Showing posts with label indecency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label indecency. Show all posts

Thursday, 10 September 2015

A tight fit

Is it just my impression, or are there more and more disputes over school uniforms and whether certain items of clothing are "appropriate" or not?

A rising number of schools seem to be adopting detailed dress codes that tell pupils what they can or can't wear, and what styles of clothing are banned because they're "indecent", "unacceptable" or "distracting".

This inevitably leads to pupils being told they're wearing something inappropriate and ordered to go home and change. And very often the child's parent complains that the school is being draconian and the clothing singled-out is quite inoffensive. Not only that, they say, but the school is drawing attention to something that would otherwise have gone unremarked-on.

The latest controversy occurred at a high school in Stoke on Trent, where two female pupils were sent home because their trousers were "too tight around the legs and bum". A male pupil was also ticked off for trousers that "made his private parts look indecent".

I have to wonder if anyone would even have noticed their "exceptionally tight" trousers if a member of staff hadn't commented on it. And so what anyway? Are tight trousers really preventing pupils from concentrating properly on their studies? Are they really damaging the school's reputation or encouraging other pupils to break the school rules? It all seems way over the top to me. A case of slightly puritanical staff reading something sexual into quite ordinary clothing.

Personally, I can't remember either of my schools ever admonishing me for "inappropriate" clothing. Either my clothing was always "appropriate" or the staff simply weren't so censorious or strait-laced. I do remember some boys at my secondary school wearing quite tight trousers and longish hair. But then, it was a single-sex school and maybe the staff felt clothing wasn't an issue because there were no girls around to be "distracted".

I guess as long as there are school dress codes, there's going to be endless controversy over whether certain pupils are breaking the code or not. And head teachers endlessly getting hot under the collar about "having to set minimum standards".

This one will run and run.

Pic: Harriet Dale of Trentham High School, Stoke on Trent

PS: There's a superb critique of school dress codes here

Sunday, 7 March 2010

Indecent snow

People's hangups about sex never cease to amaze me. To certain eyes the most innocent things become symbols of wanton depravity. And if the depravity is particularly vile, there's nothing for it but to summon the police to quench the raging fires of lasciviousness.

In Rahway, New Jersey, Elisa Gonzalez and her family spent hours crafting a nude sculpture in the front garden of their home - their version of the celebrated Greek statue Venus de Milo. And very accomplished it was, so much so that several neighbours admired it.

But another neighbour was not so keen. The bare breasts and visible pubic area were too much for delicate sensibilities and a complaint was made to the local police about the "naked snow woman".

The police officer who paid a visit thought the snow lady and her assets were very impressive. But rather apologetically he insisted she would have to be covered up for the sake of public decency.

So she was given a green bikini top and some blue fabric to conceal the offending parts and restore the dignity of the neighbourhood.

Whether this achieved the desired aim is debatable. As Mrs Gonzalez said "I thought she looked more objectified and sexualised after I put the bikini on."

I assume that all snowmen will now be required to wear Y fronts to avoid similar complaints about their shameful lewdness. The fact is, people have got away with these obscene displays for too long. They have to stop.