I don’t like the idea of ‘boys’ clothes being the neutral option
Are tracksuits boys' clothes? They've only been around since the 1970s and have always been worn by both sexes, so I see them as neutral. Clothing that follows the natural shape of the body for ease of movement (i.e. trousers) shouldn't be a male thing, should it?
I loathed having to wear skirts to school, as did my daughter, and we both wanted the (to us) more comfortable and practical option of trousers. It made me cross that my daughter's school insisted on skirts for girls when girls and parents had been asking for this 30 years before in my childhood. So I suppose that experience colours my view.
I'd have preferred something practical, comfortable and neutral, which is why I suggested tracksuits, and I've always been a bit puzzled about how we ended up with skirts as the norm for girls. Does anyone know the history? Obviously skirts can be cooler in warm climates hence sometimes also worn by men in some countries, but in northern Europe what is the rationale for dressing women like this? I suppose 'modesty' as they were floor length until fairly recently? Wanting to restrict our ability to move? To provide ease of access for period management and sex? They've always seemed a bit problematic to me.
Blazer, tie and smart trousers is basically male office wear, so offering a choice of skirts or trousers seems to me to be saying "choose which gender you want to dress as" rather than giving a neutral option. But maybe this will change if more boys/men start wearing skirts because they like them or find them comfortable rather than to make a gender statement. But in my ideal world, childhood would be as gender-free as possible.
Having said all that, I'm not really a supporter of uniform at all. I'd prefer children to be allowed to wear their own clothes to school (with some restrictions for practicality) as they do in many other countries without any apparent impact on educational attainment. But that's a different debate...