Hey, there! Log in / Register
Boston Latin students protest ban on uncovered leggings
By adamg on Mon, 10/24/2016 - 9:53am
UPDATE: Uncovered leggings were unbanned as officials and students meet on dress-code issues.
Come Nov. 1, Boston Latin School will start enforcing a long-standing ban on leggings that are worn without shorts, a skirt or a dress.
But more than 1,000 people have already added their names to an online petition against the move, saying it discriminates against female students, who question why they should be forced to cover up to avert the male gaze.
By allowing the school to dress code us, we are telling the school several things:
Yes, we still live in a patriarchal society where men can decide whether a female’s clothing is appropriate or inappropriate.
Yes, a body should be covered in order to be attractive. Establishing a sense of shame towards girls bodies is okay and perfectly acceptable.
Yes, a girl’s body is a sinful temptation that needs to be covered up at all costs for others to focus on their education.
Yes, a female’s body is more tempting and sexual than a male’s body.
Yes, it is our fault when girls get raped because they should have covered up and avoided the situation by dressing in a way that does not attract another person.
The ban on leggings is included in an overall school dress code that also bans clothing with see-through tops, shoulder straps less than three fingers wide, visible underwear and pants worn below the waist - along with clothing with drug, alcohol and gang symbols. The current dress code goes back to at least 2013 but the leggings ban had not previously been enforced, students say.
BPS told the Herald the dress code is aimed at promoting "a safe and respectful learning environment for all students and staff; and teaches students about expectations for appearance in professional settings."
The dress code does not say anything about yoga pants.
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
What's next? Demanding every
What's next? Demanding every student and staff member wear a burka such that the age, appearance, and genders of all students are made equal as indistinct ghost like figures? The only discrimination that way would be varying heights.
Professional Attire? Not a problem.
Nothing wrong with requiring kids to learn how to dress appropriately for the work place at an early age. Aside from that, I have seen mostly young women, around the city, wearing tights/leggings that were so see through that it appears that they had forgotten to wear a skirt. It looks like they are just wearing panty hose. Apparently they don't think showing their undies is a problem but I can assure them in most work places it would be a problem.
Better to start now.
Maybe
Because school isn't a workplace?
And what workplace is this that you mention? Not everyone will work in an office.
I'll get off your lawn now.
As an aquatics supervisor
who has spent 7 years working in fitness facilities, I can fully vouch for the fact that I am allowed to wear uncovered leggings to work. I do make sure to wear the thick athletic kind and not the cheap-see through kind, and that the leggings are not inappropriately highlighting any body parts or undergarments I'd prefer remain private as I do not appreciate being leered at by pervy grandpas.
That said, I think a school like BLS should be able to implement a stricter dress code like charter schools have, as it is a prep school.
Oh, can't comment without being snarky. Why is that?
Anywho, that is true. I am sure wearing leggings as a construction worker will be a future new thing.
A couple of things. True, yes, school is not a workplace. But school is nevertheless a good "training ground" for kids to learn how to act and dress appropriately. Leggings originally were worn as the bottom to a top or a shirt. Wearing just the leggings as a fashion statement is a relatively new thing.
Sorry, but I would not want my daughter's va-jay-jay to be on display while she is studying her algebra. But that is just me, of course.
And, BTW, if anyone (including kids) were trespassing on my lawn, I would kindly tell them to get off of it.
Agreed, children should not dress like that
And adults in the workplace should also not dress like that.
But college women and soccer moms absolutely should continue wearing leggings or yoga pants on Boston sidewalks, all miserable winter long. Thank you for your service.
Why?
Why is it a problem at schools or work places?
Specifically what problems does it cause?
They'll realize this is not
They'll realize this is not the right way to dress in the real workworld. Unless you want to settle for minimum wage. But you want to be a lawyer? A doctor? Land a job in high finance? Then lose the attitude and dress more conservatively. Same for all you males wearing the oh-so-2006-passe sagging skinny jeans with yur ass stickin out. Keep your mouth shut and you ears and eyes open.
This would be fine if...
...Boston Latin had a 'only professional attire allowed' dress code in general. Which it does not. Students are allowed to wear cargo pants, basketball shorts, ripped jeans, tshirts with memes on them, and other clothes which are not appropriate for [9-5 job] workplaces. That's not what this is about, and I don't know why you think 12 year old girls need to worry about how what's acceptable for the office job they might have in another decade.
Underwears
I think they've got rules about the boys walking around with their drawers hanging out too. Ah, here we go: "visible underwear... unacceptable."
It seems remarkable to me that the dress code is actually not gendered at all, as written:
So guys wearing leggings without shorts, skirts, or dresses - let alone see-through leggings that show their underwear - would be in the same amount of trouble.
Great!
Let's implement a dress code of "business casual" at Boston Latin. Collars and slacks for the boys, knee-length skirts for the girls. Whatever you want, so long as it enforces the same standards on everyone, as opposed to specifically burdening young women for the supposed benefit of their male colleagues who just can't be expected to concentrate with those lascivious leggings in their peripheral vision. Because that would be not only an equal protection problem, but would also be a really retrograde and sexist double standard.
Sounds like they already enforce the ban on hats
and "pants worn below the waist", which seems to burden males more than females, as baseball caps and the like are more commonly (not exclusively, of course) worn by males, and the "pants below the waist" phenomenon is more common to males than females. It seems more discriminatory that they waited to start enforcing this particular aspect of the dress code, for some reason.
I never wear a hat indoors
And I attribute that directly to the ban on wearing hats indoors in high school. I will note that the school campus consisted of 3 buildings, one of which was not connected indoors to the others, and of the two connected, often the quickest route was outside.
attribution
I attribute this behavior to my grandfather yelling "is your head cold?" at me whenever I'd wear a hat into his house.
Stuff your sexism
The current dress code is non-gendered. You propose to institute a gendered dress code, with all the boys wearing slacks and all the girls wearing skirts? That's very sexist of you.
Dress for Success!
Part of an education is teaching students how to make it in the world. That includes behavior, language and dress standards. I know this is an old-fashioned concept. But, people in places of power and influence still make first impressions and assumptions based on appearances. It empowers students to know this.
Believe it or not, BPS has a dress code which includes BLS. I'm not surprised Mr. C. is cracking down. He is a very spiffy dresser.
What world would that be?
"Professional" changes with profession and region of the country/world.
Aye.
Come take a walk through my office sometime (software company in Cambridge). Within eyesight, I see a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles teeshirt, pink-plaid leisure shorts, 45 pair a of jeans, and... wait, what's that over there? Why, it's an engineer, and she's wearing black leggings as pants!
I won't be sorry to see leggings go
I'm not a proponent of dress codes, but I won't be sorry to see leggings go. This has nothing to do with body shaming, nor am I particularly a prude. The fact is leggings cross the line into pure vulgarity. Do women HONESTLY know how they look in these things?. Leggings reveal every crack, orifice, bulge, outline, indentation and more, and not in the least bit flattering way. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of those parts, but I can't believe that a woman, regardless of her outlook or identity politics, would want to be seen in that light.
Sounds like you're still doing body-shaming
A lot of women look great in leggings.
It's sexual, in that it shows off a lot of a woman's figure, but a woman's figure is not vulgar.
And I've seen leggings be very flattering. Not every ounce of body mass has to fit some airbrushed fashion model reference, to be attractive.
The look is too sexual for teens at school, and for anyone in the office. But healthy adult women in non-professional settings who are proud of their sexuality should wear leggings if they want to.
Well...
...if leggings are not vulgar, then I suppose guys sagging and showing underwear and butt crack should not be considered vulgar either. Leggings show much of the same plus more. Where do we draw the line? Or is there a line?
It's okay if you're rich, a
It's okay if you're rich, a slave to the fashion industry, and don't have to work like Kim and Beyonce. But I am not rich and don't want to jeopardize my job so I dress to code. It's a very competive job market out there. No place better to start than when you're in school.
Not dressing for you
Maybe, just maybe, people aren't dressing for your pleasure. They could (and in my opinion should) be wearing what makes them comfortable and happy.
These kids should be cautious
This could end up with the school demanding khakis and collards for everyone!
Collards
The cafeteria serves them? They take a long time to cook, so I'd be surprised if they were required.
'Appropriate' dress in the work place has changed
My GF works for a tech company and some of the ppl there wear things that are unbelievable. I work corporate so I wear a suit. And we both make decent money so learning to dress for the workplace doesn't apply. As a man, I look all the time when a women wears some sheer or see through or tight leggings. I don't gawk or make rude comments, but men, and in this case boys will usually look. I can see the reasoning behind this rule, even if some see it as an intrusion on personal liberty. For the record, for all women 18+ keep on keeping on :)
Regional differences, too
What corporate people and bankers wear on the West Coast is a different thing from what you wear, too.
So banning clothing styles
So banning clothing styles typically worn by males (visible underwear/pants below the waist) was totally fine, but banning a clothing style typically worn by females is sexist. Got it.
Seriously though, this isn't just trying to inconvenience women. It's all about public decency. If girls wearing leggings as pants is at all distracting to fellow students, it's not because of "sinful temptation", it's because it's often disgusting. Neither boys nor girls should dress like that.
And honestly, I'm fairly certain if a boy showed up to school wearing leggings as pants, he'd be asked to cover up too. They're an undergarment and should be worn as such.
Boobs hanging out
The logo has boobs hanging out on it. And a species not the same as the mother mammal in question sucking on them.
Bad example for students?
Now that you mention it
The "Romulus and Remus" symbol of two human babies suckling at a she-wolf's teats is a rather odd symbol for a high school. I know it's meant to (or was once meant to) symbolize the "classical" education offered at BLS, but it's still a little bizarre.
banning prison fashion is important to me
How did this become popular? If you consider that girls are not allowed to show their underwear either, it doesn't seem unfair to me.
Leggings? I wear them a lot, but the ones I wear uncovered have thick fabric and back pockets (fake front pockets, too).
And I would guess you are an
And I would guess you are an adult, and thus can wear whatever you want.
I can wear what I want
but at work, there are consequences to those choices
What prison fashion would that be?
http://www.snopes.com/risque/homosex/sagging.asp
did you read this?
It does confirm that the style began in prison. I already knew that the "other part" of that rumor is untrue.
This is a school. Children should wear clean clothes that fit them. If the parents and school department agree on a uniform, they should wear it.
It is not ok to walk around in underpants at school. It is inappropriate for young people to wear revealing clothing at school. I believe that this leaves plenty of room for young people to express themselves.
Our cities' children are not being educated for a life in prison. Maybe they don't know better, but it matters to me.
"not okay to wear revealing clothing"
Unfortunately, girls get sent home, boys get to wear their favorite basketball jerseys because boys and sports!
what do you mean?
what do you mean?
Yeah but
Swirls totally disproved the thing she _thought_ you were going to say.
Exactly
Exactly. One usually goes with the other - sorry that I didn't realize that you had done your homework, cinnamongirl. You are the first to go there without going there!
Now. Define "revealing clothing" in a gender neutral way that doesn't prohibit girls from having large boobs.
low cut is low cut. I don't
low cut is low cut. I don't really think about it with boys. It is actually more comfortable to put a white tee under a basketball singlet. Visible nipples and aureoles is not ok for either sex. (wow, sounds so ridiculous)
So when you work with teenagers it is important to be respectful. Their presentation is their personality. You need to set limits in way that shows that you respect them not attack them
Boys gettin' all Shakespearean...
tights PLUS codpiece, now there's a look who's time has come!
Come, and gone
Eldridge Cleaver did that decades ago.
I will predict the next protest
The workload is too hard. We need to have some personal time and the amount of homework is interfering with our lives. (Girls and minorities hit hardest)
A ban on visible underwear?!
A ban on visible underwear?! Okay, invisible it is. . .
That'll
Show them!
ben franklin wore leggings at latin
under knee-breeches of course. I believe he dropped out but I think that was because they were trying to ban kites.
Sure, that's bound to work...
When I was a kid, 'lo those many years ago, Catholic School girls were required to wear plaid skirts long enough to reach their knees.
So they would leave home, and roll/fold/tuck the knee-length skirts into micro-minis, about the length of your average belt. When they got to school, they would unwind to appropriate length. And the minute they were out the school door, back to micro-minis,until a block from home.
Somehow I think the kids at BLS are just as smart as the Catholic School girls of my youth.
Why can't we
Just let kids wear whatever they want within reason so they can have fun before they grow up and get stuck in a job that requires business casual or ill fitting polls and khakis 7 days a week?
Because
invariably, Kid A comes to school in clothing that Group of Kids B act like jerks about, and suddenly the school has a problem on its hands.
Be it that someone's shirt has a pot leaf or other controversial slogan on it, or some girl's/guys whatever is showing, or someone feels uncomfortable/harassed because of what someone else is wearing or exposing, or some kid is dressed unfashionably and people are making fun, or someone is mad that someone is looking at what they're wearing, or someone is attracted to someone and hasn't developed the social skills to behave appropriately about it, or someone is dangerous to other students (gang colors) and is going to harass someone else no matter what they do but the kid's legally entitled to an education so they just ban whatever is triggering that nitwit until they turn 21 and fall out of the system.