HS Principal to Students: No Leggings unless you're a size 0 (1 Viewer)

Previous Next
coldseat said:
Why do they allow them at all?

And how stupid is this principle that she didn't know this would cause an outrage?
Click to expand...

I guess, but couldn't it also be that she was just trying to tell these kids to consider dressing a little better? It was an "if/then" proposal and since it was a woman telling the kids this, it seems like constructive criticism.

My mom told me not to wear plaid and stripes. Not to wear brown belts and black shoes. We were never allowed to wear shorts and certainly not colored pantyhose like these things.

Seems like a bunch of nothing taken out of context by snowflakes and sissies.
 
No, disagree. If she would have said nobody can wear them your point would be valid.

What she said was unless you're a size zero or two, you will look fat. That draws a line quite clearly. If you're size three or four, you have to dress defensively or you will look fat. And the boys don't need to be given "permission" by her to call people fat either.

Now, I don't think she should be fired or anything, but it's clearly not a good thing to say. It could have been worded like this "leggings just aren't very attractive on most people, so carefully consider if you want to wear them."

Still might be a bit much, but at least not specifically calling out people by the size of clothes they wear.
 
FLIPPY said:
1ulj4c.gif
Click to expand...

-
sekonie jones rocks them leggings!
 
mt15 said:
No, disagree. If she would have said nobody can wear them your point would be valid.

What she said was unless you're a size zero or two, you will look fat. That draws a line quite clearly. If you're size three or four, you have to dress defensively or you will look fat. And the boys don't need to be given "permission" by her to call people fat either.

Now, I don't think she should be fired or anything, but it's clearly not a good thing to say. It could have been worded like this "leggings just aren't very attractive on most people, so carefully consider if you want to wear them."

Still might be a bit much, but at least not specifically calling out people by the size of clothes they wear.
Click to expand...

I most recently taught in a place where the female head of school obsessed over spaghetti straps and skirt length and cleavage and hair color and hair style
They got WAY more messaging about their appearance than their accomplishments

Hard to imagine this is the one and only time this principal reduced her girls to appearance
 
Oh you're probably right. It's a common pitfall for all women, believe me. When your entire worth as a human being is completely tied to your appearance, you feel it. And it's hard not to respond by obsessing about your appearance.
 
mt15 said:
Oh you're probably right. It's a common pitfall for all women, believe me. When your entire worth as a human being is completely tied to your appearance, you feel it. And it's hard not to respond by obsessing about your appearance.
Click to expand...

unfortunately, i've seen it far too often
very similar to the trap bill cosby sprang on himself
 
mt15 said:
No, disagree. If she would have said nobody can wear them your point would be valid.

What she said was unless you're a size zero or two, you will look fat. That draws a line quite clearly. If you're size three or four, you have to dress defensively or you will look fat. And the boys don't need to be given "permission" by her to call people fat either.

Now, I don't think she should be fired or anything, but it's clearly not a good thing to say. It could have been worded like this "leggings just aren't very attractive on most people, so carefully consider if you want to wear them."

Still might be a bit much, but at least not specifically calling out people by the size of clothes they wear.
Click to expand...

I get your point, but my wife is 5'1" and 98 pounds.

She is a zero P, very fit and I guarantee you she would not wear tights out to school. I'm no prude, but I don't think they're even reasonable for school and no matter how fit you are, you will look fat wearing them.

Maybe she made the point in an inartful world, but there is some over sensitivity here that cannot be denied.

You look fat when you wear tight, stretchy clothes unless you're an unhealthy level of skinny. It's sound advice to tell young women not to dress to look bad and I don't find it body shaming at all. It's common freaking sense given to kids by their teacher.

Isn't that what teachers are for?

Next thing, kids with smokers for parents are going to be offended when the teacher tells them smoking kills.
 
dtc said:
I get your point, but my wife is 5'1" and 98 pounds.

She is a zero P, very fit and I guarantee you she would not wear tights out to school. I'm no prude, but I don't think they're even reasonable for school and no matter how fit you are, you will look fat wearing them.

Maybe she made the point in an inartful world, but there is some over sensitivity here that cannot be denied.

You look fat when you wear tight, stretchy clothes unless you're an unhealthy level of skinny. It's sound advice to tell young women not to dress to look bad and I don't find it body shaming at all. It's common freaking sense given to kids by their teacher.

Isn't that what teachers are for?

Next thing, kids with smokers for parents are going to be offended when the teacher tells them smoking kills.
Click to expand...

But you're falling into an easy trap
You're equating looking fat with being fat
You're asduming a norm that doesn't exist

Skinny people can be unhealthy
Curvy people can be healthy

It's also incredibly destructive to approach young woman from a "the way you look is your value" pov - it's actually the best way to ensure unhealthy choices
It's just a bad bad approach

Eta and remember her approach was about attractiveness vs health
 
TIL: Principals don't have too be very smart to get the job.
 
Didn't think this needed it's own thread
=================================================
While attending Mass at the University of Notre Dame last fall, Maryann White saw something that horrified her: leggings.

A group of young women, all clad in clingy Spandex and short tops, were sitting directly in front of her and her family.

“I thought of all the other men around and behind us who couldn’t help but see their behinds,” the self-described Catholic mother of four sons wrote in a letter to the editor that was published by the Observer, Notre Dame’s student newspaper, on Monday. “My sons know better than to ogle a woman’s body — certainly when I’m around (and hopefully, also when I’m not). They didn’t stare, and they didn’t comment afterwards. But you couldn’t help but see those blackly naked rear ends. I didn’t want to see them — but they were unavoidable. How much more difficult for young guys to ignore them.”

Begging female students to “think of the mothers of sons the next time you go shopping and consider choosing jeans instead,” White said in her letter, adding that she hopes leggings eventually will go out of style. Maybe, she proposed, Notre Dame women could start a trend by simply choosing not to wear the wildly popular stretchy pants.

Her plea appears to have had the opposite effect: By way of responding to her complaints, more than 1,000 students at the private Catholic University in South Bend, Ind., indicated that they planned to wear leggings to class this week..............................

MSN

www.msn.com
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Previous Next

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

    Share this page

     

    Twitter

    Back
    Top Bottom