Vent - Sexism within schools - Boys & Earrings

hawk30

JReacher1 wrote: »

I'm sticking with what the equality website says on the issue.

On a side note women and men have never had equal rights. There have always been differences between the sexes.

But the information that you posted to is out of date because it refers to the SDA (as noted on the page). We now have the Equality Act and the technical guidance for schools on the EA states on page 19 that:

"A school uniform policy states that girls are permitted to wear small stud earnings, but boys cannot wear earrings at all. This may be sex discrimination."

JReacher1

hawk30 wrote: »

But the information that you posted to is out of date because it refers to the SDA (as noted on the page). We now have the Equality Act and the technical guidance for schools on the EA states on page 19 that:

"A school uniform policy states that girls are permitted to wear small stud earnings, but boys cannot wear earrings at all. This may be sex discrimination."

Only says "May". I will just use the same argument Azari did with my link:rotfl:

Azari

JReacher1 wrote: »

It also quoted.
"
it is likely to be lawful to deny boys the option of having long hair or wearing earrings"

Which is actually somewhat contradictory to the part I quoted.

Which does not really inspire much confidence in their clarity of thought or the accuracy of their suppositions.

However, I do agree that there is no certainty of outcome should a legal challenge be mounted (although my guess is that the school would simply ban all jewellery).

hawk30

JReacher1 wrote: »

Only says "May". I will just use the same argument Azari did with my link:rotfl:

You said that the equality website (the EHRC) considers it not to be sexist. But who publishes the technical guidance? The EHRC!

Yes, 'may' is correct. But you can no longer assert that you are backed up by the EHRC.

reason2

k12479 wrote: »

Well, not every single office, across the whole country, obviously. It is going to depend on what kind of job you do. What is passable on the floor of a call centre is not going to be acceptable in the boardroom, or even on certain shop floors.

never been a problem when ive sat in boardrooms for meetings.. never..

reason2

k12479 wrote: »

Really? You think breaking the rules once, getting caught, breaking them again, getting caught and then complaining about the rules is an approach that should be fully supported? In this case, nothing significant is likely to happen, but that then sets a precedent that 'rules don't apply to me' and if you don't like the consequences, complain. But next time, that will be verbal warning, written warning...

Thats not what this is - but yes.. why would you want to raise a sheep that just does what they are told no matter how stupid or how ridiculous or unfair it is..its nice to know you support the theory of children should be seen and not heard and your own children will be raised with no sense of self or mind of their own

I assume your all for schools dictating the length of a boys hair, the forced shave policy.. and should there be one stupid rule about all boys open all doors carry all books and wait hand and foot on all girls you would expect your son to comply or suffer consequences

Rev

JReacher1 wrote: »

Massively over the top. As I've already posted the equality website does not consider banning earrings on school boys as sexist.

I hope "rev" means your a member of the CofE which bans female bishops .....

Nice try. I'm atheist.

Oh okay. Since a website says its okay it must be. Especially a website which says its perfectly fine for girls to wear earrings but not boys. Because that's clearly not sexist.

I'm grateful there's websites to tell us what's okay and what's not. I'd hate to have to think for myself and realise some things are sexist using my own opinions and thoughts.

It's a stud. The boy isn't turning up for school in full punk/hippy/goth get up. It's as unintrusive as the girl sat on the next tables stud. In what way is it okay for her to wear one and him not? It's sexist. Plain and simple.

JReacher1

Rev wrote: »

Nice try. I'm atheist.

Oh okay. Since a website says its okay it must be. Especially a website which says its perfectly fine for girls to wear earrings but not boys. Because that's clearly not sexist.

I'm grateful there's websites to tell us what's okay and what's not. I'd hate to have to think for myself and realise some things are sexist using my own opinions and thoughts.

It's a stud. The boy isn't turning up for school in full punk/hippy/goth get up. It's as unintrusive as the girl sat on the next tables stud. In what way is it okay for her to wear one and him not? It's sexist. Plain and simple.

I would trust an equality website above an annoymous name on a website!

You don't see the irony in saying that you "hate to have to think for myself" but then in the same post say your view is right and mine is wrong?

I can think for myself as well and think you're wrong!

Rev

JReacher1 wrote: »

I would trust an equality website above an annoymous name on a website!

You don't see the irony in saying that you "hate to have to think for myself" but then in the same post say your view is right and mine is wrong?

I can think for myself as well and think you're wrong!

And you don't see the irony in saying you can think for yourself but you'll trust a website over a random Internet person.

How about instead of listening to a website or a random Internet person you think for yourself and draw your own conclusion. Since the one you have now is based on what the equality website says.

So, you can think for yourself, but have based your opinion on an out of date website. Way to form your own opinion.

I wholeheartedly respect the fact that you don't agree with me and think I'm wrong. You are fully entitled to think that, just as the it's son had the same entitlement to wear an earring as the girls in his class.

JReacher1

Rev wrote: »

And you don't see the irony in saying you can think for yourself but you'll trust a website over a random Internet person.

How about instead of listening to a website or a random Internet person you think for yourself and draw your own conclusion. Since the one you have now is based on what the equality website says.

So, you can think for yourself, but have based your opinion on an out of date website. Way to form your own opinion.

I wholeheartedly respect the fact that you don't agree with me and think I'm wrong. You are fully entitled to think that, just as the it's son had the same entitlement to wear an earring as the girls in his class.

No irony at all. What you do is look at all the evidence and make an informed decision based on that. I've looked at the website which I have been informed is out of date (although there is no actual link that proves it, yet I suspect he's right), I have taken my own personal experiences and beliefs and don't believe its sexist. I believe its not sexist to impose different uniform codes on girls and boys. School children are the public face of the school and the school should be able to dictate what they wear. I realise its the 21st century but boys in earings still is the exception as opposed to the rule. I can see why they should be banned.

The problem I've found with this forum in the last couple of months is that there are many posters like yourself who don't know either way but state that you do know with absolute proof. Even though there is no evidence to back up your position. Then everyone who disagrees with this view is wrong and an idiot! Still each to his own!