Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Do parents not teach kids how to dress?


PandaPancake

Recommended Posts

I saw this article earlier this month and thought nothing of it: http://www.businessinsider.com/high-school-shaming-girls-failing-dress-code-2014-6

Then while at an amusement park in Denver I was completely appalled by how young women were dressing. Should society really be letting girls at 12 show midriff and wearing way too much makeup? I've seen hookers and strippers wear more at work than what some of them had on. I wasn't even in the water park section. It really made me uncomfortable to the point I may not go back.

Sent from my XT1080 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the "twitter-Instagram-Facebook-Pinterest-Snapchat-Whateverthehellstarted5minutesago" mentality. "Let me shock the world into noticing me." And parents, as a whole, are so busy trying to show how "with it" they are that they are completely oblivious to the fact that the society they are trying to impress is their own children. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. A bunch of 50 year olds trying to prove that they aren't old.

 

Ask a 15 year old if they are friends with their parents on Facebook, and the answer will be "Yeah, on one of my pages."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the "twitter-Instagram-Facebook-Pinterest-Snapchat-Whateverthehellstarted5minutesago" mentality. "Let me shock the world into noticing me." And parents, as a whole, are so busy trying to show how "with it" they are that they are completely oblivious to the fact that the society they are trying to impress is their own children. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. A bunch of 50 year olds trying to prove that they aren't old.

 

Ask a 15 year old if they are friends with their parents on Facebook, and the answer will be "Yeah, on one of my pages."

And bingo was his name-o!

See, I'm not a fan of overly smothering parents. Let your kids have freedom to dress and generally act as they will. However, lead them in a good direction with that. Teach them about dignity/self-respect, individuality, and how to not be an asshole. That's what a lot of these kids are missing. And the parents really are the problem here. Being "fashionable" has gotten to the point that I see little kids (I'm talking 5 years old) wearing an orange checkered shirt, with jeans, and orange Nikes with an orange fitted hat. YOUR fuging KID ISN'T GONNA IMPRESS PEOPLE! Stop trying to make your kids into models. Put them in comfortable clothes that look good, sure. But you're not dressing a goddamn manikin. It starts that young. From there, they're going to stay with the trends so they're "popular". I got picked on for fuging years for my jorts (until 8th grade, when I ditched them). Bitch, I rocked my jorts. Yeah, in 6th grade, MOST of my shorts were just old jeans that I cut into shorts (my parents are rednecks, sue me). What of it? I wore plain fuging t-shirts, or band shirts, or the occasional polo. I turned out just fine and attracted my fair share of women, AND I didn't become a little douchebag like a lot of the "fashionable" guys, either, because I had dignity and plenty of self-esteem because I was happy with me for my own reasons, not because my peers approved.

I'm not saying that every father should be trying to keep his daughter from showing her shoulders in public or anything like that. Not saying I'd be the dad to say "go put on a different shirt" if something was mildly showing skin to the point that it's generally harmless. But part of a father's job IS keeping your daughter off the pole, right? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have less of a problem with her wearing shorts so much as I hate people with a "special snowflake" attitude. "Fug your rules. I should be able to do whatever I want. I'm a special snowflake." I mean a dress code is a pretty god damned easy thing to adhere to, and the finger-length test is a pretty god damned reasonable test of modesty that doesn't force people to have some kind of puritanical wardrobe to adhere to. But SHE wants to wear short shorts, because SHE feels entitled, and SHE should be allowed to break the rules and do whatever the hell SHE wants!

 

And now, because she's been marginally inconvenienced by not being able to wear a pair of short shorts, she'd got to turn this into a media issue, a legal issue, a social media campaign, and even a feminist issue. Because boys are evil rapist objectifiers! That girl's slutty clothes just reflects how disgustingly perverted men are.

 

And why? Because one girl was told she shouldn't wear one pair of shorts. Instead of making one minor change, she now feels motivated to have the entire fuging system modified in order to suit her so she doesn't have to change anything.

 

And that is the problem with the Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, social media culture, and youths thinking everyone needs to know everything that he or she thinks, does, believes or supports. It's creating a world where we aren't a community anymore. We are an island chain of individuals who ultimately just want to look out for number one, and complain when a single thing inconveniences them. Moreover, they think their complaints should be important to the rest of society.

 

Delusions of grandeur on a cohort scale. That's our future. So lets celebrate! Rock your short shorts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And bingo was his name-o!

See, I'm not a fan of overly smothering parents. Let your kids have freedom to dress and generally act as they will. However, lead them in a good direction with that. Teach them about dignity/self-respect, individuality, and how to not be an asshole. That's what a lot of these kids are missing. And the parents really are the problem here. Being "fashionable" has gotten to the point that I see little kids (I'm talking 5 years old) wearing an orange checkered shirt, with jeans, and orange Nikes with an orange fitted hat. YOUR fuging KID ISN'T GONNA IMPRESS PEOPLE! Stop trying to make your kids into models. Put them in comfortable clothes that look good, sure. But you're not dressing a goddamn manikin. It starts that young. From there, they're going to stay with the trends so they're "popular". I got picked on for fuging years for my jorts (until 8th grade, when I ditched them). Bitch, I rocked my jorts. Yeah, in 6th grade, MOST of my shorts were just old jeans that I cut into shorts (my parents are rednecks, sue me). What of it? I wore plain fuging t-shirts, or band shirts, or the occasional polo. I turned out just fine and attracted my fair share of women, AND I didn't become a little douchebag like a lot of the "fashionable" guys, either, because I had dignity and plenty of self-esteem because I was happy with me for my own reasons, not because my peers approved. For little girls, it's especially dangerous (growing up with my sisters, I think I know). Example: the OP.

I'm not saying that every father should be trying to keep his daughter from showing her shoulders in public or anything like that. Not saying I'd be the dad to say "go put on a different shirt" if something was mildly showing skin to the point that it's generally harmless. But part of a father's job IS keeping your daughter off the pole, right? 

 

 

 

Why do you have a problem with parents dressing their kids nicely or like "models"? Why should they be wearing what you deem comfortable clothes? 

 

Also wearing midriffs and short shorts doesn't mean you're going to be a stripper. That's just ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have less of a problem with her wearing shorts so much as I hate people with a "special snowflake" attitude. "Fug your rules. I should be able to do whatever I want. I'm a special snowflake." I mean a dress code is a pretty god damned easy thing to adhere to, and the finger-length test is a pretty god damned reasonable test of modesty that doesn't force people to have some kind of puritanical wardrobe to adhere to. But SHE wants to wear short shorts, because SHE feels entitled, and SHE should be allowed to break the rules and do whatever the hell SHE wants!

 

And now, because she's been marginally inconvenienced by not being able to wear a pair of short shorts, she'd got to turn this into a media issue, a legal issue, a social media campaign, and even a feminist issue. Because boys are evil rapist objectifiers! That girl's slutty clothes just reflects how disgustingly perverted men are.

 

And why? Because one girl was told she shouldn't wear one pair of shorts. Instead of making one minor change, she now feels motivated to have the entire fuging system modified in order to suit her so she doesn't have to change anything.

 

And that is the problem with the Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, social media culture, and youths thinking everyone needs to know everything that he or she thinks, does, believes or supports. It's creating a world where we aren't a community anymore. We are an island chain of individuals who ultimately just want to look out for number one, and complain when a single thing inconveniences them. Moreover, they think their complaints should be important to the rest of society.

 

Delusions of grandeur on a cohort scale. That's our future. So lets celebrate! Rock your short shorts!

 

Halle-fuging-lujah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the "twitter-Instagram-Facebook-Pinterest-Snapchat-Whateverthehellstarted5minutesago" mentality. "Let me shock the world into noticing me."

What about the "let's all pine about what younger generations are doing while we all popped LSD and fuged in public parks" mentality?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Exactly what I was going to say. Brady seems to be taking a page out of Olsen's playbook, which is probably a good thing. They'll probably get around to giving Brady an Emmy one day, and he should thank Olsen for giving him the blueprint for success.
    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
×
×
  • Create New...