snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Social Studies

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 29 May 2014, 10:17 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,107
Default

Singing in the Drizzle, you're making it sound like it was all bright line rules, like "no v-necks" but the point is that there were obviously also grey area rules like "modest cut." People's ideas of what's a modest cut will vary, and there will be a lot of judgment by administrators.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 29 May 2014, 10:26 PM
Aud 1 Aud 1 is offline
 
Join Date: 05 October 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 7,159
Default

I was researching the name of a specific sort of neckline and looked through several dress sites. One that popped up was about Mormon wedding styles and it had most of what i had just viewed on other sites but with a little cap sleeves and a modesty panel over the cleavage.

I wonder if some of the arbitrariness of the retouching had to do with family religious affiliation or lack thereof.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 29 May 2014, 11:31 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Singing in the Drizzle View Post
You are trying to play the game of can we make an exception and twist the rules.
I'm not playing any games. You think the dress code was sensible and easy to follow. I disagree.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 30 May 2014, 12:06 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

So given that even my crazy ass rigid school dress code from 15 years ago would have allowed all but the spaghetti straps, I think we can be upfront that their dress code excuse is a bit of a lie.

And for that matter, when we took OUR photos, if someone showed up wearing something inappropriate, they'd be told to change or not get a photo. Pretty consistent there. You really expect me to believe no boys showed up with inappropriate slogans or tattoos? That it was only these trollopy women who were inappropriate and got what they justly deserved?

It's just a school making sure to teach women the proper lesson that they are objects who must be instructed how not to accidentally titillate men. Make sure we teach em' as young as possible!

Anyway, here's their dress code.

http://www.wasatch.edu/cms/lib/UT010...Appearance.pdf

Highlights:
  • No bare shoulders
  • The entirety of the back must be covered at all times
  • Any clothes that are considered an "obvious attempt to challenge the authority of the school."

Also important to teach children that authority can be shallow, pointless, and unfair but also unquestionable. Make sure they learn nice and young!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 30 May 2014, 02:54 AM
Singing in the Drizzle Singing in the Drizzle is offline
 
Join Date: 24 November 2005
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 4,745
Default

Our school made sure the first day that everyone knew what the dress code is and how it would be judged. The teachers also explained how to work within the rules to wear something like a spaghetti straps, short skirts or cut off shirts. Every rule as also applied equally to the boys. You wear shorts and they must be of appropriate length and it is the same for both sexes. If girls can only have to top button of a shirt undone then it is the same for the boys. Their were no rules against crossdressing, but clothing better be per dress code.

We had the no bare shoulders, bare back or midriff. It was hard to show underwear since shirts had to hang lower than the belt line on the pants you were wearing. So lower the pants sagged the longer the shirt had to be. The school realized that some people will have a hard time hiding cleavage so try not to emphasize it rather than not show it. And boys we are not going to allow you to show off that upper body of yours was well so keep it covered. We not have

The rules were gone over one more time about a week before pictures and a few tips for the girls since some clothing can have undesired results under the camera. If you wanted to wear something questionable bring something as a backup to change into that you know will not cause problems.

The teachers were pretty consistent at enforcing the rules and started warning students when things were starting to push the limits of the rules. And yes authority is always shallow, pointless, and unfair especially when you are a teenager and cannot express your self as you would like to.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 30 May 2014, 08:26 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

See, I learned real fast in my school what the real reason for the dress code was - covering up the rampant drug use in our "nice" neighborhood. They were sending kids home all day for dress code violations, but you could smoke a joint in front of the dean without a peep. It was also widely known which bathrooms were the "smoking" bathrooms over lunch hours - and there's no way administration wouldn't know it given the smells.

So I assume all dress codes are pointless for similar reasons - and the more rigidly enforced they are outside of just adopting a uniform policy, the more likely the school is blowing off something important.

Also, I'm not sure why your experience with your school dress code is relevant to this instance unless your experience was at this high school.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 30 May 2014, 11:41 AM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Singing in the Drizzle View Post
And yes authority is always shallow, pointless, and unfair especially when you are a teenager and cannot express your self as you would like to.
It isn't, actually, although rules about silly things like the shape of someone's neckline certainly foster that attitude. When adults tell teens, "never get in a car with a driver who's been drinking," that's not shallow, pointless or unfair.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 30 May 2014, 02:24 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 18,516
Glasses

Singing in the Drizzle, are you saying that because your dress code was made clear and enforced, these students have no right to complain when they violated an entirely different dress code that may not have been made clear or enforced?

I'll also mention (again) the bit about only editing pictures of girls.

This is, indeed, a shallow, pointless and unfair exercise of authority. No matter what happened at your high school while you were there.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02 June 2014, 02:01 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

Related story:

Grade 11 student Lindsey Stocker suspended for defying dress code, putting up posters in school

Quote:
Grade 11 student Lindsey Stocker and her classmates at Beaconsfield High School in Quebec were told to stand up in class last week so a pair of school officials could look at their outfits.

Put your arms by your sides, and if your shorts or skirts don’t reach your fingertips, you’re in violation of the school’s dress code, the officials told the students.

Stocker said she felt humiliated.

"When I started explaining why I didn’t understand that rule, they didn’t really want to hear anything I had to say, and it was in front of my entire class. I felt very attacked … and I wanted to tell them how I felt," Stocker said, adding that many of the rules in the dress code appear to specifically target girls.
If my boss walked into my cube and made that demand of us, he would get fired. It's kind of amazing what we're okay with people doing to kids for no actual benefit besides reminding them how powerless they are. Especially since she was told "Because we say so" while being slut-shamed in front of her peers.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02 June 2014, 02:09 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,577
No

Perverse. 
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02 June 2014, 02:52 AM
Sylvanz's Avatar
Sylvanz Sylvanz is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,952
Default

Perhaps I'm way old, but I don't remember dress codes being so specific, severe, and grimly enforced when I was in high school. I wore one of these to school and there was no flak (except from some of the other girls who were moving towards the longer skirts that were starting to become popular).

What ever happened to questioning authority...umm...man? It's like, "It's a rule and you cannot ever break/question a rule!!!!" That is not what being a teen/young adult is about as I recall. And as said above: I'm wondering when the DRESS CODE became some carved in stone holy relic brought down from the mountain. It's really ridiculous because the more you push them the more these kids are likely to push back. It's a waste of educational time and effort.

Yes, when they get into the real world they will not be able to dress anyway they want at a job. But guess what? They'll be adults then and frankly I don't think they are all idiots who don't grasp the difference. Also, most colleges do not occupy themselves with being the fashion police for their students, and Western society and the professional world in particular have not fallen into ruin.

This need to control the fashion choices of kids (and in particular girls) at times, almost seems pathological.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02 June 2014, 03:36 AM
Sylvanz's Avatar
Sylvanz Sylvanz is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,952
Default

Rats! I missed the edit window. I'm also a bit perplexed about "Lining up" to have your senior picture taken all at once by the school photographer. We contracted private photographers to take senior photos in all sorts of poses. My kids actually had several clothing changes and locations. We had to submit the photo we'd chosen by X date to be included in the year book. If we'd submitted anything "inappropriate" I'm sure they'd have told us to submit something else. Not that I think any of the things altered in those photos were "inappropriate" or would have been turned down by our rather conservative district.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02 June 2014, 04:43 AM
Johnny Slick's Avatar
Johnny Slick Johnny Slick is offline
 
Join Date: 13 February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 11,628
Default

Look, libs! If the boys show up wearing short skirts, we're sending them home too! If they show up wearing dresses of ANY LENGTH we are sending them home!!! How is that for equality, libs!!!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02 June 2014, 04:58 AM
JoeBentley's Avatar
JoeBentley JoeBentley is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 21,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvanz View Post
I'm also a bit perplexed about "Lining up" to have your senior picture taken all at once by the school photographer. We contracted private photographers to take senior photos in all sorts of poses. My kids actually had several clothing changes and locations.

//Wild Mass Guess//

I know when my sister graduated from High School about 4 years back her "Yearbook Photo" and her "Senior Photo" weren't the same thing. The yearbook photos were all fairly standardized; same background, same 3/4 head pose. The "Senior Photos" were your more traditional personalized fair.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02 June 2014, 05:12 AM
Cervus's Avatar
Cervus Cervus is offline
 
Join Date: 21 October 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,125
Default

I've always been kinda envious of seniors who got to choose their outfits for their yearbook photos. My school required all girls to wear the black drape and all boys to wear the tuxedo. You were allowed to wear a necklace if you wanted, but apart from that, your hairstyle was the only way you could display your individuality in your photo.

During the senior photo sessions, we were given different color drapes/tuxedos to wear against different backdrops, and you could purchase those pictures separately, but everyone had to be wearing the same outfit in front of the same backdrop in order to be allowed in the yearbook.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02 June 2014, 05:36 AM
JoeBentley's Avatar
JoeBentley JoeBentley is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 21,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebochan View Post
It's kind of amazing what we're okay with people doing to kids for no actual benefit besides reminding them how powerless they are.
Because a lot of people in authority see that as an actual benefit.

"Meek/obedient/fearful of authority" and "reasonably respectful of authority" have always had a very hazy line between them in far too many people's mind.

ETA: And seriously isn't it sort of time that the "Teenagers are just rebellious and will fight authority for the sake of doing so" trope sorta went away? I know it makes a handy across the board excuse for people in authority over them being pedantic little rule lawyers with ulterior motives, but teenagers are... you know human. They aren't a Borg Collective.

The whole "Teenagers are barely controllable" thing just doesn't sit well with me. I didn't like it when I was a teenager.

Last edited by JoeBentley; 02 June 2014 at 05:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02 June 2014, 12:06 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,331
Default

When I was in high school, we weren't allowed to wear shorts at all. However, on game day, the members of the field hockey team were required to wear their kilts or pinneys -- which were upper thigh length. Some of the girls looked rather uncomfortable wearing them to class.

On football game days, the players wore suits and ties.

ETA: The field hockey outfits were shorter than cheerleader skirts, which of course is what the cheerleaders had to wear on game days.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02 June 2014, 12:42 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvanz View Post
Perhaps I'm way old, but I don't remember dress codes being so specific, severe, and grimly enforced when I was in high school. .
I'm probably just enough older to remember them being much worse. 1950's into the mid1960's (after which there was a huge shift in not only school dress codes, but in what adults routinely wore out in public): girls had to wear skirts to school. If it was freezing cold and you had to stand out waiting for the bus, you could wear pants under your skirt, but you had to take them off when you got to school and just wear the skirt.

And never mind the finger tip rule: our skirts were supposed to be two inches below the knee; which meant, two inches of fabric on the ground if the wearer was kneeling. And I went to one school that would make you kneel to prove it.

-- Skirts on boys were, believe me, not an issue. That was so inconceivable that rules against it weren't needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
"Meek/obedient/fearful of authority" and "reasonably respectful of authority" have always had a very hazy line between them in far too many people's mind..
There is in many people's minds, and to a large extent in the culture as a whole, a confusion between "respectful of genuine authority, and of rules that genuinely make people's lives easier" and "respectful of/doing what one is told by the person(s) "above" one in whatever heirarchy is supposed to apply to the circumstance, even if that person(s) has no genuine authority in the situation and/or the rule makes people's lives no easier or actually makes them worse."

(What I mean about genuine authority is that the person claiming it actually knows more about the situation, and the situation is such that doing what the person who knows more about it says will significantly improve things. The engineer who says "you must put x number of bolts in this connection or the bridge may fall down" has genuine authority, for instance (presuming that the person actually knows the applicable engineering.) So does the parent who says to a young child "you cannot routinely eat as much candy as you want" or "you have to have this inoculation.")

I think the confusion is aided by the fact that there are some limited circumstances when it's necessary to follow orders even though the only thing one knows about the authority giving them is that person's rank -- military in battle conditions, for instance, and some emergency police, firefighting, etc. situations.

I think also that some who are themselves in no confusion about the difference think that others -- children, especially -- need to be taught unquestioning obedience because they won't be able to tell the difference and will therefore, if they're taught or allowed to question authority, refuse to obey (for instance) the firefighter who's telling them to get out of the building. I think that one often backfires, however: people who are taught to obey authority no matter how stupid it's being often conclude that all authority is stupid, and those who come to this conclusion are likely to also ignore genuine authority, thereby doing damage to themselves or others.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02 June 2014, 02:07 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is online now
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,155
Default

We had to wear uniforms when I was in elementary school but by the time I was in high school pretty much anything went. It's possible that my hippy go free free generation is somewhat responsible for dress codes coming in - I recall one of my friends in grade 11 (year of graduation in my high school) showing up braless in a fairly sheer white top. She did get called into the principal's office for that but she was only taking to an extreme what a lot of the girls were doing in the days of hot pants and braless lawlessness, otherwise known as the 70s.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02 June 2014, 06:12 PM
quink quink is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2005
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 3,193
Default

My school didn't have any dress codes that I was aware of. I graduated in 1997, and over the years I saw lots of the 90s version of hippy clothes (long skirts, hemp, 70s throwback outfits), grunge, goth, and other things. In more everyday styles, skirts ran on the short side and shirts were cropped (which I hated - I was strictly a baggy sweater and leggings girl). We did have one guy who wore skirts regularly, usually long peasant skirts or wrap-arounds with t-shirts and his ratty jean jacket. Another guy was a weekend drag performer and occasionally dressed up for class. The school was well known for its arts and theatre programs, so that might have helped, but I don't remember any non-private schools being hung up on dress code.

Eta: this was west coast BC, so it was a pretty liberal-minded place to begin with. My ex took his boyfriend as his date to Grad, and everyone - students and staff - were supportive when they were the first couple on the dance floor. Most people were more surprised that he and I had broken up after three years than that he was gay.

Last edited by quink; 02 June 2014 at 06:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Students at women’s college upset at nearly nude statue of a man A Turtle Named Mack Amusement Bark 66 10 February 2014 06:03 PM
Minnesota high school misspells own name on yearbook cover snopes Weird News 0 11 September 2013 08:06 AM
School apologizes for inappropriate yearbook captions snopes Social Studies 2 08 June 2013 10:10 AM
Teen upset picture with son cut from yearbook snopes Social Studies 7 07 May 2013 01:45 PM
Photos of man with rifle in Utah store go viral snopes Soapbox Derby 27 19 January 2013 07:31 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.