Lauren Wiggins, Moncton teen, takes stand against 'unjust' school dress code

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I think public schools should implement uniforms. Not only to stop these silly controversies, but also to hopefully teach younger generations how to dress. Standard attire for the average North American is pretty sad these days.

I think many people would be happy to upgrade their attire if it weren't so bloody expensive to do so.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Matata

Shirts can significantly limit odor from spreading, don't pretend like it doesn't (they capture odor before it becomes airborne, science!) . If I'm a teacher that's stuck in a room with 30 hot smelly kids, I'll take as many layers of protection from their stink as I can get (even in the off chance they are all using deodorant properly).

I love that I'm getting branded with the old-doddering man crowd. I've been to enough Hippy festivals that I've grown almost entirely numb to the sight of a naked human body. Dress appropriate to the occasion, you're in a classroom not a garden party.

This might be a valid point if the school administration had used this excuse as a reason to ban her dress, but they did not. They very explicitly stated that her dress was deemed inappropriate because it was a "sexual distraction" to the male students.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

The late 80s and early 90s were crazy like that. TV personalities like Geraldo and Donahue had parents and teacher scared ####less that how your kids dressed indicated whether they were on drugs, suicidal, into Satan... etc.

Pretty sure this is still happening.

Speaking of the tattoo, a 17 year old with a tattoo like that signals to me that she might have a rebellious spirit and she might have decided to openly break the dress code and report it to the media in an effort to change an archaic rule.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I think public schools should implement uniforms. Not only to stop these silly controversies, but also to hopefully teach younger generations how to dress. Standard attire for the average North American is pretty sad these days.

I agree, as I stated earlier. Uniforms make a lot of sense. It stops situations like these from occurring and it also can work to reduce or eliminate a lot of alienation and bullying that occurs based on appearance.

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

What I am against though is singling her out if it was not already explicitly stated before she attended the school.

The school has a published guideline for their dress code which I'm sure all students are informed of.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

This might be a valid point if the school administration had used this excuse as a reason to ban her dress, but they did not. They very explicitly stated that her dress was deemed inappropriate because it was a "sexual distraction" to the male students.

The school's administration haven't commented at all, this article is 100% her spin on the situation.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

The school has a published guideline for their dress code which I'm sure all students are informed of.

As stated in the article, there are many parts of the dress code which apparently haven't been enforced.

Lauren Wiggins says she feel she's been unfairly singled out though because the dress policy also forbids pants that are frayed at the cuff line, and wallet chains and bandanas, all of which she says are commonplace at the school.

[burn_this_city]

Still 17 guys...

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Rhetorical question because I'm sure you already know the answer: if a male student violated the dress code in exactly the same manner by wearing a tank top to class, would the principal have said his attire was a "sexual distraction" to the female students?

That's the issue here. A young woman is being told by adults in positions of authority that her perfectly acceptable dress is inappropriate because her horndog male classmates can't control their sexual urges. It's absolutely an unfair double standard, and good on Ms. Wiggins for taking a stand against it.

I'm assuming that if the term "sexual distraction" was used in regards to her dress it is because the dress code states:

Clothing that is excessively revealing for a school environment:

• Shirts exposing shoulders and/or backs and/or midriffs (spaghetti straps, tube tops, halter tops)

• Ultra short skirts, dresses, shorts

• Low-cut tops and blouses

• “muscle shirts”

As such, it is likely that an administrator may refer to a male student in a similar situation as being a "sexual distraction."

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Still 17 guys...

Don't worry I think she's safe.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Not gonna lie. I would find that distracting if I was in her class lol.

Well, at 17, a stray light breeze was enough for a good old NRB, so yeah.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MattyC

As stated in the article, there are many parts of the dress code which apparently haven't been enforced.

While I agree with the idea of dress codes, that part bothers me. It sounds like (from her side of the story), that she is being singled out. Either enforce all aspects of the dress code for everyone, or not at all.

The comments about being a sexual distraction are BS too and makes the school look bad. I am not disagreeing with the purpose of the dress code, but the implementation sounds like an issue. It's not always about sex either, so I am not sure why the school had to explicitly state that. A lot of schools that implement uniforms and dress codes do so to help ease the stress of other students that have body image issues. I don't imagine it was only boys that were distracted.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

As such, it is likely that an administrator may refer to a male student in a similar situation as being a "sexual distraction."

That's obviously not what they mean. Aside from that, you just have to ask yourself what lesson you want your kid learning. Personally, I'd rather teach my kid that women can wear whatever they want and it's his responsibility to act like a civilized human. If you want to suggest his behavior depends on other people's clothing, you're sending the wrong message.-- Just another case where kids out think adults...again.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Well, at 17, a stray light breeze was enough for a good old NRB, so yeah.

National Religious Broadcasters?
Non-Returnable Bottle?

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

National Religious Broadcasters?
Non-Returnable Bottle?

No-reason boner.

[polak]

17 is above the age of consent so technically...

[Coach]

Here's the full dress code. Some pretty odd things:

A. Clothing or articles of clothing related to a group or gang which, in the judgment of the principal/designee, may provoke others to violence, disrupt school operations, or intimidate students and staff members, including, but not limited to:

• Bandannas, hair nets, initialed belt buckles, chains (wallet, watch, key)

• Long belts hanging down in front

• Pants which were slit or frayed at the cuff line

• Pants worn below the waist (sagging) - 90% of boys

• Pants which do not fit without a belt - 90% of boys

• Pants which have been altered to fit around the waist - What? Isn't that what pants are supposed to do?

• Pants cut-off below the knee - No shorts?

• Pajamas

• Shorts below the knee that have been cut off and not hemmed - Same as above?

• Shorts worn below the knee with socks up to the pant line - This is getting pretty specific...

• White ribbed tank top undershirts worn as outer garment

• Sunglasses worn in the classroom

B. Clothing with inappropriate messages (e.g. alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, sexually related, obscene symbols/pictures).

C. Undergarments without appropriate outer clothing or outer clothing which exposes underclothing. No guys in this school have button shirts with visible undershirts? Doubtful.

D. Swimming attire

E. Spiked collars, spiked wristbands, or other clothing, jewelry, or accessories that could pose a threat to student physical well-being and safety. This includes Goth make-up and accessories. - How does makeup pose a threat to physical well-being and safety?

F. Clothing that is excessively revealing for a school environment:

• Shirts exposing shoulders and/or backs and/or midriffs (spaghetti straps, tube tops, halter tops)

• Ultra short skirts, dresses, shorts

• Low-cut tops and blouses

• “muscle shirts”

The aim of this policy is to foster a responsible and respectful attitude toward appropriate dress. The administration of Harrison Trimble High School reserves the right to modify and interpret this policy as deemed necessary to determine disruptive and unsafe attire.

If you're going to have a code this restrictive, you need a school uniform.

Also, I notice it doesn't mention nudity once. Loophole??

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

No friggin' kidding. Every time I start to think we've come such a long way as a society and then threads like this remind me that there's still a loud, dumb-as-rocks segment of the population that needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Yeah, society sure failed because some girl got in trouble for her spaghetti straps showing
How Rosa Parks has even been equated to this trivial story is the real failure.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

How Rosa Parks has even been equated to this trivial story is the real failure.

Well considering it was being equated to a particular sentiment and not the story itself, I'd say comprehension has taken a bit of blow today as well.

[Erick Estrada]

Would anyone care or be outraged if this story was about a guy getting punished for wearing a muscle shirt to this school?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Would anyone care or be outraged if this story was about a guy getting punished for wearing a muscle shirt to this school?

Does every discussion about a woman have to be about a man too nowadays?

Christ almighty.