Guys! BAD NEWS!

[bg23]

Women's lib gone one step too far...?

 

[cantdog]

Well, Lucifer, if pants aren't a big deal, and if, sNp, there are many MUCH more important things than being made to wear pants every day, then let them shut the hell up about it.

You can't make it a law to come and a violation to wear something else besides pants, and THEN tell the rest of us that it's not a big deal. Who made it a deal in the first place? Control freak managers with too much mandated petty authority, that's who.

In the end, all of us have nipples and there are only a few variations in genitalia, each widely distributed and altogether unremarkable and normal. Nudists have a valid point. What in the name of God is all the fuss about? If the administrative underwear checkers look at their own crotches, they will discover some fairly common equipment there, too. It's universal and no one ought by this time to be too worried about it.

The sooner everyone in their offices gets used to the idea that their students are going to arrive in all genders, the better. Attempting to hide it is not only futile, but causes a lot of undue importance and stress to be laid on it. Not to mention some totally silly interruptions of people's schooling by means of frivolous suspensions, with accompanying threats, trauma, anxiety, and whatnot.

Yet they argue that they do all this to keep their education from being interrupted, and to safeguard them from threat, and to promote their mental and emotional health.

This is such patent hooey. But one thing it does do is reaffirm their feeling of power, authority, and control, and draw a line telling all of these young people, who will very soon be making far more important decisions than what skirt to wear, that they are children and therefore chattel, that their decisions are not theirs to make, and so on.

Do you want your children to have good judgement? Then, I'm afraid, you will have to relinquish your petty authority and let them make decisions. No one under heaven has ever developed good judgement in any other way than by making decisions.

At eighteen you will place modern weapons in their hands and ask them to defend you. You will send them away to live largely unsupervised lives in dormitories and apartments.

The ones who have ever had the experience of decision making will handle it well; the ones whose every minor idea has been subject to veto and second-guessing will take the opportunity of the dormitory to smoke, snort fuck and drink whatever comes to hand. We have all seen it time and time again. "We expect you to have judgement, honey, you're x age now."

But judgement is not conferred by longevity. It comes through exercise of the faculty of judgement, and it can't start too soon. Judgement is in fact the only thing which will ever regulate the hormonal drives you speak of with such a snigger.

cantdog

 

[Guest]

School Girls!

CV is here for your school-girlie loooove!

 

[softshoe]

I am so old that I remember being required to wear a skirt in Junior High (ages 12-13). By the time I was a sophomore in high school, miniskirts were the thing. The school had no problem with hiphugger jeans or any other kind of pants, but our skirts had to be at least as long as our fingertips when our arms were held at our sides.

When I see what kids wear now, I laugh, knowing that one day they will be as embarrassed as I am when I see pictures of myself from high school. I guess every teenage generation has a right to look ridiculous.

 

[sweetnpetite]

so no child who ever attended private school or who was subjected to a dress code ever learned to have judgement? no one who ever had rules or boundaries ever learned to think for themselves?

Yes, nudists have a point. But the world at large is not nudist. and we all have to learn how the world we live in works before makeing a concious decision to go against the grain, not be raised in ignorance of social norms all together.

these are not students who were formerly allowed to wear anything and everything. (or nothing) and you can't possilby think that schools are seriously going to turn 'nudist' over night, when the rest of the world clearly is not.

We should clear up one thing here. Are we debating the merits of dress codes OR or we debating a change in dress codes? If you think dress codes of any type are just plain wrong then the school was wrong before and the school was wrong after. But I thought the discussion here was about the change in dress code (and how sad that would be for guys w/ the typical schoolgirl uniform fantasy/ fetish whathave you.) I can't really believe how many people are so willing to jump on a lead like that claiming that there's nothing more inherintly sexual about a skirt than a pair of slacks. come on! you are intellectualizing. short skirts are sexy and they are too sexy for a school environment. why claim otherwise?

Well, Lucifer, if pants aren't a big deal, and if, sNp, there are many MUCH more important things than being made to wear pants every day, then let them shut the hell up about it.

You can't make it a law to come and a violation to wear something else besides pants, and THEN tell the rest of us that it's not a big deal. Who made it a deal in the first place? Control freak managers with too much mandated petty authority, that's who.

In the end, all of us have nipples and there are only a few variations in genitalia, each widely distributed and altogether unremarkable and normal. Nudists have a valid point. What in the name of God is all the fuss about? If the administrative underwear checkers look at their own crotches, they will discover some fairly common equipment there, too. It's universal and no one ought by this time to be too worried about it.

The sooner everyone in their offices gets used to the idea that their students are going to arrive in all genders, the better. Attempting to hide it is not only futile, but causes a lot of undue importance and stress to be laid on it. Not to mention some totally silly interruptions of people's schooling by means of frivolous suspensions, with accompanying threats, trauma, anxiety, and whatnot.

Yet they argue that they do all this to keep their education from being interrupted, and to safeguard them from threat, and to promote their mental and emotional health.

This is such patent hooey. But one thing it does do is reaffirm their feeling of power, authority, and control, and draw a line telling all of these young people, who will very soon be making far more important decisions than what skirt to wear, that they are children and therefore chattel, that their decisions are not theirs to make, and so on.

Do you want your children to have good judgement? Then, I'm afraid, you will have to relinquish your petty authority and let them make decisions. No one under heaven has ever developed good judgement in any other way than by making decisions.

At eighteen you will place modern weapons in their hands and ask them to defend you. You will send them away to live largely unsupervised lives in dormitories and apartments.

The ones who have ever had the experience of decision making will handle it well; the ones whose every minor idea has been subject to veto and second-guessing will take the opportunity of the dormitory to smoke, snort fuck and drink whatever comes to hand. We have all seen it time and time again. "We expect you to have judgement, honey, you're x age now."

But judgement is not conferred by longevity. It comes through exercise of the faculty of judgement, and it can't start too soon. Judgement is in fact the only thing which will ever regulate the hormonal drives you speak of with such a snigger.

cantdog

 

[cantdog]

Yes, they're too sexy for a school environment, some of them. But I submit that you know that because you are using your judgement.

My daughter started deciding what to wear at two. The choices were deliberately limited. We had bought the clothes in the first place. We said, "Do you think the red one or the blue one?" or some such thing. But she made the decision and it was real, within its scope. We never let an opportunity slide, if we thought about it, for her to make a decision or a judgement.

The grand scheme went like this: We were in charge through age six. But we had a "rule rule," which I'll describe.

Form six to twelve we gradually let go. We didn't tell her we were letting go but we did. By age thirteen she was in charge of her life, and we were there in an advise and consent capacity. We didn't offer our consent but she continued to check with us if she felt she was out of her depth. That happened less and less often, because the kid made pretty darn good decisions. Even the decision to consult us was very shrewd; she actually was beyond her experience every time she consulted.

The rule rule goes like this. Rules are for people who don't understand the situation. Once you do understand the pitfalls and where the problems lie, you don't need a rule any more, because your judgement, now informed, will do.

When she went to college, her roommate had been told what she could and couldn't wear, and had a curfew of 11:30 pmas a senior in high school! That girl was under her parents' thumb big time, and now the thumb was off. She fucked everyone on every kind of drug, she did the worst series of boneheaded stupid self-indulgent actions my daughter had ever seen or imagined.

My daughter was appalled.

That girl was bright and didn't actually flunk out until the end of her freshman year. My daughter stuck to a difficult, demanding, frustrating lenthy program and gradusted a pharmacist. In another state. Living on her own and working. And fielding other problems simultaneously like the house with the defective boiler in the basement that gassed them day after day, while the landlord claimed nothing was wrong, and like her carpal tunnel which made her have to stop playing violin while everyday actions hurt like fire. But she handled it all, and without consulting anyone.

She didn't require your goddam dress codes. No one with judgement does.

I don't ever debate one dress code versus another, because they are a poor substitute for using your head.

That's what I'm saying. Not that no child in a dress code system ever learned to think for themselves, but merely that it is the wrong approach. Plus, if it does anything, it prevents decision making, which is exactly what you don't need.

My point with the nudists is that genitalia and sexuality are banal. The issue is not to control it from outside, but to learn to deal with it from inside. Self-control is the only kind which works, when it comes to sexuality.

cantdog

 

[Xelebes]

I guess I'm the only one who agrees with this. There is such a thing as appropriate dress for appropriate occasions, and teens need to learn this as much as anyone. There is also such a thing as consequenses of not following the rules, and this is one such an example. Yes, girls can be sexy without showing every inch of flesh. And for that matter, there's one more thing that it wouldn't hurt them to learn.

While they are at it, it might be good for them to learn (and for the boys as well to learn) that women are more than just sex objects. sorry, horny boys indeed...

you'll get over it

Ditto'd and agreeing.

 

[Remec]

posted by SNP
We should clear up one thing here. Are we debating the merits of dress codes OR or we debating a change in dress codes? If you think dress codes of any type are just plain wrong then the school was wrong before and the school was wrong after. But I thought the discussion here was about the change in dress code (and how sad that would be for guys w/ the typical schoolgirl uniform fantasy/ fetish whathave you.) I can't really believe how many people are so willing to jump on a lead like that claiming that there's nothing more inherintly sexual about a skirt than a pair of slacks. come on! you are intellectualizing. short skirts are sexy and they are too sexy for a school environment. why claim otherwise?

You're right, things have mutated a bit from where you were headed, but I hadn't realized that there had been a dress code in place previously...only that now girls would be forbidden to wear skirts. (And was it only short skirts? What about dresses? I should prolly pay more attention to these things before I type.)

Also, was this concerning a school where you pay to attend? (I know about the whole difference in terminology that Matriarch brought up, but was unclear on the point in this instance.) In that case, even though dress codes are still inherently wrong, they are fully within the scope of their rights to establish such in any form they wish. The only thing that will determine if they have made a bad decision is if the number of parents still willing to pay tuition after the code is up and running goes down.

Now, as to how I feel about the lack of schoolgirls in short skirts?

<sly, mischievous smile>
Well, that depends on how Aqualungish I feel on a given day.
hehehe

 

[cantdog]

You are quite correct, Remec, they are within their rights to prescribe dress if it is a school you pay to attend, and they are within their mandate to set dress codes in a school funded by public moneys. In fact, children have hardly any rights in the matter whatsoever, and parents have less influence in this particular area than they do in most things having to do with school policies.

Most of the world is scared of their young people, terrified that someone might see a leg or a breast , and entirely in favor of fussing around making up rules about other people's underwear. They have every support; SnP is in the vast majority in her support of the idea.

Molding the youth-- that's a good enough argument in this case, but in fact, every employer can go ahead and set dress codes, prescribe how you cut your hair, how you shave, and so on and so on. Molding the youth is no longer the excuse they give, but they do it anyway.

Power direstly over the persons of those in your authority's scope is very heady. All power trippers want to have that thrill. Molding the youth, health, safety, not offending customers, whatever reason seems best, they will give. And they have, ordinarily, every right at law to do that.

It just sucks. It widens the gap between employer and employee, or administrator and cattle in the case of the schools. Checking their underwear! How much clearer a message of dominance could you arrange for?

 

[Guest]

School Girls!

Come to Papa!

 

[emap]

Chilled that was disugusting, well done, but disgusting

Cantdog, you and your wife are the parents most of us dream of having, if mine had been different, well Ok I'd have had more sex However since parents like you are about as rare as a gremlin that doesn't have any problems, stupid rules like this are rather necessary.

I do have to say, I think you are wrong about the dress code kids don't learn how to make decisions, there are I would assume billions of different things you need to decide on in a single day, most of them are without thought, but there are thousands that are not, like say do I head into the bathroom with Steve, or do I go to John's car for a little trip. Do I eat the burrito or the hot dog or the hamburger for lunch, do I get a soda between classes, do I carry 2 books or 3 to cut down on trips to the locker, do I cut this class, do I cut the rest of the classes and go to this really cute guys house, do I go home and help with dinner, do I go to the library and study, do I go to this guys house and study, or do I take off my clothes and you know.

What I've listed is just the tip of the iceberg so to speak, there are thousands more, and there are thousands more besides that may appear depending on what you decide for those. Yes a dress code does take away some decisions, but not very many in the course of the day.

OK, yes I am a very sexual lady, my guy kinda turned me into one, but I was kinda mostly there anyway

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Um, I seemed to get misinterpreted a bit, but that's okay. The point I was making is that it was a switch from a uniform into a new uniform. As SnP pointed out, it was a blanket comment on how uniforms are generally bad for self-exploration and non-conformity and that a change between uniforms will do little but open new channels of rebellion and create amusing new takes on sexuality. I admit that the hit to the school-girl fetish trend in UK is palpable, but the all-night anime dealer can slake your lust just as well without running into problems with the law. I also agree on the stupidity of the busybodies, that's why I pointed out that our dress code never banned nudity (only showing belly-buttons) and that our own neurotics violated civil liberties in their crusade against immorality.

No one worry about this. The uniform fetish people still have good ol' Japan and the children will find just as clever a way to rebel trouser as they did skirts. Trust me. "The more things change, the more they stay the same."

 

[elfin_odalisque]

With all these comments, I just hope I'm in the right thread. The problem with not being a virgin is everyone expects you to be experienced. Let me know if I'm doing things wrong.

Some random thoughts on girls' school dress.

UK teachers have been fighting a guerilla war against micro mini skirts since Mary Quant invented them in the 1960s. Not so long ago, I remember having to kneel on a table and have the distance beteween skirt hem and knee measured. (You just rolled your waistband up afterwards).

Coed, a fairly modern concept in the UK, has given us girls hundreds of testosterone fuelled idiots to flaunt our wares at. (It helps to get better exam results).

Serious and difficult issues of acceptable religious dress and equal rights, coupled with political correctness gone mad, has made the task of teaching staff and PTAs in this area almost impossible.

If you can't do it with a glimpse of thigh, you can get the same reaction with a skin tight pair of pants. Haven't the teachers worked that one out?

And a plea. From your posts, Matriarch, you must be a UK teacher-the scars show. You have much more to offer if you can give us the benefit of your experience.

Too long as always, love Elle

Ad break: newest story: Fiona's Flight of Fantasy

 

[sweetnpetite]

Well put.

I pretty much agree with everything you have said. However, my point was that the schoolgirl skirt was a particular sexual fantasy of boys and men all over. It's sexier, in fact than nudity. And sexier than sexy tight pants.

Your rule of rules makes perfect sense. And if everybody thought like you and your daughter, dress codes would be unnesessary. However, the world is full of people without judgement, and the girls at this school demonstrated that by wearing shorter and shorter skirts until they where no longer allowed to wear them at all.

And of course the really bad thing about bad judgement is- nobody really thinks that they are using it.

Yes, they're too sexy for a school environment, some of them. But I submit that you know that because you are using your judgement.

My daughter started deciding what to wear at two. The choices were deliberately limited. We had bought the clothes in the first place. We said, "Do you think the red one or the blue one?" or some such thing. But she made the decision and it was real, within its scope. We never let an opportunity slide, if we thought about it, for her to make a decision or a judgement.

The grand scheme went like this: We were in charge through age six. But we had a "rule rule," which I'll describe.

Form six to twelve we gradually let go. We didn't tell her we were letting go but we did. By age thirteen she was in charge of her life, and we were there in an advise and consent capacity. We didn't offer our consent but she continued to check with us if she felt she was out of her depth. That happened less and less often, because the kid made pretty darn good decisions. Even the decision to consult us was very shrewd; she actually was beyond her experience every time she consulted.

The rule rule goes like this. Rules are for people who don't understand the situation. Once you do understand the pitfalls and where the problems lie, you don't need a rule any more, because your judgement, now informed, will do.

When she went to college, her roommate had been told what she could and couldn't wear, and had a curfew of 11:30 pmas a senior in high school! That girl was under her parents' thumb big time, and now the thumb was off. She fucked everyone on every kind of drug, she did the worst series of boneheaded stupid self-indulgent actions my daughter had ever seen or imagined.

My daughter was appalled.

That girl was bright and didn't actually flunk out until the end of her freshman year. My daughter stuck to a difficult, demanding, frustrating lenthy program and gradusted a pharmacist. In another state. Living on her own and working. And fielding other problems simultaneously like the house with the defective boiler in the basement that gassed them day after day, while the landlord claimed nothing was wrong, and like her carpal tunnel which made her have to stop playing violin while everyday actions hurt like fire. But she handled it all, and without consulting anyone.

She didn't require your goddam dress codes. No one with judgement does.

I don't ever debate one dress code versus another, because they are a poor substitute for using your head.

That's what I'm saying. Not that no child in a dress code system ever learned to think for themselves, but merely that it is the wrong approach. Plus, if it does anything, it prevents decision making, which is exactly what you don't need.

My point with the nudists is that genitalia and sexuality are banal. The issue is not to control it from outside, but to learn to deal with it from inside. Self-control is the only kind which works, when it comes to sexuality.

cantdog