Gay Honor student cant wear tux to prom. "Girls wear dresses and boys wear tuxes"

Status
Not open for further replies.
People are actually defending this nonsense?

If it's a formal event, it shouldn't be a problem because she intends to wear formal attire.

Gender specific dress codes are obviously a problem for some people and it's baffling to me that there are people who'd rather make someone else suffer than change a rule.
 
What would happen if she came with a tux anyway? What are they gonna do about it?

You can't call the cops because it's the school itself violating the principle of public schooling...
 
What would happen if she came with a tux anyway? What are they gonna do about it?

You can't call the cops because it's the school itself violating the principle of public schooling...
I'm guessing they just wouldn't let her in and would tell her to go home.

If she persisted they might do what they threatened here:
He said that the faculty that is working the prom told him they weren't going to work the prom if (girls) were going to wear tuxes
And basically threaten her with "If you stay the prom ends"
 
Hurt? probably no one. But if you're rewarding a honor student with choice over the rules, that's classism. Everyone else has to abide the rules, or can they too decide to wear whatever they want? Just a curious question.

I'm all for questioning impositions but where do you draw the line of what can be done and what can't be done? What if a male doesn't want to wear a tuxedo but a more casual shirt and jeans, if they totally feel uncomfortable with a tuxedo?



But there's no two code, there's one code per gender. If they denied a transgender person this right it would be something to make a fuss about because they'd be denying their identity.

As has been said many times, a girl wanting to wear s FORMAL tuxedo, and a guy wanting to wear casual jeans and a shirt is NOT the same, at all
 
ok @ yall pretending this isn't blatantly homophobic while ignoring the fact that masculine lesbians (and feminine gay men) often bear the heaviest cross when it comes to being discriminated against. the image of a lesbian getting married in a tux, for example, is something that makes certain heterosexuals very angry and this case is just an extension of that

"But rules are rules" ok @ this reductive train of thought. u r SO radical for upholding needless status quos in such a PC SJW SARKEESIAN age, continue doing the lords work yall 🙏🙏🙏🙏

expose them. this is a totally meaningless and needless 'rule' (not to mention basically just invented because homophobia).
 
I believe that this depends on your moral philosophy; as more of a consequentialist, I see no reason why arbitrariness is a negative attribute rather than a neutral one.

A consequentialist would absolutely not want rules to be arbitrary, ever, and would definitely think of arbitrary rules with derision. Perhaps you're more of a solipsist? That sounds more in line with what you're describing.

It is something that I can ascribe to much social activity that has been, on balance, beneficial. Is their lack of rational compliance reason enough to cease their being practised? My answer is no, because there is no cosmic force that compels me to be consistently rational.

Of course there isn't, it's just the basis of debate. I could point out that someone's beliefs have no rational or evidentiary basis, and they could say "well I don't care about reason or evidence." They're welcome to feel that way, but the conversation is, at that point, over.
 
So....what does this have to do with her being gay?

Doesn't sound like they are discriminating against her because of her sexual orientation, they just want to maintain a dress code for their event.

Sounds like a sensationalist article to me.

Honestly, still, it doesn't make it that much better. They are still trying to dictate that people only wear what is stereotypically normal.

Funny thing is I thought that people were over the girls don't always wear dresses when I was a kid (I'm almost 40 now) and that we are still working on the BS that guys can't wear dresses at this point. And we have these backwater people who still can't even get over a female wearing a tux.

Shit, I wear a suit when I go to an interview (Female and I hate dresses/skirts) which is a helluva lot more important how you dress than a prom.

And I can totally sympathize as a straight female with her. I'd be pissed if they told me I had to wear a dress too. I'm not as brave as her, I'd probably either just not go or get a dress honestly. But I totally support her standing up against the BS, whether it's cause she's gay or they have some stupid notion that females have to wear dresses to be formal. (and I'd support a guy wanting to wear a dress too if that is what he wants to do).
 
As has been said many times, a girl wanting to wear s FORMAL tuxedo, and a guy wanting to wear casual jeans and a shirt is NOT the same, at all
How is it not? A tuxedo is not formal wear for a woman, a dress is not formal wear for a man.
 
ok @ yall pretending this isn't blatantly homophobic while ignoring the fact that masculine lesbians (and feminine gay men) often bear the heaviest cross when it comes to being discriminated against. the image of a lesbian getting married in a tux, for example, is something that makes certain heterosexuals very angry and this case is just an extension of that

"But rules are rules" ok @ this reductive train of thought. u r SO radical for upholding needless status quos in such a PC SJW SARKEESIAN age, continue doing the lords work yall ��������

I agree with your sentiment (especially the observation of likely hidden agendas), but I want to make one correction here: I don't think the "rules are rules" train of thought is reductive, it's just tautological.

You should follow the rule.
Okay, why should I follow this rule?
Because it's the rule.
 
Says who? Did you somehow miss the picture of Ellen hosting the fucking Oscars in a tux?
I would imagine that a lot if the fashion choices at the Oscars would not be considered formal attire at a high school prom either. I mean honestly I guess I would still consider her dressed in formal attire, but wouldn't consider Trey and Matt to be dressed formally that one time.

Honestly, it's a high school prom, I doubt half of the people there want to be in formal attire at all. I bet the chaperones don't care if she wears a tux other than having to deal with guys showing up in dresses.
 
Hiding behind "but it's the dress code!" is so clearly transparent. When your "dress code" has a not so hidden sexist intent and archaic mindset behind it maybe you should start rethinking your policies a little bit?
 
It also amazes me when I think about how people can get so involved/invested in their own "world" that something like what a kid wears to a high school dance actually matters to them enough to be a dick.

Who the hell cares what the kids wear. It's a freaking high school dance. It's only important to this principal because he is living in the tiny box that is his school. If he expanded his mind and his world view a bit he'd realize that the school dance is pointless in the grand scheme of things and obviously not worth being a dick.
 
Of course there isn't, it's just the basis of debate. I could point out that someone's beliefs have no rational or evidentiary basis, and they could say "well I don't care about reason or evidence." They're welcome to feel that way, but the conversation is, at that point, over.

Correct, but I am not interested in debating for the sake of a mental exercise. I am interested in settling on a framework that can be applied in situations such as these, i.e. the breaking of arbitrary social conventions, and when it can be considered acceptable. I have stated before that solipsism and postmodernism are not valid approaches to an argument, and I said this because they lead an argument to nowhere. I am now stating that rationality is not a valid approach to every situation, because it leads our collective praxis to nowhere. If we rooted out everything rationally non-compliant but ultimately harmless from society, will we have bettered ourselves in any way beyond the symbolic?

I will restate my point, just to simplify it: something arbitrary is neither good nor bad, unless it proves to be either helpful or deleterious. Until then, it is simply neutral.
 
Yeah no, sorry. Some women don't feel comfortable wearing dresses and would rather not. Who are you or anyone else to impose what they should, or should not wear.

It's sexist, pure and simple.

by your definition isn't every dress code sexist then? what about uniforms at a boarding school? and what about men not feeling comfortable?
 
I would imagine that a lot if the fashion choices at the Oscars would not be considered formal attire at a high school prom either.
Frankly, that's ridiculous. And we have multiple first-person accounts in this very thread of women wearing tuxedos or suits in environments requiring formal attire.

So your statement is just wrong. What I agree with however is that none of this should be an issue, because it's a high school prom.
 
Oh it's Louisiana? Not surprised then. This is the same state where a bar refused to serve my cousin's friend because he was of color. And he was even in uniform (army).

We don't have this problem up North, I remember a lesbian in my graduating class wore a tux to prom. She rocked it very well too.
 
Gay doesn't even factor into this, what does it matter if a woman wears a tux? I promise the world will be the same the next morning and nothing will have changed.

Why are they playing up that she is an honor student? That has no basis on this story.

Anyways, if there is an actual written rule then she should shut the fuck up.

If there is not, let her wear what she wants.

Oh boy. Guys, the rules are written! Let's pack it up and go home.
 
by your definition isn't every dress code sexist then? what about uniforms at a boarding school? and what about men not feeling comfortable?
No of course not, but in this situation it clearly is.

Saying "You can't wear that because you are making the company look bad" is different than saying "You can't wear that because you are a girl and girls don't wear that".

And in regards to men not feeling comfortable, if they would rather wear a dress then they should be allowed too, if that makes them more comfortable.
But there is also a difference in a girl saying "I'd rather a wear a suit than a dress" in a formal setting than a guy in the same formal setting saying "I don't like a tuxedo, so i'm going to wear a onesie"
 
I don't really get why she can't wear the tux. Women wearing suits and ties and formal attire generally designed for men isn't uncommon at all. It's far more common in the working world than men wearing dresses for example. Even then, it's not harming anyone so I don't really see why people care.
 
But what if it was the other way around?

I hope they can make an exception for her, as its a special day, and she is their honor student, but i understand why they would be a bit hesitant to change the dressing code.
 
The dress code isn't "Boys wear tuxedo's, Girls wear dresses" though. It's simply "Formal".

The stipulation that the girl has to wear a dress was imposed by the faculty because they are gender stereotyping.

then there's nothing to discuss anymore. The girl is right and this issue has been rightfully brought to attention

Why?

I mean, disregarding the fact that from what I gathered from the article, the rule seemed to be the spontaneous product of a sudden surge of bigotry, why would it need to be followed if it did exist prior? What would be the justification? There are gonna be tuxedos anyway, who gives a fuck who wears them? Is the place suddenly burst into flames as soon as a women clad into tux and tie steps over the threshold?


this is a wrong assumption, imho. By your logic any stupid rule should be disregarded because reasons. That's not how it works. Sometimes we all wish the contrary, but it's not
 
No, I understand this. I agree, traditions you no longer abide become non-traditions.

What I'm asking you to do is justify the tradition reasonably. Why should this tradition continue to exist? The reason can't just be "because it's tradition."
Traditions are per definition things you do that have no basis in rationality, otherwise they would be logical and not tradition. You're kind of asking an impossible thing here.
 
Normally you enforce rules on everyone or no one because if you let one person get by someone else will want to as well.

But I think that as long as she wears a standard tux, she's good to go. But then if a male wants to wear a dress, would you let him?

The first is a real interests that is happening now, and the second hasn't even come up, so I'd give her what she wants.
 
To the people asking the question if a male student be able to wear a dress.

The answer is yes, a male student should be able to wear a dress if they choose to.
 
this is a wrong assumption, imho. By your logic any stupid rule should be disregarded because reasons. That's not how it works. Sometimes we all wish the contrary, but it's not
If that rule is archaic, discriminatory, sexist and a whole lot more and transgressing it hurts literally no one on any level?

In that case it absolutely works that way.
 
It's interesting in this thread how few people know the difference between formal and informal attire. Typical probably more so.
 
Traditions are per definition things you do that have no basis in rationality, otherwise they would be logical and not tradition. You're kind of asking an impossible thing here.

I'll agree that very few traditions are based on logic.

However, not all traditions are detrimental either, why should we keep around traditions that are harmful to certain people?
 
Traditions are per definition things you do that have no basis in rationality, otherwise they would be logical and not tradition. You're kind of asking an impossible thing here.

That's the point I assume. If tradition has no logical value and can only hurt someone why should we use the "tradition" argument as a means to defend it.

Now we get into a real dicey situation when we start talking about something like Zwarte Piet because it both hurts people and makes people happy. However, in this case, who exactly is this specific dress code making happy?
 
If that rule is archaic, discriminatory, sexist and a whole lot more and transgressing it hurts literally no one on any level?

In that case it absolutely works that way.

okay, break it then but expect to be sanctioned for doing so, which is absolutely your right
 
Traditions are per definition things you do that have no basis in rationality, otherwise they would be logical and not tradition. You're kind of asking an impossible thing here.
That should make it even easier to abandon them if they turn out to be harmful and outdated, no?
 
I'll agree that very few traditions are based on logic.

However, not all traditions are detrimental either, why should we keep around traditions that are harmful to certain people?
Yeah I'm not a big tradition kind of guy for the same reason. But presumably the vast majority of kids like the idea of a prom and an excuse to dress up in formal attire. It's also not nice if someone wants to do away with this tradition (and you could wonder how hurt she really is). Traditions lose their lustre when they become optional.
 
okay, break it then but expect to be sanctioned for doing so, which is absolutely your right

I'm sorry I really don't get what you've been arguing throughout this thread? You keep talking about how people will be punished for breaking the rules and that's kind of obvious.

Yeah I'm not a big tradition kind of guy for the same reason. But presumably the vast majority of kids like the idea of a prom and an excuse to dress up in formal attire. It's also not nice if someone wants to do away with this tradition (and you could wonder how hurt she really is). Traditions lose their lustre when they become optional.

I really don't think this is a big part of the prom tradition. When I went to prom, there were multiple people who couldn't afford tuxes and just showed in button down and tie.
 
I didn't see how the school found out she wanted to wear a tux.

Find different faculty that have no problem with the tux. It boggles my mind that the current faculty (or anyone) has that big of a problem with a female in a tux.

It's 2015.
 
What's even more confusing is people talking about rules when there isn't actually a rule in place here, just an outdated tradition.
 
it's not so obvious when you have people arguing about whether a rule is to be followed or not



okay then

That's not what people are arguing about. People are arguing about whether the rule has any merit to begin with and why the administrators should allow it. You're acting like this is a constitutional amendment
 
Im a big believer on saying "Fuck that" to dress codes... So, fuck them. Had enough of that Teletubby bullshit in the military.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom