this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023
314 points (92.9% liked)

Not The Onion

12375 readers
323 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In short the problem is the "everything goes" attitude

Who is promoting an "everything goes" attitude? Was the school proposing to have no dress code at all? What specific suggested change in the dress code is the issue here?

This whole "we can't let students come to class on their underwear" argument doesn't hold any water if the new rules wouldn't allow it either.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

While they don’t specify the new rules, there are a few clues in the arguments made to defend it:

  • Teachers shouldn’t be measuring clothing. This implies the new rules are not based on any kind of measurement
  • That leaves binary states of whether X body part is covered
  • The article states that exposing the midriff is among the newly-allowed items
  • They also argue for leaving it to the parents to decide what’s appropriate. This actually seems to imply the new rule is “anything goes [so far as school enforcement is concerned]”