When my sister walked toward the entrance on what was supposed to be her first day of school, a day that was upwards of 85 degrees, she was abruptly stopped by a teacher. Waiting outside the doors, this teacher told her that her shorts, which fell at least an inch past her fingers, were too short according to a recent change that was made in the dress code. These same shorts would have been considered more than adequate had she worn them just months before at the end of last year, before the recent dress code change. Upon informing the monitor that she had no shorts that were longer (and on a day that hot in a school with minimal, if any, air-conditioning, one could hardly be expected to be comfortable in pants), she was informed that she would have to change or leave the school. She was not alone, by any means, in being sent home, but she was likely one of the most upset. My sister had been on homebound for all but four days of last year, and was more excited than ever to walk back into that school for the first time in a year. Instead of coming home at the end of the day and excitingly relating how it went, she was forced to turn around where she stood, and return home much earlier than she planned, in tears no less.

The school dress code was changed for the 2014 & 2015 school years, and now lists "skirts/shorts worn more than 3 inches above the knee cap" under examples of unacceptable dress. This new rule not only makes it difficult for girls with longer legs, such as my sister, to find "acceptable" shorts/skirts/dresses to wear to school, but also forces them to choose between their comfort and their education. This makes girls choose; between wearing clothing more appropriate for getting through a hot day in a poorly air-conditioned school and subsequently being sent home, and wearing longer, more constricting/hot clothing and being exceedingly uncomfortable and unable to properly focus on learning. This, in turn, isplacing more value on the education of boys than girls, more importance on girls hiding their bodies than on teaching young men to behave in an appropriate, respectful manner, and giving young women yet another reason tobe uncomfortable in the skin in which they were born. At such an age, with still-changing bodies in a naturally uncomfortable and challenging stage of life, they are made to feel more awkward and self-conscious than necessary.

According to the principal, the rule was altered (from the previous rule stating that skirts/shorts needed to be worn at fingertip length) due to the fact that varying arm lengths made the previous requirements unfair. The alteration of the rule does not, however, take into account that people do not only have varying arm lengths; they also have varying leg lengths, meaning that the new requirement is as unfair to those with longer legs as the prior rule was to those with longer arms. To briefly demonstrate how arbitrary and inconsistent this rule is, my mother and I both put on the same pair of shorts for which my sister was turned away from school, and found that while they rested almost 5 ½ inches above the top of my sister’s knee, they rested at 4 ½ inches above my mother’s, and exactly 3 inches (what would be considered appropriate according to the new standard) above mine. This clearly displays how drastically unfair the rule is to those who have significantly longer legs, proportionately, than those with shorter legs, like myself. Conversely, the old rule, which depended upon arm length, would have left those with longer arms, like myself, at the disadvantage.

While we are deeply opposed to the recent change, we are not requesting that the dress code return to what it was, nor are we suggesting that having a dress code is not a necessary and - when properly fashioned and enforced - productive provision. We are therefore requesting that the rule be changed to a more objective requirement that is fair for everyone regardless of arm or leg length and which has already been implemented in a number of schools across the country - that is, to require that skirts/shorts be worn at or below each person's mid-thigh, a point which is unchanging and easy to identify; and beyond that, a provision that, when in doubt, a person’s shorts/skirts/dresses should not reveal any undergarments when the individual is bending over or sitting. This requirement would ensure that each person is judged by the same fair, objective standard, regardless of arm and leg length, which is still appropriately modest, for both shorter and taller individuals.

Creating a more fair and objective requirement which is more reasonable for everyone to follow will also reduce the number of people who need to be sent home for breaking the dress code, and will therefore not only reasonably limit distractions due to clothing, but will also prevent girls from being forced to choose between being comfortable and receiving the education that they deserve. If the purpose of changing the dress code requirements was to ensure a fairer standard, then the school should adopt a requirement that actually fulfills that purpose, making it easier for people with longer arms and longer legs alike to find appropriate clothing so that nobody’s learning will have to be disrupted, regardless of their body type.