I don’t think we have the whole story

Back in 2015 I wrote about Stephanie Hughes and how she was coded because she wasn’t wearing a crew neck shirt as her school dress code mandated. Instead she chose to wear a tank top with a sweater-like garment over top.

Recently a student named Remy was dress coded for… well:

Remy claims she was coded for not wearing a bra. And I’m not buying it. Not for a moment. Instead, I think based on the hysteria around school dress codes and the apparent disproportionate penalization of young women, she manufactured the idea she was coded for not wearing a bra when the likely reason she was coded is a bit more… obvious.

And what’s allowing her claim to propagate comes down to two simple things: the school won’t comment on such situations, and, again, the recent hysteria regarding dress codes, including attempts to label dress codes “fashion censorship”.

A Yahoo! article even pointed out that, while the dress code doesn’t specify anything regarding undergarments — likely because they presume it to be a given — it does say this (emphasis mine): “Tops must cover all parts of undergarments and shall not be low cut or revealing.”

Again, I think it’s obvious why Remy was coded for her choice of apparel. And that she manufactured the statement that she got coded for not wearing a bra to get around the fact that she was wearing something blatantly in violation of her school’s dress code and is hoping to shame the administration for the fact she got called on it. In other words, scream the equivalent of “pervert” at school administrators, likely only male school administrators as well, for having the audacity to call out young women who violate them.

The dress code for Remy’s high school also points this out: “Students who repeatedly dress inappropriately for school may be suspended for defiance.” Just as I’ve said that repeated violation of a workplace dress code is grounds for termination.

Share