The Uniformity of Schools without Uniforms
September 26, 2013
ONE OF the common arguments against school uniforms is that they do not allow children to express their individuality. I remember a mother at a school my older son attended stating that she strongly believed her six- and eight-year-old daughters would be stifled in their creativity and self-awareness if they were ever to wear uniforms. As Marian T. Horvat points out in this article today at Tradition in Action, this is a quite laughable argument given the extreme uniformity and herd-like fashion schoolchildren exhibit in their choice of clothes. Fashion is fascist in its dictates to the young. A girl’s entire identity hinges on adequately displaying not her creativity but her conformity. Dr. Horvat writes:
[I] was quite irritated when I picked up the Los Angeles Times one morning recently and found a law professor taking a strong stand against school uniforms in an editorial titled “Dressing down school dress codes.” (September 5, 2013). Her dressing down of uniforms centers basically on the same old worn-out arguments that uniforms stifle individuality and are anti-democratic.
Yes, according to Prof. Ruthann Robson, uniforms hearken to an aristocratic and no-egalitarian past. We need to stop worrying about “arbitrary rules” and be concerned about developing the “independent thinkers necessary for a democracy.” Supposedly, we should fear “standardizing our children” more than improving the learning environment.
Standardization
This myth of “independent thinkers” quickly explodes for anyone who visits one of these public school without uniforms. Whether in Los Angeles, Boston or Dallas, the school is filled with students who all look similar in their blue jeans, t-shirts, baggy shorts, tennis shoes, sandals, etc.
Instead of having a smart, neat, ordered and modest appearance conducive to learning, everyone looks drab, sloppy, disheveled and often immodest. [cont.]
— Comments —
Buck writes:
So, When parents and other adults display this level of social ignorance and such a complete lack of common sense, there is no arguing with them. Many are deniers and cowards. Many are simply stupid. The paradigm shifted long ago for today’s parents. How can their daughters not be clueless.
The Channel Four News video, in this article about a local high school “debate”, shows the student and her mother (look-a-likes) in her home wearing the offending clothes. She has the peach sweater stretched down as far as it will stick while she stands perfectly still, to show where it falls in relation to the “finger tip” code. Stretched to the maximum it comes up short. But, in seconds, as she relaxes standing still, the sweater begins to conforms to it’s normal shape and visibly shortens. Her mother, standing beside her, lying, argues “indignantly” that there is nothing distracting or inappropriate about what her daughter is wearing. She’s an idiot. The reporter is an idiot. The sweater has already crept above her thighs.
Black leggings are the standard uniform for females at the University of Maryland. I’m there often over the last seven years. It’s been a long running joke about the “uniforms” that both the males and females wear. It’s impressive. The majority of the females wear the ubiquitous black leggings. There have been times when nine of ten of the hundreds walking the streets are wearing black leggings. It’s that dramatic – that you can not but notice it. Every day they can be seen by the hundreds walking around the campus and the adjacent student housing, sorority and fraternity areas.
If I didn’t know better, I’d assume that it’s a UMD uniform code.
However, on Friday nights many of these same young females dress formally for the sleazy bar on the corner. They look like prostitutes, rookie and nervous prostitutes. They stagger on four-inch heels wearing the uniform short/short skirt that is just long enough to obscure the color of the thong underneath.
A walk around fraternity and sorority row checking license plates indicates that moms and dads from New York and New Jersey annually send a large number of their innocent daughters and sons to UMD. A couple of timely visits and any conscious parent would realize that the campus is notorious for sex and drinking. Any fool can see it.
For the young female with half a brain, the black leggings are worn for one purpose only; to titillate or taunt the male student and to show him exactly what he wants to see. Perhaps some of the others are simply naïve newbie members of the herd, but that can’t last long.
SEPT. 29, 2013
Alan writes:
That today’s youngsters are mindlessly conformist in their dress, speech, and behavior is as predictable as night following day. They are the grandchildren of the 1960s hippies, as mindless a herd of sheep as ever existed in this nation.
The law professor quoted by Dr. Horvat is an idiot. She wants to develop “independent thinkers,” she claims. That is hilarious. “Independent thinkers” like those who will point out that government-run schools are both unnecessary and tyrannical and de facto employment agencies for intellectuals like law professors who teach collectivist, egalitarian, socialist dogma in the name of education? Independent thinking is the last thing such people desire.
At the height of the hippie foolishness in 1968, actor Buddy Ebsen said to the hippies: “You are the greatest conformists in the world. You all think alike, act alike, react alike.” [ TV Guide, April 20, 1968, p. 34 ]
Half a century later, we see the same traits in the hippies’ grandchildren: In every public and semi-public place, observe the adolescents and adolescent-witted people in their tee-shirts, blue jeans, and ball caps, lugging their trendy backpacks, casual bags, and life-sustaining liquids, staring at tiny screens and tinkering endlessly with their trendy gadgets, mouthing the same inane clichés and slogans. Such people are incapable of realizing that they all wear the same uniform, because Leftist-approved ideas, premises, and vocabulary constitute the Leftist-approved uniform for their minds. Such people remind me of nothing so much as the old expression, “Monkey see, monkey do.”