Boy, 12, wears skirt to school in protest

Why skirts have not stopped being gender specific even when many other items have, is the strong fear of counting as indecent in them, from the important deficiency in their shape. Men, unless they have tried one on, don’t realise how easy that is to get wrong, how much posture care it makes necessary. That was part of women’s oppression, but now the law will let women off accidents it won’t let men off.

A gender equal boundary of decency could be easier to force into existence by trying to ban skirts, and seeing whether they are defended against leg divided alternatives on grounds of any biological need. (I find it a logical challenge that skirt wearers of both genders usually seem to only want the length that is guided by fashion rather than want to wear all sorts of lengths).

But you don’t want any attempted ban to hit folks who are being discriminatorily oppressed out of exercising the alternative they want, as is the case here. Schoolboys have been suffering this leg discrimination for 40 years and until the discrimination loophole existed enabling the action by this boy and by his predecessor in 2006, nobody ever said a word about it. All too socially scared of the mob.

Now, here is an important fact. This would not still be happening, school uniforms would not stil be happening, for years past, if the big autism organisations had done their ethical duty and spoken out about “sensory issues”. I know this story is not about autism, but the spectrum of autism and attention deficit is the source of the medical proof that all dress codes and uniforms are genocide. A proof which applies to everyone, not just the folks with those conditions, necause all may have different types of “sensory issues”. It is as part of these conditions that strong skin sensitivity against fabric, and heat sensitivity that accompanies active metabolism, are known to exist. From which it follows, folks who are soldily biologically real human minorities suffer an assault on the wellbeing of their bodies if made to wear costumes that are wrong for their sensitivities, that affect their senses and their skin. All telling folks what to wear is an assault on the bodily wellbeing of bioligically real minority groups and suppression of their openly manifested existence. Hence it fits witthin the definition of genocide in international law.

This has already been known against uniforms for years. btw I was also always a victim of long trousers uniforms from as early as 8 while boys in other places at the same time were equally inappropriately suffering the opposite!!! I have the first 2 conditions mentioned and as an adult I have had my sensory right of wellbeing to always wear shorts defended in the supported employment sector. That is on medical wellbeing grounds. Now if that has actually happened for an adult, then continued existence of any dress codes for kids is knowingly an assault and abuse upon them. My write-up on it, published in issue 66 of Asperger United only in April, I offer as supporting evidence in any resistance to the legality of school uniforms. I hate them heart and soul and to make any contribution to smashing them gives meaning to life.

The trouser skirt division of the sexes has been repudiated by women insofar as the concept would restrict them. Men also should repudiate it and act as individuals rather than robots in a collective. Horseback riding was the overwhelming cause of men wearing pants. Now that the main cause is gone, the “clinically normative mental health professional” (conformist racketeer) wants us to be stuck with pants and invented such trash terms as “cross dressing” to stop us having choices. Evidently women can’t cross dress because they are hermaphrodites! If you don’t like that explanation—try this one—people aren’t on an agenda to stop women having choices, therefore, they never call them cross dressed for wearing any form of attire. The mental “health” (“social conformity = absence of disease”) cult enforces the status quo; it does NOT promote “health.”