|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 9:47:02 GMT -5
You know what's great about the age that the children in the story are mentioned being? Nobody really cares so long as they are wearing something to cover them. Hell, a lot of little kids go out in their front yards without shirts on, boys and girls alike. People do care, it just depends on the context. If you're kid is always showing up to school in clothes that look out of the ordinary (for whatever reason), you'd most likely get a rep quickly as " that family" (whatever loaded connotations "that" carries based on how the kid is dressed). I completely agree that, doing things Cestle's way, will do that. But you can sit the kid down and explain to them exactly why you don't want them wearing a dress to school ("A lot of the other kids won't understand why you like it, and some of them might be mean to you because it."). You can suggest a compromise ("If you really prefer the girl's section of the store, I'm sure we can find you a t-shirt and jeans that you like."). And if they don't like the compromise, then you bite the bullet and let them wear the dress but warn the teacher about it. Realistically though, they're just going to get smacked down and made to feel worse than if you'd just forbidden the dress in the first place. Not if you explain your reasons why, as best you can to a child. It doesn't matter how loving and tolerant you make your home, our society is still a shitty and intolerant place for anyone not conforming strictly to the standards of masculinity (I was teased really bad for being singer, up until high school when people stopped caring). Girls have it a little easier, able to get away with more tomboyish behavior without being outcast for it, but ain't completely free of it either. Because the dinner table is public and you might be judged for how you sit, eat, look, and behave there. COTILLION-MAAAAANNNNNNN, killin' thugs who use their salad forks to eat steaaaaaak. COTILLION-MAAAAAN, that slight slouch is not okayy!Not for nothing, but Cestle has already explained at length that he personally wouldn't consider a dress to be "proper attire" for a boy and wouldn't allow it outside of playtime. Oh come on now, read the man's arguments. He's straight up said that dress-up/playtime has different rules than non-playtime. For what its worth, I wouldn't let any hypothetical kid of mine go to Target dressed in their Halloween costume, on account of it being a costume and not actual clothing. Most children's costumes are, if I recall correctly, little more than a baggy, thin bodysock that you really need to wear some other clothes under anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Dec 23, 2011 9:56:04 GMT -5
So now we're throwing table etiquette out the window too I suppose. Because it's bad manners for a boy to wear a dress.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 23, 2011 10:00:00 GMT -5
Which costumes you been lookin' at? Ones for My Li'l Hooker? A pink princess dress can be considered a costume if we really want to go down that route. This is ok. This is apparently not OK. Three guesses as to who is in that picture. The argument still boils down to but it's haaaaaaaard to be a parent! Make it easy! I don't want to deal with this! eeeeeeeeeeeeh!
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Dec 23, 2011 10:03:41 GMT -5
I wouldn't let my kid wear a costume outside Halloween, but only because most of them are sexist. I'd make them a costume if need be, but none of that store-bought "feminized Muppets" shit.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 10:07:49 GMT -5
Which costumes you been lookin' at? Ones for My Li'l Hooker? A pink princess dress can be considered a costume if we really want to go down that route. No, smartass. I was thinking of the costumes my sister and I had as kids. Power Ranger costumes, my Sub-Zero costume, her Spider-Witch dress costume, etc. Cheap spandex that barely did anything more than hide your nakedness. You had to at least long johns underneath them to make them worthy of the elements, most kids just wore their jeans underneath them.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 23, 2011 10:08:37 GMT -5
When i was little I wore my little t-rex costume for months. *shrugs* And I didn't really wear anything under it.
Nor did I wear anything but my costume when I went to Dragon*Con. If your costume consists of flimsy material then maybe you shouldn't wear it for threat of tearing.
The dresses you can buy don't have to be specifically from the costume area, y'know?
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 10:11:21 GMT -5
The dresses you can buy don't have to be specifically from the costume area, y'know? All right, you're getting two points mixed up a bit. Dresses and Halloween costumes are two separate arguments.
|
|
|
Post by itachirumon on Dec 23, 2011 10:11:57 GMT -5
In full costume perhaps if only because the facemask would disrupt learning. But I seriously doubt if he went wearing a shirt and pants that basically made up the spiderman outfit they'd really care very much. Just like they wouldn't care of he showed up in a grey shirt and black trousers with the batman symbol wearing a toy utility belt. He might have to keep the belt by his backpack in class but it's not harming anybody.
Seriously though... its embarassing that he'd goto school dressed as spiderman? Keeping in mind I said Batman, not Spiderman in the first place, but whatever - point remains valid. I rather think that'd be quite cute. Then again I'm someone who wouldn't blink if my kid wanted to dress up like a nekomimi.
Edit: Yes, Kit, I picked up on the playtime/other-time thing. I'm making a point by mentioning being out in the front yard in a batman outfit.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 10:22:00 GMT -5
In full costume perhaps if only because the facemask would disrupt learning. But I seriously doubt if he went wearing a shirt and pants that basically made up the spiderman outfit they'd really care very much. Just like they wouldn't care of he showed up in a grey shirt and black trousers with the batman symbol wearing a toy utility belt. He might have to keep the belt by his backpack in class but it's not harming anybody . What you describe there is an outfit, not a costume. This is a costume: Letting your kid walk around day to day life wearing a Halloween costume would be weird. Getting them a Spider-Man themed outfit? Normal. A one piece bodysock? Weird. I'm sorry, but I'm finding it hard divine the point. He already say play time was different.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 23, 2011 10:22:28 GMT -5
The dresses you can buy don't have to be specifically from the costume area, y'know? All right, you're getting two points mixed up a bit. Dresses and Halloween costumes are two separate arguments. No, you missed my point. If Parent A does not let Child A wear a dress outside of costume-play then why can it not be costume play all the time? Again, my nieces would go out in public, in a store, in their costumes. When it wasn't even October. There are ways to make the child happy without sacrificing daddy's precious little reputation but it seems nobody wants to think of alternatives but rather how to be authoritarian around their kids. I think various experiences is the problem here. Because if you grew up in a certain environment you have difficulty thinking of things being different elsewhere. I was a young child in California. It never mattered if I wore my costume around or even to school. My school was admittedly rather progressive. But if someone has lived in the Bible belt where there are strict societal norms about what a boy can and cannot wear the person growing up in that environment will of course be instilled with the idea 'well... better not rock the boat. if this is how it is it's how it is. Timmy doesn't get his dress'. Which brings us back to my original god damn point about instilling things at a young age that doesn't help society move forward. It's great if you want to spare Timmy the teasing. But sometimes you just gotta let them do their own thing even if it might reflect badly on you. There's nothing that says Timmy isn't just curious about wearing a dress and enjoys it around the house then wants to experiment wearing it to school. Maybe Timmy will grow out of it. But how will that happen if you prevent any sort of experimentation on the part of Timmy? Timmy could very well become the next Eddie Izzard but you don't exactly know that just yet. Timmy could be trans, but you don't know that. Or again, he could just be experimenting with it and there should really be no harm no foul. So long as the parent is competent in explaining the dangers and then gives the kid a cookie and a hug and a [Insert Cartoon DVD here] if things don't turn out exactly as planned I really can't see the child never bouncing back from the experience. Maybe he will want to try again when he's older and in a different place, a more liberal place. Okay, cool. A dress is just clothing. If you really don't want the pink frilly dress, go for a skort or something. it still has the swooshyness and is enough like a dress to placate most children I would think. But double standards is not the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by itachirumon on Dec 23, 2011 10:30:20 GMT -5
Well since you had to play defense attorney and destroy the argument I was trying to build up... let's try to make it clearer - by playing in a Batman costume in the front yard, it IS public. It will "shame" Daddy. So if he plays in the front yard in a Batman costume and that's okay, but not if he plays Princess in the front yard. That's a double standard.
I was trying to trap cesty in said double standard by getting him to admit he would not allow his son to play "Princess" in a place that might be considered by most "public"
Edit: For that outfit? Yeah he'd have to wear something underneath it for extra protection but as long as he could keep the headpiece down and keep the cape off until recess - not an issue. No weirder than some of the things little kids goto school dressing as.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 23, 2011 10:39:34 GMT -5
This is not what I said. My child can play dress-up however he wants in the front yard, even as a fairy princess. I'm not one of those macho "my-son-will-never-wear-dresses" people: I'm saying there is a time and a place for certain activities. Playtime is about make-believe and having fun so there are much much fewer boundaries. But when we're out in public (e.g. at school, at the mall, in a restaurant, etc.) this is not playtime and my child will dress and act how I believe it is expected of people to dress and act appropriately in public.
Unless you live in a convenience store, your front yard is not "public." I don't think that most people would consider their own front yard a public place. If most people do consider their front yard a public place akin to a mall or restaurant, then let me clarify: in what I've been talking about, my front yard would not fall under the domain of "being out in public."
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Dec 23, 2011 10:44:07 GMT -5
That's because genitals are icky and calling someone a cunt is just plain rude. We aren't discriminating against gender or anything else either. I agreed with you on this subject up to "genitals are icky." Genitals are awesome! They only get icky when they're infected or not kept clean. BTW, Cestle: What about kilts? They look like pleated skirts, but are made for men. Would you let your son run around in a kilt? If so, how is this any different from a dress or skirt? Also...I don't have a front yard. I have a catwalk in front of my apartment, and at ground level I have a parking lot. Can we please not bring up front yards, because I feel weird being part of the argument when I don't even have one.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 23, 2011 10:46:55 GMT -5
Not outside of dress-up playtime. Perhaps if I lived in Scotland and that was what was considered acceptable to wear. In the United States and France, people don't wear kilts.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 10:47:01 GMT -5
No, you missed my point. If Parent A does not let Child A wear a dress outside of costume-play then why can it not be costume play all the time? Again, my nieces would go out in public, in a store, in their costumes. When it wasn't even October. Because then it is isn't "costume play" anymore. Calling going to Target in costume "play time" doesn't make it so. To a certain degree, you need to be "authoritarian" with your kids. They're kids, they don't no any better about anything. Your kid might be more comfortable naked, a naturist at heart, but that doesn't mean you should send them to school buck ass naked. They might hate the taste of broccoli, never gonna eat the stuff as an adult, but that doesn't mean you let them pick the menu for the household (it would just end up being incredibly unhealthy). Giving them some freedom to explore is great and probably a necessity. But you're still the parent and the buck stops with you. "My kid made the final decision" isn't a great excuse.
|
|