Staind singer stops concert to demand audience members stop ‘molesting’ teen

[merithyn]

Meri's point that the message being sent to girls is that they are responsible for the boys' actions and reactions.

Meri's point is overstated.  Way overstated.

How so? The girls' are told by administrators (ie Principal and Vice-Principal) that the reason they have the dresscode they have is to "avoid distractions in the classroom." I'm pretty sure the administrators aren't too concerned about the girls distracting one another, and there is no dress code for the boys at all.

[Ideologue]

OK, in fairness, those are two different things.  There are valid reasons why women (and men) should wear clothing appropriate to their activity.

There may be "valid reasons to wear appropriate clothing" as you say; that doesn't counter Meri's point that the message being sent to girls is that they are responsible for the boys' actions and reactions.

How are we defining "reaction"?

I don't see how school dress codes send any sort of "it's your fault you got raped" message.  That's very different from "yes, wearing that top is going to draw attention."

[dps]

Meri's point that the message being sent to girls is that they are responsible for the boys' actions and reactions.

Meri's point is overstated.  Way overstated.

How so? The girls' are told by administrators (ie Principal and Vice-Principal) that the reason they have the dresscode they have is to "avoid distractions in the classroom." I'm pretty sure the administrators aren't too concerned about the girls distracting one another, and there is no dress code for the boys at all.

Well, not to speak for derspiess, but that's the situation at one particular school.  Your posts could be seen as claiming that it's universal.  It's certainly not.  Granted, there is an underlying attitude that's pretty widespeard, but it's not universal.

[derspiess]

Meri's point that the message being sent to girls is that they are responsible for the boys' actions and reactions.

Meri's point is overstated.  Way overstated.

How so? The girls' are told by administrators (ie Principal and Vice-Principal) that the reason they have the dresscode they have is to "avoid distractions in the classroom." I'm pretty sure the administrators aren't too concerned about the girls distracting one another, and there is no dress code for the boys at all.

I just think you're exaggerating.  The dress codes are meant to cut down on distractions.  I don't see how it's telling girls they're to blame for boys' actions or reactions.

[Ed Anger]

LOL, too funny, watching Meri mix it up with "little-girls-should-be-nurses-and-little-boys-should-be-doctors" derfoetus.

I came too late to the party to play. 

You started to play, but then deleted your post.

WE WERE BUSY

[merithyn]

Well, not to speak for derspiess, but that's the situation at one particular school.  Your posts could be seen as claiming that it's universal.  It's certainly not.  Granted, there is an underlying attitude that's pretty widespeard, but it's not universal.

According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, 57% of all schools have a "strict" dresscode, with another 19% made to wear uniforms. Dress codes are pretty standard anymore. And the standard rhetoric is that it's to "alleviate distractions".

LINK

[merithyn]

I just think you're exaggerating.  The dress codes are meant to cut down on distractions.  I don't see how it's telling girls they're to blame for boys' actions or reactions.

So... what kind of "distraction" is a spaghetti strap on a top? Or a pair of shorts that are shorter than fingertip length? Help me understand your point of view.

[Jaron]

I'm sure you heard about the recent uproar in Utah where a school photoshopped pictures of students that had violated their dress code. The real sweetness of the story wasn't in the school or the photoshops, but in the local populace agreeing with the decision on the basis of removing temptation from their children.

[HVC]

I just think you're exaggerating.  The dress codes are meant to cut down on distractions.  I don't see how it's telling girls they're to blame for boys' actions or reactions.

So... what kind of "distraction" is a spaghetti strap on a top? Or a pair of shorts that are shorter than fingertip length? Help me understand your point of view.

if a coworker wore that to work would you find it acceptable?

I went to catholic high school so both genders had a dress code, so I'm not aware of public schools codes. You say boys don't have a code, so could I guy go to class wife a wife beater or something if he wanted?

[derspiess]

Help me understand your point of view.

I don't think I can.  I'm honestly fascinated by yours, though.

[merithyn]

if a coworker wore that to work would you find it acceptable?

Spaghetti straps are fine at my office. Shorts, however, of any length, are not. Not due to "distractions", but rather because we adhere to a business casual dress code. Tennis shoes are out, too. For everyone.

I went to catholic high school so both genders had a dress code, so I'm not aware of public schools codes. You say boys don't have a code, so could I guy go to class wife a wife beater or something if he wanted?

No t-shirts with rude statements (ie cuss words) or pictures (depicting excessive violence like blood), which is true for both genders. Wife beaters are fine.

[merithyn]

Help me understand your point of view.

I don't think I can.  I'm honestly fascinated by yours, though.

Not really helping your case. Ah well. I'll take my distracting boobies and go away so you can think a little more clearly.

[Ideologue]

Meri, without discussing the details of any particular dress code, are there limits where a person of ordinary constitution is relieved of the responsibility of being one hundred percent in control of their thoughts, feelings, and inner life, as distinct from their actions, due to what other humans are or are not wearing?

[derspiess]

Help me understand your point of view.

I don't think I can.  I'm honestly fascinated by yours, though.

Not really helping your case. Ah well. I'll take my distracting boobies and go away so you can think a little more clearly.

Meh-- we're just worlds apart on this issue.  I'm almost too sleepy to be distracted by boobs anyway. 

[merithyn]

Meri, without discussing the details of any particular dress code, are there limits where a person of ordinary constitution is relieved of the responsibility of being one hundred percent in control of their thoughts, feelings, and inner life, as distinct from their actions, due to other humans?

Sure...? I guess if someone was waving a loaded gun in your face, I'd wager you wouldn't be 100% in control of your thoughts, feelings, and inner life?