17 August 2015

Dress code violation


Sent home from high school for violating the school's dress code.

Not because of the faded jeans.

Because her outfit doesn't completely cover her clavicle (collarbone).

This incident didn't happen in a church school - she attends Woodford County High School, a public school in Versailles, Kentucky, just a short distance from where I used to live.  The controversy regarding the dress code was recently reported by the Lexington Herald-Leader:
An online petition has begun seeking support to change Woodford County High School's 11-year-old dress code...

Wednesday was the first day of classes for students. One Facebook post said there was "a group of female students standing in the office" because they were not complying with the dress code.

Another post said, "This is ridiculous! Parents are being called away from important jobs and students are missing important class time because they are showing their collarbones!"...

Among the criteria in the Woodford County High dress code is that students must wear a rounded crewneck shirt or a button-down shirt that may have only the top button open. Shirts must not expose the collarbone. Shorts and skirts must be knee-length or longer.
Last year the students at the school created a 33-minute video about their grievances.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/14/3988907_woodford-county-high-schools-dress.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/14/3988907_woodford-county-high-schools-dress.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/14/3988907_woodford-county-high-schools-dress.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

20 comments:

  1. I hope that discussions of what women should or shouldn't wear isn't going to become a regular thing on this blog. I love the random stuff you come up with, but I find this kind of discussion unpleasant regardless of the views being presented. Still, it is your choice what kind of content you want to feature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is this unpleasant? There are a number of topics that this blogger comes back to regularly, so what is special about this one that makes you feel compelled to log your disinterest?

      Delete
    2. I have little or no interest in women's fashion per se except insofar as it serves as a reflection of other aspects of our society. But I do have some interest in dress codes. When I was a high school student in the 1960s, my school had a dress code for boys that mandated coats and ties. As the first wave of "60s" youth, we lobbied hard for a more relaxed dress code and were eventually granted the right to wear sweaters (!). Things are different now.

      In this case what interests me is the presumption that schools can legislate morality into teenagers by restricting their clothing choices. The administration will limit necklines, and then the students will go home and log onto Red Tube. It all seems kind of silly.

      Delete
    3. I think Mel's comment (which I tend to second) is to be understood in the light of this post as well.

      Delete
    4. Understood. Also in light of some of these...

      http://tywkiwdbi.blogspot.nl/search/label/fashion

      Delete
    5. > my school had a dress code for boys

      how much hair length were you allowed? was it allowed to go over the shirt collar?

      I-)

      Delete
    6. Yes, Drabkikker took my meaning. Your previous fashion posts have been interesting things that I wouldn't have known. These latest two aren't focused on fashion, they're people arguing about what modern women should or shouldn't do with their bodies. (It reminds me of this comic: http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/04/policing-womens-clothing/) I get enough of that in daily life, I'd rather not to get it in my entertainment as well.

      Delete
    7. This is less about fashion than it is a reflection of the author's commonly stated dislike of zero-tolerance policies, also known as zero-intelligence policies.

      Yes, this outfit is technically outside the dress code. There is also absolutely no reason why this outfit should be banned, as it is not provocative or inappropriate in any way. Rules like this that do not take into account basic common sense are meant to be discussed, condemned, and yes, even changed.


      Delete
  2. But can they dance?!?!

    What utter and complete bullshit ~ when did collarbones become erotic?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. > when did collarbones become erotic

      The issue isn't the collarbones, the issue is that the school didn't want to get involved with measuring how deep necklines are at all, and so came up with the rule that collarbones shouldn't be revealed, with can easily be done by wearing a shirt or blouse.

      Delete
    2. @Danack: So, essentially a form of "zero-tolerance" policy designed to remove administrators from any function that would require them to make an informed decision and back it up... with the expected results.

      Delete
  3. If that's my kid, I send her back to the school in a burka.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And then you would be a member of that same silly group of adults who sent her home in the first place.

      Delete
    2. I like your answer. This would likely piss-off the likely old, white batch of "born agains" and show them up for their hypocrisy.

      Delete
  4. I don't see the issue. The school has a dress code, she didn't follow it. Just another non-issue for the SJWs to get excited about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The issue is not the dress code per se. It's about stupid policies designed to prevent any administrator (gender is irrelevant here) from having to make a decision and back it up. You can file any "zero-tolerance" policy under this category.

      Delete
  5. The issue -- as noted above -- is that the dress code is ridiculous. How is a showing your collar bones a distraction? How does it impair anyone's ability to learn?

    What does impair someone's ability to learn, obviously, is being pulled from class and sent home for wearing a shirt that shows their collarbones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See Danack's comment above.

      Personally, I went to a school which had uniforms, which I am actually glad for. That way, no-one judges you for your clothing which, I understand, can be a problem at, um, more relaxed schools.

      Delete
  6. That woman's toes are Completely exposed!

    ReplyDelete
  7. There are two ways to handle judgement; use humans, or use an "algorithm".

    A human would say that this outfit is just fine, however there are other outfits which are undoubtedly more distracting which are not just fine. That gives plenty of room for argument, foot-stamping, cajoling, and even double-standards.

    The response is to develop an algorithm to replace the human judgement. There can be no argument - there is simply "pass/fail". There can be no double-standard (assuming the algorithm is fair). No one can be cajoled because the algorithm is not human.

    Problem is, algorithms can have holes in them. People sometimes seek to exploit those holes (maybe a shirt that covered the collarbone, but then had a hole allowing more breast exposure), and sometimes they fail in situations where they should have passed.

    That's all that is going on here. It is being used to manufacture some outrage, to get some clicks, and to show everyone just how "bad" bureaucracy is.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...