Inappropriate Teacher's Dress

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:38:34 GMT, Nan wrote:

However, I was addressing her issue with showing a belly,
or wearing a mini skirt. That's a pretty far cry from violent
images or a nudist, doncha think?

Yes, it is. OTOH, a miniskirt would be pretty hard to work on
the floor in, imo. And, given the pressure on little girls to be
sexual at an early age, I don't think it is a good idea for their
role models to be dressing this way for *playing* with them.
It's hard enough to get kids to dress appropriately nowadays
without adding teachers who dress in provocative ways at
their preschools.

It's quite possible the "miniskirts" were skorts. Many, many things that
look like miniskirts these days have shorts attached underneath.
I'm guessing the OP was not aware of this trend, as she mentioned "slips"
which I haven't seen as everyday lingerie in decades, so she may not have
noticed.

Sue wrote:

"bizby40" wrote in message news:q-

Thank you Ericka -- I was feeling a bit alone. :-)


Don't feel alone, I agree with your post and Ericka's post. There is a
certain degree of modesty I expect of those people caring for my children
and I would be uncomfortable if my personal line was crossed.

More importantly, though, I don't think you even have
to revert to much of a morality argument here. It's a job
requirement to get down on the floor and play with the kids.
If you can't do that in what you're wearing, it doesn't
really matter whether someone finds it too revealing. I.e.,
if it were just about a neckline that was too low or something
like that, it might be a somewhat different issue. I know that
clothing most would consider somewhat risqué also would not be
allowed at our preschool, as staff are expected to dress
comfortably and casually, but professionally, but clothing
that isn't suitable to performing primary job tasks isn't
even a close call.

Best wishes,
Ericka

On 17 Jun 2005 22:13:50 -0700, "Mary"
wrote:


Why such over analysis of my post?

First of all, summer does not start on a special day in just Ohio. It
starts the same day in all of the Northern Hemisphere.

Most colleges have started their summer breaks. These girls are
working their summer jobs. Shall we call it a spring break or a spring
job just because it is not summer yet? @@

These college-aged girls are not teachers, as they are not certified or
degreed. I think a more proper term for them would be teacher's
aides.

Yes I made note of what they were wearing. If it did not make an
impression on me, I would not be posting about it.

Belly button shirts, and tongue studs are unprofessional, and
inappropriate. The tongue studs can interfere with annunciation, and
these teachers need to role model proper speech patterns.

My twenty six year old has had a tongue piercing for years. I can
assure you, absolutely that it does not in any way affect her
eunication (sp). She has been working in preschools since she was
fifteen. Her speech patterns are just fine. I would not approve
necessarily of pants so low you could see the crack if you well, but
other than that, no, I dont object to low rider pants.

I also do not object to belly button peircing. Teachers dress casually
in many preschool and daycare situations. I generally wore leggings
and a short shirt.

Personally, I would be more concerned with long flowing clothing, long
nails or o ther safety issues.

Barb

I know my daughters' previous teachers had tattoos because they
showed my daughters their tattoos when the subject of my tattoo was
brought up.

I hardly see how this post can be considered trolling, as I did not
post in a body art newsgroup. The subject matter is not controversial.

On 18 Jun 2005 10:09:19 -0700, "shinypenny"
wrote:



dragonlady wrote:

I wouldn't allow anything but ear piercing. However, both of my
daughters got their toungues pierced as soon as they could approve it
themselves (and, I might add, pay for it.)

For the first couple of days I asked them to not talk to me, because I
was thoroughly grossed out.

However, once the initial swelling goes down, the toungue piercing does
not create problems with enunciation.

(I STILL don't like it, and it DOES cause problems for dental health,
but their speech is not affected.)

(And they've both gotten jobs where they don't have to remove the tongue
studs at work -- though they both have enough brains to have removed
them when they went in for job interviews.)


You know, I consider myself as being fairly open minded about things
like tattoos and body piercings. I even secretly feel that my DD12
would look smashing with a tiny eyebrow stud (she's got beautiful
eyes). I also understand that such fashions can be a cultural and
self-expression thing. And I don't consider myself a prude either.

But the tongue piercing thing bothers me to no end!

If my DD's came home with one, I'd be seriously worried. Because, to my
knowledge, the tongue piercing is not meant for fashion. It's meant as
an aid for performing oral sex. From what I gather, those that wear it
outside the bedroom, are conveying their interest and skill in this
activity.

Huh??????///

Sorry, but your experiences in this area must be much different than
mine. I know lots of kids who have them, just because they like them.
and no, it doesnt mean "hey boys come on" certainly not where i am.

barb

Now, if a person finds a tongue stud useful in their private sexual
practices, that's no sweat off my brow - enjoy. But to wear it outside
of the bedroom and walk around in public? Uh uh.

I'd be questioning whether my DD's had any self esteem, and whether
they were getting involved in questionable sexual activities that would
further erode that self esteem, and possibly put their health and lives
in danger. Or, maybe they were innocently unaware about what the stud
meant, in which case, I'd educate them.

Am I being too melodramatic here? Am I missing something? And, most
importantly, am I doomed to have my girls get tongue studs because it's
the one thing that would accomplish shock value for me? :-)

jen

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:07:23 -0400, "bizby40"
wrote:



There is a continuum from nudity to full artic gear. Everyone draws
the line at what is acceptable at a different place. The OP felt
these girls were dressed too revealingly. You'd draw the line
at a different place. Fine. But when you said (of your own DCPs)
"they're great with all the kids, and that is what I feel is important,
not how they're dressed." I took that as a rather insulting
statement. As if the OP should be ashamed to have focused on
something as frivolous as dress. I contend that if your DCPs
crossed *your* personal line of what is appropriate, whatever
that might be, that you would then feel that the matter of dress
was more important.

The OP made no mention of the kind of job these gals were doing,
whether her kids liked them, and so on and so forth. So that leaves
us assuming that they are doing a good job, and her kids like them.

Unless my provider were half nude, or wearing slogans that include
swearing, I would be more interested in the kind of care that she
provided to the kids

My kids have over the years had teachers who dressed the style you are
talking about, goth, preppy, and one who was an elizabethan fan who
wore all those period clothing. I also had one that I never saw out of
jeans. This doesnt even begin to discuss their hair styles or
whatever.

As long as they were caring with my kids, had a good relationship, and
got the educational message across, that is all I care about .

If the OP is as concerned about teh kind of dress she is describing,
then she probably wants to move to a place more in line with her
views.

barb

Bizby

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:22:45 -0400, Ericka Kammerer
wrote:

Mary wrote:

Have any of you faced a teacher, preschool or otherwise that dressed
inappropriately? Recently, I experienced a situation with "teachers"
(they were actually college students doing a summer intern-job) that
wore low ride, cotton, white, mini skirts, with no slips (do people
still wear slips?). One has a tongue stud. Both wore shirts with their
belly buttons exposed.
It is a delicate situation in that I am related to the owner. I did
say something to the owner, but then let the subject die.
I can say that husband is eager to drive my daughters to the school!

In a previous preschool, the teachers had tattoos, but they covered
them up. I have a tattoo as well, but if I was in a professional
situation, I would cover it up.

Hmm...I'm a little surprised by the responses. I sit on the
board of a preschool. From my perspective, the tongue piercing is
not an issue, as long as it's not being fiddled with all the time.
However, while we do not have a detailed dress code, it doesn't
particularly sound like the above described attire would be acceptable
at our school. We expect the teachers to be in clothes that
they can get down on the floor with the kids, or run and play
with the kids. I don't really see how a mini skirt fits that
bill (as I imagine they're not wearing bloomers ;-) Even college
students helping out in the school would be expected to show up
dressed appropriately--clean, neat, and ready for play. We sometime
have teens or college age folks helping out a bit, and their dress
does tend to be a bit less conservative than the older women
(which is fine), but if you can't sit cross-legged on the floor
or reach your arms over your head without exposing something
you shouldn't, I think our Director would suggest a change of
clothing would be in order.

I bet that the mini skirts were probably shorts or culottes, after
reading the post.

And while i agree with some of your post...I wear leggings and cut of
shirts and yes, I can still get down on the ground, raise my hands
overmy head and function.

Barb

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:32:22 -0400, "bizby40"
wrote:


"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
Hmm...I'm a little surprised by the responses. I sit on the
board of a preschool.
[snip]
if you can't sit cross-legged on the floor
or reach your arms over your head without exposing something
you shouldn't, I think our Director would suggest a change of
clothing would be in order.

Best wishes,
Ericka

Thank you Ericka -- I was feeling a bit alone. :-)

But the OPs objection was to the style, not to the function. And
wearing a shirt short enough to show a belly button does NOT mean that
when you stretch your hands up, you automatically show everything.

Goodness, if it did, I would be in trouble, as I dress on the "liberal
side" I guess. And I'm an old woman.

bArb

Bizby

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:07:23 -0400, "bizby40"
wrote:

There is a continuum from nudity to full artic gear. Everyone draws
the line at what is acceptable at a different place. The OP felt
these girls were dressed too revealingly. You'd draw the line
at a different place. Fine. But when you said (of your own DCPs)
"they're great with all the kids, and that is what I feel is important,
not how they're dressed." I took that as a rather insulting
statement. As if the OP should be ashamed to have focused on
something as frivolous as dress. I contend that if your DCPs
crossed *your* personal line of what is appropriate, whatever
that might be, that you would then feel that the matter of dress
was more important.

You insult too easily, then.
Because *I* pay more attention to the standard of care, not how
someone is dressed.
If the OP is unhappy with the standard of care, she's not mentioning
it. If the clothing is her only gripe, I do feel that is trivial in
the Big Picture, considering the "teachers" aren't performing ritual
sacrifices naked.

Nan

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 19:15:23 -0400, Ericka Kammerer
wrote:

More importantly, though, I don't think you even have
to revert to much of a morality argument here. It's a job
requirement to get down on the floor and play with the kids.
If you can't do that in what you're wearing, it doesn't
really matter whether someone finds it too revealing. I.e.,
if it were just about a neckline that was too low or something
like that, it might be a somewhat different issue. I know that
clothing most would consider somewhat risqué also would not be
allowed at our preschool, as staff are expected to dress
comfortably and casually, but professionally, but clothing
that isn't suitable to performing primary job tasks isn't
even a close call.

Well, I agree that clothing suited to physical requirements is a Good
Thing. However, I have to laugh at the number of posts saying part of
the job *requirement* is to get on the floor and play. AFAIK, it's
not a requirement of DD5s preschool teachers *or* the Stay and Play
staff. They *might* decide to crawl around and play outside, but it
certainly isn't "required", and I don't think I ever saw any of the
teachers or DC gals doing so.

Nan

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 23:01:54 GMT, "Cathy Kearns"
wrote:

It's quite possible the "miniskirts" were skorts. Many, many things that
look like miniskirts these days have shorts attached underneath.
I'm guessing the OP was not aware of this trend, as she mentioned "slips"
which I haven't seen as everyday lingerie in decades, so she may not have
noticed.

Probably true. Certainly skorts would make sense and many of the
teacher aides in daycares do where shorts or skorts in hot weather.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits