that gear on etc etc

For a girl, I say all the time on these threads, it's not about the clothes not at all, it's about teh body underneath. It's about our bodies as they change at puberty becomming sexual objects, our parts becoming separate entities apart from ourselves "the legs on that", the same pair of trousers fitting at the waist will be fine on a boy or a slender girl but woe betide the girl with a bit of a curvy bum, with more womanly hips, all of a sudden it's sexy, obscene, showy, eye-catching, and what can she do? So many posts on here with girls getting in trouble for wearing the correct uniform because of how their bodies underneath make it appear to a society that sexually objectifies girls from puberty up. For a short curvy girl what's she going to do? Trousers are often a worst choice, making them feel exposed, uncomfotable, all at once too long and too tight. Short are great for all. Really? How many short and generous women choose to wear shorts? Not many. Because they don't fit, they look shit, and they feel very exposing.

I am really angry about these choices being removed. It's one step forward and 2 back. We have just got to a point where most schools probably allow girls to wear trousers - which was a FIGHT - and now we get the other choice taken away?

Gender neutral = here's the uniform, trousers, skirt, short, anyone can choose what they like out of it.

So angry.

Think of the girls schools example as a sort of control group - what do they choose when they're not particularly subject to the negative influences you assumed? Answer - a mix but more skirts than trousers. Some would vary according to the weather.

So if that's the situation when they're fairly unconstrained, what is the justification for not allowing the same choice to all? Penalising all girls because some might choose for reasons we don't approve of?

It sounds really sensible to me.

School is a learning environment and, at least until 6th form, there are many many reasons to have a uniform (the clue is in the name). This should be non distracting and not allow people to ostentatiously display wealth (or for those without it to be shown up embarrassingly).

Skirts just are not ideal for either sex in many ways and teachers don't want to spend their time enforcing stupid skirt length rules. Trousers are a unisex garment and have been for many years. The phrase 'I was wearing trousers' would give nothing away about the sex of the speaker, proving this.

What does "non distracting" mean in your post, Larry?