Teenage Disco bans inappropriate outfits

razorblunt wrote: »

Actually, this isn't quite a disco, it's a ball, the dress code makes sense.
Though in saying that, I've seen women of all ages wear similar dresses (or worse) to balls and weddings.

Yeah if anything the lads are getting the worse deal on this

In fairness it's a ball, not a standard disco. A bit of class and decorum is to be expected when going to a formal function like that. I used to leave my house in respectable clothes and then change in my friends house, but back then (about 10 yrs) the most risqué thing we wore were mini skirts, and not even that mini at that. Nowadays they are basically out in their underwear, and god love some craytures do not have the figures for it at all. Some parents are perfectly happy to let their daughters out dressed like that.

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

I am all for this. I hate seeing teenage girls half naked, staggering around like storks on a pair of heels they can't walk in. And their male counterparts fully dressed in something warm. It's so depressing. We should be teaching girls them they don't need to be half naked (and vulnerable) to be attractive.

As far as I can see its women brining a lot of those expectations on themselves. Most guys seem to say they prefer more natural looking girls, with less make up caked on. And this pisses girls off and they say theyre not doing it for men theyre doing it for themselves. Well you cant say that and then also say society makes you do this to feel attractive

Jodotman wrote: »

People still seem to think theres something wrong with random sex with people.

There is quite a bit wrong with it.

Theres also the issue that 15 year old children are not legal for sex (for good reasons based on their inability to give meaningful consent) and anyone who screws one is running the risk of getting on the sex offenders register.

gramar wrote: »

15 year olds shouldn't have to go out dressing provocatively.

Who says they "have" to? I don't "have" to have a pint on a Wednesday evening, but I'm on my way to do just that. :pac:

No-one is advocating a return to the girls on one side boys on the other scenario. Not mentioned even once. Wear something decent not something indecent.

"Decent" and "indecent" are entirely based on opinion and nothing more.

ScumLord wrote: »

It's been that way since the dawn of time, we just can't see past our Catholic upbringing.

Its funny how people get hung up about clothes. I remember this same stuff happening when I was a teenager, the exact same arguments. It's weird how a dress worn at a ball can be too revealing yet a bikini at a beach is just right. What difference does it make? But that's humans for you, bizarre and willing to argue with their own shadows.

The organisers of the ball are perfectly entitled to enact a dress code and everyone else is perfectly entitled to not bother going.

Oh sure, I said 17 years simply because I myself hit puberty in 1999/2000 and wouldn't have noticed or been aware of it before then, so that's the only direct evidence I have

b_mac2 wrote: »

Make them wear a burqa.

NO

NO

NO



They might make a Bad Habit out of it :rolleyes:

Cina wrote: »

There really isn't, as long as you use a contraceptive that will eliminate the risk of STD's and pregnancy. Sadly our sex education is still terrible here due to our outdated views so this likely won't always be the case for many.

Your comments are a prime example of just how terrible our sex education must be when you're of the opinion that a contraceptive eliminates the risk of STI's and pregnancy. There's a whole heap wrong with minors who are sexually active, let alone with randomers.

As far as this ball/disco/whatever and girls wearing barely there clothing and bambi heels, it's not any indication of sexualisation or anything else, it's young girls wearing what young girls were wearing 10, 20, 30 years ago. It's fashion, and this whole effort is just a ridiculous publicity stunt that the venue knew would garner attention on social media, a bit like Coppers annual "looking for Adam, met in Coppers after the All-Ireland" nonsense.

They know it gets attention.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I'm not (nor are most people) referring to women wearing "a tight shirt" to show off their feminine features.

I know. I'm trying to find an equivalent in men to the skimpy dress. Them tight rugby tops, sure they might as well be in the buff. Or a man wearing a wife beater, women can find muscular arms on men sexually attractive, so a man wearing a wife beater could be similar to a woman wearing a short skirt.

Well, that would depend what you define as a woman merely expressing her sexuality. I mean, you could say a man who pulls his cock out on the bus is just expressing his sexuality. As a society we have to have boundaries and I feel the image I posted crosses them.

that's not really the same thing though. A man pulling out his lad isn't the same thing as a dress that shows off more than it should, perhaps accidentally.

Your point about her is right by the way, she's probably just looking for attention off the media knowing full well she'll be plastered over the newspaper by showing a bit of muff. Nips and side boob won't cut it anymore.

I wasn't saying you're point was wrong I was asking are we allowing millennia of normalised oppression to cloud our judgement. Like, before civilisation it's possible some people saw women's parts as sacred when you look at some of the iconography. They would have been running around half naked and saw womens bits as important and worth acknowledging. After thousands of years of forcing women to cover up we can't seem to separate women's bodies from sex. Not even reproduction, but pure sex.

I'm merely saying that young girls will inevitably look to adult women and how they conduct themselves in society and right now at almost every movie premiere and awards show these days, famous women are turning up half naked, braless, wearing see thru blouses etc etc, and so who can blame young girls for thinking this is what they should be doing.

I agree with that. But the reason it's bad for young girls to do that is not because it will do something bad to them, but because of how others will react. Men will see sexual objects, women will demonise them for making the men see them as sexual objects.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why?

I know there's all sorts online, but I have no absolutely no intention of having any further discourse with someone who believes 14 year olds having sex with random people is perfectly acceptable, bloody hell.

Vast majority of girls nowadays are too fat for those outfits. The venue is doing them a favor because exposed rolls of fat and cellulite legs are anything but appealing.

I had a fair idea that this would go down the route of old people have no idea and shoilsotry and control what young people wear and think.

Well we were all young once and not that long ago. It's possible to be young and have a sense that people of all ages view you as they see you first.

There is no shame in trying to enstill a sense of modesty and self respect in young people particularly parents of young girls are aware of this.

Encouraging sexual activity in 14/15 year old girls is just wrong on so many levels and I can't see how anyone can see it as acceptable and for me this includes allowing them to dress excessively provocatively.

suicide_circus wrote: »

Slut shaming, fat shaming, rape culture....This thread has it all.

Yes that's it.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why?

Because we as a society have decided that 14 years of age is not old enough to be able to consent to sex.