School uniforms

[George_Washington]

Don't be silly, it detracts from your credibility.

Oh, it's silly?

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/school_uniforms.HTM

It's a real concern and a logical one that has been talked about between various groups around the country on this issue, Mr. brillant engineer. Before entering into a debate, I suggest you do a little bit of research on the topic before throwing out childish remarks. Otherwise it just detracts from your credibility.

No. It will teach them to resent authority, how to find ways to circumvent it, and that adults really are as retarded as the kids think they are.

lmao. Oooook. So they should resent authority? So it's ok for them to go running down the street shooting everyone they see and then **** on the cops? I wonder if you really understand what the results of teaching young people to resent authority will be.

Christ, I feel like I'm debating with one of the little rascals.

I'm just curious. If you really feel like people should resent authority, than why don't you just tell your boss to take a flying leap and quit your job? But of course you won't do that which means you don't really practice what you preach. Interesting, isn't it?

Don't confuse discipline, which is most effective when self-imposed, to regimentation, which is enforced by others.

Discipline only works when it's self imposed? Yeah, that's why kids without parents who grow up being shuffled from foster home to foster home always turn out so well.

Learn what? Learn that the government has the authority to control their expression? Learn that it really is the outward appearances that are important to society and that the individual doesn't count?

The individual must cede some rights for the greater good. This is logical.

Want them to learn English? Teach them English, and expell the disruptive students from the class (the "disruptive" students are not necessarily the ones with the peculiar dress and hairdo). Get the kids that don't belong in school out of the school, ie the one's who're there to cause touble, or otherwise disrupt, and suddenly you discover the issue of uniforms is merely camoflage for the real problem.

So then I suppose students also have the right to show up to class naked since they are just expressing themselves?

I mean, think about, you guys. I dress like a slob and engineer state of the art spacecraft. As for the tattoo and piercing thing, I managed to get one kid through school without letting her "improve" on nature, and I've got two more in the pipeline that won't disrespect themselves either. The schools aren't parents, and besides, school dress codes cannot control tats anyway, and they shouldn't control jewelry, as the above discussion proves.


Bulloney. "Conformity" merely means that a group of people got together and formed a clique. If the clique is large enough, it can encompass a nation. Market forces will act easily enough on the young monsters when they're trying to find jobs. The most extreme fruitcakes won't get hired. Fair enough. Government has no business getting involved in fashion wars.


I think art and fashion suck. I wear jeans, plain old Levi's, and denim shirts, occasionally I change my underwear. But I do my job well and conduct my self professionally. And that's what counts.

Although you might do your job well, with that kind of an attitude you won't move up anytime soon. It isn't just how well a person does his or her job. Success is also dependant on how well you groom yourself, your personality, and your social skills. It's not just how well you can crunch numbers. But hey, if you're comfortable just being where you're at for the rest of life than be my guest. I just don't think your advice is any good for young people who have big dreams and high ambitions.

 

[George_Washington]

Source? I find it hard to believe that our youth is so out of control when compared to other countries. How about those riots over in France there, huh? I don't see little Billy coming home from school and burning cars.

Yeah, I don't know where you've been for the past ten years but it's common knowledge that foreign grade schools are far more efficient than ours. There's probably dozens of information on this on the Internet. But anyway, I've learned about how English schools operate from studying under a professor that was educated over in England at a public school. He said it was extremely disciplined, everyone was required to wear uniforms, and the students showed a lot of respect for their teachers and superiors. In college I also knew a Chinese exchange student who told me that they everyone, in all of their schools, were required to take calculus by their senior year in high school. They basically were taught math on a much more involved level than most of our high schools teach it. And they also wore uniforms.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Oh, it's silly?

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/school_uniforms.HTM

It's a real concern and a logical one that has been talked about between various groups around the country on this issue, Mr. brillant engineer. Before entering into a debate, I suggest you do a little bit of research on the topic before throwing out childish remarks. Otherwise it just detracts from your credibility.

Your Link:

PRO 1: School uniforms would save parents money.

Save 'em more money, tell'em their kids can go to school nekkid. This is an argument for an option, for Pete's sake!

PRO 2: School uniforms would save parents time. Kids in the morning would not have to make up their minds on what to wear.

Nothing like efficiency. Want to really save parent's time? Make the school day longer than the paren'ts work day.

PRO 3: Kids who's parents would not or could not buy them the newest fad, would not be embarrassed or harassed because of their cloths.

Like there aren't other ways to tell. Got the latest Ipod? Using last semester's back pack? Look, that one bought his uniform at Target, not Nieman Marcus!

PRO 4: Kids social standing would be based more on individual character and less their economic status.

Yeah, if we were dealing with Europans. Otherwise, the social standing of a kid will be based on personal attractiveness, personality, and parental money. Always, because they're human beings. Uniforms won't change that. Especially in high school when the possession of wheels makes things quite clear.

PRO 5: Lots of gangs use cloths to identify themselves and other gangs.

Addressed and negated. Gangs in uniformed schools operate inside the uniform regs to maintain various gang insignia. Not to mention the impossiblity of outlawing finger gestures.

PRO 6: Some kids use baggy cloths to hid weapons and drugs.

I carried a box cutter in properly fitting Levis and was never caught. Some guns also fit nicely in pockets without bulges. Your argument is null. And hiding drugs? :roll: Got socks, dude?

PRO 10: Uniforms make it easy to identify kids who belong in the school and those that don't.

Teacher's treating their students as persons and not as objects in uniform do that job better. Besides, if identifying the student is the goal, bar code their foreheads. Use indelible tattoos.

lmao. Oooook. So they should resent authority? So it's ok for them to go running down the street shooting everyone they see and then **** on the cops? I wonder if you really understand what the results of teaching young people to resent authority will be.

Want to teach them to resent authority? Here's how you do it:

Establish a perfectly arbitrary and pointless mode of dress.
Punish them for violating it.
Pump them full of notions like they're old enough to have the freedom to choose when to have sex, they're mature enough to know which sex they'd like to be, and they're wise enough to to choose to kill unborn babies if it's convenient to them, then tell them they're not old enough to pick out their school clothes in the morning.

They'll learn to resent authority, all right.

I'm just curious. If you really feel like people should resent authority, than why don't you just tell your boss to take a flying leap and quit your job? But of course you won't do that which means you don't really practice what you preach. Interesting, isn't it?

I like my job. I analyze and design multi-million dollar gadgets, then oversee the testing. Before that, I was having fun being paid to break things. Why would I quit a job like that?

Discipline only works when it's self imposed? Yeah, that's why kids without parents who grow up being shuffled from foster home to foster home always turn out so well.

So they didn't learn to discipline themselves. It's nice of you to post comments supportive of what I say, but you're purpose in a debate forum should be to find things to say that refute my position, right?

The individual must cede some rights for the greater good. This is logical.

It's wrong. The only logical limit to freedom is where one man's freedom harms another. Clothing worn cannot harm the freedom of another, unless some moron is claiming some imaginary right to not view ugliness.

So then I suppose students also have the right to show up to class naked since they are just expressing themselves?

While I have no problem with this, it is instructive that you must erect an imaginary and highly unlikely scenario as you scrape the bottom of your barrel of defense. What's wrong with public nudity?

Although you might do your job well, with that kind of an attitude you won't move up anytime soon.

Oh, so you mean I wasn't promoted last spring and I didn't get a 12% raise last August? I wonder who did?

It isn't just how well a person does his or her job.

Perhaps you're implying that rectalingus worked for you so that's the way everyone should get ahead? It's an ancient notion that does work well for many, but some of us have spines.

 

[George_Washington]

Your Link:
Save 'em more money, tell'em their kids can go to school nekkid. This is an argument for an option, for Pete's sake!

You're just sidestepping the point by comparing it to something that is both highly unlikely and wouldn't be accepted in our society. Nice dodge there, buddy.

Nothing like efficiency. Want to really save parent's time? Make the school day longer than the paren'ts work day.

This wouldn't save parents time because they would still have to leave work to address their children in school for various things. It would just add to the student's stress level by forcing them to be at school longer. For somebody who claims to care about students, you're doing a lousy job of expressing it.

Yeah, if we were dealing with Europans. Otherwise, the social standing of a kid will be based on personal attractiveness, personality, and parental money. Always, because they're human beings. Uniforms won't change that. Especially in high school when the possession of wheels makes things quite clear.

How ignorant you are. Just because someone's parents are rich doesn't mean they will be liked at school. For example, look Ozzy Osbourne's kids. They were teased and tormented in school. Some people just get jealous of kids who have come from wealth. It can happen.

Addressed and negated. Gangs in uniformed schools operate inside the uniform regs to maintain various gang insignia. Not to mention the impossiblity of outlawing finger gestures.

Another point you're just sidestepping. Yes, gangs can hide many things. But if they had uniforms, it would at least cut down on the kind of symbols they can wear that would be offensive to people and invoke fear.

Want to teach them to resent authority? Here's how you do it:

Establish a perfectly arbitrary and pointless mode of dress.
Punish them for violating it.
Pump them full of notions like they're old enough to have the freedom to choose when to have sex, they're mature enough to know which sex they'd like to be, and they're wise enough to to choose to kill unborn babies if it's convenient to them, then tell them they're not old enough to pick out their school clothes in the morning.

They'll learn to resent authority, all right.

I agree with some of that but not about the dress code. You just don't seem to understand that the way a person dresses isn't pointless. It can show pride for one's school, give a person a professional and dignified appearance, and give them a sense of belonging to a group. I mean let's be realistic. Do you honestly think there's that much individuality among kids to begin with? Uh uh. They all try to wear what's fashionable within their groups and to look like everyone else.

So they didn't learn to discipline themselves. It's nice of you to post comments supportive of what I say, but you're purpose in a debate forum should be to find things to say that refute my position, right?

There we go again with the snotty, 5th grade sarcasm. Do you really have the maturity level of a 10 year old or is talking out of your ass something you practice in the mirror every morning? If you think for a moment, you'd see that it doesn't support your notions. I think students can benefit from learning discipline from their elders. I don't think what they need is to resent their elders like it seems you would have them do. When I was in college, I had a great relationship with my teachers, the faculty, etc. In no way did I resent them. I had some bad teachers here and there but I actually tried to learn in class.

It's wrong. The only logical limit to freedom is where one man's freedom harms another. Clothing worn cannot harm the freedom of another, unless some moron is claiming some imaginary right to not view ugliness.

Not true because clothing can bear symbols that represent horrible ideas and institutions. Take the swastika, for example. It's offensive, and especially to Jewish people that have relatives murdered by the Nazis.

While I have no problem with this, it is instructive that you must erect an imaginary and highly unlikely scenario as you scrape the bottom of your barrel of defense. What's wrong with public nudity?

Most people don't think it's appropriate to come to school naked.

Perhaps you're implying that rectalingus worked for you so that's the way everyone should get ahead? It's an ancient notion that does work well for many, but some of us have spines.

That's not what I was implying at all. You might have a had a raise, who knows. But if you don't care about your appearance, it makes it all the harder to move up to upper management level. You might have had a raise in your department but CEO's and the big wigs respect people that care about their appearance and communicate well with others. Being the leader of a fortune 500 company takes more than just crunching numbers. I work for one of the largest companies in the world and I've read books written by CEO's and business leaders. I've heard numerous sources say that it takes more than just being a human calculator to succeed. So that kind of makes your notion that I am spineless rather moot, now doesn't it? And I have only recently graduated college and haven't had the time to move up yet. But I'll tell you one thing. I not only do my job well but I also take pride in how I look. Which gets me loads of compliments by hot babes throughout the day. :mrgreen:

Anyway, I refuse to further debate with an immature and rather rude individual that resorts to insults and petty sarcasm. I'm kind of above that behavior, thank you very much.

 

[Mr. D]

Honestly, I would like to see uniforms in my school. It is alot better than watching the "homies" pants hang down to their knees.

After 31 years of teaching I have come to believe schools benefit from uniforms in many ways! It reduces social competiton in clothing and makes it easier to keep out gang influenced dress, symbols and weapons! It also sets a standard for the purpose of attending school, education not dressing to impress to a hip hop cultural standard that interferes with learning!

 

[vergiss]

I repeat, as my point was ignored earlier:

Almost every school (both public and private) in Australia has a uniform, and believe me - the skanks, the Goths, the geeks and the homies still manage to personalise their appearance just enough for all that to happen, anyway.

 

[Stace]

Most people don't think it's appropriate to come to school naked.

Not to mention, there would then be...."package" comparison, if you will.....larger kids would be picked on even more about their "rolls" and stretch marks, boys would ogle the girls' breasts even more than they do now.....

Sorry, Scarecrow, but nudity is out.

 

[Thorgasm]

Not to mention, there would then be...."package" comparison, if you will.....larger kids would be picked on even more about their "rolls" and stretch marks, boys would ogle the girls' breasts even more than they do now.....

Sorry, Scarecrow, but nudity is out.

Oh, c'mon, Stace. Lighten up will ya? :rofl

 

[Stace]

Oh, c'mon, Stace. Lighten up will ya? :rofl

Let me think about this......

Nope. I had/have enough people staring at my chest as it is. Didn't/don't need nakedness to add to that.

 

[Thorgasm]

Let me think about this......

Nope. I had/have enough people staring at my chest as it is. Didn't/don't need nakedness to add to that.

:rofl , it might take their eyes off of your chest, but doubt you would like where else they go. lol

 

[Stace]

:rofl , it might take their eyes off of your chest, but doubt you would like where else they go. lol

Probably not, lol. So me thinks I will keep my clothes on. :mrgreen:

 

[Thorgasm]

Probably not, lol. So me thinks I will keep my clothes on. :mrgreen:

As long as I can wear my x-ray glasses. :rofl

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

You're just sidestepping the point by comparing it to something that is both highly unlikely and wouldn't be accepted in our society. Nice dodge there, buddy.

Oh, I don't know. If we get rid of that retarded Christian panic at the thought of a naked breast, the beaches around here would definitely become far more interesting. Remember? It's her skin, her choice (or his). If you don't like to look at skin, you have every freedom to no look at it.

That's what freedom is about. What you shouldn't have is the freedom to order other people's behavior to your liking.

All I'm saying here is that if saving parents money is the goal, they should have the option of not clothing their kids at all, which maximizes the possible savings.

This wouldn't save parents time because they would still have to leave work to address their children in school for various things. It would just add to the student's stress level by forcing them to be at school longer. For somebody who claims to care about students, you're doing a lousy job of expressing it.

Of course it would save parents time, since they could drop the kid off at school, go to work, and pick 'em up on the way home. That way the teachers could feel like they've actually put in a day's work equal to real Americans, too. National productivity would go up and up, unless you happen to be a day-care employee, I suppose.

How ignorant you are. Just because someone's parents are rich doesn't mean they will be liked at school. For example, look Ozzy Osbourne's kids. They were teased and tormented in school. Some people just get jealous of kids who have come from wealth. It can happen.

How ignorant you are. I didn't say that.

Another point you're just sidestepping. Yes, gangs can hide many things. But if they had uniforms, it would at least cut down on the kind of symbols they can wear that would be offensive to people and invoke fear.

I haven't side-stepped it. I pointed out the notion that uniforms would restrict gang influence on schools is wrong. I thought that was pretty plain. Prisons can't inhibit gang activity to any real degree. Why do you think teachers and dolts with PhD's in education administration can do something thuggish guards with clubs and total control of the gangster's environment can't do?

I agree with some of that but not about the dress code. You just don't seem to understand that the way a person dresses isn't pointless. It can show pride for one's school, give a person a professional and dignified appearance, and give them a sense of belonging to a group. I mean let's be realistic. Do you honestly think there's that much individuality among kids to begin with? Uh uh. They all try to wear what's fashionable within their groups and to look like everyone else.

You just don't seem to understand that my comprehension vastly exceeds yours. I comprehend the social intersactions of visual attractiveness perfectly well. Moreover, I've enough experience to know that it's who you blow, not how you're dressed while you're on your knees that makes most of the difference.

There's a lot of individuality among kids. Most of them grow up to be adults, and that individuality doesn't magically appear when they get their HS diploma. Yes, they all dress in a uniform oddball fashion to demonstrate their "individuality", and they resent it when this is pointed out. Perhaps you skipped the puberty stage and went straight to the Viagra stage?

There we go again with the snotty, 5th grade sarcasm. Do you really have the maturity level of a 10 year old or is talking out of your ass something you practice in the mirror every morning?

No. I'm perfectly adept at farting the alphabet. Want to hear it? But there's nothing like seeing my personal style assailed as proof of the imperviousness of my factual and rational arguments. I do heartily appreciate the confirmation of my superiority. Thanks.

If you think for a moment, you'd see that it doesn't support your notions. I think students can benefit from learning discipline from their elders.

So do I. That's why I recommended that students that cannot exhibit a mature self-control to not harass other students based on their own abritrary notions of correct dress should recieve reprimands and corrective instruction until they learn a mature tolerance for the wardrobe choices of others. It's none of their business how their classmate dresses, after all. Just like it's none of yours.

I don't think what they need is to resent their elders like it seems you would have them do. When I was in college, I had a great relationship with my teachers, the faculty, etc. In no way did I resent them. I had some bad teachers here and there but I actually tried to learn in class.

So? We're not talking about college, we're talking about highschool.

Not true because clothing can bear symbols that represent horrible ideas and institutions. Take the swastika, for example. It's offensive, and especially to Jewish people that have relatives murdered by the Nazis.

If Jews don't like the appearance of a swastika on the clothing of a classmate, he can exercise the same maturity of restraint as any other. Duh. His little feelings hurt? Live with it, it's part of history. He has no right to control the other's choices.

FREE society, remember? He complaints should only be heard when the swastika wearer actually DOES something besides accessorize in bad taste. Assaults and vandalism and other such acts are verboten on both sides. (Was that a German word I snuck in? I'm such a goyim!)

Most people don't think it's appropriate to come to school naked.

Not that it matters. Most people wouldn't go to school naked, and of those that did, 99.9% of them wouldn't be worth looking at. What you said wasn't a refutation of the idea, it was an incomplete observation on human nature.

That's not what I was implying at all. You might have a had a raise, who knows. But if you don't care about your appearance, it makes it all the harder to move up to upper management level.

And...? What makes you think I want to move up to top management? Some of us aren't messiahs or megalomaniacs, you know.

Hate to tell you this, George, but most students are destined to be replacement cogs in the great tinkertoy of an industrial society. They'll live their little nothing lives doing nothing of note but filling production demands from other nothings just like them who are also working to meet the needs of other nothings. You know, people like you and me. We'll die having known a few hundred or thousand people by name, and of those maybe six will have reason to claim to know us in any depth.

So what freakin' difference does it make if some of the nothings dress in ways other nothings disapprove of?

Those that wish to be CEO's will indeed find the correct place to insert tongue and the correct uniform to wear to do so. That will happen.

Anyway, I refuse to further debate with an immature and rather rude individual that resorts to insults and petty sarcasm. I'm kind of above that behavior, thank you very much.

And I haven't even gotten warmed up. What a pity. So you're conceding the point. To be expected, after all. You'd lost it when you chose to deny freedom.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Not to mention, there would then be...."package" comparison, if you will.....larger kids would be picked on even more about their "rolls" and stretch marks, boys would ogle the girls' breasts even more than they do now.....

Sorry, Scarecrow, but nudity is out.

LOL! I do believe I implied that it would be equally optional in parallel with the burkas. I know, I know, the girls you'd want to come to school naked never would. After all, it's the ugliest bull-dyke lesbians that challenge public indecency laws in regards to the female breast.