Personally, I would very much resent being forced to look like everyone else. If uniforms became the norm for public schools, what would be next? Forcing all girls to wear their hair in pigtails, and all guys to wear a buzz because hairstyles can be distracting?
I've been made to wear a uniform in the ninth grade, when I attended a Christian school. While I didn't like not being able to choose what clothes I put on my body, the one thing I hated most about wearing them was the way I looked in them. Maybe I'm more self-conscious than the average person, I don't know, but I do realize that my self-esteem plummeted because I did not like the way I look. I think we can all agree that there are certain styles of dress that compliment different body shapes and heights. I agree that we shouldn't judge others and ourselves based on clothes, but as a teenager I really couldn't help it. The uniform looked horrible on me. The uniform directly affected how attractive I thought of myself. I haven't read of that concern in any responding posts, so maybe I'm just an oddball. Maybe not.
Speaking as a teenager, and having attended public school all but my freshman year, I can't say that I've ever seen someone making fun of someone else for how they dress. I'm sure it happens, but I don't honestly think it happens to the point where making uniforms mandatory in public schools would cause some drastic change in the attitudes of the students. And I particularly do not understand why some adults think that public school is a big fashion show, with the students constantly competiting to wear the "latest fashions" and whatnot. I haven't heard many conversations about getting the latest Tommy Hilfiger jeans, or Gap or whatever. Really, more emphasis seems to be placed on the kind of car someone drives, or the house they live in, rather than the clothes they wear. Clothing is not as big of a deal as some people seem to think it is. At least, not in the high schools I've attended. However, I do understand why some are concerned about concentrating on school work - there are girls who like to get the guys' attention by wearing the skimpiest clothing possible, and if I were a guy - heck, even as a girl, if I were sitting next to them I know I probably wouldn't be giving 110% to Ms. Bayer's lecture on quadratics. But I do believe the rules already in place, if properly and consistently enforced, are more than enough to take care of those kind of distractions. All the public schools that I've been to have a relatively reasonable dress code - mid-thigh shorts, skirts, and dresses, no low-cut spaghetti straps, etc. I don't think the dress code is really the problem, but the enforcement of it. I consider a push for uniforms in public schools to be in part to laziness on behalf of school faculty.

I am torn on this issue. In one sense, I think it could be a positive step toward teasing based upon dress/clothing. However, I think we need to remember that the teen years are the years we most want to "fit in" (even if part of fitting in is being "different" - everyone is trying to fit in but still be "different" in a way). Kids will find something else to tease about if not clothing. Hair, shoes, weight, etc. Instead of covering up the problem with uniforms, maybe there is a better solution. I don't know of one, but I don't think uniforms work (my step-brother and step-sister had them in both public and private schools - the kids were still teased about clothes - Johnny only has 2 different colored polo shirts for his uniform but Carlos has 10 different colored polo shirts...let's make fun of Johnny cause he must be poor...

I think expression is a WONDERFUL thing for teens - there are so very few ways that they can SAFELY express themselves (no one listens to them, so this is about the only way - style and music). What's the matter with purple mohawks anyway? I went to a high school with a very small white minority and most of the white kids were into the grunge look - lots of metal chains, piercings, crazy hair styles, guys wearing linen (or like material) dresses, etc. I don't recall the guy with bright blue spiked hair ever distracting me from studying!

I understand the motive behind uniforms, but I think in the end, it's just not addressing the problem. It's just taking away yet another way for teenagers to express themselves.

I spent most of my time in high school trying to look like a vampire...long black dresses, black lipstick, long black and purple hair, black leather jacket, faux-depressed expression...

I did get picked on, but no more than I had before I decided to express myself in that manner. The criticisms from my peers merely shifted to my wardrobe, and in some ways I think it's less damaging to be criticized for something superficial that is of your own choosing.

Kids are going to tease, and get teased, whether everyone is dressed alike or not. Uniforms just eliminate one of the many things kids could get picked on for. Like Cyan stated, it's almost better to get picked on for something you can control, rather than something you can't.

it also eliminates the comparison of rich and poor., And it also eliminates gangs who wear certain clothes to show what gang they are in

But what about individuality? In't that what school is about too? Finding your different skills and individual skills & tastes?

As I'm rereading my previous post, it appears that I didn't state what I wanted to say properly. What I was trying to get across was that while uniforms may [somewhat] eliminate the problem of kids being picked on for their clothes, there are plenty of other things kids will tease other kids about. So basically, why take away kids' freedom of dress when even with uniforms, kids are going to get teased? At least if kids are getting teased for their clothes, they've more than likely made a choice to dress that way, and it's something they can change if they so desire (if the teasing bothers them that much.)

Does that make more sense?

I'm probably the only high school student in existence who couldn't care less about what clothes I wear. Call me unmotivated, but I really don't see what the point is. I drop of some money at a "cool" clothes shop, and now instantly I'm cooler?

I really figure that "cool" is just a marketing scam. You have a bunch of insecure teenagers who fear that they aren't cool enough somehow, so now they feel they need to buy products in order to be cool. I respect those who go out of their way to shop at thrift stores etc. because they find those clothes cool and are not drawn into marketing scams (unless it's a trend), but I myself don't care.

Ultimately, I would swing in favor of a fair dress code. Nudity can be distracting, but I don't see how shirts that show bush behind crosshairs offend anyone. By the time you reach high school, you should develop some sense of maturity to handle stuff like that as long as its not an assault on you or your ethnicity.

You might think that uniforms will stop gang affiliations, but they usually get around it. Maybe all of them will wear un-prohibited gold chains and watches. Or maybe they'll all roll up one pant leg (ALA my school, which doesn't have uniforms but does prohibit anything with gang affiliation.)

Bullies will find a way to torment you no matter what. They don't care about your clothes. I mean, think about: a kid who gets picked on because of his clothes will go and buy "cool" clothes. Then the bullies will just pick on him for try'n to be cool.

Freedom of expression is great, but I never chose my clothes, my mother did(no, she didn't dress me every morning )

I wore very, very cheap clothes. I don't think anything I wore were any brands anyone here has heard of. They came from yard sales, swap-meets, and thrift stores. Yes, we were that poor.

It's not just about being teased though(although I was teased quite a bit), my confidence level was extremely low. It was embarassing to see everyone in "guess" jeans and the like and here I am with patches in my pants. Asking a girl to a dance? yeah right....

I would have loved to have had uniforms. Individuality was completely based on how much my mother could afford, not my own personal style, which would have been MUCH different if my mother had more money.

I'm sorry, but that statement is highly ill-considered. Just because there is a uniform policy, discrimination based on the way people dress is not going to be solved. Like I told my sisters, who are going to a junior high that requires a uniform standard of dress:

So your not allowed to wear name brand clothing, your pants have to be black or tan, and you have to have a school colored shirt. But what if someone comes to can't afford black pants like yours?

What if one person comes to school in nice black pants, and another student comes to school looking as if he or she had pulled their clothing from the city waste site? Their both following guidelines. Uniforms are a way to convey a false security and understanding of the world around.

The truth is that except in sports and minimum wage jobs, uniforms don't exist, but it is appropriateness that matters.

Finally, uniforms are an excuse for administrators to hide from the real issue, and that is of their complete incompetence. No matter what policies are put into place, students feel pushed to learn things they don't care about, at the speed and accuracy of the other students, a student will not learn.

The problem does not lie with the student, but with the system, and the blind faith that follows a system not worth the money invested into it.

I think the school or the district would pay for it

If one cannot express themselves through their words, but must rely on vague clothing statements instead, school uniforms wouldn't take anything away from them except a way to avoid learning how to communicate substantively.

Plus, we are always so concerned about "church and state", this will alleviate a lot of pointless confrontations over something thats been distorted as a 1st Am. issue- clothing styles/statements.

Also, its cheaper for parents and safer for kids. I'm for it. Its actually one of the few things I agreed with Clinton on...for different reasons though.

How is it cheaper? You're required to buy both school uniforms and normal clothes for you kids to wear when they get home. That means you have to pay double. Also, it can be upwards of $100 for one uniform, which is not cheap.

You can get normal clothes that look good for pretty cheap. Nowadays, you really can't tell the difference between clothes sold at Walmart/Marshall's/JC Penny and some of the more upscale stores. Hell, even the stuff at the Salvation Army, while used, is brand name. If you want your clothes to "fit in," you can do it for no more, and probably less money than getting uniforms. And, as stated before, buying uniforms doesn't mean that you don't have to buy normal clothes, it just forces you to buy 5 more outfits.




What? Unless school uniforms are bullet-proof vests, they're not going to be any safer in school uniforms.




Then why not make uniforms manditory for everyone, everywhere? Because if you care about what you wear and how you look, then obviously you're unable to communicate with words and you have serious problems. Maybe we should make everyone get the same hairstyle and dye their hair the same color? Maybe get plastic surgery so we all look alike? Yeah, that'd sure make sure everyone was unique.

What you wear and how you look does matter. Maybe not to you, but for the rest of the world, it does.

Uniforms strip away your individuality. Why do you think military's have soldiers wear them, to conform and to obey unquestionably. We're supposed to question and be individuals. A persons clothing style is an extension of their creativity.

The school I work at switched from a dress code to a limited dress code purchased primarily (almost anything but shoes and pants) from a uniform company.


I think there are some definite positives about school dress codes or uniforms.
1. It conveys a more respectful atmosphere in the learning environment. (it does this to teachers, students, and (especially) visitors.
2. It protects 16 year old girls against their own worst fashion instincts. (a la brittany Spears and Mariah Carey)
3. It does cut down on the competitiveness in school dress. While it is a paradox because the uniforms are not cheap, my wife grew up on free school lunches and worked all summer one year just to have designer clothing for school. There are conflicts that arise from the type of dress. The comment about making schools safer I think would apply to our local school districts rules against gang wear.

Many of our students have expressed relief that the dress code was replaced with a more restrictive uniform.

The biggest negative about all of this is the fact that in an educational system (college prep) that demands so much from a student in academics and extracurricular, it is a shame that restrictive dress policies give many students something more trivial to gripe about. You hate to have more trivial matters be the source of conflict. (Cheating, respectful treatment of peers and faculty, quality school performance) These are better issues have become conflicts with the school.

I'm a 16 year old girl, and the day I dress like Britney Spears is the day I shoot myself in the head. I do think that some kind of dress code is important, but uniforms, (unless you're at a private school, because then it's a voluntary choice to attend) are too restrictive. I'm perfectly capable, as are my classmates, of dressing appropriately and respecting one another's choice of dress.

I try not to over generalize on this thread. I teach a large group of girls who would take care of there own fashion choices very well. I am sure you are capable of this as well.

But in my observations from several cities and ages (mine), I have seen a type of competitiveness among teenage girls to dress to the limit. The lower the limit goes the more outlandish the costume. I don't know how to best define the different periods to which I refer without sounding like a dust-farting fuddy duddy who sounds a little to disturbed by human anatomy to be let out in public.

Whether it is competitively plunging necklines or waistlines or ever elevating hemlines and half shirts, these competitions draw larger numbers of young women into the dress down. If parents don't say where to stop (and I know most do) it is the school's responsibility (if it deems it necessary for its community) to do so.

I am not trying to dismiss the fashion sense of all 16 year old girls. I am reminded on a daily basis that most of them know more about dressing well (and appropriately) than I ever will.

But you see Eeyore, it's not your job, or even your right, to make sure someone else's kids dress in a way you deem appropriate. It's the job of the parents. I'm not saying we let kids walk around naked, but if they want to dress reasonably, why do you care if they wear Abercrombie & Fitch, a Jerry Garcia tee or something more "Britney Spearish"?


As far as competitiveness with clothes goes, as I stated before, you can get fine outfits for the same or less than you pay for uniforms. If you kid is so mortified that you can't spend $40 on a tee shirt at Abercrombie & Fitch, it's a very good opportunity to teach them about the real world. They'll be able to sweat it out with J. Crew or JC Penny's. Of all the problems facing a young person going through high school, not being able to wear the hottest new things should not be that important. I know that it can be, but every single child that was denied that piece of clothing has lived.

By the same token, what a young person wears does matter, and should matter, to them. My daughter's only 8, and already she can spend a couple hours picking out what would take me 10 minutes, and there's nothing wrong with that. There's no reason to say everyone should wear the same thing, it's just silly.

1. It actually is part of my job.

2. I think there are some reasons that each academic community should look into and investigate whether a dress code or uniform would be beneficial.
I listed some of those reasons and you seem to disagree. Fine, but that doesn;t mean there are no reasons to regulate dress.

That's funny, I don't remeber relagating my personal choice in what my child wears over to you. If you're a teacher, then your job, oviously, is to teach, and I thank you for your service, but it's still not your job to delagate what I chose that my child can wear, within reason.

And yes, I do believe there are no reasons to make everyone wear uniforms, at least not reasons of any weight. There are reasons to do just about anything, but they're not all good reasons. People are just too concerned about uniformity these days that they forget that the essance of the human experiance is diversity and uniqueness.

QUOTE
Also, its cheaper for parents ...



"How is it cheaper?" Rattlesnake

Its cheaper because parents don't have to buy designer jeans. And you can make very cheap school uniforms.


QUOTE
... and safer for kids.



"What? Unless school uniforms are bullet-proof vests, they're not going to be any safer in school uniforms." Rattlesnake

Apparently you haven't noticed all the kids still getting shot for their shoes.


QUOTE
If one cannot express themselves through their words, but must rely on vague clothing statements instead, school uniforms wouldn't take anything away from them except a way to avoid learning how to communicate substantively.


"Then why not make uniforms manditory for everyone, everywhere? Because if you care about what you wear and how you look, then obviously you're unable to communicate with words and you have serious problems. Maybe we should make everyone get the same hairstyle and dye their hair the same color? Maybe get plastic surgery so we all look alike?" Rattlesnake


Thats rational. First of all, kids don't have the same freedoms of choice parents do. Secondly, I hope you can grasp that I'm not saying uniforms will cure shallow, mindlessness, but if it freaks you out not to be able to use your body as a billboard, and God forbid, have to actually think for yourself, then the problem isn't uniforms, its your weakness.

Did you even read my post? You still have to buy clothes other than school clothes for your kids to wear when they get home, not to mention that uniforms are not cheap. I suggest you pay more attention next time.




Nope, I've never heard of kids getting shot for their shoes, probably because it doesn't happen. If some kid brought a gun to school and shot a kid for his shoes, I think I would have heard about it.




Yes, you better well hope the idea of the someone saying I can't wear what I want freaks me out. Maybe you don't care how you look or what you wear, but the rest of the world does. I fail to see how having an intrest in fasion and/or caring what clothes you wear somehow negates your ability to think for yourself. That's just nuts. Would you be comfortable having someone pick out all your clothes for you? I wouldn't.

If caring what clothes you wear is a weakness, the entire world beyond you is a bunch of sissies.

QUOTE
Its cheaper because parents don't have to buy designer jeans. And you can make very cheap school uniforms.



"Did you even read my post? You still have to buy clothes other than school clothes for your kids to wear when they get home, not to mention that uniforms are not cheap. I suggest you pay more attention next time." Rattlesnake

I read your post, its just not a valid point. School uniforms would LESSEN the clothes you have to buy. Thanks for the condescending *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** though.

QUOTE
Apparently you haven't noticed all the kids still getting shot for their shoes.


"Nope, I've never heard of kids getting shot for their shoes, probably because it doesn't happen. If some kid brought a gun to school and shot a kid for his shoes, I think I would have heard about it." Rattlesnake

WHAT??!?!? Try turning on a TV. Or asking anyone who doesn't live under a rock. Oh my God!! where were you in the 1990s, when it became an epidemic? Not just shoes either, jackets are the second biggest reason kids get shot. In fact, Bill Clinton based his support for uniforms almost SOLELY on that.



QUOTE
. Secondly, I hope you can grasp that I'm not saying uniforms will cure shallow, mindlessness, but if it freaks you out not to be able to use your body as a billboard, and God forbid, have to actually think for yourself, then the problem isn't uniforms, its your weakness.



"Yes, you better well hope the idea of the someone saying I can't wear what I want freaks me out. Maybe you don't care how you look or what you wear, but the rest of the world does. I fail to see how having an intrest in fasion and/or caring what clothes you wear somehow negates your ability to think for yourself. That's just nuts." Rattlesnake

We'll try it again. Uniforms don't negate one's ability to think. Its that those who get in such a bind about them can't handle having to express themselves with words, like adults. This is the third time I've explained this to you now, do you get it?

I'll be back tommorrow night probably. Night all.

aquapub and Rattlesnake - don't turn this into a personal spat. We can debate in a civil fashion, right?

Generations of British students have survived without changing clothes twice a day, as have soldiers everywhere for centuries. Also, where do you get your figures on costs? I went to a top-tier private school for two years, and the uniforms weren't particularly expensive. It seemed like a lot because it all had to be bought at once, but over the course of an entire school year it was no more expensive than "civilian" clothes. If you're going to claim uniforms are expensive, please support the claim.

Sorry Jamie, you're right. I'll stop debating it and provide evidence. I just found this and a whole host of other proof that school violence over clothing IS a problem on an MSN search, keywords "Bill Clinton school uniforms violence."

All Things Considered NPR: Clinton Suggets Uniforms May Curb School Violence

To summarize:

Reasons for uniforms:
1) Demonstrated positive changes in student behavior (from aquapub's link)
2) Curbs violence (yes, I personally have heard of children being shot for their shoes, and I pretty much live in a cave)-aquapub's link also
3) No income related appearance disparity
4) Cheaper uniforms are cheaper
5) Less distraction

Reasons against (courtesy of Rattlesnake- minus the erroneous disproven assertions):
1)Parent's job to delegate what the kids wear
2)Children need individual expression, and what they wear is apparently vital for that level of expression.

Which reasons hold the most weight?

The problem isn't the students, but the schools. How can children evince an interest in education, when many times the teacher doesn't know what he or she is teaching. A teaching credential only means that a person has graduated college with a knowledge of pedagogical practices. It does not mean that they, especially high school teachers, understand the classes that they teach. There are times when a school will ask a teacher to take a class because no one else will teach it. For example, a teacher of mine back during my junior year, was approached to teach the sewing class, because she owned a sewing machine. However, she declined because she is not well versed in that area. Some teachers take a job just for the money, but when a student debates a point (perhaps they read a book on the subject or saw a documentary) that is valid in its source. Many times the teacher will refuse to accept the opinion, stating that the "correct" answer is in the books. Also, thinking back to high school, many of the students in my classes were very intelligent and had many well thought out ideas. My real issue is that students are being forced to learn thing they don't want to learn (or the learning is cut off prematurely to get to the next subject), moved too fast or too slow, told when to talk, when to use the restroom, how long they can go to the restroom (now this rule is understandable, but I remember teacher taking this out of control and giving one minute to use the restroom and get back to class), what to think, and know they want to put uniforms on these kids. It all goes back to an incompetent school system; full of well meaning, but poorly trained teachers. The class sizes, the poor funding, the unequal treatment of schools (inner city and suburban middle class. I am not saying that teachers are bad. I have many friends that are teachers, but to attribute all the problems of behavior and learning onto the student is ludicrous. I don't think that they should get off the hook for behavior that is inappropriate, and I also don't believe that schools should have to take on the responsibility of teaching a child moral values. That is up to the family, and if a child acts out, then appropriate punishment should be implemented. If a child is not taught proper morals at home, that is the fault of the parents, not a matter that the schools need to address. It seems as if the public schools are moving in a direction, that to me has nothing to do with the education of the child. I honestly believe that education is a three way street; that the educators should create an engaging and informative environment with the understanding that educating is their priority, that administrators take more time to at least listen to student concerns and give a good explanation of why a rule is how it is. Not to just say "because its a rule." I firmly believe that when a child understands the reasons to a rule, they will more likely follow it. However, in that same light administrators need to rescind or revise rules that cannot be given good reason to exist, except for the idea of power. So, now uniforms...gee...why don't we give everyone the same last name, teach them to speak the same, how to think the same, how to do art projects the same way, how to walk lock step with the other children, have scheduled bathroom visits (doesn't matter if you have to go or not), and then...get this the best part.....We can ressurect Stalin!!!! Gee...wouldn't that be nifty! Maybe Hitler, too!!

First, I think that the "curbs violence" suggestion is rather weak. By saying that someone died because of what shoes they wear is ignoring the bigger issue. Generally, clothes like that would be showing gang affiliation. If someone who wasn't apart of that gang wore those shoes, they would be killed.

And so, lets say that school uniforms were made mandatory for all public high schools. Everyone in the gang would roll up one pant leg (ala my school) and anyone who wanted to try the same thing would be shot.

My point is, it would be a farther reaching goal to eliminate gangs from schools than to tell everyone to wear uniforms and ignore the larger issue.

Lets even go so far to say that uniforms are superior to all normal clothes. Even so, its a persons individual right to chose what he wears to any given place (except private schools). People are aloud to make bad decisions about clothes, the government cannot tell people to wear uniforms simply because they're "better." Someones right is being violated here!

Personally, I like the idea of uniforms (at least in high school). I think it would be a real help to all those spoiled teens (no offense but from personal experience, they're usually girls) who disrespect everyone that tries to actually show them some discipline.
Also, in cases like these, I think it's good to trade individuality (clothingwise, just clothingwise) for some real discipline.
BTW, I myself am in high school .

Becoming human, its not just a matter of gangs. The shootings often happen merely because one kid demands that another kid hands over his shoes, jacket, etc. Read the link I provided, the violence surrounding clothing (mentioned by Mrs Pigpen) is far from "weak."




Lets remember that these local governments you speak of are governed by voters, who are composed largely of parents, most of whom usually vote in favor of school uniforms when it is offered to them, and for good reason. The government CAN tell MINORS (who by the way, are under the authority of parents, and don't get much say in the matter) what to wear, and the only thing it takes from them is a shallow, far less efficient way of communicating than that of words. They lose nothing. If they really can't express any depth of individuality beyond that of fashion statements, what we need to be getting up in arms about is their simplistic minds, not the travesty of uniforms.

First, I still find that instance of violence a rather weak example. By far, more people are killed because some people demand that they hand over their wallets, so maybe we should tell children to stop carrying wallets. What about cars? Hand over your keys or I'll kill you. Maybe 16 year olds shouldn't drive cars to school.

And thats still ignoring the larger issue. Weeding out the criminals would have farther reaching benefits than telling everyone what shoes they could wear.

As for the voters, if uniforms are government sponsored by law, I would fully support that. If the people in the community feels its worthwhile, and are willing to deal with the huge teenage backlash of rebellion, than I think its ultimately fair to have uniforms.

But I would doubt any such law would ever get passed in. If its government sponsored, taxes dollars will either pay for uniforms or pay to make them as cheap as possible (public schools, remember). Once the voters are told that, I doubt that they'll want to shell out money so that all teenagers look the same. If I see a community that passes it, I'll be shocked.


Edited: Aquapub, I went to your link, and it said this:
" Jacki talks with Hal Seamon, deputy executive director of the National School Boards Association. President Clinton today supported the concept of requiring kids to wear school uniforms, although he said the requirement should be imposed by local school boards and not the federal government. Seamon supports the idea and says places that HAVE school uniforms are seeing a positive change in student behavior."

I'm sure that the website must have changed (under your link that said "All Things Considered NPR: Clinton Suggets Uniforms May Curb School Violence"), because this three sentenced paragraph doesn't say anything about violence and how it relates to clothes. Please send me the other link.

Let's go with that logic, and follow it to its reasonable conclusion....
We should weed out criminals from society. How to do that? Well, first we must weed out poverty. How to do that? Well, we need to make sure there is more opportunity. How to do that? Well, we disagree, but there should be programs available.....Blah dee blah...In a nutshell, if uniforms discourage violence in any way, they should be implemented. This is a much more obtainable goal than attempting to curb criminality in general.

Much of the rest of your post makes no sense. Districts pass uniform codes for their respective public schools all of the time. It is cheaper for parents (see my previous link). Therefore, there is no reason for tax dollars to go towards funding uniforms.

Here's one
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/Pre_96/Decembe...95/606.txt.html

But you still haven't proved that they do curb violence. You've found one school in which uniforms were a part a broad program to prevent crime in schools, and that's far from conclusive. Personally, I don't really have a problem with that particular program, because it allows a parental opt-out, but I would think that more than 1% of parents would take the school up on that offer if they were properly informed, which leads me to think they weren't.

I don't buy this idea that if you make kids wear uniforms to school they all magically change into the perfect children. In fact, I don't even that that it's a good thing to turn all our kids into the perfect children! Look, we could curb crime in the US by forcing everyone to wear video recorders that showed what they were doing at any time, but that'd be a terrible thing to do. Just because something will prevent crime doesn't mean that we should implement it, we should look at how it affects people otherwise, too. Personally, I think it's just stupid (not to mention misogynistic) to make every girl wear a plaid skirt and equally stupid to make every boy look like he's going to the office, not school.

Our education system is boring and repetitive enough, we don't need to make sure everyone looks the same, too. Japan has a great school system for making cookie-cutter children that look the same, think the same, work the same way, look the same things and have the same goals in life, but is that really what you want?



As for that link, I don't see any proof the claims that article makes, anyway. All it says is that it costs less to buy a whole year's supply of uniforms that one outfit of normal clothes, which is obviously false, seeing as they later said that a skirt cost $42 dollars, a pretty normal price. If you do your school shopping on Rodeo Drive, maybe, but as I've said time and time again, clothes are not as expensive as you claim. I just went clothes shopping for both my kids, and we only ended up paying about $500 for everything.

Not to mention even if you have uniforms, you still have to buy clothes for when your kids come home. So that'd be $500 at least on top of the cost of uniforms. Yeah, so much cheaper .


And as for "income appearance disparity," I don't get this. I though you were supposed to be dead-set against making every the same economically? Since you're for this, how about income re-distribution? That way no one will feel bad about the clothes they wear. Because obviously the purpose of the law is to make everyone feel good about themselves.

You were incorrect the last time you said that, and you're incorrect now; repetition doesn't make a statement any truer. "Not to mention" would have been nice.

How exactly am I incorrect in that? I went to Catholic school before my parents got divorced, and that's how our family (and my friends' families) did it. Please elaborate.

Here's how.



It's not necessary to change when you get home. It's a luxury such as spoiled American kids are used to, but not a necessity.

Well, it may not be something that 100% has to be done, but that doesn't mean that it's not accepted practice. It's not a necessity that parents shop at stores other than the Salvation Army and Goodwill, but generally you only do that when you have no other options. For all this talk of making everyone economically equal, this system seems just as slanted towards the rich as any.

I was by no means a "spoiled American kid," by the way, but I was not forced to wear nothing but my uniforms because generally parents have some level of empathy for their children.

Rattlesnake

If you leash a baby elephant to a post with rope and raise it that way, It will grow up to treat the extent of that rope is its barrier, even once its by far strong enough to break loose.

The point of that is that American kids only see fashion statements as such a fundamental human right because we teach them to expect such "rights." Kids in other countries, namely Europe, where uniforms and don't see this as nearly the travesty that some of us here do, they just learn to express real individuality, in a much more intelligent way-with their minds; with their words.

And for a lot of us, this is hardly a problem with our ability to empathize with our kids, as you describe it, but a means of making our children safer.

Auqa, I don't know where you're getting this. Not every country in Europe has uniforms, and in those where they do have uniforms not every child is as thrilled about it as you seem to think. Just doing a search for "school uniforms in europe" on Google, I came up with this page, where there's obvious debate about the issue among Europe's youth (though the anit-Uniform side seems to be slightly larger at least in this one place,) along with this page that said school uniforms were not working and many schools were abandoning them, this website that said that school uniforms may really do nothing to help solve the problems they're supposed to solve, another website in which students do not show the overwhelming support of uniforms you claim, and this BBC story where children can't afford uniforms in England.


I don't see all these people that can't express themselves except through their clothes. I just don't see it. I've never seen someone base their entire personality and indiduality on what clothes they wear, even when I was in high school. Some people obviously valued clothing highly, as is their choice, but they certainly had a personality. Could you provide some links or at the very least some explanation of these people that you claim are unable to express themselves except through the clothes they wear?

Clothes are as much a matter of personal expression as anything else in someone's life. I don't see how you can really deny that clothing has any importance in real life. Doesn't wearing different clothes say something about a person? Do you honestly not care at all what you wear? Would you walk around in rags?

By and large, the children are not expressing themselves through clothes, Rattlesnake. They are either expressing what their parents wanted them to look like, or what they can afford to look like. They are also potentially stigmatized for what they wear, over which they have very little control.

True, not all children wear uniforms throughout Europe. Ever read Angela's ashes and see what a child who is unable to comform to appearance standards can go through?

Edited to add: I just received a flier from my child's elementary school. Their explained benefits of uniforms are the following:
*kids are more confident; everyone fits in
*student's focus on learning and not dress
*student's and teacher's expectations are higher
*attendance normally goes up
*crime normally goes down
*cost effective to the parents
*eliminates superficial differences

I donno, maybe in elementary school or something, but generally when kids get into high school or junior high they're choosing their own clothes. And continuing the point I had before, you can afford perfectly good clothes for the same prices or less than uniforms. Just look at a JC Penny's catalog and then look at the prices of uniforms.

And if your kids really, really, really want those ridiculously over-priced designer clothes, then they're welcome to work for it. Some parents don't buy their teenage kids any clothes at all and instead make them save up their own money from working during the summer to buy them. Working at 5$ an hour, it'll take them just 8 hours to get a $40 tee shirt.

And even if there's no way they can afford these clothes they really want, they'll live. I think too much is really made of how important clothes are in school. Of all the things that kids to teased for in my high school, clothes was almost never one of them unless the kid wore what could only be described as "scruffy" clothes and made a concious effort not to fit in and instead decieded to go all punk rebel. I don't know how much things have changed since the early 90's, but I can't think it's really that much.


Also, as to all the supposed benefits of uniforms: link

It's the week before school resumes. I can tell by the arguments my 9 1/2 year old daughter and I are having about clothes shopping.

She's a little round, but she likes her jeans fancy and tight. I want her clothes to look slightly loose on her, perhaps making it possible for her to wear them for a few months rather than weeks.

And the axiom, "One 'Oh, s--- !' cancels out a bunch of 'Atta boys!'" is very appropriate in this situation. Each clothing choice becomes a life and death issue to her. I gave up and went home without buying her anything the other day. As I left the car to go into the house, I shouted, "I wish you wore uniforms at your school!" to which she retorted, "I wish I did, too!"

She claims that other kids make fun of her clothes in school. I called her best friend and asked her to be honest about the clothes my daughter wears--whether there was a problem with the styles last year. She said there was nothing wrong with what my daughter wears.

Apparently a couple of dorky boys with whom she had to sit in a class were insulting her about her clothing. I know there will probably be no lasting hurt, and that my daughter needs to develop a thicker skin when she encounters this behavior, but right now I would love to wring their scrawny little necks!

Kids are cruel. I don't believe people develop thicker skins as they get older. They learn to be more civil to each other out of necessity. Imagine having to work next to a group of people who constantly criticized your appearance. I would probably cry every day! There is a reason verbal harassment is employed for conditioning purposes (in pseudo POW camps) during survival training for our soldiers. It is effectively demoralizing.

The base, hurtful, and sometimes violent types of human interaction which are expected in a school environment would be intolerable for an instant in an adult working environment or polite society in general. Differences in clothing give the mean spirited juveniles more ammunition.

Mrs. P,

My question is, which is the root and which is the symptom? Having school uniforms may prevent kids from picking on other kids for the clothes they wear, but there is still plenty of ammunition left over.


How about we just teach kids that it's not okay to make fun of each other? Like you said, that sort of behavior is completely unacceptable in the adult world, so instead of skirting the real problem by making kids wear uniforms, why don't we start teaching them that their behavior is unacceptable. I mean that in school and in homes. A big problem, IMO, is the idea that "boys will be boys." People just assume that they can't do anything about kids behavior, so nothing is done in many schools and homes about kids who misbehave. Instead, we try to passively prevent this sort of thing from happening when we should be actively changing their behavior.

Most children are taught not to pick on others. That is part of the process of growing up. You don’t see many mentally competent adults disparage a person’s appearance in an effort to make them cry.
Laws and regulations are designed to curb bad behavior. There would be no need for them if everyone would just ‘behave’. I’m not suggesting uniforms are a panacea, simply a step to help ameliorate many problems in a much more expedient fashion than simply working to curb societal ills.

But the thing is, uniforms don't do that. Sure, they won't be able to make fun of someone's fasion sense, but as Paladin pointed out, most of the kids who get picked on for their clothes aren't wearing anything wrong. Those kids just wanted to be cruel to someone. If you institute uniforms, rest assured that kids will find something else to pick at other kids for. Is it really that much better for kids to get picked on for, say, how they look or speak rather than what they wear?

When a classroom is filled with children who are all dressed the same, the children themselves tend to view one another as equals. I went to a private school for two years where uniforms were imposed. It was the best two years of my education.
There will still be cruel kids, looking to torment others, but they will have to be more inventive in terms of finding reasons to tease or ridicule their fellow-classmates. Uniforms are the best idea when it comes to schools - private or public.

Thank you, mission earth and Mrs. Pigpen. The point I was trying to make was not that a kid might be ridiculed regardless, but that uniforms would tend to draw less attention to what a person wears in school.

In school, the fewer distractions, the better. They are there to learn, not to form packs (call them cliques if you like) and savage each other for their differences.

After school, there is nothing but distractions for kids. If the parents can afford it, kids can be as expressive as they want with their clothing.

But as my mother used to say about school, "It's not a fashion show."

well, i've learned from experience that kids' treatment by their peers is influenced a lot by what they wear. Uniforms will help kids that either cant afford to or just dont dress 'stylish' enough to be thought 'cool' by their fellow students.
Uniforms are equalizers and could save a lot of kids from unecessary grief.

The more that I read into this debate, I can see good arguments on both sides of the issue. I think I'm biased on this issue, because I was picked on in school a lot, both when I dressed normally and when I dressed strangely because, as I said in another thread, I was born with a cleft palate which took many years of surgery to repair. When I dressed strangely, I could attribute the negative comments from fellow students on my clothing and not on the physical problems that I could do nothing to change. It helped my self-esteem, but given my situation, I may be the exception and not the rule.

I do see good arguments from the other side though, particularly in regards to economics. I guess I no longer know what my stance on this issue is.