News on a different front

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
Post Reply
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Burnsville MN USA

News on a different front

Post by r.m.anderson »

This just in on my RBC brokerage account:

10:58 pm ET US judge: School's rule for girls to wear skirts breaks law

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina charter school promoting traditional values engaged in unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring girls to wear skirts, a federal judge has ruled. U.S. District Judge Malcolm Howard ruled that Charter Day School can't enforce the skirts-only rule as part of its dress code that punishes violations with suspensions and even expulsion. No child has been expelled for violating the dress code since the school opened in 2000, Howard said in a decision filed on Thursday.

I don't have the rest of the story or any more details.
"YES SKIRTING MATTERS"!
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4188
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: News on a different front

Post by STEVIE »

This does beg a question, why is the skirt policy being challenged now?
It's clearly wrong but there must have been some catalyst.
Realistically, even if the girls are allowed trousers the boys will not be especially welcome in skirts.
Harsh but true.
Steve.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: News on a different front

Post by moonshadow »

Wait what? You mean the girls don't have to identify as boys to wear pants?

So.... in North Carolina (a southern state), forcing girls to wear skirts is unconstitutional.... but forcing boys to wear pants is okay? Sex discrimination has been held up in courts numerous times, what gives here? Gender and sex isn't even mentioned in the constitution.

Now if the roles were reversed I can tell you exact how the judge would rule...

He'd say it's completely fair, reasonable, and constitutional to require males to wear trousers. It is not sex discrimination as we are enforcing district gender clothing differences as our girls are required to wear skirts.

But now that the judge has ruled in this, if a boy tries to wear a skirt how can they deny him this privilege without discriminating on him based on his sex (for being male)?

... oh I forgot, the southern ace in the hole.... RELIGIOUS FREEDOM... When all else fails, just say it's a moral outrage and invoke the official state religious code. :roll:
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3224
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: News on a different front

Post by denimini »

moonshadow wrote:
But now that the judge has ruled in this, if a boy tries to wear a skirt how can they deny him this privilege without discriminating on him based on his sex (for being male)?
Logically that would be the case.
It would greatly simplify things if all students had a choice of skirts or pants - everyone would be happy.
Anthony, a denim miniskirt wearer in Outback Australia
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: News on a different front

Post by moonshadow »

denimini wrote:It would greatly simplify things if all students had a choice of skirts or pants - everyone would be happy.
Ha! That would be witchcraft! (No really.... that's what they'd call it) :lol:

I'll betcha that same judge would have NEVER ruled in favor of a skirt wearing boy!
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: News on a different front

Post by crfriend »

moonshadow wrote:I'll betcha that same judge would have NEVER ruled in favor of a skirt wearing boy!
That sets up an interesting possibility for a creative lawyer and anybody's son's parents who want to cause a stir. The thing about American jurisprudence (or what supposedly passes there-for) is that it's based on precedent -- and this judge set a powerful precedent in ruling the way he did. The law is supposed to apply equally to all citizens. Observationally we all know that's not the case, but here's the rub: If the case of a boy wanting to wear a skirt to school arose that judge would not be able to rule against the boy without also reversing his decision about the girl. A cagey lawyer could trap the judge in that logic and the judge would pretty much have to rule in favour of the boy because of the arguments pertaining to equal applicability of the law to all citizens.

It'd be fun seeing that scenario play out.

The real problem here is not the legal system, it's the local culture that has no experience with guys wearing anything other the trousers. That's the catch-22: guys won't wear skirts until skirt-wearing on guys becomes fairly common, and until more guys wear skirts, it's not going to become common. We are our own jailers here, and make no bones about it.

I actually agree with the ruling. Forcing the wearing of certain types of clothing by anybody is ridiculous and, in this particular circumstance, is one reason that women deploy when asked why they don't wear skirts more often: "I was forced to when I was younger." One of my reasons for wearing skirts? "I've been pretty much confined to trousers all my life and I wanted to branch out a bit."
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: News on a different front

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote:That sets up an interesting possibility for a creative lawyer and anybody's son's parents who want to cause a stir. The thing about American jurisprudence (or what supposedly passes there-for) is that it's based on precedent -- and this judge set a powerful precedent in ruling the way he did. The law is supposed to apply equally to all citizens. Observationally we all know that's not the case, but here's the rub: If the case of a boy wanting to wear a skirt to school arose that judge would not be able to rule against the boy without also reversing his decision about the girl. A cagey lawyer could trap the judge in that logic and the judge would pretty much have to rule in favour of the boy because of the arguments pertaining to equal applicability of the law to all citizens.
Indeed, that is my thoughts on it as well. In an ironic way, it's better that the dress code was challenged by females being required to wear skirts, because had it had been a boy wanting to wear a skirt, the court would have found some reason for upholding the status quo. However nobody in their right mind is going to tell a female she can't wear pants. It is a practice universally accepted and almost expected in almost all situations.

So in some crazy way... this is actually more of a win for boys (who STILL want to identify as BOYS) who might want to wear a skirt. The fact that it was a federal judge is icing on the cake. Of course then on the other hand we have this:
The real problem here is not the legal system, it's the local culture that has no experience with guys wearing anything other the trousers. That's the catch-22: guys won't wear skirts until skirt-wearing on guys becomes fairly common, and until more guys wear skirts, it's not going to become common. We are our own jailers here, and make no bones about it.
It takes a brave boy in combination with supportive parents to pull this off. A skirt wearing boy WILL be sent home by many schools, so it is up to the parents to stand by the kid and fight it. Success is almost certainly guaranteed, but there will be some struggles along the way. But at any rate, grouping a brave boy, with parents that support this type of thing is like winning the lottery twice in one day...

...but it's nice to know the tool is in the toolbox if it's ever needed...
I actually agree with the ruling. Forcing the wearing of certain types of clothing by anybody is ridiculous and, in this particular circumstance, is one reason that women deploy when asked why they don't wear skirts more often: "I was forced to when I was younger." One of my reasons for wearing skirts? "I've been pretty much confined to trousers all my life and I wanted to branch out a bit."
Don't get me wrong, my comments at the start of the thread are not meant to imply that I don't support the ruling. It's logical, fair, and makes since, not to mention ironically helping the case of skirt wearing boys who DON'T want to play the TRANS card. I just hate that males can't have this kind of justice on their own merit, it has to come in the form of female liberation first and foremost.

It irritates me on principle... that's all.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Gusto10
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 928
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: News on a different front

Post by Gusto10 »

r.m.anderson wrote:This just in on my RBC brokerage account:

10:58 pm ET US judge: School's rule for girls to wear skirts breaks law

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina charter school promoting traditional values engaged in unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring girls to wear skirts, a federal judge has ruled. U.S. District Judge Malcolm Howard ruled that Charter Day School can't enforce the skirts-only rule as part of its dress code that punishes violations with suspensions and even expulsion. No child has been expelled for violating the dress code since the school opened in 2000, Howard said in a decision filed on Thursday.

I don't have the rest of the story or any more details.
As by NBC:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/no ... wn-n988901
- the girls would suffer a burden bos don't have...
- no connection to attaining traditional values and the need of the dresscode
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: News on a different front

Post by Coder »

I saw a related news article about this, looks like the charter school lost their case in 2022, but they have appealed to the US Supreme Court

https://www.aclu.org/cases/peltier-v-charter-day-school

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles ... equirement
Barleymower
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1297
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:28 pm

Re: News on a different front

Post by Barleymower »

Men and boys do not have the right to be defended they must accept their lot or they are discriminating.
Any rights men fight for are being denied seemly on the basis that in deconstructing of the patriarchal system removing mens rights is a necessary step.
Therefore in any court case regarding rights, the rights of men will be ignored.
Men do not see what is happening to them and like Samson they/we will eventually be blinded in chains unless we do something.
The easiest way we can change our lot is to stand up for ourselves. We must stand up for ourselves through the power of persuasion.
Barleymower
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1297
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:28 pm

Re: News on a different front

Post by Barleymower »

Here in the UK schools are progressive enough to allow boys to wear skirts in school. Of course, no boy wears a skirt to school except in a stunt or protest.
I'm told that one boy in my daughters school was going to wear a skirt but opted out last minute. He feared non violent bullying. I said "would the bullies drop it eventually drop it if he carried on?" The answer came back as no it would never stop. Kids would point, laugh, ridicule continually, without end. I was given the example where a boy received this treatment (not skirt related) over two years. That's why it won't change for the foreseeable future.
Barleymower
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1297
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:28 pm

Re: News on a different front

Post by Barleymower »

I also asked my youngest, who is at primary and went in a dress on home clothes day: would you wear the girls uniform skirt to school?.he said no because the skirts are ugly. What about senior school where styles are better? The answer was "no way!" Why not? The amount of bulling would be monumental!
Sigh..😕
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: News on a different front

Post by crfriend »

Barleymower wrote: Wed Jan 11, 2023 6:27 pm[...] would you wear the girls uniform skirt to school?.he said no because the skirts are ugly.
Love it! The kid's got taste. Good on him!
What about senior school where styles are better? The answer was "no way!" Why not? The amount of bulling would be monumental!
I'm drawn to this rejoinder for that problem: "Either way this is going to look bad for you. If you win, you'll have beaten up the kid in the skirt. If I win, you'll have had the snot kicked out of you by the kid in the skirt."
Sigh..😕
And thus the policing perpetuates itself. I can't say that I am happy about that. Worse is that the Administration will turn a blind eye to it essentially telling him to "conform or suffer" -- and that's entirely pernicious.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
ScotL
Chatbot
Posts: 1459
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: News on a different front

Post by ScotL »

Barleymower wrote: Wed Jan 11, 2023 6:27 pm I also asked my youngest, who is at primary and went in a dress on home clothes day: would you wear the girls uniform skirt to school?.he said no because the skirts are ugly. What about senior school where styles are better? The answer was "no way!" Why not? The amount of bulling would be monumental!
Sigh..😕
Your kid is monumentally brave. Kudos for raising such a strong young man.

But to suggest that a kid if his age will be able to navigate the complicated rules that constrain us in terms of gender norms and navigate the complicated world of puberty and school is too much. Especially when we as established adults have trouble doing it.

It’s been said before, but change in fashions will take time. Men didn’t stop wearing skirts/hose by royal decree all of a sudden. It did take some time to burn out.
Post Reply