THIS is a "jumpsuit". The young lady did technically violate the "plunging neckline" prohibition, but compared to the above (the kind of thing she'd she in Vogue), her outfit looked more like a karate robe.
Posted on 10/06/2019 9:22:53 AM PDT by BenLurkin
Please explain.
There is a game plan: when the totalitarians are in power zero tolerance is in force, When not in power, challenging and weakening the standards is in play (see, for instance, ACLU and "community organizers").
Agreed. But also hard to set rules and then arbitrate them based on the beautiful and the tasteful. Kind of surprising that even this group can so dictate attire in this day, but they did and I don’t really see where this girl and her family ought to be squawking to the media about the enforcement of a clearly stated rule.
THIS is a "jumpsuit". The young lady did technically violate the "plunging neckline" prohibition, but compared to the above (the kind of thing she'd she in Vogue), her outfit looked more like a karate robe.
Wait you mean Hillary. Zoomed me good. It was a little passé for me to make the connection.
Which leads a viewer to consider the possibility the ousted student's attire was a declaration the dress code was defective because "we are not all male or female". Wonder if she brought along a date.
But then this gay guy showed up in a dress which was okay (not this school).
“No “Dirty Dancing” permitted either!”
Back in the day, when I went to the Catholic high school dances, a nun would walk up to my partner and myself and separate us saying “Leave some room for the Holy Ghost”.
LOL. Good one!
So true. Funny how that works.
I attended a Catholic grade school till the 10th grade.
Your quote sounds exactly like something the Nun’s or Mother Superior would have said back then. Most of the teens would have rolled their eyes, sighed audibly, and complied with her request.
Yeah, they probably would.
I can see them sticking to the dress code. However, I would be really interested to see if the rest of the attendees did adhere to them, as well. Prom dresses nowadays are pretty risque and I really do wonder if they all were to code.
Oh, I was only responding to the superficial stuff. Perhaps the homeschooling group is religious and conservative and they requested only dresses. If it was orthodox Jewish it would have done the same. Yet she really does look respectable.
Her formal-looking elegant jumpsuit is a lot more “dressy” than a boy wearing dress slacks with a shirt and tie. No requirement for a jacket? Semi-formal for a man must include a suit jacket.
Bet the wasn’t more than a couple of boys who were dressed up nearly as nicely as this young woman.
They specifically BANNED jeans, they did not BAN dress pants or jumpsuits. She has a point.
If she fashioned a skirt from clear cellophane and wore that over the nice jumpsuit, would that qualify?
>>Any minor slight, real or imagined, could bring out the lawyers.<<
The real issue is not the lawyers. The real issue is the judges. There is now no aspect of life which judges do not deem to be part of the legal sphere over which they rule.
They also didn't ban 1890s swimsuits or togas. Does that make wearing those garments ok? No it doesn't, because words have meanings; it's really that simple.
My guess is that mom, and probably her spawn, wanted to get turned away so they could go "viral" and get simpletons to rush to their defense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.