School field trip, bathing suit guidelines

[mamacatnv]

How are they reaching into our homes with a dress code?

Dd has to wear khaki or black shorts with school color polos or tshits to school. And closed toe shoes. Shorts have to come to her fingertips.

She is out for summer. She either has on nike shorts, or jean short that come no where near her fingertips. Her swinsuit is a bikini that she would have to wear a tshirt over if with the school.

The school has not reached into our home, she just has to wear school appropriate clothing to school just like I have to wear work appropriate clothing to work.

Dress codes aren't new. We had one when I was in school. My sister had a stricter one before me.

My DD's school dictates hair color and can dictate style if someone deems it distracting, piercings (who can have them and where they can be), tattoos (not allowed at all), clothing, shoes, backpacks, lunch boxes, book covers etc.

Whether or not my kid has two earrings or three and whether those earrings be on a girl or a guy IMO are not the schools call, that is reaching into my home. Telling a student they can only have naturally occurring highlights ie blond, red or brown again is reaching.
Just my opinion but I think dress codes have gone too far.

saying shirts can't have profanity or bare butts must be covered is different from saying shoulder skin is distracting

The trend in prom dresses too short, too tight, too much cleavage etc.
The bathing suit issues
All of these have been making headlines lately - surely the administration of some of these schools have gone overboard or the topic would not be grabbing the headlines

 

[scrapquitler]

Did some of you attend schools with no dress code? I really don't see the one's now as any different than in year's past, they just focus on different things.

When my sister was in school, she had to wear a dress/skirt and it had to touch the top of her knee cap. They did not care how long your legs were or how short you were or anything else as long as the skirt touched the top of the knee cap. And her bangs could not come below the middle of her eye brows. And they took time every day to inspect skirts and bangs. The guys hair could not go below the collar or below the top of the ear. She graduated in 1969.

When I was in school. guys couldn't wear earrings, their hair could not go below their ear (see they did loosen it up some). We couldn't wear anything with vulgar sayings or advertising alcohol or cigarettes. No holes and jeans, no hip hugger jeans, no shorts at all. I graduated in 81.

My sons graduated in 2000 and 2002. Their dress code was possibly the easiest going of them all but it was the way the kids dressed then that prompted the school to have the dress codes they have now. (and our middle school and high schools have the same dress code adopted at the same time). But they did have to be completely clean shaven. They were sent home to shave or they could use a razor the school provided. They had to wear a belt and if they didn't, one was provided or they could go home and get one.

As much as it is said on here that we should be preparing our children for the "real world", I am surprised at those that do not like dress codes. Are you not expected to dress a certain way for work?

I graduated in 1985. The only 'dress code' rule in my high school was 'you can't wear a shirt that advertises a product that you can't legally purchase' And I don't think it was even a written rule from the Board Of Ed, but rather just the principals own preference.

 

[sam_gordon]

saying shirts can't have profanity or bare butts must be covered is different from saying shoulder skin is distracting

So you ARE ok with a dress code.

Can a dress code go "too far"? Of course.
Is every school's dress code too extreme? Of course not.
Does a dress code have a place in schools? IMO, yes.

 

[unhinged]

Did some of you attend schools with no dress code? I really don't see the one's now as any different than in year's past, they just focus on different things.

When my sister was in school, she had to wear a dress/skirt and it had to touch the top of her knee cap. They did not care how long your legs were or how short you were or anything else as long as the skirt touched the top of the knee cap. And her bangs could not come below the middle of her eye brows. And they took time every day to inspect skirts and bangs. The guys hair could not go below the collar or below the top of the ear. She graduated in 1969.

When I was in school. guys couldn't wear earrings, their hair could not go below their ear (see they did loosen it up some). We couldn't wear anything with vulgar sayings or advertising alcohol or cigarettes. No holes and jeans, no hip hugger jeans, no shorts at all. I graduated in 81.

My sons graduated in 2000 and 2002. Their dress code was possibly the easiest going of them all but it was the way the kids dressed then that prompted the school to have the dress codes they have now. (and our middle school and high schools have the same dress code adopted at the same time). But they did have to be completely clean shaven. They were sent home to shave or they could use a razor the school provided. They had to wear a belt and if they didn't, one was provided or they could go home and get one.

As much as it is said on here that we should be preparing our children for the "real world", I am surprised at those that do not like dress codes. Are you not expected to dress a certain way for work?

We had the only dresses for girls until 6th grade (early 70's.) I still remember the day in 6th grade that we could wear pantsuits. My mother went out and bought me a light blue polyester jacket and pants. I felt so foreign wearing pants to school that day. The dress code evolved very quickly after that. Fast forward 6 years later when I graduated high, we were wearing our hot pants/Daisy Dukes and midriff shirts, short plaid skirts with matching knee socks, or our tied up under the bra button down shirts with our hip hugger Jordache jeans and Frye boots.

I had a pair of those sailor pants, lol. Funny how #2 and #3 could be worn today. At least that is the main look in our high schools today.

My children do not have a dress code and with 30,000+ students in the district, it is rare that somebody comes in dressed trashy. Of course, our definitions of trashy may differ. I see nothing wrong with the short length in the 70's picture above which is the same as what our students wear today. As long as the booty and breasts are covered, I don't see an issue. The few students that do come in looking like they are street walkers are dealt on an individual basis. This "parents and students cannot be trusted, so we have to have extremely restrictive rules" methodology is crazy. Given the freedom to dress as they please, 95% of the students are great.

Our students are not regulated in hair color, piercings, facial hair, flip flops (there would be a mutiny if flip flops were banned,) or clothing style. The only rule is nothing can be hanging out and no writing that is offensive or promoting illegal products. It is amusing to watch the young men wear beards just because they can. We had two swimmers on the swim team in full beards. Amazingly, when they shaved them off for regionals, they took time off their races.

 

[mnrose]

The no tattoo policy is easy in Minnesota. It's agains the law to tattoo anyone under age 18. And, against the law to have ANY piercing done (by a professional piercing place anyway) under the age of 16 other than standard ear piercing. Other piercings require parental consent, age 16 to 18.

Our school has no policy on either of these because of the state law.

As for hair color/style, there is no policy. My DD has had her hair a variety of interesting shades. She always does a manic panic color right before she has her head shaved (nearly bald) for St Baldricks (pediatric cancer fundraiser). I'm not a big fan of strange hair shades, but I tolerate this...she has the biggest heart. I'm waiting for the district to say something about her being "bald." I'd probably go all Mama Bear on them if they did. LOL.

 

[Saimaeve]

I honestly thought this was an ad from something today. I could see all of these styles going over well in fashion today.

 

[luvsJack]

My DD's school dictates hair color and can dictate style if someone deems it distracting, piercings (who can have them and where they can be), tattoos (not allowed at all), clothing, shoes, backpacks, lunch boxes, book covers etc.

Whether or not my kid has two earrings or three and whether those earrings be on a girl or a guy IMO are not the schools call, that is reaching into my home. Telling a student they can only have naturally occurring highlights ie blond, red or brown again is reaching.
Just my opinion but I think dress codes have gone too far.

saying shirts can't have profanity or bare butts must be covered is different from saying shoulder skin is distracting

The trend in prom dresses too short, too tight, too much cleavage etc.
The bathing suit issues
All of these have been making headlines lately - surely the administration of some of these schools have gone overboard or the topic would not be grabbing the headlines

Our's can't have a tattoo that shows, but isn't that the same as many places that may hire these students in years to come (like, say, Disney?)? Piercings--they can have a dozen in their ears but none in the nose, lips or eyebrows, again, not so different than places of employment. Hair color must be a natural color, but for many of them that compete in different areas, those rules apply to them from other areas anyway. DD is in choir and was in show choir and they are told upfront that hair must be a natural color. Some kids, in the school NOT in choir, do get by with blue or pink streaks or tips and nothing is said. But again, places of employment make the same rules at times.

Have you shopped for a prom dress lately? Some are cut to the belly button or are so short the girl can't walk without seeing everything underneath, much less bend over or actually dance. Our girls can wear short dresses to prom but they have to be within reason. They cannot wear a dress with too much cleavage. I don't think that is unreasonable. If they are old enough to go to prom they are certainly old enough to understand what is and isn't appropriate. Just because Kim K. wears it, doesn't mean a 16 year old should.

Have the schools gone so far overboard or is it also that parents don't think their child should have to follow the rules or don't take the time to make sure they do? Personally, I think its a little of both.

 

[luvsJack]

We had the only dresses for girls until 6th grade (early 70's.) I still remember the day in 6th grade that we could wear pantsuits. My mother went out and bought me a light blue polyester jacket and pants. I felt so foreign wearing pants to school that day. The dress code evolved very quickly after that. Fast forward 6 years later when I graduated high, we were wearing our hot pants/Daisy Dukes and midriff shirts, short plaid skirts with matching knee socks, or our tied up under the bra button down shirts with our hip hugger Jordache jeans and Frye boots.

I had a pair of those sailor pants, lol. Funny how #2 and #3 could be worn today. At least that is the main look in our high schools today.

My children do not have a dress code and with 30,000+ students in the district, it is rare that somebody comes in dressed trashy. Of course, our definitions of trashy may differ. I see nothing wrong with the short length in the 70's picture above which is the same as what our students wear today. As long as the booty and breasts are covered, I don't see an issue. The few students that do come in looking like they are street walkers are dealt on an individual basis. This "parents and students cannot be trusted, so we have to have extremely restrictive rules" methodology is crazy. Given the freedom to dress as they please, 95% of the students are great.

Our students are not regulated in hair color, piercings, facial hair, flip flops (there would be a mutiny if flip flops were banned,) or clothing style. The only rule is nothing can be hanging out and no writing that is offensive or promoting illegal products. It is amusing to watch the young men wear beards just because they can. We had two swimmers on the swim team in full beards. Amazingly, when they shaved them off for regionals, they took time off their races.

Dd has shorts as in #2 and pants similar to #1. All of her shorts that she wears outside of school are at least as short as #2 and her suit is smaller than #5, which she is wearing at the lake right now. I don't have an issue with short shorts. But, I don't have an issue with dress codes either. I can't wear short shorts to work either, should I be upset? And she has well learned what is and isn't appropriate at certain places. Choir director says "dress up" for an award ceremony, she knows she can't wear a too short skirt but dresses appropriately. But, if she goes out to eat with her friends, she can wear that short dress or skirt because its an appropriate place for it.

Khakis that are of a certain length and a school t-shirt (of which dd has plenty so its not like its a hardship to figure out which football shirt or baseball shirt to wear today) or a polo is not that restrictive.

 

[unhinged]

I honestly thought this was an ad from something today. I could see all of these styles going over well in fashion today.

Funny isn't it how styles come back. I just hope the 80's big hair never comes back.

I would say that add some flip flops and #2 in that ad is how 99% of our high school girls dress. Their shirt may be a bit shorter, just skimming the top of the pants or the tank may be looser with a sports bra underneath. But that is the epitome of the girl's high school uniform in our area.

 

[unhinged]

Dd has shorts as in #2 and pants similar to #1. All of her shorts that she wears outside of school are at least as short as #2 and her suit is smaller than #5, which she is wearing at the lake right now. I don't have an issue with short shorts. But, I don't have an issue with dress codes either. I can't wear short shorts to work either, should I be upset? And she has well learned what is and isn't appropriate at certain places. Choir director says "dress up" for an award ceremony, she knows she can't wear a too short skirt but dresses appropriately. But, if she goes out to eat with her friends, she can wear that short dress or skirt because its an appropriate place for it.

Khakis that are of a certain length and a school t-shirt (of which dd has plenty so its not like its a hardship to figure out which football shirt or baseball shirt to wear today) or a polo is not that restrictive.

Our students also have learned what is appropriate and what is not. Just because they can wear shorts to school does not mean that they are ignorant of how to dress well. Our sports teams always dress up in Polos and Dockers on meet/game days. Our DECA and FBLA teams are some of the most snappily dressed people, coming in with tailored suits and ties. There is a lot of peer pressure to dress appropriately when the situation calls for it. For instance, at our Football banquet, all the boys wore sweaters or vests, button down shirts, ties and dress pants. One player showed up in athletic shorts and a Under Armor tee. Even the coach called him out "guess who didn't get the dress memo" during the presentation.

Because they don't have to, the students tend to love to dress appropriately for different situations.

 

[robinb]

Our's can't have a tattoo that shows, but isn't that the same as many places that may hire these students in years to come (like, say, Disney?)? Piercings--they can have a dozen in their ears but none in the nose, lips or eyebrows, again, not so different than places of employment. Hair color must be a natural color, but for many of them that compete in different areas, those rules apply to them from other areas anyway. DD is in choir and was in show choir and they are told upfront that hair must be a natural color. Some kids, in the school NOT in choir, do get by with blue or pink streaks or tips and nothing is said. But again, places of employment make the same rules at times.

I live in a college town. If places of employment had those rules they would not be able to be able to find employees ! There is NO dress code at my DD's high school except I think boys are not supposed to "sag".

 

[kamik86]

Our's can't have a tattoo that shows, but isn't that the same as many places that may hire these students in years to come (like, say, Disney?)? Piercings--they can have a dozen in their ears but none in the nose, lips or eyebrows, again, not so different than places of employment. Hair color must be a natural color, but for many of them that compete in different areas, those rules apply to them from other areas anyway. DD is in choir and was in show choir and they are told upfront that hair must be a natural color. Some kids, in the school NOT in choir, do get by with blue or pink streaks or tips and nothing is said. But again, places of employment make the same rules at times. .

The problem with comparing to employment is that there is no law that says I have a specific job. There isn't a law that I have to have a job at all. So if dressing a certain way, getting a tatoo, or a piecing, or having blue hair is important to me I could get a job that is ok with that.

However students are told by law that they MUST attend school from I believe the ages of 6 until they are 16 and to a large extent (besides homeschooling or private school if the area even HAS one) it even dictates WHERE they must go to school. So they don't have the option to just choose to not go or to go somewhere else. Which makes it much more reasonable to work to change the school policies.


Even with all the choice if an adult doesn't like their employers policies they also have the freedom to try to change them.

 

[sam_gordon]

So they don't have the option to just choose to not go or to go somewhere else.

I disagree. There are choices...
* Home school
* Private School
* Start your own school

They may not be great options, but they are valid options. If you feel that strongly against your school's dress code, you're free to find another solution.

 

[pryncess527]

They may not be great options, but they are valid options. If you feel that strongly against your school's dress code, you're free to find another solution.

Or, I'm free to ask the authoritative body to explain the rationale behind that choice, and if I consider that rationale to be insufficient, attempt to affect change in my community. We don't always have to accept the current situation silently. I think unreasonable dress codes (and not ALL dress codes are unreasonable) provide a lovely opportunity to question authority and stand up for a change you consider important. As has been mentioned in this thread, dress codes have changed a LOT over the years, and I'm sure that is often because of involved parents who did not accept antiquated ideas like girls must always wear dresses, or boys can't have long hair or earrings.

I'm not suggesting that people flagrantly break the rules, but I see no harm whatsoever in asking for a justification for those rules and trying to encourage a school system to be more thoughtful in their rules. When we know better, we do better.

 

[luvsJack]

Our students also have learned what is appropriate and what is not. Just because they can wear shorts to school does not mean that they are ignorant of how to dress well. Our sports teams always dress up in Polos and Dockers on meet/game days. Our DECA and FBLA teams are some of the most snappily dressed people, coming in with tailored suits and ties. There is a lot of peer pressure to dress appropriately when the situation calls for it. For instance, at our Football banquet, all the boys wore sweaters or vests, button down shirts, ties and dress pants. One player showed up in athletic shorts and a Under Armor tee. Even the coach called him out "guess who didn't get the dress memo" during the presentation.

Because they don't have to, the students tend to love to dress appropriately for different situations.

And because our's wear the school "uniform", they also love to dress appropriately in other situations where they can dress up or wear nice jeans.

I still maintain that the kids are not being hurt by these rules. They are learning that sometimes you just abide by the rules and move on. Wearing shorts that come to their fingertips isn't going to take anything away from them. And it will teach them that you dress for the situation.

 

[luvsJack]

I live in a college town. If places of employment had those rules they would not be able to be able to find employees ! There is NO dress code at my DD's high school except I think boys are not supposed to "sag".

I live in a college town too. 2 Universities and a community college. MANY places have these rules and they have plenty of employees.

 

[sam_gordon]

Or, I'm free to ask the authoritative body to explain the rationale behind that choice, and if I consider that rationale to be insufficient, attempt to affect change in my community. We don't always have to accept the current situation silently. I think unreasonable dress codes (and not ALL dress codes are unreasonable) provide a lovely opportunity to question authority and stand up for a change you consider important. As has been mentioned in this thread, dress codes have changed a LOT over the years, and I'm sure that is often because of involved parents who did not accept antiquated ideas like girls must always wear dresses, or boys can't have long hair or earrings.

I'm not suggesting that people flagrantly break the rules, but I see no harm whatsoever in asking for a justification for those rules and trying to encourage a school system to be more thoughtful in their rules. When we know better, we do better.

I agree 100% with your post, but especially with the bolded. If you care that highly about something, do something to change it.

 

[unhinged]

And because our's wear the school "uniform", they also love to dress appropriately in other situations where they can dress up or wear nice jeans.

I still maintain that the kids are not being hurt by these rules. They are learning that sometimes you just abide by the rules and move on. Wearing shorts that come to their fingertips isn't going to take anything away from them. And it will teach them that you dress for the situation.

That is rather insulting to teens to say that they can't learn to dress appropriately for different situations unless you are told how to dress.

Dress codes work in some places, but lack of dress codes are also extremely effective in other places. I prefer my children learning how to make their own decisions on how to dress appropriately rather than having an administrative staff dictate how they are going to dress. The students still suffer the consequences if they show up in pasties and thongs.

You live in the deep south right? Traditionally, it is a much more conservative area of the country than say the West. I live in an area that has throughout its history been rather progressive in dress and style. So, different things work for different people. In my neck of the woods, first and second graders are dying the tips of their hair pink, blue. I was doing recess duty last week and a second grader came to school with bright purple hair. Because it is so prevalent, hair color and piercings do not hinder most adolescent type jobs around here. It is amusing to count piercings when checking out at the grocery store.

 

[luvsJack]

The problem with comparing to employment is that there is no law that says I have a specific job. There isn't a law that I have to have a job at all. So if dressing a certain way, getting a tatoo, or a piecing, or having blue hair is important to me I could get a job that is ok with that.

However students are told by law that they MUST attend school from I believe the ages of 6 until they are 16 and to a large extent (besides homeschooling or private school if the area even HAS one) it even dictates WHERE they must go to school. So they don't have the option to just choose to not go or to go somewhere else. Which makes it much more reasonable to work to change the school policies.


Even with all the choice if an adult doesn't like their employers policies they also have the freedom to try to change them.

So its better to allow our kids to continue getting tats, piercing or whatever now so that they are not employable in the field of their choice?

There is no law that you have to have a job but is that the life you want for your kid?

My kids have tats. My kids have piercings. (dd doesn't but hasn't asked for extra piercings) But their tats are cover-able and when a piercing became a problem for a job, they took it out or wore a clear post in the hole while working. When they were in school, they had piercings but they knew what to do to make it within dress code. Same thing.

 

[pryncess527]

I still maintain that the kids are not being hurt by these rules. They are learning that sometimes you just abide by the rules and move on. Wearing shorts that come to their fingertips isn't going to take anything away from them. And it will teach them that you dress for the situation.

In many situations, kids are not being hurt by these rules.

But there are other situations where girls have been singled out, often in front of the class, and spoken to regarding their clothing in a way that is absolutely harmful. Or, situations like the OP here, where the "rules" are so vague and confusing, it creates uncertainty which is not helpful. When dress codes create a situation that make young girls (or boys for that matter, the must-be-clean-shaven thing bugs me . . . ), particularly pre-pubescent girls, feel self-conscious, sexualized by adults, or when the language of the dress code puts the onus on women to avoid unwanted attention, I think there IS harm caused. And there have been a slew of stories about dress codes being used in that way.

So no, they are not all bad. But they aren't all harmless either.