Another school bans clothing cause it "gang related"

[Racket_Man]

http://www.stylelist.com/2010/06/22/skinny-jeans-hoodies-banned-high-school/?icid=main|hp-desktop|dl5|link6|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stylelist.com%2 F2010%2F06%2F22%2Fskinny-jeans-hoodies-banned-high-school%2F

Ok I can agree with the no unddies showing or those too small tank tops or hot pants type short shorts but cargo pants?????? OK I get the competive fashion these days but why not just (as some of the commentors suggest) go with a school uniform????

and what is with the UK school mentioned at the bottom of the article banning girls under 15 from wearing skirts??? Heck if they are so big on school uniforms over there I thought that females were supposed to wear skirts as part of the uniform????

[fireheart17]

For some reason I read this and thought that the girls were required to wear tartan pants. The skirts depicted in the photo are not ones you'd normally see at a private school.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Cargo pants? Why don't you ban jeans next. Thank whoever my school never tried to pull crap like this, I only ever wear my cargoes :(

[Mongo Skruddgemire]

Our school started getting obnoxious with clothes crackdowns. They decided to ban hats at all school functions since hats were used by the gangs. And I'm talking a total ban. Even at extra-curricular events like outdoor sports. Yes you could buy the Team Ball cap at the field's concession stand, but if you wore it...you were suspended.

Could never figure out what gangs the school was afraid of. We were an intellectual magnate school where the only gangs I could think of were the nerds who would lurk on the BBS systems (yes this dates me to the late 80's) and ambush each other in the Door Games and talk smack in the forums. There was also this clique of girls who would stake out the local mall and UTTERLY DESTROY...their parent's credit ratings.

So the hat ban was implemented. So, for the last two weeks of school me and a group of my friends decided to protest. We wore matching suits and ties.

Funny thing was, the administration knew what we were doing and knew why we were doing it. But they were powerless to stop us. What were they going to do? Suspend us for dressing above the dress code? Toss us out for looking like the young republicans? They knew that if they tried, our parents would march in with lawyers in tow.

For two weeks we enjoyed the sight of administration gnashing their teeth as we would go from class to class in an obvious (non-disruptive) pack who would discuss classes and latest news articles in popular science.

Sadly nowadays the schools have the right to stop even that.

I do agree. They need to do a school uniform or at the very least decide on a standardized mode of dress. It would suck for the kids, but they'll get over it.

[Lace Neil Singer]

and what is with the UK school mentioned at the bottom of the article banning girls under 15 from wearing skirts??? Heck if they are so big on school uniforms over there I thought that females were supposed to wear skirts as part of the uniform????

It's cuz girls were rolling the skirts up to thigh level and someone got the crackpot idea that banning skirts would stop child predators and rapists from getting the wrong idea. :rolleyes: Yeah, cuz it's always the girl's fault if she gets raped, cuz she's wearing a short skirt and men just can't help themselves.

A uniform isn't a fate worse than death like some American kids seem to think. A lot of UK schools have a uniform; in fact, the majority do. It doesn't stop cliques forming, like some claim, but at least all the kids are on a level playing field and know what they can and can't wear.

[Jack]

I may be biased (or unbiased as the case may be) because I'm not in school anymore, but I think I'd really prefer a uniform to the dress codes I used to see. They contained a lot of wording like "faculty's discretion" and "in the opinion of" and "determine that" which, even given the accompanying laundry list of things we couldn't wear that no one even wanted to anymore (they're always a decade behind), left us open to a good deal of selective harassment.

[fireheart17]

Nearly all schools in Australia at both primary and secondary level have some form of uniform. (the ones that don't are either the pre-university schools (Year 11 and 12, treat the kids like uni students) or they have a very unique teaching methodology that's not Montessori or Steiner)

I have no problem with it as it does level out the playing field. However, while the private schools seem to be more focused on having everyone look almost identical, the public schools will allow some level of freedom.

[Greenday]

Haha. I have a bunch of friends from Scranton. Can't wait to tell them. I don't see this working though.

[Red Panda]

I don't see the big deal. Its basically a step down from a school uniform, which is better overall as it allows more freedom to the student to express themselves and freedom for the parent as far as prices go. You can buy a five dollar pair of brown pants or a 50 dollar pair, but a school uniform will only have the one price.

[jackfaire]

Cargo pants? Why don't you ban jeans next. Thank whoever my school never tried to pull crap like this, I only ever wear my cargoes :(

*sighs* I miss being in good enough shape to find cargos that fit.


On topic what's next banning clothes altogether?

[jackfaire]

It's cuz girls were rolling the skirts up to thigh level and someone got the crackpot idea that banning skirts would stop child predators and rapists from getting the wrong idea. :rolleyes: Yeah, cuz it's always the girl's fault if she gets raped, cuz she's wearing a short skirt and men just can't help themselves.



The other side of the coin is that they seem to think it's always rape if a girl under the age of 18 has sex. It could never ever be that a girl wants to have sex.

Girls hate sex.

[Jack]

Probably because they call it statutory rape, even if it wasn't rape per se. Joe Average might not know what 'statutory' specifies, so he discards it. "Rape".

[jackfaire]

Probably because they call it statutory rape, even if it wasn't rape per se. Joe Average might not know what 'statutory' specifies, so he discards it. "Rape".

I am referring to when they sleep with their same age boyfriends, I don't know if that qualifies as statutory but if it does it does for both sides.

The assumption seems to be that the 15 year old boy wanted it and the girl had to have been tricked, fooled, or forced. Because it could never be that the girl approached the subject and is the one that chased the guy. That's just impossible.

[KnitShoni]

Our school district has something called standardized dress (pissed us and our parents off when they implemented our senior year). It was basically a uniform. We weren't allowed to wear jeans, cargo pants, or any type of short. We could only wear navy blue or khaki slacks or skirts. Our shirts could only be red, blue, and white, and they had to be polo style. They claimed it was to combat the wearing of "gang-related clothing." We always thought it was ridiculous how out of touch district administration was, since most of the gangs down here wore khaki bottoms with blue, red, or white tops. They seem to have loosened up a bit since my stepkids started school. They can wear jeans now.

Of course, this is a school district that bans fingernail polish on elementary school girls and facial hair on high school boys.

[infinitemonkies]

What would they do if a gang decided to wear something of religious significance as their identifying symbol? Like a crucifix or rosary beads? The supreme court says the school cannot order student to not display such items.

Anyone know if this has actually happened anywhere?

[BlaqueKatt]

What would they do if a gang decided to wear something of religious significance as their identifying symbol? Like a crucifix or rosary beads? The supreme court says the school cannot order student to not display such items.

Anyone know if this has actually happened anywhere?

you're kidding right? (http://fratching.com/showthread.php?t=2879&highlight=rosary)

plus the first amendment is limited in public schools (http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/firstamendment101/)-the courts have given permission to limit rights for various reasons-wearing rosary beads as part of a gang symbol has allowed schools to ban them from visible wear* with the courts ok, as it may cause a disturbance being gang-related. Also a Catholic would not wear rosary beads around their neck-it's considered very sacrilegious to some-as they are prayer counters, not a decoration or jewelry. They are also usually blessed by a priest and therefore a "holy item" worthy of being treated with reverence.

*you can still wear them, just under your shirt not on the outside