|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:52 am
Personally I'm against them.
I don't see the benefit. They won't stop clique associations because cliques form over common interest not so much clothing. The won't stop gang affiliation for the same reason. Look at prison. Gang affiliations are still rampant and yet they all wear the same uniform. It doesn't keep people from even noticing class differences. If you're poor you'll have to buy a used uniform giving your status away anyway.
All uniforms do is take away individuality without solving the issues they are trying to solve. People will always find away to stay in their cliques, stereotype and be apart of gangs. Clothing changes really don't change that.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:26 am
Would you believe the schools in England have uniform regardless of whether it's a private school or not?
There used to be clashes with some schools *especially the one I was in* at the start of it. We had to wear navy blue jumpers and trousers. It didn't look smart at all. Then we had a new school building and they decided to try out a new school uniform in which everyone voted for. I had to wear black blazer with black trousers and a TIE.
Uniforms never changed anything. There would be the odd people who wore it properly, the majority would hang their tie loose and get nagged at by teachers the majority of the time. People would wear trainers/sneakers and get sent home, even if we wore a jumper we would get sent home.
Girls weren't even aloud to have their blousers hanging out the blazers ¬_¬ It was ridiculous. My school wasn't even private. In fact it was a bad school, a school which police people now patrol X(
BUT I do have to say the change of uniform has changed the behaviours and the school has noticed too. The grades have increased HIGHLY, and when I did my exam, I was told if I didn't wear my uniform I would get sent home and miss the exam. *That scared me so it made me WANT to wear the uniform* crying
Okay, so here's a little argument for an against uniforms *gawsh I had to do this for English lmao - good times!*
Good Points
+ Say you weren't financially stable, and you can't afford to buy a lot of clothing to go to school with, uniforms are there, they are consistant and there's no 'fashion' in school. There are plenty of people who are effected by the economy crises, imagine a single parent family or a struggling family and their child is bickering them to buy them new clothes because they need to fit in with their peers. Children/students may get bullied for wearing the wrong type of clothing, and it increases bullying.
+ It gives a good reputation to the school, if you had a load of people wearing skimpy clothing and things like that, then what will other people think? Imagine a parent wanting their child to go to THAT school, would they like to know that their child will be hanging around with people like that?!
Bad Points
- The students won't have their own invidual sense, school is a big thing, making friends, finding your own personal identity. Uniforms may spoil this because as a child you would like to experiment. *but there is outside time -winkwink-*
- Going to school should be something people should enjoy. Wearing uniform would make the school seem repetitive and boring, being relaxed in your own style of clothing makes things seem more casual and therefore means that school may even seem more pleasureable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:36 am
I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:40 am
Dress code, yes. Uniform, no. As long as girls aren't showing tons of cleavage and stuff like that, I don't see why kids shouldn't get a little bit of freedom.
I'd especially hate uniforms if they forced girls to wear skirts, 'cause I haaaate wearing skirts. XP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:41 am
Well........ On the one hand, they could potentially mean miniskirts...... On the other, they could potentially mean miniskirts. Depends. Am I still allowed to wear jackets of non-uniform orient? Because my jacket holds everything. And they would not be able to get it off of me. Tiny miniskirts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:46 am
Little Miss Fortune Dress code, yes. Uniform, no. As long as girls aren't showing tons of cleavage and stuff like that, I don't see why kids shouldn't get a little bit of freedom.
I'd especially hate uniforms if they forced girls to wear skirts, 'cause I haaaate wearing skirts. XP Well my school made us wear miniskirts for PE. Navy blue. And yes - it went above our knees O_o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:54 am
MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:06 pm
Vajapocalypse MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there. No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:11 pm
sikh-91 Vajapocalypse MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there. No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students. Not necessarily. Anyone can make a uniform or professional wear look trashy. It's just teaching them to only expand their ideas of professionalism to one type of professional wear. I for one don't think that polo shirt and khakis is very professional at all. It's not trashy but it's certainly nothing to brag about on the professionalism front.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:23 pm
Vajapocalypse sikh-91 Vajapocalypse MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there. No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students. Not necessarily. Anyone can make a uniform or professional wear look trashy. It's just teaching them to only expand their ideas of professionalism to one type of professional wear. I for one don't think that polo shirt and khakis is very professional at all. It's not trashy but it's certainly nothing to brag about on the professionalism front. But the children will only admire the adult's fashion sense in the working place, so they will get their ideas from them. Uniform won't effect it. Uniform is there for 'disapline' and 'equality' in the school. Wearing uniform in school won't effect anything at all. They spend around 6 hours in school time, and how many out of school? *18 hours ^^,* They also have weekends. People usually get their ideas from role models and peers, magazines, media, so it won't effect them at all whee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:37 pm
sikh-91 Vajapocalypse sikh-91 Vajapocalypse MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there. No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students. Not necessarily. Anyone can make a uniform or professional wear look trashy. It's just teaching them to only expand their ideas of professionalism to one type of professional wear. I for one don't think that polo shirt and khakis is very professional at all. It's not trashy but it's certainly nothing to brag about on the professionalism front. But the children will only admire the adult's fashion sense in the working place, so they will get their ideas from them. Uniform won't effect it. Uniform is there for 'disapline' and 'equality' in the school. Wearing uniform in school won't effect anything at all. They spend around 6 hours in school time, and how many out of school? *18 hours ^^,* They also have weekends. People usually get their ideas from role models and peers, magazines, media, so it won't effect them at all whee Uniforms don't create equality. Just because you and I wear the same shirt doesn't make us equal (sake of debate not saying you are below me or vice versa). It doesn't even grant us equal opportunity. Why should I be disciplined for something I haven't done yet? I shouldn't. So why should I have to spend money on an out fit I don't like when the outfit I do like is just as school appropriate? Now we're back to the idea that it's a waste of money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:14 am
I'm of a rather mixed opinion. On the one hand, it does shove down some creative freedom.
On the other, it does form a sense of equality and solidarity in the school. You might talk to people that you might otherwise have been scared off from due to the way they dress (let's face it, people who wear the sterotypical 'goth' clothes, and those people did exist in my high school, rather scared me). It makes it difficult to form opinions about people without getting to know them a bit first.
Case in point, my outfit here in the Corps. For our first week, we wore "fish dress": a white undershirt (two in girls' cases so as to show no bra through it), knee-length khaki pants, a brown belt, tennis shoes, and a canteen on a strap over our right shoulder. It was ugly, we were to some extent jealous of the non-regs walking around in jeans and t-shirts, but it was a pretty quick route to cutting off our individuality ("Sir, it is not a fish privilege to be an individual!") and also to making us come together as a class. Those people in the white shirts and shorts with the uncomfortable-to-wear canteens were our buddies, there with us for whatever hell was to be thrown at us next.
Now, we all wear the A&M khaki, except for today (we're in our formal uniform, Midnights, as it's Patriot Day). Regardless of different personalities, of different backgrounds, of anything else, we are probably one of the largest, most united groups on campus. And though there are other factors, the uniform is a definite part of that.
However, individuality can also help in an academic setting. The Corps is a pretty small portion of the school (4% or so), so I'm terrified to fall asleep in class because I'm the only cadet in some of my classes. The uniform tends to stand out a bit, and standing out... well, sometimes it's best not to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:01 am
If you'll forgive the pun, there are several schools of thought on mandatory uniforms. I don't really want to get in to it, but I will say that whether being used as a means of vain image or reputation improvement by "surface polishing", or further attempts to control our youth by stripping away any individuality, uniforms do not bode well for any school whether Catholic, Preparatory, Private or Public.
Kids are either going to find some way to rebel and stand out anyway, refuse to wear them all together and be forced to a different school potentially ruining their education, or become monotonous drones and sheep for the mass marketed media, trending, and puppets for the government.
You know this uniform thing is vaguely familiar, I remember in history class watching old news reels about another group of people who were forced to wear uniforms and all be the same. Though they were a little hard to understand since the narration was in German. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:11 am
Vajapocalypse sikh-91 Vajapocalypse sikh-91 Vajapocalypse MistressMinako I went to a Catholic school, then a public high school. When I went to high school I had to get a whole bunch of new cloths and such because I'd worn a uniform for nine years. It was stressful and expensive and tons of people in high school didn't understand the idea of keep your private bits covered.
They switched to uniforms a couple years ago, I went back to do some research and the atmosphere was different, the kids looked better and the teachers weren't slapping old t-shirts on every other girl with her top down too low.
All it takes for a public school "uniform" are some slacks and a polo shirt. They can still identify and do all that teenage bullshit but I for one think uniforms look more respectable and teach a kid how to look professional. ... So you didn't have clothing you wore outside of school? It is cheaper to not have uniforms because the clothes you wear outside of class can be worn during class as opposed to uniforms where you need to invest in a new set. That is unless you wore your uniform for every occasion. That's very subjective. Kids wearing uniforms to me seem stuffy and unable to really be themselves. Also, nothing's wrong with tasteful cleavage and some girls can't help it. I had a friend who had DDs. Unless she was going to wear a poncho or a shirt 2x larger than her some cleavage was going to show. A polo shirt isn't going to cover that. Teaching a kid to look more professional shouldn't be the result of uniforms. Your employer isn't going to give you a uniform at work. They are going to assume you can create your own professional style. Kids wearing uniforms don't teach them to be professional because they can't expand their clothing options to enhance the professional styles out there. No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students. Not necessarily. Anyone can make a uniform or professional wear look trashy. It's just teaching them to only expand their ideas of professionalism to one type of professional wear. I for one don't think that polo shirt and khakis is very professional at all. It's not trashy but it's certainly nothing to brag about on the professionalism front. But the children will only admire the adult's fashion sense in the working place, so they will get their ideas from them. Uniform won't effect it. Uniform is there for 'disapline' and 'equality' in the school. Wearing uniform in school won't effect anything at all. They spend around 6 hours in school time, and how many out of school? *18 hours ^^,* They also have weekends. People usually get their ideas from role models and peers, magazines, media, so it won't effect them at all whee Uniforms don't create equality. Just because you and I wear the same shirt doesn't make us equal (sake of debate not saying you are below me or vice versa). It doesn't even grant us equal opportunity. Why should I be disciplined for something I haven't done yet? I shouldn't. So why should I have to spend money on an out fit I don't like when the outfit I do like is just as school appropriate? Now we're back to the idea that it's a waste of money. Yeah, it tends to go around in circles. But children get taught disaplined from parents, and adults, so what difference would it mean for teachers and schools to do this? I've turned out fine wearing uniform for 11 years. *I don't need to wear uniform anymore, but I do need to follow a dress code which I sneakily avoid ninja *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:35 am
sikh-91 Vajapocalypse sikh-91 Vajapocalypse sikh-91 No, but they would expect you to look smart and representable. Having uniform in school means the school has an advantage in disaplinary over the students. Not necessarily. Anyone can make a uniform or professional wear look trashy. It's just teaching them to only expand their ideas of professionalism to one type of professional wear. I for one don't think that polo shirt and khakis is very professional at all. It's not trashy but it's certainly nothing to brag about on the professionalism front. But the children will only admire the adult's fashion sense in the working place, so they will get their ideas from them. Uniform won't effect it. Uniform is there for 'disapline' and 'equality' in the school. Wearing uniform in school won't effect anything at all. They spend around 6 hours in school time, and how many out of school? *18 hours ^^,* They also have weekends. People usually get their ideas from role models and peers, magazines, media, so it won't effect them at all whee Uniforms don't create equality. Just because you and I wear the same shirt doesn't make us equal (sake of debate not saying you are below me or vice versa). It doesn't even grant us equal opportunity. Why should I be disciplined for something I haven't done yet? I shouldn't. So why should I have to spend money on an out fit I don't like when the outfit I do like is just as school appropriate? Now we're back to the idea that it's a waste of money. Yeah, it tends to go around in circles. But children get taught disaplined from parents, and adults, so what difference would it mean for teachers and schools to do this? I've turned out fine wearing uniform for 11 years. *I don't need to wear uniform anymore, but I do need to follow a dress code which I sneakily avoid ninja * They get taught discipline when doing something to deserve it. It's different because it's premeditated. For example you aren't going to get grounded for a week because you might say a swear word you get grounded for a week because you did say a swear word. I've turned out fine NOT wearing a uniform throughout my 12 years of public education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
