commentator
Senior Member
I agree with both positions. Having everyone wear the same type clothing is easier, and economically more feasible for most parents. It eliminates the "how nasty is too nasty for school?" and "where did you buy your clothes?" questions in many ways.
But I agree also that skirts, dresses, things that don't as my grandma would say, 'cover your straddle' are not as modest, as easy to get around in, or as weather wise as modest pants type apparel for either sex. I was one of the first teachers to dare to wear a pants suit (remember those awful old polyester beauties?) in the seventies to teach. I was on the floor, on the ball courts, around with the kids, doing lots of activities, and there was no such thing as a modest skirt in those days. They were either maxis or three inches above the kneecap.
But this lady claims she "didn't know" about the requirement. I question that. And if she didn't know, and signed her child up unknowingly, then she certainly has the option to withdraw, not sue.
But I agree also that skirts, dresses, things that don't as my grandma would say, 'cover your straddle' are not as modest, as easy to get around in, or as weather wise as modest pants type apparel for either sex. I was one of the first teachers to dare to wear a pants suit (remember those awful old polyester beauties?) in the seventies to teach. I was on the floor, on the ball courts, around with the kids, doing lots of activities, and there was no such thing as a modest skirt in those days. They were either maxis or three inches above the kneecap.
But this lady claims she "didn't know" about the requirement. I question that. And if she didn't know, and signed her child up unknowingly, then she certainly has the option to withdraw, not sue.
