• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Deleted member 984

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,203
35 year old UK parent here...

Honestly I think some UK schools have some really twisted logic on uniform...

Like this.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-49592200



Trousers showing a bit of ankle? GTFO ... Let's isolate the kid...

Why does having your trousers 10mm too short affect the kids ability to learn... Or blue hair, or any kind of individuality..

This case highlights the silly ... Let's ban skirts to be gender neutral!.... When being gender neutral would mean all options for all people .....

My 4 year old has started school this week and he has to have the following..

A school jumper with the school logo (we have 5 of these @ £10 each..

A white or yellow polo shirt with school logo 5 @ £5 a pop..

All black shoes £40

Black or grey trousers 3 @ £7 a pop..

A school bookbag with school logo £5

Black pumps for indoors.. £3

Black or navy shorts for PE - £4

White t-shirt and white long sleeved top for PE £8

Total - £156

And when it gets to high school you blazers etc that cost a bit as well.

So really with the kids and parents on this one..

I don't have a uniform at work... What exactly is it preparing the kids for?

My school was as strict as that under one head teacher. Possibly worse. No buzz or crew cuts and hair no longer than the nape of the neck nor cover your ears for a guy. Girls hair had to be at least shoulder length. Loads of stupid rules on type of tie knot, tie length, trouser cut, even shoe lace knot, how many different PE uniforms we had was ridiculous. So my hours waisted of people's lives getting disciplinary for uniforms not being correct.
 

nekkid

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,823
Yeah we got PE kit, trousers from a supermarket.. and on it's own only £10 for a jumper isn't expensive... But you really need at least 3 jumpers cos they ain't gonna stay clean for long... So it's £30 plus...

The worst thing is when my 4 year old grows out of it we can't hand it down to our 2 year old in a couple of years cos the school have also announced they are having a new logo so the old logo stuff is being phased out and effectively banned by the start of the year he would start.. old and new logo is fine for this year and next tho.

Just unlucky timing for us on that one but ..

We've got a 2yo as well - this is a bit weird lol.
 

Brotherhood93

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,780
I'm not sure why this is a big deal. My high school had a gender neutral uniform back when I started in 2004 and nobody, boys or girls, really cared. I'm sure it's been the same for many schools across the country too.
 

Prine

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,724
I'm baffled by the argument. Parents have to buy uniforms for their kids every year anyway (you know, kids grow!), so how is a change in dress style "wasteful"?
Yeah, It's contrived if you ask me, as if they're trying to frame thier discontent by linking it to the climate so that it's given special attention. Ends up undermining them, its so dishonest.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,666
School uniforms change all the time. They phase in new uniforms and phase out the old. Theres nothing new about that. People dont protest new uniforms. Lets be clear. They are only protesting the gender neutral aspect, everyrhing else is a bullshit excuse.
I'm not sure what it's like in the UK; have you anything to back the bolded up? Certainly in Ireland it is very uncommon for the uniform itself to change. The school I went to has had the same uniform for at least 35 years and it would be taken very negatively if it were to change. A school in Dundalk made the news earlier this year after changing their uniform for the first time in 65 years, although in that instance it was brought forward to modernise the uniform and was done with 80% agreement by the parents.
 

Oh no

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 25, 2017
653
35 year old UK parent here...

Honestly I think some UK schools have some really twisted logic on uniform...

Like this.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-49592200



Trousers showing a bit of ankle? GTFO ... Let's isolate the kid...

Why does having your trousers 10mm too short affect the kids ability to learn... Or blue hair, or any kind of individuality..

This case highlights the silly ... Let's ban skirts to be gender neutral!.... When being gender neutral would mean all options for all people .....

My 4 year old has started school this week and he has to have the following..

A school jumper with the school logo (we have 5 of these @ £10 each..

A white or yellow polo shirt with school logo 5 @ £5 a pop..

All black shoes £40

Black or grey trousers 3 @ £7 a pop..

A school bookbag with school logo £5

Black pumps for indoors.. £3

Black or navy shorts for PE - £4

White t-shirt and white long sleeved top for PE £8

Total - £156

And when it gets to high school you blazers etc that cost a bit as well.

So really with the kids and parents on this one..

I don't have a uniform at work... What exactly is it preparing the kids for?

Oof, that's shite. UK (Scotland) parent here too and as long as your kids have a blue top (jumper/cardigan/tshirt) you're good. Trousers, skirts, shoes, boots whatever they don't care as long as everyone has tops that are pretty close in colour. There are official jumpers/tshirts etc with the school logo but they're not mandatory. Gives the kids a bit of freedom while still keeping the colour theme going. Boys can wear shorts etc too when it's warm so no conflicts in the summer about girls being allowed skirts but boys stuck in trousers etc etc. Seems to work well and not cause and not cause any bother.
 

Deleted member 41502

User requested account closure
Banned
Mar 28, 2018
1,177
The bolded isn't the case. Uniforms can be passed down to siblings, and if the child grows enough during the previous year a new uniform might be purchased close to the end of the year with the idea being that it can be used at the beginning of the next school year. In addition, not all children grow significantly between years and a new uniform may not be needed.

I agree that most parents would buy a new uniform at the beginning of the academic year, but particularly for those in a low income household being required to purchase a new uniform when there are already uniforms which fit can be an unnecessary burden given the already high cost of returning to school without it.
My kids schools PTA arranged second hand uniform sales (and the school gives hefty discounts to lower income families as well). That's like literally the only thing the PTA does. All the fundraisers every year are basically for that too.

I wish they had a uniform girl and boys dress code.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,468
35 year old UK parent here...

Honestly I think some UK schools have some really twisted logic on uniform...

Like this.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-49592200



Trousers showing a bit of ankle? GTFO ... Let's isolate the kid...

Why does having your trousers 10mm too short affect the kids ability to learn... Or blue hair, or any kind of individuality..

This case highlights the silly ... Let's ban skirts to be gender neutral!.... When being gender neutral would mean all options for all people .....

My 4 year old has started school this week and he has to have the following..

A school jumper with the school logo (we have 5 of these @ £10 each..

A white or yellow polo shirt with school logo 5 @ £5 a pop..

All black shoes £40

Black or grey trousers 3 @ £7 a pop..

A school bookbag with school logo £5

Black pumps for indoors.. £3

Black or navy shorts for PE - £4

White t-shirt and white long sleeved top for PE £8

Total - £156

And when it gets to high school you blazers etc that cost a bit as well.

So really with the kids and parents on this one..

I don't have a uniform at work... What exactly is it preparing the kids for?

Woof! I will say get your bum to Asda or Tesco for shoes, they're £10-15 and are really good. Stylish and hard wearing. The only time I've paid £40 for school shoes was when my wife was adamant we go to Clarks for my daughter's first pair of proper shoes. Fucking Clarks, £40 and the toes were all scuffed after the first week because obviously that's what happens to school shoes.

Luckily at my kids school logos are optional so it's basic Asda/Tesco/Sainsburys for all uniform stuff.

As for the story, what bullshit. Why even start claiming gender neutral by reducing choice? Just allow school uniform trousers or skirts for girls and boys, job done. Problem solved. I'm a genius. My daughter likes wearing skirts.
 

Navidson REC

Member
Oct 31, 2017
3,422
Uniforms are a way for children to understand dress code in workplace life. You can't wear whatever you want to work, so you better get used to it now.

We all rebelled again school uniforms when we were kids in some form or another but these protests are dumb as shit.
Well, people in Germany know how to dress for work environments without ever having to wear school uniforms. Not sure if that's a strong argument.
 

ZeroX

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
21,266
Speed Force
My public school uniform cost like $150 a pop. It was nasty expensive, and if you didn't have the official stuff they'd send you home.
 

Eumi

Member
Nov 3, 2017
3,518
I'm not sure what it's like in the UK; have you anything to back the bolded up? Certainly in Ireland it is very uncommon for the uniform itself to change. The school I went to has had the same uniform for at least 35 years and it would be taken very negatively if it were to change. A school in Dundalk made the news earlier this year after changing their uniform for the first time in 65 years, although in that instance it was brought forward to modernise the uniform and was done with 80% agreement by the parents.
In my experience, the one time a school in my area changed uniforms and everyone had to replace it, there was a decent stink about it because people didn't like being expected to shell out for an entire new school wardrobe.

Not sure what that poster is referring to, unless by all the time they actually mean "has happened some times"
 
Oct 25, 2017
21,442
Sweden
school uniforms are bullshit

if you've been ok with school uniforms all this time, but start protesting using eco-arguments as a pretext the moment someone implements gender-neutral ones, you're going to get the side eye
 

Rendering...

Member
Oct 30, 2017
19,089
User banned (5 days): inappropriate joke
All uniforms warrant and deserve boob armor. What is even the point if they don't accentuate rad boobage?
 

Joni

Member
Oct 27, 2017
19,508
Uniforms are a way for children to understand dress code in workplace life. You can't wear whatever you want to work, so you better get used to it now.
Any dress code in a workplace as restrictive as these school uniforms would be challenged quite hard. It also seems to be quite contradictory as it is a school with a speciality in arts and performance, areas not explicitly noted for their uniforms.
 

Jam

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,050
Yeah bad restrictive policy change and the protest was probably in bad faith.

Aint no winners here.
 

nekkid

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,823
Well, people in Germany know how to dress for work environments without ever having to wear school uniforms. Not sure if that's a strong argument.

It's not. But it is a good way of neutralising issues around kids not dressing a certain way, or if their parents can't afford certain brands.
 

Peleo

Member
Nov 2, 2017
2,656
I seriously don't understand why the fuck someone would force kids to wear suits during their childhood. Us adults already have to wear thir uncorfortable shit quite often, let them enjoy their childhood. Sometimes in London I see them playing football in their break with suits & social shoes and it seems outrageous as a foreigner.

During my school days we also had an uniform, but it was a t-shirt & shorts combo and a hoodie & tracksuit trousers for the winter (this was in Brazil so our winters were mild). Still had the same benefits of uniforms (everyone wears same stuff, helps identification, part of collective etc) without hindering them.
 

StallionDan

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,705
I guess I could see the case for poorer families that would hand down the clothes between generations, but the school should be supplying them with the clothes anyway

Schools do not provide anything. Not for free anyway.

You can expect most schools to charge parents for their unique tie and a school badge to sow on blazer front pocket. The rest parents can buy anywhere. Some schools will go further though and demand a certain jumper, bag and whatever else with their logo be used and only can be bought from them. And buying from the school always costs a premium.
 

StallionDan

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,705
School uniforms change all the time. They phase in new uniforms and phase out the old. Theres nothing new about that. People dont protest new uniforms. Lets be clear. They are only protesting the gender neutral aspect, everyrhing else is a bullshit excuse.

They really don't. In my years at school there was exactly one rule change, that girls could no longer wear long socks with their skirts and had to wear black tights instead. Most did already anyway.
 

Dougald

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,937
They really don't. In my years at school there was exactly one rule change, that girls could no longer wear long socks with their skirts and had to wear black tights instead. Most did already anyway.

When I started secondary school they'd changed the Blazer ~5 years previously and started allowing girls to wear trousers when I joined. 20 years later the uniform is still exactly the same as it was then, so I'm with you here. It's not common.

Hell, my nephew goes to my old Primary school and he wears the same design of uniform I wore 25 years ago.
 

Steiner_Zi

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,343
Uniforms are a way for children to understand dress code in workplace life. You can't wear whatever you want to work, so you better get used to it now.

We all rebelled again school uniforms when we were kids in some form or another but these protests are dumb as shit.
That's your morals man. Uniforms are not everywhere in Europe and personally I consider them a bit fascist. Also news flash, I work at a tech company and everyone dresses as they like.
 

tokkun

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,400
I'm baffled by the argument. Parents have to buy uniforms for their kids every year anyway (you know, kids grow!), so how is a change in dress style "wasteful"?

As someone who grew up poor and went to a school that had uniforms, I wore hand-me-downs from my older brother or other relatives. You could also get items in consignment stores.

It was pretty common, as a lot of people were poor in the community. I think the only people who would be 'baffled' by it would be those who never had to worry about money.
 

Soap

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,171
That's your morals man. Uniforms are not everywhere in Europe and personally I consider them a bit fascist. Also news flash, I work at a tech company and everyone dresses as they like.

I am married to someone from another European country and I understand that this a uniquely British thing (for the most part) since she disagree with me too.

I still don't think this is worth mass protests though, one way or the other.
 

Mikebison

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,036
I spent the entirety of my time at secondary school finding ways to get around the uniform rules. It was an elaborate game.
 

Semfry

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,952
This is annoying because it's right for the wrong reasons; it's obvious that "gender-neutral" is a rallying point for transphobic outrage that this has a blatant undercurrent of, but as others have said this isn't even "gender-neutral" (which is part of why the use of that term as a protest point makes me suspicious), it's enforcing male style, and bullshit for that reason.

Nevermind that uniforms in the stereotypical school sense are generally a shit thing that enforces sexism and racism (when you look at stuff like hairstyles and what cultural symbols are more accepted to show), and get even more outdated as a concept when work dress-codes are generally getting looser with a few exceptions.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,151
United Kingdom
I'm a proponent of school uniforms.

When we were younger, we weren't able to afford all the popular sports label clothing that all the other kids wore, so not having to worry about that because everyone was wearing the same uniform at school was a godsend for us.

The dress code for uniforms at our school, however, was very strict, especially for the stuff you wear for PE; which was creepy as fuck for the girls (why are you forcing all the pre-teen girls to wear blue gym knickers and a white Tee?)
 

someday

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,453
I hated wearing skirts and dresses when I was a kid. It struck me as completely unfair that I had to wear clothes that restricted me and boys didn't. I think letting girls wear skirts or pants is better. Hell, allow shorts as an alternative uniform so everyone gets to go bare legged. Just stop forcing girls to wear clothing that you don't force boys to wear.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
School uniforms are still a thing in the UK?
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,789
I like uniforms for jobs and whatnot just because I think they are cool and promote creativity within a system. Of course it's not for everybody so it's hard to find meaningful grounds to enforce it. Schools at least can fall back on student income differences. But in terms of how to do it, just select a bunch of mix and match pieces and let people choose what they want. Pants, shorts, skirts, long sleeve, short sleeve, whatever.
 

Hesemonni

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,974
What does said protest-inducing uniform look like? My Google-Fu seems to fail me yet again.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
That's unfair on boys because they don't get to wear shorter things in warmer months (because a lot of teenage boys won't want to wear skirts, even if era forgets this).

If skirts are allowed, shorts need to be too. I'm fine with the decision going either way (trousers only or shorts and skirts allowed).


When I went to school in Scotland in the 1970s boys had to wear gray flannel shorts, blazers, ties and caps. Shorts were for boys from 4-12. After that you could wear long pants. If you look at Scotland on a map, or google "Scottish ice storm" then you will understand that while it looked like Hogwarts, it was absolutley awful to wear shorts in January.
 

JCG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,533
Gender neutral uniforms should be the rule, not the exception. That said, I do think this should also be made clear to parents at an early point in time. They'll have to buy multiple uniforms either way, so it's not really about the financial angle.
 

Dixie Flatline

alt account
Banned
Sep 4, 2019
1,892
New Orleans
Girls want at least some freedom in uniform "fashion." I remember when my high school tried to ban fitted pants and short sleeve polos for girls. Literally no one listened and we just ignored the rule so they couldn't enforce it without suspending half the student body. Don't step on a girl's right to look pretty. You're gonna get bit.
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,508

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,316
I hate to think that pants are male attire at this point in history. That's definitely limiting for women.

Making women only wear pants is no better, no less progressive, than making them wear only skirts.

When you eliminate all the more inherently feminine clothing options and leave the only options closer to the boys attire, it is by that definition making the boys attire the neutral one.

I'm, not the one making the pants a boys attire, they are.

This isn't a gender neutral decision , it's an anti-feminine decision

Gender neutral would be allowing anyone to wear skirts or pants
 

someday

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,453
Making women only wear pants is no better, no less progressive, than making them wear only skirts.

When you eliminate all the more inherently feminine clothing options and leave the only options closer to the boys attire, it is by that definition making the boys attire the neutral one.

I'm, not the one making the pants a boys attire, they are.

This isn't a gender neutral decision , it's an anti-feminine decision
And see I always felt that forcing girls to wear skirts or "girl clothes" was sexist lol. I would have been miserable. I hated wearing dresses growing up, they weren't practical for playing, I had to worry about the wind blowing it up, boys lifting my skirt, being cold because I wasn't allowed to cover my legs like the guys did. I get what you're saying but I can't help but see it differently. I envied boys for being able to wear clothes that were comfortable, and designed for the wearer and not everyone else.

Ultimately though, I'd really prefer that clothes stopped being coded at all.
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,316
And see I always felt that forcing girls to wear skirts or "girl clothes" was sexist lol. I would have been miserable. I hated wearing dresses growing up, they weren't practical for playing, I had to worry about the wind blowing it up, boys lifting my skirt, being cold because I wasn't allowed to cover my legs like the guys did. I get what you're saying but I can't help but see it differently. I envied boys for being able to wear clothes that were comfortable, and designed for the wearer and not everyone else.

Ultimately though, I'd really prefer that clothes stopped being coded at all.

Both are sexist.

Forcing either.

Only pants is sexist
Only skirts is sexist

The problem wasn't that you could wear skits, it was that you couldn't wear pants. It's the had to wear skirts that's the problem, not the skirts inherently themselves. Like a win is girls can wear pants, not girls can only wear pants

Ultimately this ruling does more to gender clothing because they are inherently saying the only thing that isn't gender neutral is feminine identified clothing.

That to get to gender neutrality we have to eliminate all the feminine....
 

someday

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,453
Both are sexist.

Forcing either.

Only pants is sexist
Only skirts is sexist

The problem wasn't that you could wear skits, it was that you couldn't wear pants. It's the had to wear skirts that's the problem, not the skirts inherently themselves. Like a win is girls can wear pants, not girls can only wear pants

Ultimately this ruling does more to gender clothing because they are inherently saying the only thing that isn't gender neutral is feminine identified clothing.

That to get to gender neutrality we have to eliminate all the feminine....
I see what you're saying. I guess I feel that pants are gender-neutral and that skirts are the gendered clothing. Forcing girls to wear gendered clothing is sexist to me more than everyone wearing pants (something that almost every woman in the world already owns and wears regularly).
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,316
I see what you're saying. I guess I feel that pants are gender-neutral and that skirts are the gendered clothing. Forcing girls to wear gendered clothing is sexist to me more than everyone wearing pants (something that almost every woman in the world already owns and wears regularly).

They're the same identical act.... just this one is less honest about it.

Honest question what does stop gender coded clothing mean when you say it?

Because I'd hope you wouldn't think this is a step towards that, because quite to the contrary this is coding clothing even more as an entire option is being eliminated because it's being deemed too feminine to ever be neutral.

Neutrality would be skirts and pants for everyone.

Not let's just erase girls clothing and call it neutrality.

Like with all due respect you're letting your own personal distaste for skirts colour that for some girls, they are about to experience the very same thing you did, just the other way around.

We don't win by declaring skirts as less than.