Boy wears skirt to school in protest

[Buzzard2010]

A 12-year-old boy has worn a skirt to lessons in protest at his school's uniform policy which bans shorts.
Chris Whitehead says being made to wear long trousers in summer when girls can wear skirts is "discriminatory".
This week the youngster borrowed his 11-year-old sister Joanna's uniform to wear to Impington Village College, near Cambridge, to garner support for his cause.
Around 30 fellow pupils waved placards saying, "Cool shorts, not hot pants", "Shorts for the long-term" and "What's wrong with my legs?"

Boy Defies Uniform Rule By Wearing A Skirt - Yahoo! News

That's one brave kid, and I got to admire him for doing this... GOOD LUCK LAD!

- Simon

 

[MYmacROX]

Schools have the right to implement their own dress codes. If he didn't like it, he can ask his parents to bring it up via the proper channels (petition the school board, etc).
It really disappoints me when people show no respect for authority. There is a right and a wrong way to express your dislike for something and to request change to policy. This is the wrong (and stupid) way, IMHO. That's my 2¢...

 

[Buzzard2010]

I do agree with you there but a 12 year old will be a 12 year old I suppose. Maybe when he is older he'll realise his mistake

- Simon

 

[vansmith]

I'll have to disagree with both of you.

I think it's important to encourage dissent especially if it's for something that is clearly built around a double-standard. If that were my son, I can say without hesitation that I would be behind him 100% because in no way should someone always submit to authority simply because they are "authority." This goes for both children and adults. In no way should a child have to submit simply because they were told to do so (within reason). If they were, why bother teaching them critical thinking? The last thing we need are more people who walk around approaching the social world as mindless drones who don't challenge anything.

 

[Doug b]

I'll have to disagree with both of you.

I think it's important to encourage dissent especially if it's for something that is clearly built around a double-standard. If that were my son, I can say without hesitation that I would be behind him 100% because in no way should someone always submit to authority simply because they are "authority." This goes for both children and adults. In no way should a child have to submit simply because they were told to do so (within reason). If they were, why bother teaching them critical thinking? The last thing we need are more people who walk around approaching the social world as mindless drones who don't challenge anything.

Oh the field day I could have with that statement were I not an Mac fan! (Don't question the magic or the reality distortion field etc..) Granted, I'd likely get banned here but that would further serve the irony. By the way.. I agree with you fully.

Doug

 

[harryb2448]

Pssst Simon guys have been doing that in Scotland for yonks! As my Lancaster grandmother who raised me said "Never ever trust a man in a dress!"

 

[osxx]

I think schools are putting so much emphasis on everything but education my how things
changed since I was there the only requirements were shoes,shirt (no printed offensive
or illegal names on it) and pants or shorts if you were brave enough (peer pressure) .

 

[MYmacROX]

I'll have to disagree with both of you.

I think it's important to encourage dissent especially if it's for something that is clearly built around a double-standard. If that were my son, I can say without hesitation that I would be behind him 100% because in no way should someone always submit to authority simply because they are "authority." This goes for both children and adults. In no way should a child have to submit simply because they were told to do so (within reason). If they were, why bother teaching them critical thinking? The last thing we need are more people who walk around approaching the social world as mindless drones who don't challenge anything.

You do realize I never said he should "submit" 100% like a mindless droid.

There are proper channels if a person is not happy with rules/policy. You may not always get your way, but lack of respect to authority is not the solution. We're talking about school uniforms, not separate water fountains for different races.

 

[CrimsonRequiem]

You do realize I never said he should "submit" 100% like a mindless droid.

There are proper channels if a person is not happy with rules/policy. You may not always get your way, but lack of respect to authority is not the solution. We're talking about school uniforms, not separate water fountains for different races.

There would be a lot of water fountains. >_>"

 

[vansmith]

You do realize I never said he should "submit" 100% like a mindless droid.

There are proper channels if a person is not happy with rules/policy. You may not always get your way, but lack of respect to authority is not the solution. We're talking about school uniforms, not separate water fountains for different races.

Nor did I say that they should act out against everything they don't believe in (hence the "within reason" in my first post).

What recourse does a 12 year old really have? The school's not going to listen to them and if the parents do decide it's worth trying to talk to the school authorities, there's no guarantees there either. What I'm getting at is a child shouldn't always have to depend on their parents to assert their dissenting beliefs. Students need to learn that holding and asserting dissenting views is a good thing. Otherwise, they're going to learn that the only way to get things done is to either go to their parents or submit to authority which is a terrible lesson. I'm not arguing that they show disrespect or act out everytime they disagree with something - I'm more concerned with picking your battles and developing a sense of confidence in holding particular views.

And ultimately, he's not breaking any rules. As noted by the headteacher:

Ultimately the boys can wear a skirt to school because it doesn't say they can't in the uniform policy and we would be discriminating against them if we did not allow it.

He is in essence making a statement (and a statement about gender norms whether he knows it or not) and not breaking a rule. He's still dissenting though.

What you see as a lack of respect, I see as an assertion of a disagreement with a double-standard.

 

[MYmacROX]

Yes, we do differ on our views of a child's recourse.
I don't believe the average 12 year old is anywhere close to being mature enough to approach a situation like this properly - as demonstrated by this kid's actions.
Immature, irresponsible, disrespectful. If a kid doesn't know how to behave, perhaps it is his parents' fault for not raising him properly. Or perhaps he is just unruly and doesn't want to be civil. In either case, I just don't think pulling a stunt like this is an appropriate approach or response. Schools have a right to make rules to keep order and I can only imagine how tough that must be with how rotten a lot of kids are today compared to 20 years ago when I was 12 years old. A lot of troublemakers then, and obviously a lot more now.
The other problem is that society as a whole is so far gone today, that things like this seem acceptable or normal. People are using a faulty standard of appropriate conduct and morals.

 

[vansmith]

We're going to have to agree to disagree I see.

When is a student mature enough? Is there a special age? If there is, are those who are below that age precluded from engaging in dissenting action? Seems like an arbitrary divide to me.

Yes, the school has the right to make rules but as I noted, he's not breaking the rules. He's making a statement within the confines of the established rules. I also don't think its fair to generalize an entire generation ("obviously a lot more now"). Perhaps my youth will come out here but from what I've heard, this generation has some competition from previous generations in terms of civil disobedience . I don't think it's fair to say that there are more now than there was then given that "troublemaker" is a subjective term (if it wasn't, we wouldn't be disagreeing).

As for things seeming acceptable or normal in today's "far gone" society, you're once again making a generalization as if it's never happened before. Every time there's a conflict driven social change, it's because one group wants change and one doesn't. It's those who don't want change that frequently think things are "far gone." The point here is that every time there's change, there's always a group who think's society is "far gone." I'm sure my generation will say that about our grandchildren's generation.

 

[Ghostshadow]

I gotta go with Vansmith on this one.

 

[MYmacROX]

Yes, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I stand by my points and have my reasons. That's ok.
But I do have to say anyone who is objective can just read/watch the news and easily observe the degradation of society's morals/behavior. It's moving in one direction - down.

 

[Murlyn]

I'll have to disagree with both of you.

I think it's important to encourage dissent especially if it's for something that is clearly built around a double-standard. If that were my son, I can say without hesitation that I would be behind him 100% because in no way should someone always submit to authority simply because they are "authority." This goes for both children and adults. In no way should a child have to submit simply because they were told to do so (within reason). If they were, why bother teaching them critical thinking? The last thing we need are more people who walk around approaching the social world as mindless drones who don't challenge anything.

Especially question us moderators who are in authority here! Or maybe.. I encourage dissent to authority, unless of course I am in authority! Ill have to use that quote sometime

 

[Murlyn]

When is a student mature enough? Is there a special age? If there is, are those who are below that age precluded from engaging in dissenting action? Seems like an arbitrary divide to me.

The same can be said of your "within reason" statement. That is completely subjective. Who's "within reason" should we use as the basis? Yours? The schools? I am hoping that the rules that the school has in place are indeed based on "within reason". So what I am hearing you say is "within what I deem reasonable" when in my opinion it should be "within what the school thinks is reasonable".

I also agree that proper channels should be used. I can also most definitely say that I did not use the proper channels while growing up 90% of the time. That's youth for you though, you "hopefully" learn as you get older.

I do want to say though that what he did was clever. He didn't break the rules and he made a statement. It wasn't the proper channels, but it was still within the rules. Sure the rules will probably be changed now, but hopefully while they are in there they will allow boys to wear shorts during the summer also It was definitely clever.

 

[vansmith]

But I do have to say anyone who is objective can just read/watch the news and easily observe the degradation of society's morals/behavior. It's moving in one direction - down.

I'm not a believer in the notion that the social/individual can be objective (we all have a history and identity that shapes our interpretations) so take a guess as to whether I agree or disagree .

Yes, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I stand by my points and have my reasons. That's ok.

I have mine, you have yours, everyone's happy.

Especially question us moderators who are in authority here! Or maybe.. I encourage dissent to authority, unless of course I am in authority! Ill have to use that quote sometime

Fantastic. That's a keeper.

The same can be said of your "within reason" statement. That is completely subjective. Who's "within reason" should we use as the basis? Yours? The schools? I am hoping that the rules that the school has in place are indeed based on "within reason". So what I am hearing you say is "within what I deem reasonable" when in my opinion it should be "within what the school thinks is reasonable".

Agreed completely. My opinion is very much subjective and so is everyone else's. The part of my statement that you quoted speaks to that. The arbitrariness with which an age is determined to be the age at which someone is classified as mature is a subjective point. There's no uniform age of maturity - the state says I can drive at 16, I'm an adult at 18 and can drink at 19. All of those are different ages for different levels of maturity. There are people that agree with those and people that disagree.

The real reason in including the "within reason" part was to preempt an argument stating that I think children should act out every time they disagree. You need to "choose your battles wisely." This is of course subjective as well - some parents let everything go and some parents let nothing go (and everyone in between).

 

[Murlyn]

The real reason in including the "within reason" part was to preempt an argument stating that I think children should act out every time they disagree. You need to "choose your battles wisely." This is of course subjective as well - some parents let everything go and some parents let nothing go (and everyone in between).

Good thinking, and definitely clear and something I think we can all agree one!

 

[MYmacROX]

I'm not a believer in the notion that the social/individual can be objective (we all have a history and identity that shapes our interpretations) so take a guess as to whether I agree or disagree

That's an interesting view. I think that statement on history and identity shaping our interpretations does have validity in many aspects of life. But I'm not speaking on the opinion of a jury in a court case. I'm pointing to our obvious genetic/fleshly/animalistic descent. We now see more diseases, more mental-illness, more askew perceptions of "acceptable" behavior, less self-respect, less respect for others, less self-control... the list goes on. That is what I'm basing my comments on.

What this 12 year old child did was probably something that might have even creeped up into my foolish brain at that age. But I knew better than to pursue that course of action due to the training and discipline I received at home.

This is how it would have gone at my house...

Me: "Mom, Dad, the school won't let us wear shorts in the summer. It's hot, it's not fair!"

Mom, Dad: "We can speak to the school about it and maybe organize a petition among the other parents to persuade the school to change their policy. But you realize that the school is doing what they feel is best for the students and they might not change their minds. You might have to live with it until you move on to high school."

Me: "Aww, man!"

 

[vansmith]

Respect and self-control are not products of socialization? Do they not differ across cultural contexts? If they were genetic, understandings of respects would be universal. Disease? Absolutely genetic (or biomedical). Respect, control, perceptions of behaviour, etc? Socially determined. What was respectful 100 years ago doesn't qualify now. What is proper behaviour is also culturally contextual.

So, it seems we have taken a philosophical/social turn...lol.