Clothes are a method of expression and freedom of expression is something we should encourage vigorously.

"Those that would give up essential liberty for a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

quote:

---

Mandatory school unis promote conformity

---

Only in dress. Consumer culture promotes conformity in a manner of thought and behaviour. Teenagers spend loads of money following the latest trends in clothing. Whose dollars do you think are fueling Nike sweatshops?

quote:

---

They were fluorescent orange, though. The overalls, I mean.

---

Okay, so the kilty thing is a poor choice. It attracts dirty old men - while, of course, the skinny top that shows off the belly-button ring attracts no unwanted sexual attention. And the $700 leather jacket goes unnoticed by other kids in the subway. Right.
What would rich girls wear, given free choice, that didn't target them for something?

quote:

---

Only in dress. Consumer culture promotes conformity in a manner of thought and behaviour. Teenagers spend loads of money following the latest trends in clothing. Whose dollars do you think are fueling Nike sweatshops?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard tunderin' jeesus:
I usedta wear my overalls regularly in college. Easy to roll out of bed and slip them on. No muss, no fuss, no thought - important when functioning on two hours sleep and the lingering effects of recreational combustibles.

They were fluorescent orange, though. The overalls, I mean.

---

Just some food for thought:

School Uniforms are NOT manditory in most Japanse High Schools. Girls in the public system choose to wear them because they think they are cool, for a number of reasons.

Anyone who associates school with freedom of expression has been out of contact with our educational system for too long, I suspect. Let the kids express themselves any way they want outside of school.

I don't think anyone should have to wear the schoolgirl kilt. (That can't be warm in winter...can it?) It does have certain connotations. But they might choose to, in which case...what can you do.

But trousers should always be an option. This isn't 1960.

quote:

---

Anyone who associates school with freedom of expression has been out of contact with our educational system for too long, I suspect.

---

Amen. I never had to wear a uniform and I still found it plenty repressive.

[ 03 June 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]

quote:

---

We can say, "Who cares what people's bodies look like?" Teenagers do. They care deeply and want to look nice - it means a lot to them. They should be able to dress in ways that make them feel confident in themselves.

---

Of course, no one should be forced to wear a kilt, or skirt of any kind. Slacks for winter and summer pants or long shorts for warm weather should be the rule for both boys and girls.

quote:

---

I'm curious to know if a financial political or familial relationship exists between Trustees and the manufacturers and retailers of school uniforms

---

You mean like the ones between teachers union pension plans and shopping malls?

Teachers holds $2 billion of its approximately $60 billion assets in real estate, and owns seven of Canada's prime regional malls, among them Calgary's Chinook Centre; Richmond (British Columbia) Centre; and Markville Shopping Centre, Markham, Ontario. It also owns 75% interests in two others. The fund represents 155,000 elementary and secondary school teachers in the province

[ 03 June 2003: Message edited by: PitPat ]

but as for girls wearing pants...nooooo waaaay, says the King of Swaziland:

quote:

---

MBABANE, Swaziland (Reuters) -- Swaziland's absolute monarch has singled out women wearing pants as the cause of the world's ills in a state radio sermon that also condemned human rights as an "abomination before God."

"The Bible says curse be unto a woman who wears pants, and those who wear their husband's clothes. That is why the world is in such a state today," Mswati, ruler of the impoverished feudal nation of about one million, said late on Thursday.

The Times of Swaziland reported that the monarch, who reigns supreme in the landlocked country run by palace appointees and where opposition parties are banned, went on to criticize the human rights movement.

"What rights? God created people, and He gave them their roles in society. You cannot change what God has created. This is an abomination before God," the king told an audience of conservative church leaders.

Women on the streets of capital Mbabane were not impressed.

"The king says I am the cause of the world's problems because of my outfit. Never mind terrorism, government corruption, poverty and disease, it's me and my pants. I reject that," said Thob'sile Dlamini.

---

quote:

---

That's true, but some feedback from uniformed students seems to indicate that they like wearing uniforms, and even find it a relief from the pressure of deciding what to wear in the morning.

---

They're certainly free to wear it then, no? Why is it important that everybody be forced to wear a uniform? Kinda makes it sound a little moral/religious:

quote:

---

They're certainly free to wear it then, no? Why is it important that everybody be forced to wear a uniform?

---

quote:

---

Men didn't wear pants in biblical times, they wore a sort of caften thing and shawls or open robes which could also be tied as skirts.

---

[ 04 June 2003: Message edited by: Rebecca West ]

quote:

---

It isn't, and who said anything about forcing anyone to wear anything?

---

That's typically how it works, isn't it? Students whose school has a dress code are forced to wear uniforms. Those students who enjoy this do so at the expense of the students who don't really care to have their clothing choices decided for them.

As for the $500 shoes versus the Wal-Mart shoes, most of the schools sold the uniforms themselves or had some sort of distributor do it for everyone in the place - so everyone looked the same. Judging by the prices they charged, the schools made a nice tidy profit too...

This is North America so I think women should have the option of wearing pants or a skirt, if it were implemented here - and it SHOULD BE.

I think having everyone dressed in a proper, conservative fashion helped to create a far more respectful and disciplined school. It also made kids target their energies into sports or clubs (or academics even, god forbid) to form an identity rather than assuming an identity by trying to dress like slim shady or Britney... Essentially the school uniform kills "mall cool" and a lot of the cliques that form based on being say a rapper/skater/mod/prep/punk.

From what I saw, uniforms made for a far more pleasant school experience than anything I encountered as a student in Canada.

Requiring uniforms generally ends up costing families more because kids still need the same trendy clothes to wear outside school hours, so the savings issue is a bit of a fallacy. And, as you seemed to miss the point, shoes are not part of the uni sold by schools.

And I think there is some value, a great deal of value, in kids learning to express themselves in any manner. I find the notion of a "conservative disciplined, respectful" (read: back to basics, head down, no talking) environment a bit at odds with an optimal learning situation. This concept though certainly seems popular with parents and older people, who perhaps can't remember their own school days and how they would react to uni's being imposed.

And Tex, not everyone is interested in sports and such. Those just create their own cliques anyway.

But I don't suspect you have much faith in kids anyway judging by your final line. Get in line, sit down, shut up, this is your future, get used to it. Pretty sad actually.

By the way, did you wear a uniform in school? How many in favour of them in this thread did?

[ 05 June 2003: Message edited by: Tommy Shanks ]

quote:

---

By the way, did you wear a uniform in school? How many in favour of them in this thread did?

---

But it was my (well early on my Mom's of course) choice. Not some school staffer deciding that I'd look great in gray pants and a white shirt.

While I never had to wear a school uniform, had my school opted for a manditory uniform policy, I'm sure I would've thoroughly enjoyed the process of subverting it.

I live near a public school which has switched to uniforms with much success. There are 3 or 4 basic uniform options and girls may choose between a kilt or pants.

*Many* girls choose the kilt to titillate the dirty old men on the bus and then derisively snort about it with their friends.

quote:

---

Sounds like me, North Stars from Bargin Harold's, old jeans, $3.00 plain coloured t-shirts, etc.,etc.

---

And I find the suggestion that female sexual power is demoralizing a gross over-generalizaiton. That is not, for example, how many Japanese feel.

[ 06 June 2003: Message edited by: Tackaberry ]

Not because they are a great class leveller but they help even things out, the rich kids will still have better cars, computers at home, parents with degrees, music lessons, etc. These things can't be taken away easily.

I would have felt better in a uniform (I never went to a school with them), but it would have removed one pressure from a pretty complicated time and I think would have been worth it. When I lived overseas most kids I knew liked their school uniforms, and the teachers didn't seem to come down too hard on those who tried to subert it.

In my original post, I didn't mention anything about changing teaching styles or bringing back older subjects like handwriting or latin. I'm not advocating a return to old-style schools, just uniforms for their positive effect on school culture and to encourage polite, and civilized behaviour.

In my day (grumpy old man voice), to emulate your favorite rockstar was to wear plaid shirts and doc martens, The Metal Heads wore band shirts. Really not many of us imitated our favorites to stupid degrees, most of my grunge friends didn't end up dead and the Metallica fans didn't end up... uhhhh suing Napster. I have faith that the children of today are just as smart. Most trends are fairly harmless, and comprised of what is effectively disposable culture.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rebecca West:
There's a brief period of time where many girls perceive their sexual "power" over men and revel in it. Before long most of them realize what a double-edged sword it is, how demoralizing being constantly ogled and harassed is.

---

Girls don't want to be told what to wear, but they sure don't want to be invisible, either. Or maybe that's the same thing, stated twice. They want to be sexy and attractive, but they only want to the attention of the guys they find attractive. What they really want is to have it both ways, without a price to pay. Too bad: can't be done.

[ 06 June 2003: Message edited by: nonesuch ]

quote:

---

Girls don't want to be told what to wear, but they sure don't want to be invisible, either.

---

I don't think this applies only to girls/women (the need to conform and to stand out, a delicate balancing act for most of us to detemine which is more important and how to express each, is usually just being learned and experimented with by teenagers. Sometimes they find a balance, sometimes they don't). Recognition as a human need has been theorized by philosophers (was it Kant or Hegel who wrote quite extensively on this?) and psychoanalysts, and it is practiced in a rather crude way through overt sexualization by many women in my eyes.

quote:

---

How big is "before long" and how many are "most"? I ask only because i don't see all that many women in their 20's and not enough in their 30's breaking the cycle.

---

Yes, agreed. But heck, I've been known to dress scantily, act flirtateously and dance suggestively, as an expression of self but with the knowledge that there are people watching this performance. I've also done it at times because I needed to feel valued, even simply as a commodity or by those whom I had no respect or desire for, because I felt smothered by invisibility, and that seemed a better option than being ignored. And while the value of women to society as a whole tends to degrade as they age, they often have individuals in their life who are able to reassure them of their value as people, and have many times discovered that themselve as well. But there often isn't seen to be a lot of value in young women aside from their bodies.

It is as Rebecca West said, a double edged sword, to be recognized for something that is less than what you are but seen as you, in a way that may make you feel degraded, but which can affirm that you exist, that you are seen, and maybe even seen as special. I hate being ogled, and at times it can make me feel weak and shamed and dirty, but there can also be a rush of power in it, and I'll admit that I don't feel a lot of power in my life (not to say that I feel particularly powerless either most of the time - after all, I'm young, white, able bodies, well educated and relatively well off. But I'm not aware of teh power that I wield through my various privileges in the way that I am aware of power when it comes to the use of my sexuality). And though its not something I trade on often, I wouldn't want to give it up. Its my ace in the hole, as it were.

quote:

---

What they really want is to have it both ways, without a price to pay. Too bad: can't be done.

---

I find this phrasing quite scary, because it is the same type of thinking that I see going into rape myths - women and girls are responsible for the reactions and actions of others, specifically men, and in this context specifically older men. Even if the price isn't sexual assault, the implication is that a woman or girl dressed "provactively" must accept the reactions she gets and take responsibility for them. The problem being that she can't control anyone else, and that those reactions are often designed to control her.

Provocative is also in the eye of the beholder - I know I often get comments and offensive reactions to my body simply because I happen to have large breasts, whether I'm wearing a tight shirt or a bunnyhug. my confidence now I think defuses a lot of these situations, but I feel I was preyed upon when younger by those who used my lack of confidence to act innapropriately. And looking back, it was the fact that I wasn't able or willing to assert myself that led to the harassment more than my physical self. Again, that exercise of power - I don't know if they felt it, were aware of it, or if it was just part of the male privelege to be able to act as such, but I sure felt the power dynamics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tackaberry:
Rebecca, if you re aright and humans have to display staus, then you must think socialism in any form is doomed, being contrary to human nature.

---

quote:

---

And I find the suggestion that female sexual power is demoralizing a gross over-generalizaiton.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch: How big is "before long" and how many are "most"?
I ask only because i don't see all that many women in their 20's and not enough in their 30's breaking the cycle.

---

My daughter and I have had long discussions around the benefits and pitfalls of being very attractive, the different tools of power and manipulation men and women use, and why they're sometimes gender-specific. While she and her friends don't frame their observations in the language of feminism, they're very aware of the power dynamic between men and women and how it plays out in the larger world.

quote:

---

I feel I was preyed upon when younger by those who used my lack of confidence to act innapropriately. And looking back, it was the fact that I wasn't able or willing to assert myself that led to the harassment more than my physical self. Again, that exercise of power - I don't know if they felt it, were aware of it, or if it was just part of the male privelege to be able to act as such, but I sure felt the power dynamics

---

What a wonderful thing self-knowledge and self-confidence is. If it were ours to give, it would be the best gift any experienced woman could give a younger one.

[ 06 June 2003: Message edited by: Rebecca West ]

quote:

---

I find this phrasing quite scary, because it is the same type of thinking that I see going into rape myths - women and girls are responsible for the reactions and actions of others, specifically men, and in this context specifically older men. Even if the price isn't sexual assault, the implication is that a woman or girl dressed "provactively" must accept the reactions she gets and take responsibility for them. The problem being that she can't control anyone else, and that those reactions are often designed to control her

---

Hey, that isn't what i said! Nowhere did rape come into it.
If you make yourself attractive to men, you attract the ones you don't like as well as the ones you do want. If you you don't dress to attract men, the ones the you want may not notice you. If you dress according to the latest teen fashion, you may look more provocative than you're comfortable acting on. If you wear a uniform, you don't stand out as an individual, but may be noticed as a type. If you pick out your own clothes, you're more responsible; if somebody else picks them out, you're less free. That kind of price.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:

How big is "before long" and how many are "most"?
I ask only because i don't see all that many women in their 20's and not enough in their 30's breaking the cycle.

---

quote:

---

Hey, that isn't what i said! Nowhere did rape come into it.

---

Maybe not for you. But as I said, this is the type of thinking that I see rape myths stemming from. And I stand by that - if you would like to clarify your statements in a way that shows to me there isn't an underlying, very frightening attitude, I'd love to read your post (note - your last post didn't help any in my opinion).

quote:

---

If you make yourself attractive to men, you attract the ones you don't like as well as the ones you do want. If you you don't dress to attract men, the ones the you want may not notice you.

---

I love (big sarcasm here) the way men are at the centre of everything in this world view of women and girls - not comfort, not self, not feeling good about oneself. 95% of the time, when I get dressed, I don't do it for men, I do it for me (one letter, big difference). I like to look attractive, though my idea of attractive usually involves loose jeans and shirts that fit but aren't overly tight or low in my everyday life. yeah, I choose jeans that I think look flattering on me, but my prime motication is not "what will men think of my butt in these pants,"? but "what do I think of my butt in these pants?" And that still doesn't deal with teh fact that unwanted attention, up to and including harassment, happens regardless of what a woman does or doesn't wear.

quote:

---

If you dress according to the latest teen fashion, you may look more provocative than you're comfortable acting on.

---

Provocation is in the eye of the beholder. Really, lets turn this around - if I see an attractive man in a nicely cut suit walking down Bay street (provocative attire in my eyes - especially those banker pinstripes), am I justified in making comments to my friends or self on how I'd like to jump him or questioning if that bulge in his pants is real, leering, following him, whistling, touching him? Do we blame him because he dresses in a powerful and in my eyes sexy way?

In grade 8, a teacher would leer at a girl in my class who often wore a red velvet bodysuit - when we complained through the appropriate channels, we were told it was her fault for dresing like that. After all, why should it be expected that a thirty something man entrusted with the care of young men and women all day shouldn't feel free to stare openly at the breasts of a 13 year old? I mean, they were nice breasts. Of course, in my oversize sweatshirts I got the same reaction. Who's to blame here? It wasn't the clothes - it was the attitude, that our bodies were on display, whether we put them there or not.

quote:

---

And there is, too, some desire to control in a girl's dressing and flirting to turn men on.

---

Yup. Its nice to feel powerful sometimes, espcially when you feel powerless in the rest of your life. And its sad that young women often only feel power through their bodies.

quote:

---

More, in fact, than there is in ogling.

---

But I strongly disagree here. I don't think its the same type of exercise of power - there's a qualitiative difference in the type of power expressed in my eyes.

quote:

---

To suggest that girls and women are not responsible for their actions, but boys and men are responsible for their reactions is to suggest that women have no control over anything. Surely we know better?

---

Those girls were hiking up those skirts as far as they could go and then some (I've seen waaaay too many underpants this summer)...then there were the see-through blouses and the thigh high boots that they paired with their uniforms....it was all kind of...icky.

Its funny because, when we go into the public non-uniform schools all the girls look really normal. Jeans, sweatshirts, running shoes. Nothing as revealing as the uniforms. It seems like a much healthier atmosphere.

quote:

---

Surely we know better than to suggest that I said that? What actions did I say that

---

However, this often becomes the catching point for many men when they are subsequently told that women are powerless and men have the power. They are not able to make the leap from the power they feel to the concept that the woman does not control how the man reacts to her appearance. What women do not often appear understand is that the lived experience of men is not one where they are calculating their response to the woman in question (undoubtedly similar to their own experience of attraction to men). It does not feel like a reaction that I have control over, or that I even consciously desired. I didn't ask to be stunned senseless by a beautiful woman, who I seem to keep wanting to look at out of the corner of my eye. I can sit and analyze the components of my assessment, but that doesn't really dispel the visceral feelings of compulsion involved. I do not feel like I have the power, even though I do have the power as to what I do with my reaction.

Perhaps it's a failing of language and the words we use to discuss male/female power relations. I'm not trying to be an apologist for rapists, or men who leer at girls on the bus. I think being attracted to someone and violating another person's freedom and dignity are seperate issues.

[ 07 June 2003: Message edited by: verbatim ]

I personally think the uniforms should be abolished. Surely under 2(b) of the Charter they could be challenged and be ruled as violations to our right; perhaps then creating a precedent to get rid of those other anoying uniforms (suits).

And no, we didn't have to have as many clothes as a student at a non-uniform school. In my case, having the uniform meant having more money to spend on fewer evening/weekend clothes -- which for me meant the difference between Levis and knock-offs, which back then was Very Important ;-)

It was much more economical having the uniform; in lower grades, you could turn outgrown ones in at the school shop, and in higher ones, the durability meant that one kilt lasted years.