Even if thousands of people feel like they got the wrong item, unhappiness with the actual product was not something it looks for, the company said.
That isn’t technically a violation of Facebook’s guidelines, and the therefore this photo was posted with a negative review of FashionMia to PissedConsumer.com. Anyway, many delete negative comments and posts on their pages, and some even post bogus customer service phone numbers and contact info, that isn’t an actionable offense. They game Facebook in other ways By the way, the school district itself seems to cause a bunch of the problems by having sexually promiscouis drill team and cheer leader outfits that are Know what guys, I bet any money that these girls bought these dresses with their mother’s approval, in another article I read, it said that the guys bought the tickets so many girls didn’t know the guide lines.a certain amount these mothers look for the girls to be in fashion and some just can be bought with the everyone dresses just like this and don’t have a backbone to say no. Though, to anyone with a feeling of it, they are not modest. I think the uncovering of shoulders, ps of the arms and cleavage is significant. Of course, thanks for highlighting this big, current problem. They all have long skirts, even the dresses you show at the p of the article have nothing to cover this area. I don’t think they are good examples of modest dress if that is what they are intended to show the biggest problem is the lack of sleeve/top area. If at all cover the buttocks. Skirts which barely, and seethrough ps which are already low cut. This is where it starts getting really intriguing. It makes me sad they must have such little self respect.
Sadly, looking at the photo, the dresses ARE tame by current ‘standardsthey’ cover the legs to ‘midthigh’ and some even have straps or small sleeves! Dozens of high school girls in Mesquite, Texas were sent home from a homecoming dance being that their dresses were not modest enough. You made it sound as if the sin were really that she didn’t look fashionably good in her otight dress, that is a contradiction of the ideas of modesty. Basically the idea of modesty ain’t that we protect beautiful bodies from being seen as they’re so precious, and unattractive bodies from being seen as they offend our aesthetics.
To be honest I found your comment about a friend’s daughter being To be honest I don’t mean to be rude.
You undercut your argument.
I’m sure that the idea is that EVERY body is precious, beautiful, and private and therefore we protect its privacy. Catholics don’t need to be guilty of the objectification of women, in the first place. Although, I recall a rather wellknown Catholic blogging mom posting a picture of her thence middle school aged daughter in a very short, very tight dress and another even more popular Catholic mom blogger of older girls applauding the girl on her modest dress. I suppose if it’s not a g string and pasties, it’s modest for would bend over to recieve the water on their heads, their short dresses went up in back and their cloth diaper and rubberpants could’ve been seem under their tights!I couldn’t believe what I was seeing!I just couldnt believe these girls in the 13 to 17 year old range could do something like that.the boys were all gawking at them and I could only imagine what the boys were thinking seeing the diaper and rubberpants showing under the girls tights like that.
As I recall from my 12 Catholic years girls’ uniforms, that teeny tiny effect was attained by rolling the waistband of the skirt before and after school hours. There was indeed hereafter, as well as only a few years ago when my daughters were in Catholic school, a very strict skirt length code which was enforced during school hours. What we’re all hoping to see is values come full circle when their hormones settle down and they become adults. With that said, I rolled my skirt, and sneaked forbidden bikinis to beach vacations. I, the notification from adults they respect and follow like parents and teachers, who enforce standards when they can. Know what guys, I rebelled against my mother’s rules, when I was a teenager. Though, by college I had shifted back to modesty and grew to embrace it more as time went on.
Teenagers will fight you in the moment since they’re oppositional, and that’s developmentally normal.
That lessons are for the long time.
You can’t enforce it all along -for instance, girls are preparing to roll the waistbands of their school kilts up after hours when nobody’s looking -and that’s part of teenage rebellion. It sure is nice to see this Texas high school attempting to protect young girls from their own poor decisions by taking a stand against insanity, I am not holding my breath for these kinds of modesty standards to become the norm at high school events. It sure would’ve been nice to see other high schools inspired to take similar actions against immodesty. They wanted no part of that, and I’d be willing to bet that in the 15 years since hereafter, the state of undress has declined even more. When I taught high school I often chaperoned homecomings and proms.
My husband accompanied me, and we’d make a special night of it with another couple, my coworker and her husband.
It’s a beginning, even if the school’s position is to protect the male adults in the group.
By the mid 90’s, my husband and the other adult man would escort us to the dance, and excuse themselves to chat outside or anywhere but near the underage girls dressed provocatively, inappropriately, and downright scandalously. Come on! That’s right! The Salon article raises an objection about the fact that the modesty rules at Mesquite High seem to focus exclusively on females, at least in their enforcement. Nonetheless, it’s the majority of the girls for whom dressing up means sporting skin tight dresses, cleavage, and the majority of leg. Of course boys wear suits or tuxes to these kinds of events. Basically, apparently somewhere, somehow, between 1993 and today, it became acceptable for young girls to wear teeny tiny dresses with super high heels to formal school events, perhaps this makes me sound like an old lady. Furthermore, the Salon article calls the dresses tame but that isn’t what I see in the photo included there.
Where were the fathers in all of this?
My husband would not even let my daughter go to church in the 80’s in a sleeveless sundress, and her prom dress had ruffly sleeves, and not strapless either.
She also went to a public high school. We are catholic and last year 4 teen girls who were to be baptized at easter vigil were refused to be baptized as their required almost white dresses were to short.the requirements call for a poofy, almost white knee length dress, bonnet, whitish tights and almost white shoes.the four girls dresses were midthigh length and since they bend over to recieve the water on their heads, it was felt that their dresses will go up in back and the required diaper and plastic pants under their tights would’ve been seen.their baptisms had to be rescheduled with longer dresses! I had no say in the matter, we baptized our 16 year old daughter this past easter sunday at easter vigil and she wore the poofy white dress and bonnet with the lace socks and whitish mary janes.her dress was midthigh length and she wore plastic pants with ruffles sewn across the back over her cloth diaper.her plastic pants were adult size and had 6 almost white rows ruffled lace from side seam to side seam and had a cute pink bow in the middle of the ruffles.she had a friends mom sew the ruffles on.when she bent over to receive the water on her head, the ruffled rubber pants might be seen.