Non uniform at school - provocative clothing.

[MotherMorph]

I'm probably really late to the party about this and has been discussed a million times before.
I was discussing with a friend the other day how only womens clothing is really ever described as provocative/suggestive. "They were dressed like a slut etc" I've literally never seen anything written about how a males clothing could be overtly sexual or provocative. It made me wonder why there always eems to be some responsibility on woman (and the way they dress) for how how men behave.
Then recently on a local fb page someone started a discussion about 6th form dress codes and non uniform policies at school. The list of what girls cant wear is as long as your arm. What cant boys wear? Ripped jeans. That's about it. (In 6th form to be fair, they are expected to wear suits)
The argument was brought up about hormones and whether girls would dress provocatively. I realise that they would need some boundaries, but my DD has "cropped" tshirts that finish on her belly button, it's not the same as wearing a triangle bikini. No strappy tops, vests, cropped tshirts, off the shoulder, cold shoulder, short shorts, ripped jeans etc. There is not a lot in her wardrobe that isnt in this list and yet she dresses quite conservatively!! (This is for non uniform)
In 6th form they must also wear suits or business like clothes. But there are 100 rules about that as well.

If boys routinely wore equivalent clothing it might be described as provocative.

But they don’t.

I see your point on the language used when describing women's clothing.

However with regards your lists boys/girls clothing - perhaps the school didn't think it necessary to tell boys not to wear tops which do not cover their midriff.

A top which shows midriff is inappropriate. Yes - it covers more than a triangle bikini. But it is not suitable clothing for a professional environment (which I would class a secondary school as).

The school would be better placed to share one list and have it apply to both sexes.

Dont you think it's because mens clothing is not at all Adventurous in any way and women's clothing is so varied?

What are the makes going to wear thats provocative? Hot pants?

Non uniform days are a nightmare, girls often come dressed inappropriately, it is fashion that is the problem and how sexualised it is, as well as greater choice for the girls and not understanding what is appropriate. Boys generally wear jeans/ trackies and tshirts and hoodies with trainers. All appropriate to be in a classroom. The last non uniform day there was a girl wearing a boobtube crop top and was almost falling out of it, most others were wearing crop tops of other designs Jeans that were ripped all the way down the leg, open toe shoes, very short skirts, shorts you could see the bottom of their bum cheeks. None of those things are appropriate for school / work place and I teach science so having that much skin on show is a safety hazard.

However I am aware that particularly in America they are very strict and boys can wear vest tops but girls can't as they can't show their shoulders which is obviously not OK and is sexist.

I guess the question should be why does fashionable = less fabric for girls? I am sure most teenage boys would be able to pull something out of their wardrobe /off "the chair" and it would be suitable. DD said I might need to buy her something else to wear....which I dont particularly want to do for 3 mornings of school. She generally wears shorts and a (slightly) cropped tshirt, or skinny jeans with a crop tshirt or cropped jumper. Less than an inch of her belly is on show. She would rather wear school uniform.

Hopefully someone much more clever than me will be along - but its all about girls/women being sexually objectified and being responsible for men not being able to control their urges.

There is often no way for women to win - conform to fashion and you're often "provocative", don't confirm to fashion - you're unattractive.

Damned whores and gods police - it starts young

Fashion equal less fabric...because girls should only exist for the benefit of men . From birth baby girls are praised for being pretty not strong or clever, so they know being pretty is important

I've worked in schools with sixth form. Girls uniform are always an issue as everywhere I've been the code is that it should be knee length and the response to this includes comments like we're not nuns.

In sixth form boys usually stick to the suits rule and the biggest problems is top buttons undone or no tie and maybe shirts not tucked in.

Some sixth form girls would push more against business dress rules and wear low cut tops and so on. I'd email the sixth form team about this rather than speak to pupils directly as it is such an awkward conversation to have.

On a similar note there would be similar messages from the female head to staff briefings in the summer about wearing appropriate dress.

For men shirt tie and trousers are expected and adhered to. In hot weather men wear short sleeve shirts and may take blazers off.

For whatever reason there is less consensus about professional dress for women and more variation in what is worn in warmer weather

Rather than saying no this garment, no that garment, no the other garment, naming specific garments for each sex, wouldn't it be more sensible simply to say something along the lines of "Skin may not be visible between knees and collarbones and between collarbones and upper arms"?

After all, it is considered inappropriate for either sex to expose these areas in formal daywear.

I teach science so having that much skin on show is a safety hazard

I know you probably meant having that much skin 'exposed' as opposed to 'on show' but this sounds like the risk is that boys might get distracted while carrying glass lab equipment.

I agree OP that there are two main issues -

(1) girls being held responsible for the boys' and teachers' inability to avoid sexually objectifying them, tale as old as time, and

(2) the fact that women's value to society is still unfortunately proportional to their attractiveness to men. Which influences fashion.

Men's clothes are merely functional, as men possess worth in their own right. Women have to work bloody hard to even be acknowledged, let alone valued, in society, and every tiny choice they make is scrutinised and criticised because they should know their place and not seek acknowledgement of any kind.

Jellyslice
Neat idea.
My work involves a lot of rules, so, I generally try and focus information on what you can do, rather than what you can't. Your idea is beautifully simple.

I was reading a "here's what the Disney princesses would look like now" thing showing modern beauty standards on BuzzFeed (insomniac lately, don't judge me). Completely genuine article, not meant as a commentary on anything, just art.

The answer was essentially "more make up, fewer clothes, long straight hair".

I don't think the problem is with the rules as much as it is with a society where it's acceptable for sexualised clothes to be sold to teenage and younger girls. Some teenagers might find the rules helpful, though I like the way of framing them as what is allowed rather than what isn't.

BuzzFeed has a LOT of stories about Disney princesses and other characters.

@Bluebooby

BuzzFeed has a LOT of stories about Disney princesses and other characters.

It really does. I don't want to take a quiz to find out what kind of donut I am, but at 3am I don't mind designing a room to see which Disney Princess I'm most like oh some such nonsense.

Well, TBH I think it is because the sexualisation of men's clothing is not a big thing. The fashion industry is not going out of it's way to make men present themselves as sex objects if they want to be cool or on-trend. So most boys and young men are not wearing things like that. You do at some schools see rules about tank tops, or sagging their jeans, and requiring shirts too.

In fact even men's shorts these days are pretty long.

Women's and girls fashion however consistently pushes the envelope of sexualising girls and telling them being in fashion means presenting themselves as sex objects. And because new things keep becoming normalised they keep having to find new ways to push that envelope, too.

So there are tons of women's clothes that do it, and girls who want to look cool and fit in want to or sometimes feel pressured to wear those things.

School dress codes usually reflect the things students actually try to wear. Being as it's a school, and it's not really appropriate for students to go around presenting as sex objects, or being surrounded by other people presenting as sex objects, so they often focus more on girls clothing.

The way around it is really for parents to talk to their daughters about the fashion industry and not needing to follow it's every whim.

DD2's school always sends out guidance for non-school uniform day. It's very simple - "Whilst we want pupils to enjoy themselves, we need to considertheir comfort and health and safety. All tops must cover their midriff and not be too low or revealing. If shorts or skirts are worn, they must be of a decent length. No hot pants or extreme mini skirts. Shoes must be sensible and no high heels. No extreme hair colouring or excessive jewellery is allowed."

I think that's entirely sensible.

It's absolutely not the point, but...

Once, having gone to church, I read in the newsletter a request for everyone to stop wearing short shorts in summer. What this was phrased as though, was 'please could congregants, male and female, stop wearing provocatively short clothing, especially shorts'.

Now, this was the first time I had EVER seen mens clothes described like this, so I asked about a bit. It turned out that the secretary was personally offended by the length of some of the mens football shorts and it was pretty much entirely directed at them .

But yeah, only once have I ever seen male and female dress requirements lumped together like that.

Now, this was the first time I had EVER seen mens clothes described like this, so I asked about a bit. It turned out that the secretary was personally offended by the length of some of the mens football shorts and it was pretty much entirely directed at them.
😂😂

I have to say though, I dress in a similar manner to your DD, though only jeans (no shorts). There is fuck all provocative about a cropped jumper and high waisted jeans. Nor about a high waist and a cropped T shirt.

I feel bad for teen girls. I remember the quandary of very short skirts being in fashion and it looking "wrong" if they were longer.

My feelings are:

1. bodies aren't shameful so if a girl is confident to go out in shorts with her bum hanging out good for her (looking at you SD) There's only a short window in life where you have that confidence

2. if boys/men can't deal with it, that's their problem and should be treated as such.

I think the root cause of this is porn culture and oversexualisation of girls, it's not fair to tell teen girls not to wear certain things when everything around them is telling them that's how they "should" look.

We need to deal with the underlying culture, then things will become more equitable. Although it appears that actually boys are becoming more image conscious, rather than women being less image conscious. Based on DS's instagram feed of waxed 6 packs and how to get them

I wonder how a boy turning up wearing 'provocative' stereotypically female clothing might be treated?

I guess the question should be why does fashionable = less fabric for girls?
You beat me to it OP.

I do feel girls are in a no win situation really because a lot of money has been spent over the years pushing a very narrow view of what it is to be an ideal woman, what beauty looks like and it just so happens that the dominant model of femininity and what girls should aspire to is thin, made up, tanned, no body hair, wearing fitted clothing or clothing that reveals a lot of skin that men typically want to look at.

Then when women pushed back, the advertisers and media rebranded to say 'do all the same stuff, but we'll rebrand it body confidence and you're doing it for you', which is the same end result but girls are taught they're doing all this additional styling and maintenance for them. It just so happens that it follows the same male gaze expectations.

At this point challenging the fact that a whole industry is created around subtly and not so subtle telling girls to appeal to men could be construed as being a prude. Or if people challenge the fact that teen girls often dress in accordance with the socialisation and advertising then they risk being told they're victim blamers or making girls responsible for men's actions.

There's a lot to unpick.

The school would be much better saying that all students are expected to wear appropriate length shorts/skirts, keep their chest and midriff covered. Naturally there's always going to be someone who shows up with their arse hanging out their shorts playing dumb asking what's inappropriate, but it's a starting point.

Tbh the amount of school mums who come to pick up their dc in shorts with their bums hanging right out is more shocking to me ... yes good for them for being confident but it does not look flattering one bit.
And no I'm not jealous, I work out 6 days a week and work bloody hard and I think I look better naked now at 35 than I ever did before..but it doesnt mean I want everyone to see those bits of me ,nor is it cooler in hot weather, if anything it's more uncomfortable.
I do agree however that its what's been pushed on girls and women to think is fashionable. As soon as the suns outs everyone round here basically strips off and its stupid because looser flowy clothing would keep you cooler than a tight boob tube and denim shorts.
Anyway I realise I went off on a tangent there..insomnia makes me waffle sorry.