Forum - View topicINTEREST: Japanese School Opts for Flexible Uniform Code to Support LGBT Students
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Animegomaniac
Posts: 4136 |
|
|||||
Expressions of self identity would lead to things like breakdowns of traditional societal norms as well as a birthrate increase. Why would Japan want either of those? Need, sure, but "want"? Slap a label on them, put them in a box and keep them like that. "You there are san, you are sama, you are kun and you are chan. This is how I see you and this matters. Somehow..." They have a long way to go just to get to the first step. And honestly, isn't this just another way to keep a lid on the concept of true individuality? "You can wear a skirt or pants and you can wear a tie or an ascot. These are chooses we freely give you!". The bottoms seem to be pretty straight forward but I question the sexuality of an ascot. "What if I don't want either of those neckwear options?" Denied! |
||||||
|
||||||
MarshalBanana
 Posts: 5471 |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
Haterater
 Posts: 1727 |
|
|||||
|
I like this. More options are always welcome. Doesn't look out of place at all.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
SHD
Posts: 1757 |
|
|||||
That person might be a woman for all I know but then I wonder what kind of modern woman they are that they don't even consider the existence of things like underwear, stockings or oh, female personal hygiene products. What they say might have been true two hundred years ago but not today. Also, why would people in Europe have different biological reasons for developing certain types of clothes than people in say, Asia? |
||||||
|
||||||
Yuvelir
 Posts: 1619 |
|
|||||
Assuming that every culture will evolve in very similar ways is one of the mistakes of eurocentrism/colonialism. Even if there is a logical basis for a cultural outcome, it doesn't mean that it will always happen as its adoption also depends on other cultural, societal and practical factors that may happen in a culture and not another. Basic needs are covered by every culture, conveniences (like seems to be the case for skirts/pants) aren't. Afterall humanity has been going on for quite a while, each region having their series of needs, values and arguments piling up and morphing over time. So even if in one culture pants are a man thing and skirts a woman thing because of a series of convenience factors for one culture, another one might not attribute such importance to them. Clothes didn't just pop into existence all of a sudden with pre-assigned roles. In short, men in traditional Japan wear skirts because their culture and religions evolved in a different way and didn't need to put such an emphasis on "pants for men" (which did get pretty ridiculous in Europe since Abrahamic religions do have a clause against crossdressing in the Book of Deuteronomy). P.S.: as for the woman whose veracity and hygiene you were doubting, please pay attention to the first line
|
||||||
|
||||||
Velshtein
 Posts: 72 |
|
|||||
To postmodernists, reality itself is a social construct. |
||||||
|
||||||
Usagi-kun
 Posts: 877 Location: Nashville, TN |
|
|||||
This. So much this. I grew up with uniforms adopted in secondary. It was a modest school and several students actually enrolled based on scholarship. Uniforms were a blessing. The upper echelon of students could afford jewelry, designer clothes, sports apparel, shoes, tech gadgets, etc. I am not very 'girly' by nature and the point of some of these 'enhanced' features just did not correlate with my identity. Once we got uniforms, I never had to worry about what to wear. There we no 'cliques' devoted to clothing status, and lower-income, scholarship students also did not have to worry about being excluded from social interactions just based on what they wore. I am far from saying this did not eliminate things like bullying, but it made individuals less of a target in these areas. We could not mix-match uniforms, but in this regard, it offered a bit of relief. However, it should never be an personal goal just to 'fit in' as a form of protection, but in the superficial teenage experience, it definitely provided an environment where students could focus on more important things like studying and just enjoying a peaceful time with friends. Parents did not seem to object to either, but it also exemplified a status of 'private schooling' in an appeasing way. Now that I am a working adult, it is kind of ironic that my workplace requires uniforms as well. I hate the one for the girls. I would wear the boys' in a heartbeat if I could. |
||||||
|
||||||
EricJ2
 Posts: 4016 |
|
|||||
It's called "Tasting the dog biscuit", and admit it, you've always been secretly curious to do THAT. (Seriously, what is it, they get so excited about them!) 
Meaning, it's the natural human instinct to feel incomplete if you can't experience what you see someone else does, and want to try it yourself for the first-person accumulated knowledge. That doesn't mean you want to make a life commitment to demonstrate your Sensitive Off-Centerism to the World, it just means you've always been curious what skydiving, bungee-jumping, or driving a NASCAR racer is all about either just once, although you wouldn't want to do it for a living. Perspective means knowing the difference, and there are a lot of people in the world too caught up with their neato selves NOT to. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
nargun
Posts: 930 |
|
|||||
Your categories only exist in your head, you know. In the physical world, things are just things, each different. But this is annoying, so you take "similar" things and group them... ... but the groupings aren't "real", aren't physical. You made them up, and we can -- must -- make them up in any way that serves our purpose. You're the one who's taking your mentally-constructed categories and demanding the world conform, no? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Velshtein
Posts: 72 |
|
|||||
If you honestly believe that the categories of male and female are not ontologically real and are just made up, then I don't really know what to say. What's next? The earth isn't really revolving around the sun? The world earth isn't round? Secondly, you fail to recognize that mentally constructed categories are made after the fact, not prior to the fact. We use our minds to mentally organize our observations to create hypotheses, theories, models, etc.. That's how inquiry works. Or is that also something you want to reject? If so, then enjoy floating aimlessly in your self created sea of arbitrary beliefs and epistemic nihilism. Postmodernism is nothing but anti-intellectualism attempting to masquerade as something enlightened and insightful. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
MarshalBanana
Posts: 5471 |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Chrysostomus
Posts: 335 |
|
|||||
|
A ridiculous move that serves no point. School uniforms exist to prepare kids for their future jobs where they will, more likely than not, also have to conform to dress codes. Where no amount of dumb progressive propaganda will let you come to work however you please.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Yuvelir
Posts: 1619 |
|
|||||
I work at a laboratory. I can wear whatever the fudge I want as long as 1.I use a lab coat while working with chemicals 2.I don't have so much skin exposed that it becomes a safety hazard Does this count as a dress code that necessitates being prepared for it by wearing an uniform as a teenager? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Chrysostomus
Posts: 335 |
|
|||||
Dress codes also exist to instill a sense to discipline, which is of course a fundamental value to teach to any future functioning member of society. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Yuvelir
Posts: 1619 |
|
|||||
I was mostly being ironic and you took it that way. Of course not being allowed to go to work in a swimsuit is the same as wearing an uniform. And had I gone to a school where I had any semblance of choice on what to wear would surely have hurt my chances of working in that lab. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group