Boys right to wear skirts - woke?

[crfriend]

That test is on. Haven't you heard, young men wearing skirts in Atlanta, making bold fashion statement. The video went viral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JILRNORoImw

Just because some random self-proclaimed "influencer" says something "went viral" does not mean that society (and that includes the very large contingent of the "unwashed masses") will go along with it. I'd like to think differently, but a lifetime of experience has taught me otherwise -- sometimes brutally.

100,000 You-Tube views isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the 300+ million "souls" in the USA -- and the USA is getting dumber and more hard-line by the hour. Numbers do not lie. Do the maths.

[FranTastic444]

And the "woke ideology" (that DOESN'T exist) bit is the cherry on top for me, as it further demonstrates that these reactionary buffoons just throw the term "woke" around because they're too stupid to get a better script. Either that, or they project this nonsense onto their dimwitted followers who instinctively recoil at anything labeled "woke" by the terrible, idiotic people that they foolishly idolize.

Oh, how I hate the word "woke". But such is the nature of political populism these days - distill an issue down to a single word that you can then hurl as an insult to your "enemies". Doesn't matter that the word originally came out of the black community about a 100 years ago. Doesn't matter than the vast majority of people who use this word cannot define it when asked. Doesn't matter that most of the people who use this word are god-fearing Christians who fail to see that there's now't so woke as Jesus. I found this article interesting.

[FranTastic444]

Surely the root of the problem is school uniforms. They are an unnecessary expense for parents and in most cases uncomfortable and impractical wear for active children.

As someone who lived in an underprivileged area and who wore a uniform throughout my secondary school education, I can understand (at least in part) why the powers that be went down this route, but I don't agree with it (and it didn't work). The primary drivers for a uniform, so we were told, was to protect the parents who were financially challenged from having to buy expensive school clothes for their kids and to ensure a degree of equality between the kids from poorer and wealthier backgrounds. But you could still spot the difference between the haves and have-nots. If you wore a Lord Anthony snorkel, unbranded jumper and trousers and wore "pumps" when you did PE, that put you into a very different social group to those that wore Farrah trousers, Fred Perry jumper, a Sergio Tacchini coat and Addidas or Nike trainers when doing sports classes.

The other arguments for uniform - being smart / presentable and getting ready for working in the real world were, in my opinion, tosh! Interestingly, the school I went to was later converted into an Academy and the uniform there now is super strict and include blazers, ties, school badge (always optional in my school days), leather shoes (well shined and strictly no trainers) etc.

[crfriend]

The other arguments for uniform - being smart / presentable and getting ready for working in the real world were, in my opinion, tosh! Interestingly, the school I went to was later converted into an Academy and the uniform there now is super strict and include blazers, ties, school badge (always optional in my school days), leather shoes (well shined and strictly no trainers) etc.

All this does is make the argument that style beats substance every time -- and the bald truth of the matter doesn't matter which is that "style" has no correlation whatsoever to how well one can perform their job. The problem is that "style over substance" now has a real following in many places in the world. Just look at what occupies the top echelons on the USA at the moment -- and that's not likely to get better going forward as the damage has already been done.

Note that class distinctions remain front-and-centre. even with "uniform" dress codes. This is entirely by design.

[Barleymower]

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/polit ... ol-5167961

Interesting article revealing the depth of feeling against boys who might consider being anything other than adhering to or reinforcing societal standards and expectations for masculinity.

BM, I think we need to add some context here about the DUP. Fire and brimstone preacher, Ian Paisley set up this party in the 1970's and their policies / beliefs are very much driven by Christian Fundamentalism. Seeing their stance on LGBT rights, it is no surprise to see them take this stance on a gender-related matter. See here for more info.

Yes, i figured that attitudes about LGBT and by extension boys wearing skirts in schools in their minds are linked. If a man wears a skirt it because he is GAY! Or worse he wants to be a WOMAN!
They are all patting each other on the back for holding up what's right and wrong and making sure all these deviants are cured, no doubt through prayer. In the mean time Ian Paisley is getting embroiled in the Kinora Boys Home coverup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kincora_Boys%27_Home
You couldn't make it up.
Still no boys wearing skirts, can't have that.

[Jim]

Oh, how I hate the word "woke". But such is the nature of political populism these days....

woke4.jpg

[Barleymower]

Well said Jim.

[crfriend]

That's the way it should be -- and all too often is NOT.

[JeffB1959]

Oh, how I hate the word "woke". But such is the nature of political populism these days....

woke4.jpg

I couldn’t agree more! I’m proud to be woke!