Carlow school issues clothing diktat to female students

Eric Cartman

Sonics2k wrote: »

Oh please, go back and you'll find people claiming this about all forms of womens clothing. Bell bottoms were too tight on the arse in the 70's, hip jeans in the late 90's, yoga clothes in the 80's and so on.

If you can't separate a teenage girl wearing comfortable clothes and sexualising them, then just maybe you're a part of the problem.

We're not talking about girls showing up to school in those arse cheek high plaid skirts, we're talking about a pair of leggings.

but we are. You can accept that there are two types of skirt there, a normal one and ones that are designed to be more revealing and more sexually associated.

I am saying that there are the same for leggings, nobody is demonising leggings in their entirety.

Eric Cartman

Hurrache wrote: »

I see you read from the same book the Italian judge reads from when claiming a woman couldn't have been raped as she was wearing tight jeans which are too hard for an attacker to pull down.

So to summarise, tight leggings ladies, don't do it, you'll only be asking for it.

thats a gross leap from what I actually posted and I knew well something like that crap would come in to this thread as a reply. Nobody is 'asking for it' and we're not discussing rape here. Back to your cave.

seamus

Gatling wrote: »

But as the school principal Clearly said this morning the issue was soley with the girls attaire ,
Can't imagine lads being called in and told you can't wear skin tight legging and Yoga pants as it's not part of school uniforms .

This is really basic stuff though, anyone with an ounce of cop-on can deal with it.

You call all students in for assembly, you make it clear that the uniform code is to be adhered to, and then list examples of things that you don't want to see.

Then you mention as examples, jeggings/yoga pants, and you also include tank tops and branded hoodies.

That way, you imply there is an issue with the uniform not being worn correctly, without singling out any specific piece of clothing or gender.

ElJeffe

Parents need to parent and act responsible. I'm a father of three girls two of them in their 20's and a 17 year old and none of them would of been allowed or have been allowed wear items of clothing like you see teenage girls wear these days. There is a certain level of respect you need to have for ones self and i don't think modelling a 15 year old girl on some half arsed influncer who looks like a street walker meets that standard.

I honestly think and have thought for some time a lot of parents just don't care and in many cases put themselves before their children.

Gatling

Sonics2k wrote: »

If you can't separate a teenage girl wearing comfortable clothes and sexualising them, then just maybe you're a part of the problem.

We're not talking about girls showing up to school in those arse cheek high plaid skirts, we're talking about a pair of leggings.

Comfortable clothing there's ton of comfortable clothing for kids and teen girls that doesn't need to worn so tight that they have everything on display ,or pulling up legging so high that they are up their backsides and fronts too .

Parental responsibility Comes into it as well ,it's usually mother led ,ah sure she looks gorgeous with everything on shows its the style these days isn't it ,don't let them teachers tell you what to do .
It's not just happening in secondary schools it's filtering down to primary schools too

Stihl waters

anewme wrote: »

I wont post on this thread again Ted, so not to derail it, but PM has been sent to you on it.

Just go, nobody cares about your self imposed importance

Amirani

This story is depressing on so many levels. Complete failure of basic media standards of fact checking, horrible abuse directed at young girls (and women more generally), horrible abuse directed at male teachers who did nothing wrong (and men more generally).

Would make you despair.

Open the Pubs

Irish feminists that live on twitter, and many are journos, love this stuff. It's more opportunity for their life mission:

"Men are creeps. Men are perverts. Men are scumbags. I hate men, **** MEN. Irish men are sexist, misogynist, rapists etc


We are soooooo oppressed. Ireland is like Saudi Arabia for women. I'm such a victim in life. Catholic Church bla bla bla Belfast trial bla bla bla"


Ireland 2020 is probably one of the best places to be a woman in history. To listen to these ones you'd think it was the worst. That's what entitlement and "privilege" brings. You'd think reading twitter women in this country are ISIS brides....:rolleyes::rolleyes:

SAMTALK

The school should really have thought this out a bit better and wrote a letter / email for all the students and parents.

It's a sensitive subject no matter what was claimed to be said or not said. Why can't school have a PE uniform that is acceptable to them as well

Sir Oxman

Open the Pubs wrote: »

And as for Richie Sadlier, for a man who dines out on mental health promotion and going around schools taking doing talks on sexual consent, what a cretin he is labelling the teachers are paedophiles based on nothing just for a few twitter likes.

An RTE employee to boot. If I was a principal I wouldn't be letting him into my schools anymore to his talks if that is what he thinks of teachers. How do you think the mental health of those male teachers will be today Richie? With people calling them paedos and staring at them in the street over facebook fake news.

Just searched out his comment, of course it's a throwaway two second job for him for likes on his Twitter.
Quite astounding - he has effectively fanned the flames of a speculative media story based on hearsay and in real life he has affected 17 professional working men.
And worse, the journalist he quoted has 'IMRO news reporter of the year 2020' in her bio!
This guy is a psychotherapist?? In schools?

6541

I heard the principle on the radio this morning. He defended his corner and came across really well.
At the end it was apparent that media are to blame for this. Shame on the media.
Even the RTE presenter was trying to make tabloid nonsense but failed miserably in the face of a well capable principle.
Also shame on some of the parents for bringing the school that their kids go to into distribute.

Amirani

seamus wrote: »

This is really basic stuff though, anyone with an ounce of cop-on can deal with it.

You call all students in for assembly, you make it clear that the uniform code is to be adhered to, and then list examples of things that you don't want to see.

Then you mention as examples, jeggings/yoga pants, and you also include tank tops and branded hoodies.

That way, you imply there is an issue with the uniform not being worn correctly, without singling out any specific piece of clothing or gender.

School should have handled it in the way you suggest, I agree. The way they approached it wasn't some gross mishandling though, and shouldn't be in the news.

Topgear on Dave

6541 wrote: »

I heard the principle on the radio this morning. He defended his corner and came across really well.
At the end it was apparent that media are to blame for this. Shame on the media.
.

The principal is denying it.

But the very first headline I just heard on the 11am news on 98fm was that the school is " coming under pressure to apologise".

It made them sound as guilty as hell.

B-D-P--

I guess the school had more an issue of 12 year olds walking around with visible camel toes..


What ever about they way the school said it, Is anyone willing to say its ok for the your girls to have cloths like this?
Of course they aren't, its wrong.

mikefromcork

meeeeh wrote: »

I really believe there would be absolute outrage if something like that would be said to girls in schools in most sane European countries.

Did you get your hands on a recording of the assembly? If so, please share.

GarIT

To all the people complaing about it only being said to girls. The principal has said, they are limited in the number of people they can have in the hall due to covid restrictions. It would have been pointless or bring all the lads into a hall and increase the risk of covid spreading to tell them they aren't allowed wear leggings when they already don't.

Snotty

How is this still being debated, the school did NOTHING wrong, they spoke to the girls about a uniform issue that was only being abused by girls, also quite well handled as it would have brought jeers from teenage boys. The cloth type is not uniform standard, you can insinuate anything you want after that but its all BS.
The school is a school, not a PR company, they don't have a team of people ready to make statements, they were too busy educating and dealing with the issues 1 on 1 with the students.
Lastly, idiots on social media and plenty still in this thread are 100% to blame here but they wont admit fault or even learn anything from this, so don't waste breath on it now.

Hurrache

Eric Cartman wrote: »

thats a gross leap from what I actually posted and I knew well something like that crap would come in to this thread as a reply. Nobody is 'asking for it' and we're not discussing rape here. Back to your cave.

You sexualised girls wearing leggings, in your own words...

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I don't think it helps them trying to sexualise themselves wearing a very specific type of leggings .....

It's bull**** to lay the blame on girls and the "influencers" you think they're following. Despite their title, "influencers" don't have as much influence as some people seem to think.

"asking for it" doesn't mean rape in this context, it means asking for themselves to be sexualised because of the clothing they're wearing, just like you just did.

How did we ever manage to follow fashion trends over the decades before the internet, **** knows.

nullzero

A prime example of the importance of getting your facts in order before you open your mouth, or indeed posting an article.

It seems like everyone involved in this issue has come off the worse for it.

seamus

GarIT wrote: »

To all the people complaing about it only being said to girls. The principal has said, they are limited in the number of people they can have in the hall due to covid restrictions. It would have been pointless or bring all the lads into a hall and increase the risk of covid spreading to tell them they aren't allowed wear leggings when they already don't.

Then they should have used a more appropriate forum for it. Given the teachers a statement to say in class, an email to all parents, etc.

It's a dismal failure in basic cop-on to think that you could call only the girls into the hall and ask them not to wear tight clothes, without raising a few eyebrows.

As said above, it's hardly worthy of national news, but the school did err here.

Open the Pubs

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Just searched out his comment, of course it's a throwaway two second job for him for likes on his Twitter.
Quite astounding - he has effectively fanned the flames of a speculative media story based on hearsay and in real life he has affected 17 professional working men.
And worse, the journalist he quoted has 'IMRO news reporter of the year 2020' in her bio!
This guy is a psychotherapist?? In schools?

He shouldn't be in schools after that tweet, he was no great footballer either. He has become one of the go to "male feminists" in media, which is almost certainly to do with enriching himself. I can't imagine how bad his school talks are.

I'm sure in his days in Millwalls dressing room male feminism was the order of the day :rolleyes::rolleyes:

meeeeh

mikefromcork wrote: »

Did you get your hands on a recording of the assembly? If so, please share.

No. Do you think they are all lying and girls were not singled out?

Hurrache

Hurrache wrote: »

Seriously, stop stretching. A newspaper published a story about someone's private life they don't want anyone to know about, that's unethical. But not defamation.

Given the amount of red tops and dodgy broadsheets we have it should therefore be easy for you to find any amount of defamation cases they've lost when reporting stories in a similar manner to this case.

We're going around in circles, you clearly don't understand what defamation is.

If you publish* something wrong, that causes someone to suffer reputational damage, you have defamed them. Its simple.

Yes. I could produce links to defamation cases fought, settled and/or thrown out, but I suspect I'd be wasting my time.

You can reply if you want, I won't be replying to you further, I don't want to hog the thread. going around in circles with you whacking moles

kippy

Even this thread has expanded to cover stuff that is not at all relevant here.

This is a School wherby the uniform policy was not being followed - that's the crux of the matter, the school dealt with it.

This kind of thing goes on in schools all the time.


Anything else is just nonsense.

Hurrache

Open the Pubs wrote: »

Irish feminists that live on twitter, and many are journos, love this stuff. It's more opportunity for their life mission:

How small minded are you, actually, how comfortable does it make you, to pigeonhole a women or girl with an opinion as a feminist, even thinking that's a bad thing.

Do you find it hard to deal with women in general and look for an easy way out for you to bat them away?

nullzero

meeeeh wrote: »

No. Do you think they are all lying and girls were not singled out?

It appears that they were singled out on the basis that they were the only ones breaking the rules in relation to the wearing of the correct clothes as per the school rules.

That doesn't equal a misogynistic conspiracy.

Gatling

seamus wrote: »

It's a dismal failure in basic cop-on to think that you could call only the girls into the hall and ask them not to wear tight clothes, without raising a few eyebrows.

If they sent letters home or emails we still would have gotten a similar case of fauxrage .
Especially on social media ,no matter what way they did this we would still be here.

They explained to the groups involved why this was being discussed with them ,and yet straight home to mammy I'm be sexualised ,bodyshamed ,and afraid of male teacher now .

Jesus wept

whisky_galore

I'd hate to be a male teacher working in that kip!

strandroad

strandroad wrote: »

Did you see the posts about common whores and prostitutes?
It's teens wearing leggings to PE ffs.

Who?

Not to defend misogynist, but i suspect there's an inferred hatred of women due to confirmation bias, rather than being explicitly said.

I stand to be corrected.

Sonics2k

Eric Cartman wrote: »

but we are. You can accept that there are two types of skirt there, a normal one and ones that are designed to be more revealing and more sexually associated.

I am saying that there are the same for leggings, nobody is demonising leggings in their entirety.

Eh no, I can see a very very clear difference between some skirt used for bad pornos and some skirt used for the office or school. Just like I don't see a pair of leggings on a damn child and sexualise the child because some adults also wear them.