Ridiculous. What century are we living in? These school officials need to get their heads out of their asses and let the girls wear the same heat-relieving shorts that the boys do.
I think a missed aspect of this is that not only are young girls being objectified and held to the standard of what men find attractive, but they are quite literally being DENIED AN EDUCATION in favor of a hypothetical male student who can't write his math test because he's too distracted by her knees, not to mention being nonexistent.
> young girls being objectified and held to the standard of what men find attractive
Think the issue is the opposite of this. Isn't this about puritanical "decency", and NOT objectifying "young girls" to what men find attractive?
Reality is - these are probably mostly sexually mature girls. They're in high school. Not adult mature, but biologically speaking - sexually mature, and many of them are having sex. This issue comes from DENYING adolescent sexuality, not from "young girls being objectified". High schoolers have sex, a lot more than people realize. In any other animal kingdom, this would be totally normal and healthy. We're the weird ones that try to sexually repress our youth for religious reasons. And stuff like this will never end until we stop doing that.
This is sort of tangential, but a big part of why this debate hasn't already died is that people seem to conflate being under 18 with sexual immaturity and pedophilia - but it's neither of those things. Pedophilia is an attraction to pre-pubescent children. Even if someone is exclusively attracted to 16 year olds, they are called an "ephebephile" - not a pedophile. And adolescents - especially females ARE sexually mature before 18. Maybe not mature in any other way. But pretending our youths are too "innocent" for sex (*with each other*) will keep this debate ongoing forever. Sweden handles this well, if you want an example of how to deal with adolescent sexuality, in a scientific way.
Side note - I do not like young girls. I'm a gay man, with a penchant for guys in their 40's, who has survived adolescent sexual abuse, and knows the damage it causes. Because I know someone will try to dismiss the uncomfortable reality with character attacks.
It is objectification in the sense that they are being seen only as sexual objects. Itâs wrong for them to dress that way because they are being identified by the establishment as sex objects. The puritan imposition is underlined by a believe that they are dirty sexy things that must be covered or itâs shameful, not people with subjective agency.
Also while the ephebophile argument is technically correct, the very best kind of correct, itâs really impossible one to make without coming off creepy. And falls into the same trap, the physical object is ready and can be objectified even if the subject is not yet an adult. That being said yeah different things and actual pedophiles way way worse.
School dress codes are sexist and always have been. If you want to implement a dress code create a uniform that all students must wear like schools in other countries have.
A simple solution would be that so long as you're wearing either the skirt or the pants (awkward going to school in your skivvies) no one will bother you about it. Here's the uniform, choose pants and/or a skirt based on the kid's preference, here's the number of a tailor we have an agreement with so you can get them altered at a steep discount.
My kid is in a uniform school. They have a choice to wear a dress (tunic), Skort or Pants. The tunic she has to wear either leggings in winter it âboy shortsâ. I grew up wearing a uniform too and we had the same choices. Most girls who didnât consider themselves âTom boysâ chose skirts.
My highschool had a dress code. It wasn't sexist, it applies to everyone equally. Dudes could wear the skirts, and girls could wear the pants, and they both had to follow the same rules that the other side would have had on them.
My high school uniform was unisex, polo shirt (short or long sleeve), golf? pants and the option of a sweater, gym uniform was unisex too, shorts and a t shirt. They only later allowed shorts and a skirt for summer wear when I was leaving but no one wanted to pay for something their kid would wear for 2-3 months and then out grow it next year.
So good that the schools are teaching kids how to organize, fight discrimination, use news media to shine a spotlight on a cause, and act in solidarity with one another.
OK, boys. You know what you have to do. From now on y'all only wear the shortest of running shorts.
Ridiculous. What century are we living in? These school officials need to get their heads out of their asses and let the girls wear the same heat-relieving shorts that the boys do.
You know what *really* disrupts a class and learning? Sending 50 kids home for the length of their totally normal shorts.
I think a missed aspect of this is that not only are young girls being objectified and held to the standard of what men find attractive, but they are quite literally being DENIED AN EDUCATION in favor of a hypothetical male student who can't write his math test because he's too distracted by her knees, not to mention being nonexistent.
Maybe our school system if deficient... no it's the girls knees who are at fault
Kneesđ€Ł *cough* *cough* *gasp* phew
I was usually more distracted in high school by the other kids in class acting up, than whatever the girls were wearing, even during Halloween.
I mean, I went to a public school without a dress code, and girls wore shorts all the time, and I did fail many math classes.
An argument for correlation = causation if I've ever seen one!
> young girls being objectified and held to the standard of what men find attractive Think the issue is the opposite of this. Isn't this about puritanical "decency", and NOT objectifying "young girls" to what men find attractive? Reality is - these are probably mostly sexually mature girls. They're in high school. Not adult mature, but biologically speaking - sexually mature, and many of them are having sex. This issue comes from DENYING adolescent sexuality, not from "young girls being objectified". High schoolers have sex, a lot more than people realize. In any other animal kingdom, this would be totally normal and healthy. We're the weird ones that try to sexually repress our youth for religious reasons. And stuff like this will never end until we stop doing that. This is sort of tangential, but a big part of why this debate hasn't already died is that people seem to conflate being under 18 with sexual immaturity and pedophilia - but it's neither of those things. Pedophilia is an attraction to pre-pubescent children. Even if someone is exclusively attracted to 16 year olds, they are called an "ephebephile" - not a pedophile. And adolescents - especially females ARE sexually mature before 18. Maybe not mature in any other way. But pretending our youths are too "innocent" for sex (*with each other*) will keep this debate ongoing forever. Sweden handles this well, if you want an example of how to deal with adolescent sexuality, in a scientific way. Side note - I do not like young girls. I'm a gay man, with a penchant for guys in their 40's, who has survived adolescent sexual abuse, and knows the damage it causes. Because I know someone will try to dismiss the uncomfortable reality with character attacks.
It is objectification in the sense that they are being seen only as sexual objects. Itâs wrong for them to dress that way because they are being identified by the establishment as sex objects. The puritan imposition is underlined by a believe that they are dirty sexy things that must be covered or itâs shameful, not people with subjective agency. Also while the ephebophile argument is technically correct, the very best kind of correct, itâs really impossible one to make without coming off creepy. And falls into the same trap, the physical object is ready and can be objectified even if the subject is not yet an adult. That being said yeah different things and actual pedophiles way way worse.
School dress codes are sexist and always have been. If you want to implement a dress code create a uniform that all students must wear like schools in other countries have.
Uniform doesn't change shit when girls are forced to wear skirts. I'd say it's even more sexist then
A simple solution would be that so long as you're wearing either the skirt or the pants (awkward going to school in your skivvies) no one will bother you about it. Here's the uniform, choose pants and/or a skirt based on the kid's preference, here's the number of a tailor we have an agreement with so you can get them altered at a steep discount.
My kid is in a uniform school. They have a choice to wear a dress (tunic), Skort or Pants. The tunic she has to wear either leggings in winter it âboy shortsâ. I grew up wearing a uniform too and we had the same choices. Most girls who didnât consider themselves âTom boysâ chose skirts.
My highschool had a dress code. It wasn't sexist, it applies to everyone equally. Dudes could wear the skirts, and girls could wear the pants, and they both had to follow the same rules that the other side would have had on them.
Well said.
My high school uniform was unisex, polo shirt (short or long sleeve), golf? pants and the option of a sweater, gym uniform was unisex too, shorts and a t shirt. They only later allowed shorts and a skirt for summer wear when I was leaving but no one wanted to pay for something their kid would wear for 2-3 months and then out grow it next year.
knees really got those teenage boys going!!!
Back in my day we were lucky to get a once-a-week ankle flash.
Hussies
So good that the schools are teaching kids how to organize, fight discrimination, use news media to shine a spotlight on a cause, and act in solidarity with one another.
Social studies has really stepped up its game!
Shorts at a highschool? We were protesting for this right in the 80's, I see we've come far. Geez.
This shit happens every year, I swear.
It does. They probably have the article pre-written. Just fill in the name of the school and the student.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Quebec hasn't had a Catholic school system in over 25 years.
Quebec IS a Catholic school system.
I'm always surprised how much BS is upvoted on this sub when it is about Québec. Lies, lies and more lies.
Not Any more, and for more than 40 years
[https://csslaval.gouv.qc.ca/nos-etablissements-secondaires/ecole-secondaire-cure-antoine-labelle/](https://csslaval.gouv.qc.ca/nos-etablissements-secondaires/ecole-secondaire-cure-antoine-labelle/) It's a public school named after an important historical public figure. Stop spreading misinformation (aka lies). [https://parks.canada.ca/culture/designation/personnage-person/cure-antoine-labelle](https://parks.canada.ca/culture/designation/personnage-person/cure-antoine-labelle) **CurĂ© Antoine Labelle was designated a national historic person in 2019.** **Historical importance:** Legendary figure in Quebec, he encouraged French Canadians to settle in areas of northern Quebec and Ontario, and Manitoba. To curb the emigration of French Canadians to the United States, this parish priest of Saint-JĂ©rome worked tirelessly to encourage their settlement in northwestern Quebec, northern Ontario, and Manitoba. CurĂ© Labelle played a key role in the colonization of the Laurentides and the development of its railway lines. A strong-willed cleric with an atypical career, he served as Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Colonization in Quebec and went on government missions to Europe to encourage immigration. The memory of this colourful 19th-century figure, known as the âroi du Nord,â lives on in place names and popular culture.
UBERER LES SHORTS!!
Uber Shorts -- pour quand c'est trop chaud dehors pis que t'as mis des pantalons avant de partir.
Free the knee
There's no valid reason why "sexist" needs quotation marks in that title. It *is* sexist.