Wise thoughts, Bennett. As the mother of a 16 year old son, I’m familiar with the discomfort you suggest this mom might be struggling with. My son is not doing anything untoward, and is quick to defend women & girls’ rights, but when he told me, a few weeks after arriving in Germany, that he missed cheerleaders, it wasn’t megaphones and sneakers he was talking about. It took me a minute to be ok with that, but of course it’s actually fine. I trust that he didn’t leer, touch, or comment inappropriately.

On the cultural pressure for women to cover themselves, Muslims will tell you that it is wrong for men to tell women how to dress. It should be a woman’s choice. There are stories of Mohammed telling men who criticized women dressed in revealing ways that they (the men) should “lower their gaze”. So it is not a religious thing there either—the pressure is cultural/societal.

On dress codes, I’m of two minds. Yes, telling office workers that their shoulders must be covered and clothing shouldn’t be tight does affect women disproportionately, but aren’t the cultural ideals that women should wear uncomfortable shoes that could legit lead to injury (turning an ankle or falling) and be relatively uncovered while men sport walking shoes and clothes that easily draped over a paunch sexist themselves? Those are slowly changing (go Angie, with the flat shoes!) but still quite strong. How much of women’s wishes to wear them are internalized gender norms that say our bodies should be visible and appear available? I disagree strongly with sending girls out of class because their attire “interferes” with boys learning, but I also strongly prefer to address young girls (heck, everyone, at any age) in terms of their abilities and character, rather than appearance. Not that I know how to undo the general emphasis on feminine bodies—see young man missing cheerleaders above.

You know what I love? I love Victorian England. Men were brought to trial - and most often convicted - of doing things like lifting their shirt while standing in front of a window. Good times!

Rl, and soon thereafter, women began arming themselves with hat pins to prick the jerks with.

Before saying anything else, I want to state that I think men and women on their own time (not at a job) should be able to dress however they please.

But there are so many people here defending the right of women to wear revealing clothing. That's fine, but how often do we consider the cultural norms (in the Western world) that women's bodies be uncovered, pushed up in all the right places and put out there for general sexual (thought) consumption? It is no accident that women's clothing is more revealing, that women's formal wear tends to be strapless and plunging, even that women's shoes tend to look a certain way.

So we are quick to criticize the idea that women should be expected to cover up, but we aren't so quick to criticize that spaghetti straps, short-shorts, strapless, figure emphasizing, leggings and other fashions are marketed almost exclusively to women. That, IMO, is just as sexist as the opposite of expecting women to cover up.

I think that I am with Rachy. Not only is thinking about sex all the time exhausting, but so is looking for reasons to be offended. Yes, the woman who wrote the piece has misplaced concern and should expect her son's to take responsibility for their own focus and their own thoughts. But I don't feel that workplace or school dress codes (not that Universities have one) are unfair in most cases, as they generally do expect the same things for men and women (as far as covered is concerned, men are expected to wear suits and ties, which is far more restrictive than women's dress codes).

Well, I don't find leggings to be even remotely sexy, or revealing. Less revealing than so many other clothing choices. They ARE traditionally workout and gymwear so it's gonna be hard to not see women in them.

I don't love the leggings as regular wear phenomenon and I'm a little disappointed by the mainstream popularity of clothing for women that relies on such unimaginative allure.

And while I believe completely that people are responsible for their own behavior, I monitored both of my daughters clothing choices because we don't live in that paradise yet.

I didn't read this post as a comment on Catholicism. I thought the letter writer felt like she needed more authority than her own voice to be taken seriously, which I understand, but in the end was inappropriate and misleading.

FWIW, here is a way more inclusive way to craft a dress code.

https://www.scarymommy.com/roa....._source=FB

Kari, that is perfect - exactly what I think is reasonable.

Bennett, thanks so much for explaining that perspective to me.

I think Echo articulated a lot of what goes through my mind about it.

I love that we can discuss such a difficult and controversial issue in such a productive way!

Kari - I like that policy- that is a mature inclusive way to tackle a tricky area.

I don't have any opinion about leggings to be honest. I wear them. I do have strong opinions about the way that people opine about leggings and what is appropriate.

I also think that it is fine to have a dress code and to make expectations clear of people, as long as it is achievable from a sizing, cultural and cost perspective. I might start a new topic about that.

Our past high school principal had a policy like this, and it worked very well. Unfortunately, the new principal seems to enforce NOTHING as far as a dress-code goes. I think it's unfortunate.

Actually, I rather prefer school uniforms. It eliminates dress code concerns as well as "keeping up with the Joneses."

The mentality of women as "the temptress" -regardless of any specific outfit- has always bothered me.

When DD was in high school, dresses and shorts had to be at least fingertip length. Of course, some kids have proportionately longer/shorter arms and fingers. And as for shorts: DD pointed out to the Principal that junior size shorts simply weren't sold that long; we looked. If a girl were big enough to wear misses sizes, she had more (ugly to her) options. Same with the very, very tall but very slender girls: No dress would be long enough in their tiny size.

Glad to see Roanoke's unisex dress code. I also don't want to see gender non-conforming kids forced to wear clothing that doesn't fit their gender identity whether fluid or not.

I will also say that I mentioned to a young woman running around the path where I walk that I could tell the panties under her leggings had pink and red hearts of varying sizes. Yes, they were as thin as tights. I also added that maybe she couldn't tell when she dressed inside, but in full daylight from the back that's what I could see and did she know that. That's the only time when I've seen too much and the mom in me came out.