I remember going to high school wearing short shorts in the middle of winter. My only nod to the cold and rainy weather were a pair of sheer nylons underneath.
I also remember heading to school wearing what I can only describe as a Holly Hobby dress.
I didn’t think twice about baring my midriff (I really miss my teenage abs).
I often wanted to look older than my years, and more sophisticated, though I don’t think I ever achieved the latter.
See, I was one of those teenagers that experimented with fashion, trying to find my “look”. Some of the experiments were more cringe-inducing than others.
Now I’d never even consider heading outside in shorts in the winter, since I’ve come to value my circulation as I’ve gotten older and at least a smidgen wiser. Practicality wins out eventually (for most). But without those youthful experiments, would I have found my comfort zone?
And I don’t remember, not even once, having anyone say a thing to me about my outfit of choice.
I was certainly never ejected from school, or told to cover up.
I was contemplating all of these things this week as I considered the comments made by two Chilliwack school trustees. I was horrified by their antiquated views.
One of the things that strikes me about every fight that comes up anywhere over school dress codes is that they disproportionately target girls’ clothing. Oh, there might be a few lines pertaining to boys not wearing their trousers around their knees, or hats in school or some such, but it’s nothing compared to the old-fashioned, puritan, morality-driven desire to make girls cover up that is so obviously at the heart of virtually every single one of these documents.
No bra straps showing. No bare shoulders. No short shorts. No skirts higher than a certain length. No belly button showing. And on and on.
The only thing more offensive were the apparently unabashed comments from Chilliwack trustee Darrell Furgason who said that dressing modestly was important not for the girls themselves, but because they would distract the boys with their show of skin. Which is also the problematic heart of many of these school dress codes. Have any of these people ever thought that if a boy is so horribly distracted by a girl in short shorts and spaghetti straps maybe he’s the one that needs to be talked to, not her?
I won’t repeat everything I wrote in Wednesday’s editorial about how this kind of thinking leads to a dangerous misogyny.
But it’s past time to stop the ridiculous perpetuation of the notion that girls and women are supposed to be responsible for and manage the thoughts and actions of those around them. Let’s leave it on the rubbish bin of history where it belongs.
