03-26-2004, 10:53 AM
>maybe I'm wrong, but wasn't it Doc Martens with white shoelaces? I think that, at least here in Germany, that's what those Skinhead idiots wear...
You're not wrong, white shoelaces also have been associated negatively. Of course as you mentioned, things like this can vary from places to places.
From this site, (it's not my school, but it's close enough in writing.)
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:ZtVPbD...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Page 7, ' Any symbolic attire/item that suggests racial overtones sexual reference, or gang membership is not allowed (ie. inappropriate shoelaces for Doc Martens-red, white, and/or yellow, suspenders hanging down, kerchief hanging out of back pocket, pick in hair, symbols on clothing.)'
I understand their intent. Unfortunately the meaning of those symbols are not always universal. Banning doc martens with white or red shoelaces because they might mean something bad, to me amounts to (pardon the pun) nothing more than a symbolic, knee-jerk, and heavy handed gesture. Address racism, banning coloured\uncoloured shoelaces on boots will not get rid of the real problem.
My biggest beef is these rulings are somewhat arbitrary, and taken out of context. When I read wcip Angel's post, my concern is not so much about the bracelets, as it is about the inappropriate sexual exposure. Not to mention what sounds like an extreme case of bullying. Those things are more disturbing than some jelly bracelets which might or might not symbolize anything. I hope the parents and schools address those problems, not just draft up some ruling banning bracelets.
>Those things are then worn in the back pocket, right side for "active", left side for "passive" or the other way around, I forget
Hehe, that's the problem with fashion and symbols sometimes. Wait 5 minutes - 5 decades and black becomes white, up becomes down and cool becomes hot. Wait, that last one doesn't apply. Oh well don't take any fashion tips from me. ;)
You're not wrong, white shoelaces also have been associated negatively. Of course as you mentioned, things like this can vary from places to places.
From this site, (it's not my school, but it's close enough in writing.)
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:ZtVPbD...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Page 7, ' Any symbolic attire/item that suggests racial overtones sexual reference, or gang membership is not allowed (ie. inappropriate shoelaces for Doc Martens-red, white, and/or yellow, suspenders hanging down, kerchief hanging out of back pocket, pick in hair, symbols on clothing.)'
I understand their intent. Unfortunately the meaning of those symbols are not always universal. Banning doc martens with white or red shoelaces because they might mean something bad, to me amounts to (pardon the pun) nothing more than a symbolic, knee-jerk, and heavy handed gesture. Address racism, banning coloured\uncoloured shoelaces on boots will not get rid of the real problem.
My biggest beef is these rulings are somewhat arbitrary, and taken out of context. When I read wcip Angel's post, my concern is not so much about the bracelets, as it is about the inappropriate sexual exposure. Not to mention what sounds like an extreme case of bullying. Those things are more disturbing than some jelly bracelets which might or might not symbolize anything. I hope the parents and schools address those problems, not just draft up some ruling banning bracelets.
>Those things are then worn in the back pocket, right side for "active", left side for "passive" or the other way around, I forget
Hehe, that's the problem with fashion and symbols sometimes. Wait 5 minutes - 5 decades and black becomes white, up becomes down and cool becomes hot. Wait, that last one doesn't apply. Oh well don't take any fashion tips from me. ;)