U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-23-2016, 01:37 PM
 
Location: The analog world
15,520 posts, read 8,734,436 times
Reputation: 20825

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomputer View Post
I wonder if the bodice of the dress was lined and about the sheerness of the skirt. I can't tell from the picture.

I think its unfortunate that she had this experience on such an important night in her young life. On the other hand, I wish girls could be "girls" for just a little longer. My own grand daughters sometimes surprise me with the heavy make up and revealing outfits.

I wore mini skirts, short shorts, and bikinis. I don't know how my father lived through it Does this make me a hypocrite? Sure. But at least I keep my mouth shut.
The dress is very clearly fully lined.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2016, 01:40 PM
 
1,575 posts, read 1,423,663 times
Reputation: 3754
The dress is lovely, and the girl looked very pretty and appropriate. Some posters should really be ashamed of themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
19,879 posts, read 36,379,125 times
Reputation: 21293
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
She looks fine - this was about her size. The teacher even made a comment about "Us big girls gotta cover up." This is about that teacher being uncomfortable about her own body and trying to force this student to feel the same way.
Yep. And other people who are uncomfortable about their own or others' bodies doing the same thing. Shame on the teacher, and shame on them. That's where the REAL shame belongs!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:00 PM
 
Location: A place that's too cold
4,077 posts, read 4,046,849 times
Reputation: 10052
Quote:
Originally Posted by gouligann View Post
I agree. She can't help having a cleavage and if some slim girl wore that dress, it would probably be deemed appropriate by the prom police. Double standards are not fair. Thick or thin, same dress code.

I think some of you who don't approve are just looking at, and are disgusted by the size of this young girl, not how beautiful she is and how pretty the dress is.

No, not at all. She is a beautiful girl, I just personally don't consider that much cleavage to be a good look. That's simply my personal preference, and if I had a daughter, I would have guided her toward a different dress. I'm guessing that a specific point of the prom dress code was violated, otherwise, how could they have turned this girl away? But maybe it truly was willy nilly and without just cause.

I agree that double standards are not fair, but if a small busted, or differently shaped girl had worn the same dress, it could have looked completely different. Just like a very short dress that covers enough derrière and thighs on a 4' 11" girl, might be completely indecent on a 5' 8" girl.

Valid points in many posts here, from various ways of viewing the issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:13 PM
 
6,307 posts, read 7,129,660 times
Reputation: 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
Yep. And other people who are uncomfortable about their own or others' bodies doing the same thing. Shame on the teacher, and shame on them. That's where the REAL shame belongs!
Absolutely.

The way I see it, absent any concrete "rules" about dress, this is about the individual's personal feelings on the "dress issue".

Heck, this thread has brought up some thoughts that I haven't felt in a long time.

When I, 25 years ago, was looking for my prom dress, it was mortifying. What was out there, at that point, simply didn't fit. It might have fit at the waist, but the bust? Not even close.

There was nothing, off the rack, that would fit.

Now, 25 years later, I get it. But, back in the day? I was inconsolable.

And, for those who say, "just lose weight", I've been there since I was about 12. When I was 18, and shopping for dresses for prom, I was working on losing weight. You see, for me, what I learned growing up, is that one can really only be loved if they are thin. So, that was the goal. And, when I still was a "bigger girl" at prom time, it was devastating.

Thankfully, my mom understood the concept that my bust was not going to disappear, and she wanted to see me in a dress that worked for me. So, the "electric blue sequined dress" was born.

(Yup, again, it was the early 90s. Frankly, I envy this gal's dress, but that's beside the point.)

This gal's dress is, IMO, wonderful for her body type. Shoot- she may be trying to lose weight, or not, it simply works for her at this time. And, who is ANYONE to judge it? From the photo, it's obvious that she feels beautiful in it, and that's what matters.

I know what it's like to be told "we don't have anything for you". Frankly, that's one of the worst feelings I've ever experienced.

If schools want to make rules about this, that is their prerogative. But, for God's sake, make it uniform. It's really not that difficult. Neckline plunging a certain length from the collarbone. Hem a certain length above or below the knee. Shoulders covered.

Just don't leave it for individuals to interpret. Because, as we have seen, that is simply a recipe for disaster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:16 PM
 
7,950 posts, read 3,862,498 times
Reputation: 27230
Quote:
Originally Posted by patches403 View Post
As a fellow woman who also has a lot on top, I know from personal experience wearing something cut like this just how much more of her cleavage can be seen from "above". That's probably why it was decided that the dress was inappropriate.
I'm also a fellow woman with a lot on top, and I disagree with pretty much the whole post. I saw nothing wrong with what she was wearing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:16 PM
 
6,307 posts, read 7,129,660 times
Reputation: 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post

I agree that double standards are not fair, but if a small busted, or differently shaped girl had worn the same dress, it could have looked completely different.
Yup, if someone without a bust or other curves to fill it out had tried to wear a dress like that, it wouldn't have worked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:38 PM
 
1,745 posts, read 2,029,686 times
Reputation: 3678
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishigas73 View Post
So, that's what this is about? That the bigger girls should essentially wear potato sacks, because to encourage them to wear something that *might* make them feel good about themselves is encouraging obesity?

I'd tell you where to take your skinny, judgmental butt, but I'd not like to get banned from this forum.
Nope. Not what I'm saying. I'm saying you dress according to figure. Quite simple. Fashions are designed for the thin. They are meant for the thin. I am far from a twig. I have a 21.2 BMI and 15% body fat. I could rip men my age apart if I needed to. Even being as in shape as I am, I cannot wear many of today's fashions. They are designed for the thin, tall body type. I am stocky, athletic and short no matter how fit. I pay attention and respond accordingly.

This is called "taste".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:42 PM
 
1,575 posts, read 1,423,663 times
Reputation: 3754
That dress was not made for a skinny person with a tiny cup size. I was a string bean and couldn't have worn that dress without a wardrobe malfunction. The dress was for someone who was curvy and on the larger side.

That dress was perfect for that girl. It was in excellent taste.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2016, 02:48 PM
 
6,307 posts, read 7,129,660 times
Reputation: 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastBoundandDownChick View Post

This is called "taste".
And apparently "taste" is highly subjective.

Be that as it may though, if you've been alive and breathing for about, gee, the past 7, 8 years or so, you'd realize that "fashion" has moved from having a size zero as the sample size. All of the major designers that I know of have come to accept this reality.

Sure, there are some designers that are holding out to this completely unrealistic ideal, but most have come to understand that, nope, that's not where the money is.

Have at your ideals. "Fashion" in general, has moved from the ideal of size zero. Move with the times, or not. But don't think for a moment that what you think is what "fashion" is these days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top