Another victory for the ACLU over Propriety
A US District Court Judge has ruled that a North Carolina charter school promoting traditional values engaged in unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring girls to wear skirts! Believe it or not, the judge ( Judge Malcolm Howard) was appointed by one of our most Conservative Presidents. This is a kindergarten through 8th grade Charter school. You know, the kind of school that parents choose.
Three "mothers" who had the support & advice (and maybe even the inspiration) of the leftist organization, the ACLU, sued on behalf of their daughters (think about that!) against the dress code.
“All I wanted was for my daughter and every other girl at school to have the option to wear pants so she could play outside, sit comfortably, and stay warm in the winter,” Bonnie Peltier said in a statement provided by the ACLU. That sounds like something Bonnie wants. I doubt her young child would make that complaint, would she? The three girls, ages 5, 10 & 14, were represented by all the forces & powers of the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina and the law firm of Ellis & Winters LLP!
"The school argued that its student uniform requiring all students to wear white or navy blue tops tucked into khaki or blue bottoms is part of its traditional values education known to parents when they enroll their children.
"This July 24, 2017, photo provided by Bonnie Peltier shows her daughter A.P., that their home in Winnabow, N.C. Peltier sued her daughter’s charter school because it required girls to wear skirts and forbid them from wearing pants. A federal judge ruled on Thursday, March 28, 2019, that Charter Day School’s skirts-only rule for girls was unconstitutional sex discrimination. (Bonnie Peltier via AP)
Here is the logic of the ACLU:
“They [Charter Day School] are permitted to have a dress code,” said Chris Brook, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina. “They are not allowed to have a dress code that treats girls differently than boys.”
Obvious question: Are girls different than boys?
"U.S. District Judge Malcolm Howard found the dress policy violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
66 visitors
"After a final judgment is entered in the case, Charter Day will have 30 days to file an appeal in the Fourth District Court of Appeals."
They should appeal.
Good for the ACLU.
"Propriety". Since when did "propriety" forbid girls from wearing pants? What century are we in, anyway?
If the school takes taxpayer money, the school can't discriminate on the basis of sex. No requiring different dress for girls vs. boys. If they want to do that, they can give up taxpayer support.
The next ACLU lawsuit could be that washrooms and locker rooms cannot discriminate between boys and girls, and they should be entitled to use the same washrooms and locker rooms. After all, there can't be any difference between boys and girls, eh? I think I was born too soon.
Well said, Buzz. Viva la Difference!
What does the fact that there is a difference between boys and girls have to do with a discriminatory dress code?
Is our anatomy so different that it is indecent for girls to wear pants? Do pants expose our genitals? Any woman who has worn a skirt or dress will tell you that it is much more likely that we will accidentally show more skin that we'd like to in a skirt than in pants. Playing on the playground? Watch out for those monkey bars. Take a tumble? Windy day?
And a skirt on a cold day can be miserable. Tights or leggings under a skirt are still not as warm as pants.
Now, the girls get to wear pants, which will allow them to play the same as boys, in the same degree of comfort as boys. Why does that seem to threaten men?
The last surviving olde farts of the post WWII patriarchy still dream of a return to an idyllic mythical Pleasantville where everything was still seen in comforting sepia toned black and white and when everyone conformed and we all stayed in our predetermined assigned places. Where all the boys played with balls and all the girls played with dolls. Anyone crossing the set boundaries was rightfully punished for the good of all by God fearing white Christian men who knew what was best for everyone else whether they liked it or not.
They are saying "If you won't obey our rules you don't attend our schools"...
Pleasantville? More like Gilliad of A Handmaiden's Tale. Who is up for that?
Hi Sandy, I wasn't sure you would address your comments to me, but now that you have, I think the question you ask answers itself. The difference between boys and girls would mean that they are not only biologically different, emotionally different, but socially different. I don't think the dress code is discriminatory at all. If a boy wanted to wear a skirt, he should be expelled for wearing one. You see, there is the equal treatment!
Is our anatomy so different that it is indecent for girls to wear pants?
Indecent - no. untraditional - yes. unatractive - yes. inappropriate -yes. The yea's have it!
Do pants expose our genitals?
No
Playing on the playground?
I think we could allow pants in the playground. I'm sure the school would have a female locker room for pants and coats when the kids go outside. Let's keep it real. This is about changing social norms.
Why does that seem to threaten men?
Another strawman argument. It's about what is appropriate.
Yes, let's have elementary school girls go to a locker room and change every time they go outside for recess, and change again when they come back in.
I can't believe you even typed this comment after the first one I quoted.
An unsupported assertion. You think pants are unattractive. That is entirely a matter of opinion. You think pants are inappropriate. Also entirely a matter of opinion. Again, I ask - what century are we living in, here?
Yes, the dress code is discriminatory. It forces girls into a garment that restricts their activities and leaves them exposed to the cold.
And yes, the only ones who seem to be threatened here are men. Except for JBB, who seems to recognize this for the ridiculousness that it is.
It is entirely inappropriate to force girls to wear dresses in the year 2019.
And the judge told them "If you won't obey our rules, you don't get our money."
I think there are a few people here who would like to live in Gilead.
In Oklahoma elementary school children regularly die in tornados because their local school districts cannot even afford badly needed storm shelters so I am absolutely sure your brilliant idea of mandating elementary schools install playground locker rooms is gonna fly /S...
Their real aim is to delegitimize institutions and organizations that protect and defend our rights and that fight against creeping FASCISM like the ACLU, NAACP, NOW, ADL and the SPLC do...
Isn't that what happens in the winter? Don't the kids have to put coats on? Are you saying that the girls would be put out by putting on the pants? Is it that hard?
You think pants are unattractive. That is entirely a matter of opinion.
It is mine and it may be the opinion of many. It is a charter school, where people choose to send their children. They don't just choose on the quality of teaching. I am sure they also want their children to learn how to present themselves. There is something to be said for appearance as well as hygiene. Don't we teach children to brush their teeth at least once a day and shower at least once a day?
So, ya, put me against the generation which endorsed faded genes for both genders for all occasions.
You think pants are inappropriate.
School shouldn't be a "come as you are" type place.
It forces girls into a garment that restricts their activities and leaves them exposed to the cold.
It teaches them how to present themselves. Slacks & sandals are for the three bitter moms!
Do they have to take off clothes to put their coats on? We're talking about girls partially disrobing, storing their clothes, and putting on different clothes twice in every recess period here, Vic. Not just adding a layer. Think, Vic. Preferably before you type.
It's a charter school that is no longer being allowed to use taxpayer money to discriminate on the basis of sex.
We teach both boys and girls that, yes. BTW, you should be brushing twice a day.
This is your response to me saying that you think pants are inappropriate. So, if pants are inappropriate only for girls, and not for boys, you are endorsing school being a "come as you are" type place for boys only. I'm so surprised.
Girls can be every bit as neat and modest in pants as they can in skirts.
The good news is, the Neanderthals and Misanthropes lost this round...
It sure is pissing some people off.
Next they'll be letting women work outside the home and buy houses and shit.
Next thing you know women will be demanding the vote. Oh, THE HORROR...
Uppity bitches.
Well, Sandy, if you want them to wear pants for playing in the playground, that's what you got to do. You make it sound like it's a major project for a girl to wear a skirt. How did so many accomplish this feat for so long? Ah, the way we punish these children/Sar
It's a charter school that is no longer being allowed to use taxpayer money to discriminate on the basis of sex.
You mean it's no longer being allowed to follow the will of the vast majority of parents who sent their children there. That sounds like progressive America!
We teach both boys and girls that, yes. BTW, you should be brushing twice a day.
Thanks Sandy, I know that, did you notice where I said "at least"
This is your response to me saying that you think pants are inappropriate. So, if pants are inappropriate only for girls, and not for boys, you are endorsing school being a "come as you are" type place for boys only.
And you ignored where I said boys don't get to wear skirts! Boys don't get to come as they are btw. Did you read the part about "all students to wear white or navy blue tops tucked into khaki or blue bottoms"???
All students must comply with proper attire!
Girls can be every bit as neat and modest in pants as they can in skirts.
That could be argued as a valid point, but it seldom works out that way. On the other hand there is nothing more "neat" on a girl, or woman for that matter, than a skirt!!!
Or, you let them wear pants if they want to. Much more practical.
It can be a major project for a girl to wear a skirt. Most elementary school gym classes don't change out, so we were discouraged from wearing skirts on days when we had gym class. Why? Because they restrict activity. My teachers figured this out decades ago. Not sure what the holdup is here.
Civil rights aren't a popularity contest. Why are those other parents so concerned with what girls who aren't their own daughters are wearing? Seems like they might be a bunch of busybodies.
Because it's irrelevant. Your way, there's one set of rules for boys, and a different set of rules for girls. Not acceptable, which is why the judge rightly ruled against it.
I'm not sure where you're reading that they aren't. The girls aren't showing up to school without either skirts or pants, are they?
Your opinion.
It's called the will of the people vs a judge, a leftist organization and three manipulated women
Civil rights aren't a popularity contest.
Nope, you don't have a civil right to go into a school that has a set dress code and change it. You simply don't send your child there.
Your way, there's one set of rules for boys, and a different set of rules for girls.
Quite the contrary... Girls don't wear skirts / boys don't wear skirts = EQUALITY
The girls aren't showing up to school without either skirts or pants, are they?
Proper attire as defined by the school is skirts, not whatever mom feels like
Add me to the list who think this is ridiculous Sandy....
I have three sisters who grew up in the 50s & 60s, and I raised two daughters. All of these "ladies" would tell Vic to stick his puritanical brainwashing where the sun never shines.... I also made sure my two daughters learned how to drop a guy like a bad habit if he didn't take "no" for an answer.....
Again, since you seem to have missed it, the school lost and the girls won...
You really don't understand civil rights, do you? This is why I prefer students who think.
You do if the school receives taxpayer money. If the school receives taxpayer money, the school isn't allowed to make discriminatory dress codes.
Flat out not true. If one group is required to wear different clothes from the other group, they are following different sets of rules.
Not anymore.
Me too.
Unreal in this day and age. Forcing girls to wear certain clothes. Clothes that would stop them from being as active as they could be.
I am surprised that some here are not saying that girls cannot participate in sports and should only cheer on the boys.
These same people argue that a kid can wear a maga hat or any bigoted t shirt they want in a public school.
Now that they want public funds to go to charter schools, they are now public.
I knew you were one of the good ones, too.
Same with you - you're a good egg.
I played baseball with the boys growing up. I'm sure that would have some people clutching their pearls.
Obviously not.
Someday we need to do an article on what Obama called "the expansion of rights".
This is why I prefer students who think.
I have a hunch you prefer impressionable young minds that can be indoctrinated.
If the school receives taxpayer money, the school isn't allowed to make discriminatory dress codes.
They weren't discriminatory.
If one group is required to wear different clothes from the other group
Both groups have requirements. Uni-sex dressing is an ideology not equality. And it's a rotten ideology
Big! The concept of the majority rules only applies when liberals have the majority, otherwise it is called tyrany by them.
Says the guy who wants to force girls to wear skirts because he thinks they look nicer.
The court and the definition of "discriminatory" disagree with you here.
How are they unisex? Girls' clothes are cut differently from boys' clothes. And allowing girls to dress equally comfortably as boys promotes equality, as it allows them to participate in the same activities as boys.
Again, your opinion, and a most outdated one.
Why are you scared of girls in pants?
I don't get why some people have such an issue with girls wearing pants? So what if they do, right? After all, girls/women wear pants in public everyday without it being an issue. So why is it an issue if schoolgirls wear pants? Taking issue with women's clothing is something you would hear about from the Middle East.
True.
It seems some people want to emulate Middle Eastern customs here, especially were girls/women are concerned. What's next: don't allow women to go anywhere without a male family member escort?
I'm waiting for some of them to try to repeal the vote for women, or take away our drivers' licenses. Probably while screaming about the dangers of Sharia Law.
I wouldn't be surprised if some wanted to do just that.
While touting the bible at the same time.
And wondering the whole time why women are kicking up such a fuss.
Proper women live to please men. They wear skirts because that's what men like. They don't argue with men. They're demure little darlings without minds of their own, and who never insist on being treated on an equal footing with men, or insisting that their daughters be treated on an equal footing with boys.
Note - I absolutely exclude you (and JBB, Ender, Dismayed Patriot, and FLYNAVY) from this group of weak-minded men. Something tells me you'd find a woman who let herself be treated like a doormat to be as boring as plain white rice.
That's what some seem to think or hope. Like wanting to go back to the 1950's, or even to pre-20th century mindset.
Thank you.
Requiring all women wear skirts means barring women from wearing pants...
My ancient Mama fought and legally won that right as a teacher back in 1967.
A school board lost that battle on a local level in Oklahoma over 50 years ago.
We were required to wear Specific "Uniforms" when I went to school (Boys and Girls). NO ONE bitched then.
"Learning" was the "Important" part of "School" back in my day ! 
These girls are learning. They're getting a practical lesson in civics and standing up for their rights. I understand that there are some folks who don't like that, though.
They're being taught by their parents to "Resist", any authority !
In my day....the "Teacher" and the Principle were "IT" ! There was nothing else but books, even in college ! Ya know the books, Arithmetic, Science, Geography (is that even taught anymore?), Biology....etc....
Everything else was considered an after school elective ! I took "Chess" !
BULL! It's their bitter moms who are objecting!
Do you think the kids are unaware of what's going on?
Little children shouldn't be exposed to political arguments at that age, but liberals do have a way of spreading misery.
Oh, good grief. You make it sound like King Solomon is deciding to cut them in half while the mothers fight over them right before their eyes.
The mothers are fighting for the right for girls to follow the same dress code as boys in a publicly funded school. A right with which the judge agrees, BTW. How is that "misery"?
One of the students is 14, which is older than I was when I took civics. Do you think students taking civics shouldn't be exposed to arguments concerning civil rights?
I prefer students who think. [deleted]
And one was as young as 5. Where is the decency of liberals?
I prefer students who think. From your comments, I can see that you probably don't.
I need for you to explain that a bit. Some people reading that would think you meant I prefer students who don't think. Others might interpret it to mean you don't think I think. It's kind of open ended. The kind of sentence someone famous leaves himself wide open with.
OMG, their moms are arguing that they should be allowed to wear pants. Next, they'll be in court while the moms fight to get porn in kindergartens! The horror
As far as students who think - I don't want students to just memorize their civics lessons. I want them to actually think about how civics applies to them in their daily life. Unfair and illegal dress codes are a good example.
What in hell does some wrong headed throwbacks trying, and failing, to force young school girls to wear dresses have to do with decency? If your bassackwards wrong headed hypocritical ideal of decency is the lousy immoral thrice divorced perverted whoremongering pussy grabbing treasonous letch currently occupying the White House then nobody, and I do mean nobody, should want anything at all to do with it anyway...
And conservatives like you Vic want to wallow in your "Little house on the Prairie" world where women were little more than shoeless, fetal incubating short order cooks.....
Trump is also off topic!
I'll leave personal attacks up there for moderation. Let's see how that goes.
Oh I see. You want to "teach them" Like Angela Davis & Howard Zinn would "teach"......So they all think alike....Got it!
That's a personal attack. Could you stick to the topic?
You're the one who doesn't want them to apply the lessons they should be learning, mostly because you don't like the results of those lessons being applied.
I'll leave your sweeping generalizations up for moderation too and see how that goes.
It's not just me. How about one of the early leaders of the feminist movement:
"One of the goals of the Feminist Elite is to reinforce to women the idea that men are obsolete."- Tammy Bruce
Girls wearing pants makes men obsolete?
Damn, men really need to up their game, if it's as easy as that.
There are many women who don't hate men. I'm sorry for those who were victimized, but the problem is always the same for progressives, they always need to demonize entire groups. Sandra, is there a reason why you think a school, where parents get to choose to send their children, shouldn't have a right to a dress code?
Then why do you continue to support the victimization? Double standards for girls is a form of oppression, Vic.
Where have I said they shouldn't have a right to a dress code?
They don't have a right to have a discriminatory dress code. There is a difference. My high school had a dress code, and I had no problem with it. Neither male nor female students were allowed to wear tank tops, cutoff sweats, midriff-baring shirts, or clothing promoting drugs or alcohol. Girls were not required to wear skirts, but if they did, the skirts had to be fingertip length.
No discrimination. No allowing one article of clothing for one group, but forbidding it for another.
BTW, your truncation of my comment is noted.
That is their mission in life and their reason for being....
And those of us who went to such schools appreciate it now!
Funny. Most of the comments I've read on articles about this school from older women who had to wear dresses to school are along the lines of "Good! We fought to wear pants back in my day, because being forced to wear skirts was stupid then, too."
You speak from the male perspective. The perspective of one who has never been required by law or school rules to wear a garment that restricted you and left you exposed.
I hear they have a invented a special clothing called "Leggings". Even one of the girls in your picture is wearing them. Hell, us boys would get cold too ! Those pants weren't very thick, and neither were the shirts !
Leggings aren't as warm as pants.
I even wear long underwear under jeans in the winter. NO....pants "Aren't" warm-er.
Pants aren't warmer than a skirt and leggings?
Have you worn a skirt and leggings?
Yes !
"Scottish" thing !
My leggings worked Great, but of course, I didn't go designer, I went the "Reality" route !
A "Scottish" thing.
Yeah, I doubt it.
I've been to Scotland. There were some men wearing kilts, but none wearing them with leggings. Kilts are traditionally worn commando.
"Scottish" thing. Hmph.
Now why would you say something like that ?
"I've been to Scotland. There were some men wearing kilts, but none wearing them with leggings."
I wasn't doing it in Scotland, and "Exact" wasn't what we were going for !
We weren't looking to be "Comfortably NUMB" !
If you're claiming your attire is "Scottish", you're claiming its origin was in Scotland. I'm sorry you misunderstood your own comment.
I just noted I had wore a skirt and that it was a "Sottish" Thing. no where did I say it was "The most accurate thing on the planet" !
"Reading between the lines"....really doesn't work, no matter what others try and tell you !
Keep backpedalling.
I think you simply talk to women with a different view that the women I know.......
You speak from the male perspective.
Maybe, considering most of the women in my orbit eventually take to skirts and high heels. Hum....It's a funny thing..
The perspective of one who has never been required by law or school rules to wear a garment that restricted you and left you exposed.
To quote somebody famous......"Wow!
I'm always "Forward" on the "Forward" meter.
Yu are the one that keeps trying to come up with "SOMETHING" Else. Not "It Is Me " !
I ams what I ams…..
I didn't talk to any of them. They're comments on Facebook about this school.
You're the one who claimed your attire was a "Scottish" thing.
It was really just an "It Is ME" thing that you were trying to pass off as "Scottish". You got called out. Arguing that you didn't say what you clearly said is silly.
A Scottish "THING" !
You still don't get it ?
A "THING"…..not a "Historical" thing that needs to be taught in schools !
It was just a "Fun" day .
Are you kidding me? Why are a bunch of men who have never been restricted by such sexist rules weighing in as if they know wtf they are talking about? I vividly remember being forced to wear dresses until high school (thank god my high school was ahead of its time). Wonder if this attitude is related to the conservative attempts to go backward (mag-again) and control female fertility as well. Seems like a lot of old farts think they have the right to tell girls what to wear.
Then you also should listen to the former leader of the feminist movement:
"The question we all face is what sort of culture we
will live in for the rest of our lives and then hand
on to the next generation -
one that embraces these most basic of values,
or one that collapses because of their absence.
- Tammy Bruce
Not terribly surprising to see you vilifying women's equality.
Are you personally accusing me of vilifying women's equality? Is that like calling me misogynist without saying it?
You're vilifying feminism. Feminism is women's equality. It's right there in your posts.
You are also vilifying feminism. Do you think attractive women don't want the right to education, careers, and control over their own lives?
I say that if they require girls to wear skirts to school then they should require boys to wear skirts to school as well. That would be equality, not sexual discrimination.
When I went to school in Texas girl were required to wear dresses, not just skirts. I was embarrassed, along with most all other girls in school, when the boys ganged up to peek under our dresses and made fun of the underwear we wore. Yeah...real equality. NOT!
If girls must wear skirts, then boys must wear skirts as well. No excuses.
That's something some here don't seem to understand - a skirt or dress leaves one open to upskirting and can be much less modest than pants. I've seen men look up women's skirts when the women were above them on a staircase. And if a woman falls or gets caught in the wind, she can end up putting pretty much everything on display.
Or maybe they see that as a feature, and not a bug.
When we would tell the teachers or ground monitors what the boys were doing they just laughed and said, "Well....boys will be boys."
It was insulting and humiliating when the boys went pointed at you and laughingly told other boys what kind of underwear you were wearing. Then they would make a game of name calling your underwear. The ones that were the worst were from the "nice wealthy families" and the "good Christian families."
And boys are far more brazen today. There is nothing to excuse putting girls through that kind of treatment at school, or anywhere else.
[deleted]
Back in my day black and brown kid were not even allowed in white schools...
My mom and all the teachers in our local school district were required to teach school and to take and to supervise their classes on field trips, on the playground and in the lunchroom while wearing the then required dresses, hose and high heels until they fought for and won the right to wear pants. That was over 50 years ago. Did you think that bullshit was okay, too?
Your not a very good "Shock Jock" JBB. We're talking "Clothing" right now ! "Race" doesn't seem to be the issue in this article.
heck....my parents loved the "Uniform" deal. Saved our everyday clothes for another month or two. But we were kids after all !
[Removed]
[Removed]
Because? You are not one and why I generally ignore your lameass comments...
[Removed]
As a matter of fact..RACE IS OFF TOPIC!
What i am is not the topic, either. You will not be receiving a friend request...
Oh....I understand now !
"ME" …. as a topic is okay.....but "YOU"....as a topic.....isn't !
Got it !
I'll try to be more "Sensitive" next time.
I got that.
Nor will you ever get one from me.
IOW "just shut up do as yer told?"
I attended a school with a dress code, and there are good reasons for it. But then, maybe girls wearing pants is not so bad......
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
Don't like being "Objectified" ?????????
REALLY ?
ummmmm.....Like the ones that dressed "In Black" to protest ?
OR
The ones that just want attention ?
A "little Boob here, and bit of Crotch there" …… Do as we say, not as we do !
And "School Uniforms" are the Problem ?
Would you support schoolgirls being required to wear any of that shit?
Kim Kardashian West is the last person to reference regarding decency.
What grown women wear at night has zero to do with little school girls.
So, do you support the sexulaization and objectification of little girls?
Here we will actually disagree jbb.
Sentient men know that women call the shots. If they want to be sexy and alluring from time to time.....they are. If they want to be considered professional and astute at other times, we have to respect that as well because they are. This caveman's best recommendation is to find one who will be your partner as you go through life. To hell with what they do or don't wear.
My recommendation is take them as they are, and enjoy the show........
They did in my day !
Wasn't a problem then !
"Actual" Schooling isn't popular now ? It's all about the "Clothes" ?
"Kim Kardashian West is the last person to reference regarding decency."
She, and the rest of her sisters, are "Popular" with "Little Girls" !
A woman can want to feel sexy and alluring without wanting to be objectified - she wants to be seen as a sexy and alluring woman, not a sex object.
Women who lived through it say otherwise.
Whom ?
The kardashians ?
Did you have to wear a "Uniform" in school ?
Choice in dress is one thing. The topic is a wrongheaded dress code...
We are talking small children, prepubescent girls, not grownup women.
Look at the pictures above. Do you really think it okay to objectify kids?
Why is it wrongheaded ?
"We are talking small children, prepubescent girls, not grownup women. "
Those same pubescent small children love them the Kardashians !
You don't think actual adults do....do you ?
I don't recall mentioning them in my comment.
Because it is the topic of the article. A dress code that was overturned...
You just "Generalized", so I chose !
Any "Definitive' person you had in mind ?
Says NOTHING about the Dress Code being "Wrongheaded" (Your specific comment) !
It's "Wrongheaded" because some ACLU Big Buck …... "Non-Profit" my ass.....COMPANY told you it was ?
ya do know the ACLU has gotten really picky on who or what they will support ?
Women on Facebook commenting on articles about this case whose schools required them to wear skirts.
Most didn't care for it. Some flat-out hated it. And some lived in Minnesota, and suffered for it.
It's wrongheaded because it discriminates against girls.
Are you sure they aren't "Russians" trying to sway you ?
I hear their was a big tadoo going on on "Facebook" about "Russians and "Influence.
I could say...based on the warped thinking these days....it discriminates against boys too.
What if the "Boy" wants to wear a skirt ?
Are you a woman who had to wear dresses when you were in school? If not, stop mansplaining what we thought. I ALWAYS HATED IT AND SO DID MY FEMALE FRIENDS. Not sure why you think anybody is good with being denied the right to wear pants. But please stop this idea that those of us who had to do it thought it was just peachy. We didn't.
Because you couldn't wear what your adolescent mind thought you should be wearing ?
Let them.
Then he should be allowed. Trying to claim it's somehow more sensible to allow pedophile priests and pastors to determine what is "proper" or "decent" is insanity. Does the bible say a woman must wear a dress? Of course not. If it's not your legs, not your child, not your body, then IT'S NOT YOUR BUSINESS!
But it would still be a "Uniform" !
his legs would get cold !
By his own choice, not that of somebody who cares more for their own opinion than his comfort.
I had a method to my "Madness" ?
Have you figured out yet.... WE ....are discussing "Clothes" in School ....meanwhile, Congress always talk about putting MORE funds towards schools, because our children aren't "Learning" like they should !
Has your "Wonder" about schools subsided a bit since our conversation ?
Are "Clothes" really that important to an education ? Is letting "Kids" do or wear what they want....REALLY contributing to "Education" ?
If you and others are all about the clothes and "Child" choice in schools...… I get it !
Houston....we will STILL have a problem !
I don't know. It seems important to some that they be able to tell other people's children what to wear. Why is that, do you think?
IMO, students can learn while following a reasonable dress code that applies to all students equally.
Folks find Pre/Grade/ and high school to be Free "babysitters" and find it should be a "Democracy" too. Crappy thing though, most folks don't even know what Grade their own kid has, then bitch they weren't told by the school when they don't graduate. My schools sent home monthly reports on our progress, and had no problem telling parents their kid was fucking off if they were.
Folks want their kids to be full blown adults these days, and now they want these kids to be able to vote when they turn 16. Not a "Good" thing for sure.
School is supposed to be neither a "babysitter" nor a "Democracy" ! Pre School, Grade School and High School are supposed to be "Book Learning" centers...… PERIOD !
When you are in college as an Adult, then you can learn "Civics'" and "Humanities" and any other "Feel Good" class if you want. It's your choice as an adult ! Just don't bitch when your degree is in "Feeling Good" and you can't find a decent paying job !
Actually....Not True !
if the girls don't have a choice, neither should the "Boys"....right ?
Wow, you don't want our kids to know how government works? That's frightening, but also a bit enlightening.
Really? You asked:
My reply:
Nobody is advocating for making boys wear skirts, unless it's perhaps you. Would you also force them to wear leggings and call it a Scottish uniform?
If they actually taught specific "Civics"....sure ! Not any more.
Remember "School House Rock" ? It was to the "Point" and nothing said about what side agreed to what and why.
Just TEACH !
In School these days...."Opinion" pollutes "How a Bill is made" !
So, you want them to know they have rights, but not actually expect to exercise those rights?
LOL, ok.
But "Girls" shouldn't wear "Skirts", wanting to or not. It's just about the "Skirt" !
No Skirts, No Skirts, No Skirts !
baby it's "Cold" out there, subjectively that is !
"Children" haven' earned the right of "Choice" ! It's our job to "Teach" until they get to the age of "Independence". Then they can make all the choices they want. Unless they still live at YOUR earned home after becoming an ADULT. Then they STILL shouldn't have a choice.
Nobody has said that.
"Three Mothers" !
THREE.....Over the many that haven't bitched at all.
Minority rules and is able to sue the very school system everyone else pays for ?
They are "Children". you do know what "Children" are …. right ?
You "Exercise your rights" when you become an "ADULT" !
Are you one of those that want the Kiddies to be Adults before their time (the bowl of condemns for 12 year old's movement) ?
Those mothers aren't saying that girls shouldn't be allowed to wear skirts. They are saying girls shouldn't be required to wear skirts.
Those children are citizens, and as such, have rights. I'm glad that they will grow up knowing that.
[Removed]
[Removed by the Hand]
[deleted]
Fair enough. Let's all stand up and fight slutty exhibitionism. The girls in this story want to show less skin. Why get in the way of that?
Back in a while
“All I wanted was for my daughter and every other girl at school to have the option to wear pants so she could play outside, sit comfortably, and stay warm in the winter,” Bonnie Peltier said in a statement provided by the ACLU."
Pretty sound reasoning.
"That sounds like something Bonnie wants. I doubt her young child would make that complaint, would she?"
WTF? Who the fuck are you to claim this woman is making shit up and lying about her girls wanting to wear pants? I have 9 and 4 year old daughters and even my 4 year old knows what she wants to wear most days and picks out her own clothes. The fact is I doubt this author has more than a dozen brain cells to rub together as they are obviously complete idiots who know nothing about children or raising them. This school lost and for good reason.
I'm sure that all those who are angered by the outcome of this court case know they are in some fine company since they join the larger Muslim community in attempting to force women to wear certain clothes for "propriety". A skirt is just a piece of cloth just like a Hijab, it must make those Christians happy knowing they are standing with Islam in enforcing dress codes on women.
Enjoy your day
Why would you assume that? "My legs are cold" sounds like a perfectly reasonable thing for a girl to say. So does "I'd like to be able to play on the equipment without everyone seeing my underwear."
Why do girls need to wear skirts?
Yes, they are. But not in a way that would inherently imply that girls need to wear skirts and boys need to wear pants. Tell this guy he looks like a girl:
We're told in the discussion that it's because they look nicer, and the majority of parents are allowed to tell girls that they need to be cold to be proper girls.
On a more serious note, I read one article that said the school wanted to preserve "chivalry". I'm unaware of a rule of chivalry that insists that additional discomfort be inflicted on girls above that experienced by boys. I rather thought that chivalry required that men promote the comfort of women.
Thanks to everyone who kept it civil.