School Bans Skirts – “They Put Girls at Risk”


A school has banned girls from wearing skirts, claiming that they “put girls at risk.”

The mixed sex secondary school, located in North Yorkshire, has banned skirts completely lest innocent young flowers unknowingly attract the bestial attention of marauding males, naturally inclined to rape any alluring young girls they come upon.

Girls under 15 will only be allowed to wear modest black trousers, whilst older girls will be allowed navy blue skirts only if their hemlines are no more than three inches above the knee.


The headmaster patronisingly claims younger girls under his charge are “wholly unaware of the signals they are giving out” – presumably he is unaware, or, as is more likely, unable to admit that girls of this age are sexually active and sexually aware, as most clearly are.

The school admits that its inability to enforce a simple dress code on young girls has led it to ban skirts completely:

“We have been seriously concerned now, for a number of years, that girls as young as 12/13 years of age are placing themselves at risk by wearing skirts of a wholly inappropriate length.

We are also aware that parents are becoming increasingly frustrated that the school seems incapable of imposing its authority on such young children. In the end we could probably do so but the cost in terms of detentions and exclusions would be very high and disproportionate to the end we would achieve.”

The school also complains about the usual schoolgirl trick of altering skirt length based on the environment:

“Parents who have come in have been astonished to see the difference between the length their daughter may wear her skirt as she leaves home and what has happened by the time she is walking the corridors of the school.”

Just what the girls are at risk of is not specified – stimulating sexually repressed teachers perhaps.

Leave a Comment


  • Anonymous says:

    Thats actually the headmaster’s devious plan… first he makes them girls wear trousers… Next, he’ll make them boys wear skirts… Let’s see if anyone will get aroused by that… XD

  • Anonymous says:

    Young girls should have a right to chose what they want to wear. Instead of changing how girls dress, think and feel…it would be a better idea to target the men that make it “dangerous” for women.

    Look, if a girl wants to wear a short skirt, so what, let her do it. If a man or woman decides to sexually harass her because of HER choice, the harasser’s choice is the wrong one, not hers.

    Hell yeah it’s nice to look, but if you go touching without her consent then you should get hell for it, who gives a fuck what she wore?

    • Anonymous says:

      Oh yeah, if a girl wears slutty clothing its ok, but if someone acts then they are the one in the wrong.

      Let be tell you something, girls are not any better then boys, children tend to think they know whats best for them, newsflash “THEY DON’T”.

      Your hippy like philosophy is what has destoryed the very core of human ethics.

      By your standard if I wear the skulls of human children around my waste and wield a cane made from the bones of children, noone should be allowed to tell be not to otherwise becuase its “MY RIGHT”.

      • Clothing is not slutty. People are, or aren’t.

        Yes, if ‘acting on it’ means rape or molestation the perp is indeed in the wrong, not the victim.

        Adults also tend to think they know what’s best for them. News flash: they often don’t either. “Best” is also something completely relative.

        Furthermore, while I realize that producing plaid skirts for schoolgirls does require killing twice as many people as your skeletal wardrobe, we have to keep in mind that they are woven from soft fetus skulls so the net loss of organic material is less even if the casualties are greater.

  • Anonymous says:

    That is why we have a little something called BIRTH CONTROL, which is safe for girls down to the age of 5.

    Yes, SAFE DOWN TO THE AGE OF 5! I know that because one girl near where I live is taking these pills because her ovaries aren’t putting out enough estrogen and other things on their lonesome, and has been since she was 5.

  • Anonymous says:

    True. This is a man who is still living in the 1700’s, where something like this would have…. oh wait, it didn’t have an effect even back then, because nearly EVERY person wasn’t a virgin when they got married.

  • Anonymous says:

    It’s a human right, period and done with. The right to wear what you wish to wear is one of the most BASIC human rights in the world.

    It’s just that a lot of idiots have fallen into the bullshit thinking that if they are employing someone, they have the right to dictate their dress to them.

    Sorry, but unless it is causing a danger in the school (and it doesn’t apply here)…. you have no right to dictate to someone what they wear and what they don’t…. EVEN IF THEY WISH TO GO NAKED!

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually, when you sign up to a job or school its a privilage to be there.

      Not every country has the ability to give 1st class teaching, and so when sluts come into the classroom and disrubt that its not fair on the people who are there to learn, as I said eariler, fuck like an animal somewhere else, NOT SCHOOL.

      Also a company has to keep an image and a professional atire, its not “your right” to turn up naked to the job and expect everyone to be “OK” with it, your being paid to shut the fuck up and work, not inflict your personal philosophy on a company thats paying you to serve chips.

  • Anonymous says:

    Ah, but most of the time, the parents in question have NO PROBLEM with what their children are wearing, and would rather the overly moral asshats butt the fuck out, to put it MILDLY!

    I have even had parents tell me that, that they wished that the religious morality idiots would DIE and leave the world, because it would be much better off without them.

  • Anonymous says:

    No, what is really is: a sign that they are doing something that you personally don’t like, which you are calling ‘moral decadence’ and which you have absolutely NO right to tell them they are doing something wrong.

    To be blunt, it’s THEIR body, leave them the fuck alone!

  • Anonymous says:

    This is rather how do I say, conflicting. First I don’t really care what the girls, wear and that it can be fine statement, but It was skirts right? Not dresses?

    Still, you know the girls are altering them on purpose because they dislike something about the school.

    Frankly their reasoning is BS. The headmaster is just a feminist supporter using this ban as a political platform. It’s obvious the real reason the need for banning skirts was because people weren’t following the rules. Why are they using the excuse that it’s due to “placing themselves at risk”? They know perfectly well that it’s done on purpose yet claim the girls are doing it unknowingly.

    Frankly this is more of a insult than a punishment to the preteen females than it is to the boys. It contradicts this statement of protecting women and their dignity.

    It’s like a slap in the face and then spitting on it. The headmaster could have been clean and clear about the issue being sexually deviant and breaking dress cod. Instead they send out the message of “you’re an ignorant on to what your doing you shouldn’t be exploring your sexuality because you don’t know that you could get yourself raped”.

    Frankly, I’d be pissed about this if i was a girl. I’d be like, well you’re just incompetent on putting authority over us. And then you’re telling us because we wear provocative clothing, we’re stupid?” The girls are doing it on purpose and probably know what they are doing, cuz like they said the skirts change on their “environment”. They have a brain.

    While it is a bit of common sense for 12/13 year-old. They extended to the junior high and high school section as well apparently. I think that a high school girl would definitely have a sense for danger. You aren’t supporting females at all you’re calling them stupid.

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with your comment– however he isn’t REALLY a true feminist supporter. He might claim that he’s “feminist” because of his attempt to “protect” women. But all in all he’s really hurting young women by taking their choice away and calling them stupid–as you said.

  • Anonymous says:

    I don’t really care what the heck they wear. +-= Does Skirt really make you sexually attracted at the first place? who know, maybe the male in schools will change the targets to Trouser wearing girls…..

    Skirt is Fine, Pants are fine, just don’t show your Undies to others =-=, and don’t go around putting up your clothes(GIRLS!) =-=

    and the girls will also realize, when no males are attracted by them, she will feel bad…Example: thinking “Why aren’t they interested to me? are they GAYS?”

    I like girls wearing skirts, but I also like girls with Pants, or Shorts If it SUITS them.

  • Anonymous says:

    Shut up, pedophiles.

    It’s disgusting how many of you are “outrage” that they’re banning skirts.

    Why? You want to look at some underage girls panties?

    The whole lot of you should be castrated and put in jail.

    • Anonymous says:

      Nope. While the ban on skirts is odd, when I was young and didn’t live in UK, most of my female classmates wore trousers. Especially in winter, as it was warmer. Trousers were better: it was easier to run in them, and if there were any uncomfortable hard chairs in a classroom trousers kept you less uncomfortable, and so on. But then again the teachers very much encouraged us to play active games during recesses, and the classroom usually had a few simple toys you could borrow. Such as bouncing balls, long elastic band, really long skipping rope, and so on.

  • Anonymous says:

    This saddens me a lot. Not only will the confidence of girls be affected negatively more than ever now due to the school restricting free choice of uniform, but this will lead to a robot-like society in the future. That is, dull, boring and all too similar.

    When you are asked to wear a uniform, you should be free to wear it how you want to. There is no guidebook in this planet that says a girl’s skirt should not be worn higher than how you normally would wear one.

    They might as well change the uniforms to orange like prisons, shave their heads and mind-wash the students into fully obedient slaves.

  • Anonymous says:

    Just more socialism. Everything is headed towards socialism.. what does wearing a seatbelt due to hurt anyone else but you? What does wearing a skirt do to anyone but you? It’s more socialism and less freedom.

    • Fatalistic says:

      Perhaps you were thinking of fascism. This certainly has nothing to do with socialism, but I guess now that communism is pretty much dead that certain political elements needed a new scapegoat word to push onto the populace to blame for all of the world’s ills.

  • Well, I have to be against you in this one guys.
    Seriously, girls skirts these days are too damn short and they don’t leave anything to the imagination, don’t wanna sound old fashioned, but skirts too short often are too much, I mean, c’mon, you are still in middle school, think about the overpopulation and the fact that kids of those age are NOT going to take responsibility of whatever happens next.

    Just my thought at least.

  • Anonymous says:

    Ha. The headmaster probably has urges and needs a way to repress them lest he get caught.
    I mean look at all the other news of teachers molesting their students. There’s been several on Australian news these past few weeks. (mainly male teachers molesting male students though…)

  • Anonymous says:

    I’m too old to care about schoolgirls, but I like seeing women in short skirts — the shorter, the better.

    Even fat chicks look better in mini/micro-skirts.

    Man, I miss the late 1960s/early 1970s!

  • Anonymous says:

    “The headmaster patronisingly claims younger girls under his charge are “wholly unaware of the signals they are giving out” – presumably he is unaware, or, as is more likely, unable to admit that he is a pedophile.” Corrected

  • Just because the girls are wearing pants doesn’t the oogling and altering will end.

    They could always get pants one or two sizes two small. They don’t even have to wear panties no more. Truthfully, this could be an even better scenario that we could’ve ever hoped.

  • Anonymous says:

    Wouldn’t this lead to more rape? I mean, skirts allow a pedophile to “sample” the girl to see if he is going to proceed with the rape. Now, if there are no skirts for sampling- he’ll be forced to rape at first sight! Bad move.

  • Anonymous says:

    The girls SHOULDN’T be allowed to wear skirts.

    If they do that perverted headmaster might rape them.

    He can’t help not being able to help himself to schoolgirls.

    Think of the childrens safety and refuse to let them go into the headmasters office, lest he enter their orifice.

  • g0dslay3r says:

    no point.girls can still be raped even when they are wearing trousers.if they really wanted to protect the girls then they would have banned all males from the school and turn it into a eden of females

  • Anonymous says:

    Great, that’s one step closer to Equality (Now?). It’s shunned upon males to wear skirts, so let’s ban skirts for females as well. And while we’re at it, let’s ban sexy curves, hips and female breasts also. Actually, why isn’t wearing bras banned yet? That shit is not only unequal but sexy as hell. Ban that shit!

  • moebius22 says:

    Another chivalrous sexist male with his antiquated misandrist views that women need to be protected from his brutish sex.

    The school is unwilling to punish females en mass, but British schools have no such problem when it comes to the wholesale punishing of male students.

  • Anonymous says:

    Or in other words: “I can’t control myself with all these young, bare legs pointing the direction to the juicy fruit! Cover them up or I’ll rape them!”

    Another example of the old “It’s the woman’s fault she was raped because she was dressed provocatively!”

  • PrinceHeir says:

    guess this some western country good for them?? can anyone tell me if there is a country besides japan that wear mini skirt as school uniform i don’t know about u but those skirts are short 😀

  • Anonymous says:

    This sounds like my high school, they did the exact same thing. Just they went as far as also only collar shirts, only certain colors and no designs at all, no tattoos/piercings/unnatural colored hair, matching black or white socks, etc etc etc.
    Good thing I’m out of there now..

    But still, banning skirts completely? Come on now. 😐

    • Anonymous says:

      Brits don’t even deserve the respect given to prudes. Prudes might be capable of some manner of self-control.

      A prude would say, “England shall not permit this immodesty! Obey lest I bludgeon thee with yon bust of Queen Victoria!”

      These modern idiots are saying, “Girls are precious little sunbeams who would never have evil thoughts or intentions, and they must be protected.”

  • i find it funny that the same girls can be cheerleaders and flaunt the spankys/pantys without it being a problem. and that gymnasts and swim teams can wear even less and its all good.

    just dosent make sense to me at all.

  • Anonymous says:

    And so it begins…
    The end of the world as we know it.

    Disgusting pant wearing girls everywhere now, all thanks to idiots that can’t rationalize that pants can be taken off and girls will be fucked anyway unless true education is given.

      • Anonymous says:

        I’d say that what’s currently wrong with having sex young, is the mediocrity of sex education.

        I once thought it was only in my country, then discovered it was the same on pretty every ‘modern’ countries I care for, that children in age to lust and act on it, have no clue how AIDS or other STDs work in layman’s terms, think contraception is trivial. They’re on the verge of thinking a condom is optional if the girl thinks her last periods date made it okay.

        Then again that’s not supposed to magically change once they’re adults, but still that’s when they are supposed to take life-changing decisions.

  • Anonymous says:

    The girls don’t short skirt themselves for the company of men, as they resent all human interaction, where I go to school, and just rise their skirts’ length whensoever they feel like feeling a breeze… girls at my school think men are not to be trusted.

    They don’t like any man… unless he’s EXTEMELY attractive… the kind of attractiveness that doesn’t exist naturally, like we are with 2d girls…

    I’m a devote fanatic of hentai with loli’s in it, simply for the reason that some of those stories I’ve read were love stories… really good ones in some cases. kiss x sis, cannon sensei tobayahsi … spelled that wrong….

    Anyway the point I made was that the girls in my school don’t care if they are approached by even the best specimen of males or alpha males as they are called… oh yeah I’m in England I forgot to mention that, my school is abbeydale grange secondary school, Sheffield, south Yorkshire… the postcode escapes me…
    Do feel free to drop by and find out for yourself whether the girls with skirts on, are in fact easier to GET, or not, comparing them to the trouser wearers…

    There is this girl I have a crush on in my class, stay away from her please, or feel my 13-year old wrath! as I kick you in the shin… her name is Ferda, she is curvy, and an alpha-female.

  • Anonymous says:

    As much as the otaku here would complain about this school’s rule, it’s mostly true. Not saying that I don’t prefer the skirt myself (fap fap fap) but it does encourage a certain behavior amongst the Japanese. This school’s rule, however, is probably because the pig fat disgusting schoolgirls here should cover those cow calves anyways.

    • Anonymous says:

      @ Anon 03:17 :

      “Sometimes, a cigar is just a smoke.”

      “Sometimes, short skirts are just fashion, and not ‘sending out sexual signals’.”

      It doesn’t matter to a rapist what a female is wearing/not wearing. They’ll invent excuses and interpretations which they think justify their actions, i.e., “She shouldn’t have been showing her hair/ankle/fingernail/etc. — she was just asking for it.”

      • Anonymous says:

        You’re being too absolute. A rapist is not necessairily a guy out there for the purpose to rape a guy.

        A rapist might be a guy that was there, got sexually aroused by a sexy attire on a sexy girl, decided to seduce the girl, failed, couldn’t bear with failing that, and got the cake anyway.

  • Anonymous says:

    For a second I though this was in Japan. This must be in some sort of english catholic school just for girls, for certain…
    Hey, they have the right, no the duties to defend those poor girls from the perverted teachers of that school the school, right!!! lol

    A thief will most likely persons will still their possession if they have the chance to… It’s the same thing with perv, they think everyone is like them. That’s why they create law to defend from people acting the same way as they would…

  • Anonymous says:

    Ah yes another of those moralists, what a joke, he is telling that its for their safety, but usually those who try to fix such “problems” are those who are affected mostly by them, i bet he was getting a boner while staring at those girls, he certainly didnt done that for them but for himself so he wouldnt get acused being a pervert.

  • Anonymous says:

    Great, just what was needed: sexual repression. Because that will solve the problem of.. sexual repression. I wonder what they’ll do when this proves wholly ineffective.. burqas?

  • You know, for all I know that Sancom users will complain about this, I’ll actually vouch in defense of the administration of this school.

    Firstly, the school has to keep an image in order to continue attracting students. If you were the parent, and you see all these young girls running around dressing like skanks, you’d first wonder how effective the administration is if they can’t even impose a simple dress code on the populace, let alone any other basic function.

    Secondly, they didn’t ban skirts entirely, only for the younger grades. You’ll still get your teenage pantyshots, you silly perverts.

    • You know, speaking of image, image is probably the reason they don’t let males wear skirts.

      In reality, the best reason to ban skirts is so that the dress code isn’t sexist. Males often have higher body temperatures due to higher muscle mass (though I guess females also tend to retain more heat due to higher fat) so they could benefit from skirts.

      The Scottish did.

      • If it had a uniform, it had to be either in response to a nearby school who didn’t have a uniform or because they needed one anyway. Regardless, every school has an image to maintain in order to keep attracting students every year, public or Catholic or not.

    • To be frank, my own opinion mostly leans towards this. And despite what people say, 12-13 year old girls in the UK are usually not sexually active. Most people here have probably watched too much Kissxsis or read too much H-doujin for them to think that girls start having daily intercourse once they know about it.

      I bet that most girls at that age who wear really short skirts aren’t doing it as mating ritual, but just because they are attention whores.

      • Anonymous says:

        BZZZZZZT! Wrong! The UK has the second highest numbers of teenage pregnancies in the first (developed) world, behind USA, and the age range included is 10-15.

        On a personal note, there was a 13-14 year old girl living with her mother next to me, and whenever the mother went to work she’d have her boyfriend round and have loud, noisy sex that you could hear through the walls. Sometimes she’d also have her best friend and the best friend’s boyfriend and again, have loud, noisy sex, this time as a foursome. As at the time I was working on shifts, I found this behaviour horribly disruptive….

        So to summarise, 11-15 year old girls in the UK are sexually precocious and do fuck, despite what you may think.

      • Most girls that age, despite the pleas they make that they ARE aware of their actions, don’t consider the consequences of dressing provocatively. Some of them don’t consider a short skirt as being a plea for attention because they’re friends all do it too, or they have this ego shield that no one will touch them when they dress like that.

        Besides, they can still wear their skirts outside of school if they wanted to. When you’re in an institution for learning, your clothing comes second. Personally, as someone who’s attended a Catholic high school with a uniform, the pants ended up being more comfortable than the skirts anyway.

  • Utterly ridiculous. His comments reminds me of that Muslim cleric a while back who compared women showing any sort of skin who get raped to meat left outside getting eaten by cats, simultaneously objectifying women and implying he thinks men are purely driven by animal urges and will instinctively rape any scantily-clad women.

    This is Paedo Panic for you. In the last couple of decades, the entire nation of Britain seems to have lost all trust we have for each other. Everyone suspects everyone else of being a closet paedophile and feels they must pull increasingly oppressive shit like this to ‘protect the children’. It happens elsewhere too, but it really feels like Britain is the epicentre.

    • I dunno about you, but I knew a heap of girls when I was their age that wouldn’t even touch a skirt.

      I honestly don’t see what the huge deal is. You’re in school to learn, not flash your panties to onlookers.

      • Anonymous says:

        One could argue that discovering what it is like to flash your panties to onlookers your age, and common consequences, is part of learning.

        School is for learning yes, but that’s not limited to classes. Then again, I might have preferred it if they learned that being purposely in the way of people’s concentration when they’re trying to study, is inappropriate.

  • Anonymous says:

    “wholly unaware of the signals they are giving out“

    Dear mister, they are wearing those skirts becouse they are AWARE of the temptation they do with them. Nearly ewery woman would be happy to know they attract many men, as it gives them a feeling of value.

    Maybe the women should ban in the schools men wearing pants, since men poke into ewerything they do 🙂

  • This is NOT according to 計画…

    TL Note 1: 計画 means keikaku.
    TL Note 2: Kekikaku means plan.

    On a more serious note… Seriously? Why not just outright change it into a single sex school? Being of the female gender, their very existence will cause these “innocent young flowers to unknowingly attract the bestial attention of marauding males, naturally inclined to rape any alluring young girls they come upon.”

    Skirts don’t cause rape. People cause rape.

    Also, there are people who have a fetish for trousers you know.

  • Barbarian of Gor says:


    Not enough energy to rave and froth and foam for 2000 words on the “New world order making us all sexless slaves!” And there’s a simpler solution;

    He can’t, or doesn’t feel like even trying to, deal with “Upskirt” photos and all the perceived altercations with them. So “just put pants on you little skanks!”

  • Anonymous says:

    Banning skirts is sort of like the seat belt law. It should be a personal choice, not an enforced law. If you want to risk crashing through your windshield then don’t wear a seat belt. If you want to “entice boys” with your sex appeal then wear a skirt. There is a danger inherent in both but it should be a choice rather than having someone impose their will upon you “for your own good”.

    • Anonymous says:

      One may argue that it’s not so much for your own good as it is for the good of parents raising children who watch no-belt-wearing and skirt-wearing persons.

      I don’t really agree with this argument, but people being absolute as ‘no effect exists at all’ are wrong.

    • Anonymous says:

      Seatbelt law is there because injuries incurred when crashing are many, many times more severe and if not fatal, will tie up valuable resources in hospital, rehabilitation, that could be used elsewhere.
      Oh another thing;

      Even though I do put my belt on, I disabled the seatbelt alarm in my car, plus half a dozen other alarms. I’m not going to be nagged into doing something a mindless machine thinks I should be doing, that’s what my own mind and my own eyes are for!!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Where I live seat belts used to be optional, but it resulted in two unfortunate circumstances coming together: 1) There are a lot of people who can’t influence whether their fellow passengers wear seat belts. Think kids &c. 2) In the event of a crash, someone who isn’t girded up properly tends to bounce through the vehicle and often cracks his scull against those of one or two passengers.
      This, and the fact that sometimes people do have to be protected against their own short-sightedness, resulted in the mandatory use of seat belts. You can now get a fine for not wearing them, but nobody is complaining, probably because everyone is secretly thankful.

    • Anonymous says:

      The seat belt law is less about you taking less damage from going through the windshield and more about you not being a human missile potentially damaging anyone in either the car you are in a wreck with or causing several other wrecks.

      The ‘inherent danger’ of using a skirt is to the self not others and I question the existence of the danger.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s not illegal, it’s just banned in that school, if they want to entice lecherous men with their hem-lines then they can, just not at that school; it’s simply like a seat belt alarm, if you buy a car with a seatbelt alarm and you complain that you can’t drive without a seatbelt you’re a moron.

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually, this goes against human rights, i.e. specifically the right to wear what you wish to wear. I am expecting a lawsuit on this very soon, as parents say that the school has gone too far on this subject.

        • Usually choices like this come from the PTA themselves. But you never know for sure unless its specifically said. Also, a human right? I think your going a bit too far, thats a personal choice not a human right. Human rights are the simple staples that we require to live, you don’t need skirts to live, some people just need skirts to help get a boner.

          Everyone has a bit of blame for crap like this, if parents didn’t let their kids dress like sluts, this wouldn’t be an issue. If the media didn’t constantly show clothes like this then the kids wouldn’t see it. And if the clothing designers wouldn’t shove these clothes out knowing it makes money and shoving adverstisements in kids faces to show them its “cool” then we wouldn’t have all these problems. I’m probably missing a few steps but its late and i’m tired.

          I personally don’t have a problem with whatever people want to dress like, its not me so i don’t give a shit unless it starts affecting my life. But these people shouldn’t bitch and complain without looking at themselves first….but people admitting their own mistakes is as rare as common sense.

    • Anonymous says:

      Who said they were worried about love? I believe they are worried about lust instead. Not that it justifies it really.

      “We are also aware that parents are becoming increasingly frustrated that the school seems incapable of imposing its authority on such young children.”

      Read this as: We are aware that certain parents are pushing blame onto others yet again and can’t be bothered to monitor what clothes their children wear.

    • Middle school girls alluring males to touch them and make out in the bathroom has nothing to do with love. Still, i say let the little sluts do what they want, the short skirts aren’t the cause, but rather one of the symptoms of moral decadence…

      • Anonymous says:

        No, it doesn’t…. but there is nothing wrong with lust either as long as both parties know it is about lust…… and the fact is that most middle-schoolers who are getting doinked by men and even people their own age DEFINITELY fucking well know that is what it is about.

      • Anonymous says:

        Morality is subjective, and the girls are allowed to act as the please in the same way boys do. By what right are we to force them into an identity they themselves do not desire?

        • Obviously. However the passage from a higher moral standard to a lower one over the course of contemporary era can be defined as objective data anyone can observe by making a generalization.

          So you’re saying forcing them to wear trousers and forbidding skirts actually frees them? Let me remind you they were allowed to use trousers before too.. and in fact, i’m saying let them do what they want, however morally unacceptable it is, as there is no escape from it.

    • Anonymous says:

      DING! DING! DING! We have a winner and a sane man here folks. You got it right in one, they dress ‘sexy’ because they want to be seen as sexual beings and are HOPING that a man or teenager will proposition them.

      I still remember what ‘da girls’ told me in middle school (I hung out with them more than the boys)… they knew what they were doing and knew exactly what it could lead to.

    • Besides.. it is really the parents fault if they allow their daughters to dress as whores at the age of 9. (Seen on street, but are uncertain of real age.)

      Also… long skirts can be sexy too. He probably misses the good old times, when girls had those.

    • I have a better solution. Just let those boys and girls fuck the shit out of each other.

      It’s so sad that old people themselves never realize the reason they consider sex is a bad thing. Even unconsciously, they’re just fucking envious.

      Old womans often blabber how uncultural and indecently it is to show your naked buttocks in some fashion journal. Well of corse you’d blabber if no one would enjoy your fucking buttocks anymore. I hate people like that.

      • Anonymous says:

        Funny thing is, skirts or no skirts, a lot of them will fuck each other before they graduate school. Only old people believe that action like this make any difference at all.


        • Anonymous says:

          If these skirts really are sexy (and the sexiness thusly removed is not replaced with other sexiness of equal level, which I’ll admit is unlikely,) of *course* it makes a difference. It’s just, not a binary situation.

  • Anonymous says:

    Well… just to play devil’s advocate here for a moment…..

    While it’s still largely a stupid thing to do… random sex AT school (though likely extremely consensual) may be lessened without the easy assess a skirt would provide.

    But not by much. If you REALLY wanna fuck at school you are gonna fuck at school.

  • Anonymous says:

    Girls wearing trousers doesn’t make sense. There’s no sense of fashion at all. I bet that old fart don’t even understand what a girl wants. Especially if he has a daughter.

  • Anonymous says:

    I once smelled used legit japanese school girl panties. She took her panties right off in front of me for 5,000 yen and gave them to me. They had a very light brown stain with a woonderful smell of ass.

  • Anonymous says:

    i think the second comment on this article justifies this rule completely…also, why does artefact always have to insert his opinion into the end of every article? does he think we can’t think for ourselves? or maybe its to make clear his opinion so that anyone who disagrees with it can be thoroughly ridiculed (yeah yeah, let the ridicule begin “why are u on a porn site if you aren’t for sex everywhere, all the time, in everything you see.”) Maybe I would rather not get a raging hard on when im just walking down corridor at my school, simply cus some girl is wearing the sexiest thing ive ever seen. Maybe i’d rather think about school when im at school, and not think about girls to the point that my grades suffer. I think rules like this are to help the minority of people, like me, who can’t control themselves when it comes to sexuality (the “weakest link in a chain” example is fitting in this case.) A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Help out that link, will ya?

  • Anonymous says:

    Personally, about fucking time someone did this.

    I was fed up at school at watching all the fucking sluts wearing whatever they damn well please, well put this in your fucking pie hole and eat it sluts.

    Oh and to the people going “OMG desu, i’ll kill you desu”

    These are the same girls who spit in your face and laugh at you for so much as walking pass them.

    School is for learning, if you wanna fuck like an animal then piss off!

    I hope they further get rid of make-up and skirts in businesses as well, more sexual harrassment shit thats gone on for too long!

    “Oh no you looked at my breasts(which are emphasised by the bra and low triangle blazer) thats sexual harrassment!”

    “Well all is ok now becuase you have to wear an actual business suit, not that slut get up you usally wear”

  • Anonymous says:

    “…presumably he is unaware, or, as is more likely, unable to admit that girls of this age are sexually active and sexually aware, as most clearly are.”


    He’s a school administrator you Fcking Idiot. What’s he supposed to do, inform parents that their children are ‘sexually active’ and their protestations are uninformed and unappreciated? And while he’s at it why doesn’t he lead an ‘anti age of consent’ rally at the town hall, while he still has a job to buy picket signs with?

    Girls as young as 12/13 don’t need to wear short skirts. Maybe I’m old fashioned, maybe I’m not loli-gaging, Maybe I just don’t get it… but I don’t go for that kind of thing, and I see no reason to concede ground to those who do.

    Post Script:
    The work ‘risk’ here is used as a cover. Really the disobedient little fools have pushed the envelope too far and now the school has two options: play hardball with a bunch of spiteful little girls, or change the rules entirely and blame some common enemy, as opposed to blaming the girls themselves.

    Really, now, what would you do?

    • Anonymous says:

      The guy still declared that said girls are unaware of the signals they send.

      And I would still agree with him, though I think they’re aware it attracts lust, which is the reason why they wear that in the first place, I think they’re unaware of what it fully means. Or they were, at least.

    • Anonymous says:

      Blame the girls, to be blunt. I am not going to prevaricate with ANYONE, not even parents.

      It’s just time for the world to realize that children and teenagers ARE AND ALWAYS WILL BE SEXUALLY ACTIVE! Just learn to deal with it and deal with reality, by getting your ‘little angels’ on birth control to prevent unwanted ‘problems’.

    • Anonymous says:

      The point went straight over you head it seams. That misguided pedagogue claimed the girls are “wholly unaware of the signals they are giving out” when in fact it’s actually the complete opposite.

      If he was even just halfway descend as an educator he’d know that making sure the girls dress appropriately can only ever be the parents’ job (excluding schools that impose uniforms of course) and he would indeed tell them that they should go shove their complaints right back up their rectums and do their job properly for once.

      • I agree with you anon, its not the school’s job to enforce dress unless they are uniform. Thats the parents job (which they aren’t doing very fucking well anymore). But the school administrator has nothing else to do but what he did, he can’t very well tell the parents off because they’ll throw the bullshit speech of “my child is innocent” back at him, then every fucking soccer mom within a 6 country radius will be picketting on his front lawn.

        This is purely societies fault for not fixing their own mistakes and blaming the fucking boogeyman for everything. I wonder what humankind will do when the real boogeyman comes, and how fucked we will be when he does come.