Gender neutral uniforms in all Scottish schools

[skirtyscot]

The claim that boys can wear skirts is dishonest - it gives a illusion of equality and nothing more. In reality, boys can't wear skirts for school; the authorities know they can't and they wouldn't be pushing this through if they really believed there would be masses of boys taking up the opportunity. The inequality remains.

The inequality doesn't come from the school, it is in our society. If the school expunges the inequality from its rules, you can hardly blame the school for the remaining inequality. Nobody expects large numbers of boys to turn up in skirts all of a sudden, but that is because the societal pressure on boys and men to wear trousers is so great and so ingrained. It would never cross most boys' minds to wear a skirt. But once it is allowed, one or two may try it. We should be pleased that the authorities are willing to explicitly allow it.

[Stu]

I'm not blaming schools for allowing it, Alistair. In fact, I think they should allow it. My point relates to the dishonest way this is being presented, i.e. as though in reality it applied equally to both sexes when it clearly won't. Some schools have had this policy for several years, but how many boys have actually taken advantage of it? Virtually none. The only ones who have turned up in skirts have either been trans girls, or boys who have done so as a single act of protest against not being allowed to wear shorts in summer. Neither of these are examples of boys deciding to try out skirts for their own sakes.

Don't misunderstand me, I would be delighted if the explicit and official policy led to an abandoning of the social taboo of boys wearing skirts, but I really can't see it making any difference at all for boys. Rather, this was always aimed at expanding choices for even more girls while pretending to be a move for gender equality.

[SkirtsDad]

The reality is that they are privileging girls by giving them a choice not enjoyed by boys.

I disagree. Except in private schools, girls already have the choice of trousers or skirts. The new announcement is entirely about letting pupils dress according to their gender. Although extending the choice to all pupils would obviously let any boy wear a skirt if he had the balls to do it, nobody expects that to happen. The only ones who are expected to make use of the new freedom are transgirls. Transboys can wear trousers already.

Well put skirtyscot, and good point about the private school.

Don't misunderstand me, I would be delighted if the explicit and official policy led to an abandoning of the social taboo of boys wearing skirts, but I really can't see it making any difference at all for boys. Rather, this was always aimed at expanding choices for even more girls while pretending to be a move for gender equality.

How is this in any way about expanding choices for girls? In my son's school, for instance, girls have a choice of three styles of trousers or a skirt.... boys have one 'choice' of straight trousers. Most girls there already wear trousers. Society, in the West, likes trousers, that's it! Why should anyone expect men and boys to suddenly start wearing skirts? All I want to see is that they are not prevented from doing so by archaic rules that enforce gender stereotypes and that is precisely the safeguard that this policy ensures. It will means that a boy with enough courage or desire to wear a skirt, or dress if it is part of the uniform, won't be sent home and told to change. There will be some! http://metro.co.uk/2017/03/21/schoolboy ... o-6523466/

[crfriend]

The new announcement is entirely about letting pupils dress according to their gender. Although extending the choice to all pupils would obviously let any boy wear a skirt if he had the balls to do it, nobody expects that to happen. The only ones who are expected to make use of the new freedom are transgirls. Transboys can wear trousers already.

Contemplate, for a moment, who is getting left out of this discussion altogether -- the perfectly "normal" healthy male child. He's not even being considered in this. Is that in any way, shape, or form fair or equitable?

So, once again, we find ourselves in the position of having been suckered into a situation that benefits one class more than others, all in the name of "equality" and "fairness". It's time to put a stop to the chicanery.

The rules will let [a boy wear a skirt], but will the staff and pupils really be on his side or will they just think he's weird? I'm optimistic about that: after a while most people would accept it with a "Why not?". But the first boy will need thick skin and determination.

Recall your remark of a couple of sentences above the quote, "Children can be right bastards." School is definitely the place where the nail that sticks up gets hammered down, and getting bullied is no fun whatsoever; worse is that it's tolerated by the adults who see it as a way of maintaining control and "hammering down the loose nails". It would take an extraordinarily strong lad to keep up a campaign of skirt-wearing for long enough to emerge from the other side of the onslaught he's going to face, and for the overwhelming percentage of guys the pain just isn't worth it -- so we're stuck with the status quo.

But, let's not take the rotten bait that this is about equality, for it's not -- not even on the surface.

[Daryl]

If everyone is allowed to choose between skirt or trousers, it is inevitable that a few boys will wear a skirt on day one, for a laugh. That gets us no further forward; it's in the same category as boys wearing skirts as a protest against not being allowed to wear shorts in hot weather. Some may do it out of curiosity, just to see what it's like or because they're being egged on by (probably female) friends. That only helps if they do it again. What we would want is for boys to persevere until the novelty wears off (and the up skirt pics on social media die down). It would need someone confident, popular and a bit counter-cultural. Or maybe just an attention - seeker!

So there will be some, now and again. But will there ever be enough for it to become an unremarkable sight? Not necessarily common; come to Scotland for a fortnight and you will probably see no men in kilts except in tourist areas or wedding parties, but it is accepted at other times and nobody bats an eye at it. Maybe it will: if just one boy wore a skirt a couple of times a week, everyone would get used to it soon enough. The threshold is actually quite low.

Canada is pretty cold too (-22 overnight), and I almost never wear tights. Long thick knit socks are warmer than pants. I never wear pants just because it's cold outside.

If my fears are groundless and the rule does in fact become that skirts are explicitly allowed for boys, it will be huge, though not an overnight change. There were boys at my son's schools who wore denim dresses all the time, and the school tolerated it. It would not have been tolerated in my time. I don't care if the rationale for the policy is gender; it's a pilot light for our cause no matter what.

Once official pressure to wear only trousers ceases, it's up to the people (including us) to nibble away at the social pressure. This is done mostly by us BEING SEEN.

[crfriend]

Once official pressure to wear only trousers ceases, it's up to the people (including us) to nibble away at the social pressure. This is done mostly by us BEING SEEN.

I don't think that there's any "official pressure" (e.g. laws or other binding restrictions) on the matter; I think for adults it's mainly inertia and for youngsters the bullying they'd get for "straying from the path". How often, after all, does the average adult male wake up and think about putting something else on his lower half than the trousers he's worn his whole life? It's a mind-set thing. The young boy might think about it from time to time, but knows the sorts of abuse that he'd endure with the jeers and fists of his peers -- whilst the adults look the other way tacitly endorsing the actions; it's right here that the notion is quashed.

Even for adults it can get messy, and can have profound impacts on one's livelihood and, rarely, safety. Putting on a skirt and heading out the door takes guts and perseverance. But, yes, the only way forward is to normalise the idea, and Daryl is correct in that it's mostly being seen that's going to do the trick.

[Daryl]

Once official pressure to wear only trousers ceases, it's up to the people (including us) to nibble away at the social pressure. This is done mostly by us BEING SEEN.

I don't think that there's any "official pressure" (e.g. laws or other binding restrictions) on the matter; I think for adults it's mainly inertia and for youngsters the bullying they'd get for "straying from the path".

True enough, but I'm willing to include failing to protect non-conforming children from bullying as "official pressure". If a person of authority ever says "you can avoid all that abuse by just dressing normally", that is official pressure. Dress limitations in the workplace are pretty official too, I think.

If official pressure only means statutory pressure, then I think you are right.

[crfriend]

Point taken. Sometimes something entirely "unofficial" (e.g. statutory) can be taken as such if invoked by another who has some form of power over one -- and the effect is identical.

I need better, or at least more precise, verbiage.

[skirtyscot]

If a person of authority ever says "you can avoid all that abuse by just dressing normally", that is official pressure.

If a school uniform offers the choice of a skirt to all pupils, then surely teachers would not be allowed to make a remark like that. Mainly because of the risk of the child playing the transgender card. But it would apply equally to all pupils.

[skirtyscot]

I'm not blaming schools for allowing it, Alistair. In fact, I think they should allow it. My point relates to the dishonest way this is being presented, i.e. as though in reality it applied equally to both sexes when it clearly won't. Some schools have had this policy for several years, but how many boys have actually taken advantage of it? Virtually none. The only ones who have turned up in skirts have either been trans girls, or boys who have done so as a single act of protest against not being allowed to wear shorts in summer.

I don't get the dishonesty. Scottish Government's express aim is to let the transgirls dress like girls. Nobody is thinking about normal boys here, as Carl pointed out. But then, why would they? There is no pressure from boys or their parents to let them wear skirts.

The thing is, any transgirl can already wear a skirt (unless the uniform is trousers for all) because of having identified as a girl. So with this thought I'm left wondering how the announcement changes anything at all? Who benefits? Let's see...

Girls - all choices available already ;
Boys identifying as girls - instantly given same choices as girls;
Girls identifying as boys - not a snowball in Hell's chance of them having any choices taken away (and if you tried, she would simply have a day of feeling female if it suited her) ;
So by a process of elimination, the only people who gain are boys!

So I conclude that the announcement was conceived by a skirtsman mole in Edinburgh, under cover as a transgender rights lobbyist.

Skirts on, lads, the great days of freedom and equality are at hand!

[Daryl]

I'm not blaming schools for allowing it, Alistair. In fact, I think they should allow it. My point relates to the dishonest way this is being presented, i.e. as though in reality it applied equally to both sexes when it clearly won't. Some schools have had this policy for several years, but how many boys have actually taken advantage of it? Virtually none. The only ones who have turned up in skirts have either been trans girls, or boys who have done so as a single act of protest against not being allowed to wear shorts in summer.

I don't get the dishonesty. Scottish Government's express aim is to let the transgirls dress like girls. Nobody is thinking about normal boys here, as Carl pointed out. But then, why would they? There is no pressure from boys or their parents to let them wear skirts.

The thing is, any transgirl can already wear a skirt (unless the uniform is trousers for all) because of having identified as a girl. So with this thought I'm left wondering how the announcement changes anything at all? Who benefits? Let's see...

Girls - all choices available already ;
Boys identifying as girls - instantly given same choices as girls;
Girls identifying as boys - not a snowball in Hell's chance of them having any choices taken away (and if you tried, she would simply have a day of feeling female if it suited her) ;
So by a process of elimination, the only people who gain are boys!

So I conclude that the announcement was conceived by a skirtsman mole in Edinburgh, under cover as a transgender rights lobbyist.

Skirts on, lads, the great days of freedom and equality are at hand!

I love your math and declare my pessimism dead. (in this thread anyway;)

[Stu]

skirtyscot

I have no problem with the policy. It is the presentation of the policy that is the issue as it pretends that all children will henceforth have unfettered choices and thus equality, when that is far from the case.

You say: "So by a process of elimination, the only people who gain are boys!"

If the official rules say they can wear skirts if they like, but the social rules say they will be ridiculed, castigated and socially excluded if they do, then they are still not going to consider wearing skirts. Thus, they "gain" nothing. The only people who gain are girls (and trans girls), by having their rights enshrined into law, and the authorities who are virtue signalling their equality credentials, while the boys are still effectively forced to don the same trousers every day. I hope I am wrong. I would love to be wrong. I hope that, in a few months' time, boys are routinely wearing skirts for school to such an extent that Marks and Spencer are marketing school skirts for boys as well as girls.

But I don't think that's going to happen, do you?

[pelmut]

The good side is that if a boy does turn up wearing a skirt, for whatever reason, he can't be accused of breaking the school rules any more. That removes the first line of attack of any bigot.

[skirtyscot]

You're right, stu, of course there aren't going to be large numbers of boys turning up in skirts. Realistically the only sort I can imagine doing it is someone senior, in his last year or two (so the knuckle-trailers in his year have already left) and is confident, popular and willing to be unconventional. Nobody else would get away with it socially. And even at that, he's a rare bird.

The logical deduction about boys being the winners from this was tongue in cheek!

[skirtyscot]

When this edict filters its way down to my local primary school, I will lead the way by turning up to take the chess club in a skirt.