Patriotic clothes banned at Middle School

[Lord Poe]

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

So would you agree with me that employers should have every right not to hire somebody that has 12 piercings in their nose, or a 5 inch mohawk, or neck (and in some cases, face) tattoos?

[Darth Wong]

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

So would you agree with me that employers should have every right not to hire somebody that has 12 piercings in their nose, or a 5 inch mohawk, or neck (and in some cases, face) tattoos?

Yes. I wouldn't hire somebody who walked in with a shitload of face piercings. These people make a conscious choice not to look like professionals. I'll be damned if I trust them to act like professionals.

[SCRawl]

Just because an employer may require you to wear something silly later isn't really a good reason for making you wear something silly at school.

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

The major problem in that situation is that the school exists for the sake of the students. It's there entirely to educate them; it is a small world that revolves around the student body. The companies exist to satisfy their bottom line.

I think that this is a little short-sighted. While it is true that the students are effectively the nominal customers in this relationship, schools exist because we as a society need our young people to be educated, so that they can go on to be productive and self-sufficient, have children, etc. This is one reason why there are laws requiring that all people under a certain age must be in some sort of education program (be it home-schooling or a more conventional system).

[Darth Wong]

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

Coincidental aside: I was asked to give a little speech at a local high school to explain to teenagers how to impress employers. At one point afterwards, two young girls informed me that my statement about not wearing excessive facial piercings when applying for a job was "bullshit rules that people make up just so they can boss other people around". A touch of sharp insight and thick-headed stupidity rolled in one sentence, that.

Ah yes, the lovely class of young people who think that a job is a right.

[TaintedLove]

[
Ah yes, the "where do you draw the line" argument, classic tagline of slippery slope bullshitters..

i used to mock slippery slopers too until i opened m eyes and noticed things were changing.

hello. the ban the clothing BS is treating a symptom of underlying violence. maybe you think glossing over the issue in a way that denigrates patriotism is the way to go. to me, it's just symptomatic of the way the illegal immigration issue has been handled for the last decade.

appeasement.

[theski]

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

So would you agree with me that employers should have every right not to hire somebody that has 12 piercings in their nose, or a 5 inch mohawk, or neck (and in some cases, face) tattoos?

Damm straight..

[Wicked Pilot]

These are middle school kids not high school kids. I wonder how much of this is their own idea and how much is the parents pulling strings behind the stage.

[loomer]

Well, my friend, here in Australia, there is no middle school. So in parts of the world they are considered whiny highschoolers.

[Alex Moon]

Wow, I'm actually agreeing with Wong about something.

This is Westminister, and as such I can believe the administrators. The immigrant community is large in the area, and the families generally (white and hispanic) tend to be lower income. It wouldn't suprise me that there would be tensions.

[Flagg]

You know, you can quit a job if you don't like the dresscode, but until you're 16, you can't quit school. I have no problem with schools requiring uniforms, but to compare that to factory workers wearing heavy protective jumpsuits is pretty stupid.

[TheBlackCat]

In middle school we just had to wear khaki pants and either a white polo shirt or a blue striped short-sleeved button down shirt, or a blouse and a skirt (navy sweatshirts were also available, but in Florida those are rarely needed). It wasn't uncomfortable, it wasn't annoying, and it made dressing in the morning a lot simpler. Technically there were no specific rules differentiating what boys and girls wore, girls can and often did wear the "boy's" uniform and one april fools day a bunch of guys came in dressed in the girl's uniform (they couldn't be punished, there was no rule agains it). I personally don't see what is so wrong with that. The clothes aren't uncomfortable, restricting, difficult to put on (as opposed to wearing a tie every day), and ultimately are basically what I wear now anyway (although with less color variation).

[Flagg]

I always thought the best solution was to have a code of polo shirts and khaki pants, with a variation for females students. I don't see the need for a color restriction or anything of that nature at all. It solves the "problem" of inappropriate clothing, but doesn't go to the point of being a bland looking preppie uniform.

[Lagmonster]

You know, you can quit a job if you don't like the dresscode, but until you're 16, you can't quit school. I have no problem with schools requiring uniforms, but to compare that to factory workers wearing heavy protective jumpsuits is pretty stupid.

Special protective work clothing and uniform school clothing are both ideas in place to protect people; it's just a matter of what they're being protected from.

[Durandal]

Yes it is. School is supposed to prepare you for life, and our schools are turning out students with waaaaay more fucking attitude than they should have. I've seen kiddies walk into a building and apply for a job while wearing baggy jeans, for fuck's sake. And when they don't get the job, they get pissed off at the company.

So would you agree with me that employers should have every right not to hire somebody that has 12 piercings in their nose, or a 5 inch mohawk, or neck (and in some cases, face) tattoos?

It only makes sense to stay away from those people for certain jobs. If you're talking about hiring a salesman, everything about him, including the way he dresses, influences his performance.

[Flagg]

You know, you can quit a job if you don't like the dresscode, but until you're 16, you can't quit school. I have no problem with schools requiring uniforms, but to compare that to factory workers wearing heavy protective jumpsuits is pretty stupid.

Special protective work clothing and uniform school clothing are both ideas in place to protect people; it's just a matter of what they're being protected from.

And what are students being protected from? Bright colors? It's not like uniforms will suddenly make people ignoraqnt as to who the rich kids are, and who the poor kids are.

[TheBlackCat]

So would you agree with me that employers should have every right not to hire somebody that has 12 piercings in their nose, or a 5 inch mohawk, or neck (and in some cases, face) tattoos?

My parents said they would never hire someone with a tattoo period, and I think that would probably apply to execessive piercing as well.

[The Dark]

but how the hell can you even begin to call "concrete jungle" patterns (which are more associated with terrorists and guerillas than soldiers)

Oddly enough, I saw two US Army soldiers at lunch today in Orlando, dressed in "concrete jungle" BDUs. Not sure what unit; the shoulder patch was the Liberty Bell surrounded by stars.

[Darth Wong]

And what are students being protected from? Bright colors?

Who gives a shit, as long as it works in reducing conflict on the school grounds?

Rational thought obviously escapes you, so let me explain the two criteria which would make this a bad idea:

1) It is unconstitutional (not the case).
2) It doesn't work (also not the case according to the article).

All your other arguments against it are hot air and bullshit.

[Flagg]

And what are students being protected from? Bright colors?

Who gives a shit, as long as it works in reducing conflict on the school grounds?

Rational thought obviously escapes you, so let me explain the two criteria which would make this a bad idea:

1) It is unconstitutional (not the case).
2) It doesn't work (also not the case according to the article).

All your other arguments against it are hot air and bullshit.

In the situation described in the article it's obviously warranted. I was speaking in general terms. Like I stated before I don't really have a problem with uniforms, but I would prefer a strict dress code rather than a standard uniform.

[Darth Wong]

In the situation described in the article it's obviously warranted. I was speaking in general terms.

If it makes sense in one case, it might make sense in other cases, so it would be stupid to reject it as an option. In general terms. And what is the fucking harm? Lost "individual expression" or some other mealy-mouthed "emo" bullshit?

Like I stated before I don't really have a problem with uniforms, but I would prefer a strict dress code rather than a standard uniform.

I would actually prefer uniforms. They make things easier on the parents in many ways (as someone who has one kid in regular school and one kid in a private school with uniforms, I can say this with confidence). They also make it much easier to keep track of kids when on a school trip, because you can instantly identify the kids in your group; no small thing when you're on a field trip and your group ends up getting mixed up with another school group. And finally, they take away the fashion-show aspect of school.

[Flagg]

In the situation described in the article it's obviously warranted. I was speaking in general terms.

If it makes sense in one case, it might make sense in other cases, so it would be stupid to reject it as an option. In general terms. And what is the fucking harm? Lost "individual expression" or some other mealy-mouthed "emo" bullshit?

I never rejected it as an option, and don't see them as a bad thing. I don't know why the idea of uniforms makes me uneasy, maybe it's from when I was a teenager and the thought of wearing uniforms disgusted me. And I don't buy into that "expressing yourself" argument at all. If you're so fucking shallow that you need certain types of clothes to express yourself then you don't have anything worth saying.

Like I stated before I don't really have a problem with uniforms, but I would prefer a strict dress code rather than a standard uniform.

I would actually prefer uniforms. They make things easier on the parents in many ways (as someone who has one kid in regular school and one kid in a private school with uniforms, I can say this with confidence). They also make it much easier to keep track of kids when on a school trip, because you can instantly identify the kids in your group; no small thing when you're on a field trip and your group ends up getting mixed up with another school group. And finally, they take away the fashion-show aspect of school.

Well you have the experiance from a parental angle so I can't argue with you there.

[Zero]

Why isn't a desire for comfort a genuine reason for not wanting to have to wear a uniform?

[The Dark]

Why isn't a desire for comfort a genuine reason for not wanting to have to wear a uniform?

Because a uniform doesn't have to be uncomfortable.

[Patrick Degan]

You know, I'm catching a whiff here. A certain aroma, of a specific kind of bullshit. You know, all those outcries of 'Banning christmas' or 'banning the constitution' that turned out to be something far less offensive.

Yes. I expect a pending War on Patriotism propaganda campaign hitting sometime around, oh, Labour Day.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

Why isn't a desire for comfort a genuine reason for not wanting to have to wear a uniform?

Because a uniform doesn't have to be uncomfortable.

In theory yes. In practice, it is pretty hard to find a uniform that's as comfortable as a T-shirt. I don't understand it, but the more formal a piece of clothing is, the less comfortable it tends to be.

In my school it was basically shirt and trousers uniforms. In winter IIRC you had to wear a tie. It just wasn't too comfortable, and any Free Dress Day is a real treat there.