A school in Ashby-de-la-Zouch in the UK made headlines last week for allegedly removing over one hundred students from class (on their first day) for apparently turning up to school wearing footwear that was considered to be ‘unacceptable,’ thus breaching the school’s uniform rules. Now, while many parents were angered by this – in fact, if you were to read some of the social media posts, I’d go so far as to say some went ballistic – in this instance, I’d say, they’ve only got themselves to blame.
If these parents had bothered to read the school’s guidelines, which, according to the principal, were ‘announced before the summer break,’ they’d have known what was, and what wasn’t acceptable for this particular school. In addition, in an attempt to make their new uniform policies crystal clear, the school in question even provided visual prompts for those parents who were either too dim to get the message or were so smug they thought the rules didn’t apply to their little darlings! Yes folks; pictures of acceptable footwear was apparently posted on the school’s website. So, armed with all of this information, I’d conclude that, in this instance, the school’s actions were entirely justified.
Look, one of the reasons I’d imagine school uniforms are worn by students is to reduce what may be the obvious socioeconomic disparities existing among them in the hope of encouraging a level playing field for everyone. You see readers, as we live in an era of high fashion brands where certain items of clothing have become a definitive status symbol – separating the haves and the have nots among us – no parent wants their child to feel ‘different’. And, while it’s awful to think that some kids may use another’s choice of clothing as a reason to pick on them or to isolate them, I’d support the wearing of a uniform as it allows less opportunity for some to be singled out by their less compassionate peers.
Look, my granddaughter started secondary school last week and, while the list of dos and don’ts regarding her uniform and her PE gear were longer than Greece’s national anthem…(it has 158 verses…swear to God), both herself and her mother have chosen this school and they have to comply. Now don’t get me wrong, I fully support the thinking that everyone, (and in this case students) should be allowed to express their own individuality, and I’m not opposed to that. Indeed I love the whole gender neutral uniform policy being adopted by many schools where they offer students a range of options; but again, parents need to adhere to these. Now I’m not skirting the issue (sorry, that was a terrible pun), but I believe if parents enrol their kids in a particular school, they do so in the knowledge that they sign up to, and fully embrace that school’s rules and mandatory uniform policies, whatever they are. Simples!
However, if a parent is strongly opposed to uniforms, believing they restrict their little darling’s freedoms of expression, then that’s fine, and, in order to keep everyone happy, they should seek out a school more appropriate to their kids’ specific needs. Here’s the thing…our kids go to school to learn, and to gain what we hope will be valuable skills and knowledge they can confidently apply to their future real-life situations and careers. And, while school should be a place where students can freely express themselves, the fact is, in order to keep in line with the establishment’s ethos, some limitations will apply. Now, while I know some schools’ uniform policies may cause severe stress on a family’s budget, often sending many into debt, (especially if they insist on including specialist items), I’d strongly advocate for a system that prioritises a value-for-money and affordability ethos over specific bespoke elitist attire.
At the end of the day, if your child joins An Garda Síochána, becomes a firefighter, a pilot, a flight attendant, a doctor, a nurse, a soldier, a chef, a delivery driver, a fast food operative, or a lifeguard, etc., (all great careers), they’ll be required to wear a uniform. With that in mind, school-flake parents, stop getting shirty (aagh, I did it again), and remember, you chose this school because you believed it was the best one for your kid!
Nobody does drama, difficulty and disaster like Sinead O’Connor
RTE Director General Dee Forbes should really be a travel agent for guilt trips, given the woman’s tenacity and capacity for rattling that begging bowl! Yes readers, according to the Irish Times, poor put-upon Dee has informed her staff that they must now face cutbacks as the station cannot afford to “continue as we are,” if they don’t receive an increase in funding. And about time too!
Look, to be honest, as a reluctant licence fee payer, it has always been my belief that RTE, with its humdrum shows being fronted by tedious presenters trying to sell washed-up lacklustre guests as TV gold, has long since passed its sell-by date. I mean, excitement must surely be thin on the ground at Montrose House if someone thinks teasing has-been Sinead O’Connor as a reason to tune into last Friday’s Late Late Show is what passes for titillation. I’d rather read Donald Trump’s Twitter updates than tune into a show featuring a drama queen who appears to feel duty-bound to create controversy, viewing just about everything as an ultimate disaster.
Don’t get me wrong, I do feel a certain amount of empathy for Sinead’s, let’s say, circumstances, but, is it so awful of me to be sick to the back teeth of her continuous angst-ridden sagas? It’s as if adversity, calamity and tragedy have now become as natural to her as breathing. Yes, the woman is a talented singer, yes, she’s clearly a troubled soul and I have huge compassion for her, I really do…but OMG Sinead love, do drama, difficulty and distress absolutely have to be your weapons of choice when appearing on d’telly?