United Airlines is receiving criticism, after it was reported that two young girls were prohibited from boarding a flight because they were wearing leggings. The girls were reportedly traveling from Denver to Minneapolis when three of them were stopped for their outfits. One changed out of the leggings and was let on the flight, and the other two were prohibited from boarding. Shannon Watts, a woman who was boarding a separate flight, tweeted about the incident:

1) A @united gate agent isn’t letting girls in leggings get on flight from Denver to Minneapolis because spandex is not allowed?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

2) She’s forcing them to change or put dresses on over leggings or they can’t board. Since when does @united police women’s clothing?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

3) Gate agent for flt 215 at 7:55. Said she doesn’t make the rules, just follows them. I guess @united not letting women wear athletic wear?

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

United responded to the tweets Watts sent, indicating that the girls were in violation of its “Contract of Carriage” which includes a provision that passengers be “properly clothed.” But the concept that adolescent girls wearing leggings is improper sparked outrage on social media.

A 10-year-old girl in gray leggings. She looked normal and appropriate. Apparently @united is policing the clothing of women and girls. https://t.co/RKsIFoE8pq

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 26, 2017

@shannonrwatts Hey, @united, you know how this ends, right? Images of women in leggings tagging you on social as they fly your competition.

— Jenn (@jennvzande) March 26, 2017

@washingtonpost leggings? Like the ones in your advertisement @united hmmmmm… pic.twitter.com/EfIlBRMlEY

— OLIVIA FOX RADIO (@Oliviafoxradio) March 26, 2017

For the record, the girl wearing the leggings was TEN YEARS OLD. Good luck to @united explaining why she looked too sexual.

— Dana Schwartz (@DanaSchwartzzz) March 26, 2017

@united Leggings are business attire for 10 year olds. Their business is being children.

— Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) March 26, 2017

United has since stated that the girls were flying as “pass riders,” which are usually family members of United employees. Apparently, those designated as pass riders are held to a stricter dress code that specifically includes a ban on spandex. A local outlet, 9News, spoke to Jonathan Geurin, a spokesperson for United, about this special pass rider dress code:

Pass riders have a stricter dress code to board. The three people involved in the incident did not meet the criteria for pass riders.

Pass riders are considered representatives of United and that extends to the dress code requirements. Casual attire for pass riders is allowed as long as it is in good taste for the environment.

As an example, Guerin says flip flops are not allowed for pass riders.

9NEWS asked to see the dress code policy for pass riders. Guerin says the information is part of an internal policy and will not be released at this time.

But that concept seems odd–it’s hard to believe that anyone would have mistaken pre-teen girls for employees, or assumed that they represented United just because they may have been related to an employee. United has announced that it’s looking into the policy and the complaint, but many were left with a bad taste by the incident. After all, leggings are normal travel attire for many women–and that’s certainly not the airline’s business.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post United Prevents Girls Wearing Leggings from Boarding Flight appeared first on Law Street.

Samantha Bae

Samantha Bee, who really is just marvelous at pinpointing what we’re all thinking about this election, took Donald Trump to task over his claims of “partial birth abortions” at the last debate. But partial birth abortions, as Bee points out, aren’t actually a thing–in fact the question by Chris Wallace, the moderator, wasn’t even accurate in the first place. Only a tiny percentage–under 2 percent of abortions–are after 21 weeks. And they’re overwhelmingly for medical reasons, like because the woman’s life is at risk. Watch Bee’s takedown of Wallace and Trump here:

Also, kudos to Bee for our favorite nickname for Trump yet: a “dick-waving Berlusconi knock-off.”

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 25, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Here at Law Street, we cover the big issues that matter to our readers–from entertainment, to politics, to the law. ICYMI, check out our top issue briefs of the last year, and make sure you start 2016 just as informed as you were in 2015.

#1 School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem?

Image courtesy of eric pakurar via Flickr

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Some things make more sense when it comes to the dress code: no short-shorts, no shirts with offensive sayings, and no pants that sag too low. There are also some questionable additions to the dress code, namely yoga pants, leggings, spandex running pants and other clothing that fights tightly to the body. With the seemingly endless stream of issues that American school teachers are responsible for this begs the question, are yoga pants really the problem? Read more here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Top 10 Issues of 2015 appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier this week, Fox News entered into a discussion about the appropriateness of leggings as pants. While that’s a hotly debated topic–particularly when it comes to school dress codes–the way that Fox News approached the conversation can only be described as really yucky.

The discussion was sparked by a viral video made by a Tennessee woman, Jamie Higdon, who ranted about women who wear leggings as pants. One of the “Fox & Friends” hosts, Steve Doocey, moderated the panel. He was joined by the husband of a co-host, Andrew Sansone, as well as “Duck Dynasty” star Willie Robertson, and one of Fox News’ legal analysts, Arthur Aidala.

Here’s the entire uncomfortable interaction, if you want to check it out for yourself:

There are just so many things wrong with this segment that I don’t even know where to begin.

For starters, let’s talk about the fact that as far as I know, none of these men are experts on fashion. Instead, they were qualified to be on the panel because they’re all dads. That’s disturbing, because it sends a clear message–that it’s up to a father to police what his daughters wear. Not a woman herself, because we can’t possibly be trusted to make autonomous decisions about what we can put on our own bodies.

Then there’s the fact that these four men clearly ogle the young women that are paraded out in front of them–and some of the comments they make get downright creepy. For example, Doocy asked one young woman if she had a tattoo in a particularly leering manner. At another point, the men applaud one of the models who turns around to show that her “tail” is covered. They also all comment on the physique of a model named Paige. In perhaps the creepiest moment, Aidala comments “We all took our nitroglycerin pills before she came on the set, just to make sure,” implying that Paige’s ensemble could have given the men heart attacks.

At one point Aidala does point out that dress codes aren’t just an issue for women. He comments on the apparel of young men he sees too, implying that sagging pants aren’t appropriate. But there’s a difference in the rhetoric used when referring to these young men and women–the men aren’t be sexualized. And I would bet you quite a bit of money that if young men were paraded out in front of these panelists wearing saggy pants, this segment would look a lot different. There would be way less clapping, way less leering, and I don’t think anyone would joking about heart attacks.

Overall, the panel just stinks of sexism and creepiness. It’s not a father’s job to police what his daughter wears, and it’s sure as hell was not this panel’s job to leer at and comment on young women’s bodies while doing so. Thanks guys, now I need a shower.

Learn More: School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem?

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fox News Features Cringeworthy Panel of Dads Talking About Leggings appeared first on Law Street.

Crime and weird news ruled the news last week. A new interactive map from writer Law Street’s crime editor Kevin Rizzo made waves across the internet as it allows you to visualize where crime in the United States is getting better or worse. Definitely check that out! The number two story, from Anneliese Mahoney, brings yoga pants back into the news as Montana lawmakers continue their quest to outlaw the comfortable clothing in public spaces. And finally the third most popular post came from writer Marisa Mostek with her weekly look at the dumbest laws across the country, this time focusing in on the Virginias and the Carolinas. ICYMI, check out the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 Interactive Crime Map: Is Your City Getting Safer or More Dangerous?

As reported in Law Street’s comprehensive annual crime rankings, Crime in America 2015, violent crime across the United States continued its downward trend according to the latest figures reported by the FBI. Curious to know how your hometown stacks up against the rest of the country? Check out the interactive map below for yourself to see if your city is getting safer or more dangerous according to the latest data. Read full article here.

#2 Just Relax: Montana Lawmaker Attempts to Ban Yoga Pants

A proposed bill that would ban yoga pants in Montana has been tabled, eliciting joy from practitioners, women who like to be comfy, and rational human beings everywhere. If you’ve never worn yoga pants before (or their closely related cousin the leggings) they’re basically like wearing a hug on your legs. But not everyone is that happy with yoga pants, because they tend to conform to our bodies, apparently rendering them a scourge to society that needs to be outlawed. Read full article here.

#3 Dumbest Laws in the United States: The Virginias and the Carolinas

This week, the dumb laws blog will focus on two sets of neighboring states: Virginia and West Virginia and North and South Carolina. What do railroad companies and Sundays have in common? South Carolina has dumb laws pertaining to both seemingly unrelated things, as it turns out. On Sundays in South Carolina, you won’t be able to go dancing, as dance halls may not operate on that day of the week. Also on Sundays in South Carolina, you cannot do any work. It is the day of rest after all. If you wish to spend your day off playing an instrument, make sure you buy one before Sunday, as they are banned from being sold then. It makes sense, if you think about it–since work on Sunday is prohibited, who would be working at the musical instrument store? Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

A proposed bill that would ban yoga pants in Montana has been tabled, eliciting joy from practitioners, women who like to be comfy, and rational human beings everywhere.

If you’ve never worn yoga pants before (or their closely related cousin the leggings) they’re basically like wearing a hug on your legs. But not everyone is that happy with yoga pants, because they tend to conform to our bodies, apparently rendering them a scourge to society that needs to be outlawed.

At least, they’re that scourge according to one Montana lawmaker. Rep. David Moore, a legislator from Missoula, proposed a bill that would redefine indecent exposure laws, making it illegal to wear in public:

any device, costume, or covering that gives the appearance of or simulates the genitals, pubic hair, anus region, or pubic hair region.

Moore explained that “Yoga pants should be illegal in public anyway” during a hearing on the bill. He also cited that tight-fitting beige clothing would be something included under the new bill as indecent exposure.

So, the bill didn’t really actually ban yoga pants–but it did leave determining indecent exposure up to the discretion of police officers, and yoga pants could certainly have been included.

One of the most concerning things this about this bill is that it didn’t amend the penalties for breaking indecent exposure laws. According to the Billings Gazette:

A first offense for violating Montana’s indecent exposure law carries a fine of no more than $500 and six months in jail. A second offense carries up to $1,000 or one year in jail.

That seems incredibly extreme for pants that don’t even show skin. A year in jail for yoga pants, really?

In addition, there are many worries that Moore’s legislation is sexist in nature–after all, it mentions only the “female nipple” and based on societal norms alone, women are more likely to wear tight-fitting clothing. One of Moore’s female colleagues, Rep. Virginia Court, even attempted to point that out to him, to seemingly no avail.

The debate over yoga pants in our public spaces is nothing new–the fight over whether to ban them in schools has been waging for a couple years now. Read fellow Law Streeter Noel Diem’s breakdown of the subject here.

The applicability of a ban of yoga pants in school is debatable–those who believe in instituting one argue that the tight-fitting garments are distracting to students, while those who disagree with a ban argue that young men should be taught not to objectify women for their clothing choices. Either way, schools are somewhat different; they usually have stricter dress codes than the real world, and they do have to take special considerations into account, such as bullying, and developmental differences between students.

To ban yoga pants and other tight clothing for adults, however, would most likely be both significantly more difficult, and receive even more ire than a similar move inside a school. Expression concerns aside, it’s important to take into account that yoga pants, spandex, and other forms of tight-fitting clothing are often used by athletes, as they provide minimal interference to physical performance.

The entire move on Moore’s part paints him as outdated and puritanical. While there’s certainly many, many times and places where yoga pants shouldn’t be worn–and private businesses are more than welcome to institute dress codes that exclude them–outlawing them for all of public society is extreme to the point of being laughable. Moore’s bill has been tabled–which means that nothing will really come of it. Meanwhile, people of Montana, relax easily tonight in your comfy, form-fitting clothes.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Just Relax: Montana Lawmaker Attempts to Ban Yoga Pants appeared first on Law Street.

Law Street’s top three articles last week covered a whole range of hot topics. Don’t worry if you ate too much turkey and couldn’t keep your eyes open to read them though, we’ve got you covered here. The Crime in America Team’s coverage of the Safest and Most Dangerous States in the nation took the top spot; Noel Diem delved into the complicated world of school dress codes and their effects on students for article number two; and Allison Dawson wrote the third most popular post of the week with a look into the University of Virginia’s move to shut down fraternities while it investigates rape allegations published in Rolling Stone. ICYMI, here are the top three stores of the week from Law Street.

#1 Slideshow: America’s Safest & Most Dangerous States 2015

Alaska is the most dangerous state in the nation according to the latest violent crime data from the FBI. With an increase in violent crime rate from 603 per 100,000 people in 2012 to 640 in 2013–the most recent year for which the FBI provides data–Alaska moved into the number one spot, followed by New Mexico (613) and Nevada (603). Read full article here.

#2 School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem?

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Read full article here.

#3 University of Virginia Suspends All Fraternities After Rape Allegations

You might have missed it with all the huge news events within the last week, but there was aRolling Stone article published last week about a young woman who was the victim of a heinous crime. Seven (yes, SEVEN) young men at a fraternity party raped the woman over a three-hour period. The rape took place two years ago, but now that the story is out UVA President Teresa A. Sullivan has decided to shut down all fraternities until at least January 9, 2015. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Some things make more sense when it comes to the dress code: no short-shorts, no shirts with offensive sayings, and no pants that sag too low. There are also some questionable additions to the dress code, namely yoga pants, leggings, spandex running pants and other clothing that fights tightly to the body. With the seemingly endless stream of issues that American school teachers are responsible for this begs the question, are yoga pants really the problem?

What’s the fuss about yoga pants?

Yoga pants have really become a hot button topic among everyone from teenagers to fashion’s biggest designers. The pants are made out of a thin material that stretches and gives, which is why they’re comfortable for people to wear. The pants are usually credited as flattering on most body types because they cling to the legs and give definition where there may not be any. The pants also can become sheer when someone bends over, which is a chief complaint among the trend’s naysayers; however, if they are the proper size, that may not be an issue–especially with yoga pants, which tend to be thick. Many schools are dealing with the dilemma of whether or not they are proper attire for the classroom, and emotions run deep on both sides.

What sort of punishments can yoga pants get you in school?

Regulations vary from school district to school district, but an increasing number of them are outlawing yoga pants, leggings, and similar wear. The punishments and ramifications also vary, but they usually involve a request to change into either clothes brought by parents, or provided by the school.

Ashley Crtalic published a well written letter in the Billings Gazette a few weeks ago that raised some interesting points about her local high school dress code, including a punishment that is increasingly popular in public schools: public shaming and humiliation for not following the dress code. Some schools have extra, extra large shirts that say “I disobeyed the Dress Code,” or “Dress Code Reinforcement” on them, showing everyone in the school that that person broke the rules. Students have to either wear the shirt or have a parent bring in a spare pair of clothes.

Alternatively, some schools will have their students sit in the office until parents come in with a change of clothes. The concern with this is that today in America, if a home does have two parents, they usually both work, so requiring a parent to leave work in order to bring alternative clothing to school can be a burden. These students are missing out on important class time that they need, especially if they want to go onto college–all because they wore yoga pants to school. Other punishments range from detention, demerits, loss of privileges, and loss of activities.

How are students fighting back?

Feminism is reaching a whole new, younger audience thanks to social media websites like Tumblr. It is through those platforms that people are hearing more and more about these argued injustices. A 14-year-old student recently put up these posters over signs announcing her school’s dress code, protesting against them publicly and hoping to gain support.

Many school officials claim “distraction” is why these types of pants are banned. Students have responded to that criticism with concerns of their own, however, that such strict dress codes and punishments unduly distract female students. If a female student has to sit in the classroom with an embarrassing shirt on, or sit in the office waiting for a new outfit, she is probably not able to pay full attention to her studies.

Students who disagree with these dress codes argue that the distraction comes in many forms–gossip, catcalling, attention, unwanted touching, or even unwanted pictures. If it is as bad as has been reported at some schools, it would be bordering on sexual harassment, which shouldn’t be tolerated by any school. Those who stand against such dress restrictions argue that part of the purpose of school is to prepare young people to be functioning members of society, one of those things should be how to properly function in public.

So, is banning yoga pants a good idea?

Some argue that not allowing girls to wear yoga pants or leggings to school is a way to keep them responsible for their own appearances, and provide training for when they go into the real world. Girls won’t be allowed to wear leggings or yoga pants to the office, and school is preparing young adults to go out into the work force. Schools have banned pajamas, basketball shorts, and sweatpants for students for similar reasons–they aren’t the correct attire to wear in a professional environment. Supporters argue that it’s not an attack on young women, but rather a valuable teaching moment for students.

Other parents say that not allowing yoga pants or leggings in schools will cut down on the bullying and taunting of other students, namely females. Many girls who are bigger get made fun of for wearing leggings, especially if they cannot find them in the correct size. There is also a question of classism within leggings. Those who can afford the more expensive leggings are more likely to not have a problem with the sheerer, cheaper variety.

Some of the parents who are for banning yoga pants are in favor of instituting a much stricter dress code overall for all students, limiting them to shirts with collars and khaki pants. This works to eliminate some of the label mongering that many schools face, as the outfits will all be similar. It also prepares students for being comfortable in what would be a business casual outfit in college or a work place.

Case Study: Haven Middle School

The administrators of Haven Middle School in Illinois told parents in September that their daughters were no longer allowed to wear shorts, leggings, or yoga pants to school because they were “too distracting.” Parents fought against the rule because they didn’t think it was the girls’ responsibility to stop boys from becoming distracted.

They wrote a petition that 500 students went on to sign, claiming that the rule was sexist. Some students wore yoga pants anyway, in protest. One girl told the Evanston Review that, “Not being able to wear leggings because it’s ‘too distracting for boys’ is giving us the impression we should be guilty for what guys do.”

The parents are fighting back as well, say that, “This kind of message lands itself squarely on a continuum that blames girls and women for assault by men. It also sends the message to boys that their behaviors are excusable, or understandable given what the girls are wearing. We really hope that you will consider the impact of these policies and how they contribute to rape culture.”

As of publication time the dress code at Haven Middle School is still up for review.

Case Study: Skyview High School

When the administrators of the small Billings, Montana high school decided to add the following provision to the handbook over the summer, they didn’t think it would cause a big problem: “Leggings, jeggings, and tights ARE NOT pants and must be worn with dress code appropriate shorts, skirts, dresses, or pants.”

But it was a problem for many students, including one who went to the school board and declared that they were shaming the women in the school. “It’s completely sexist and misogynistic,” she said. “This tells women that our bodies are something that need to be hidden.” It is important to note that boys in the school were allowed to wear sleeveless t-shirts as they are a part of their uniforms.

No one has been sent home for violating the new code, but the principal has said that she has asked students to put on a longer top or sweatshirt. If they don’t have one, they can borrow one from the office. By a week after the ban, 200 students wore yoga pants on the same day.

Conclusion

Dress codes do have a place in our public schools. It is the job of the school district to prepare students for their best possible futures–futures that probably don’t include wearing leggings or yoga pants to the office. They are fine for gym class, for lounging around on the weekends, but in school, the goal should be to learn, not be comfortable. In fact, not allowing any sort of loungewear on the school grounds is a great way to improve the wardrobe of students before they go into college or the workforce. Let’s teach our kids how to dress for success.  As is currently the case of some dress codes or dressing standards, schools are typically assuming that boys can’t pay attention because of the way girls dress; however, we might not be giving either party the benefit of the doubt. By high school, if schools have done their jobs, our students should know how to act. If they don’t, then it is up to principals, guidance counselors, teachers, or other male students to have a meeting of the minds with these young men. This is a topic that will continue to cause contention in our public schools as districts deal with new trends and fads.

Resources

NY Daily News: ‘Distracting’ Yoga Pants Banned By Officials at North Dakota High School

Billings Gazette: Why Yoga Pants Are Incredibly Dangerous to Today’s Youth

My Fox Philly: High School Bans Yoga Pants

Alternet: High School Bans Dangerous Threat to Male Students: Yoga Pants

Fox 17: Leggings and Yoga Pants Are Banned at Niles High School

Boston.com: Your Guide to America’s War on Yoga Pants

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem? appeared first on Law Street.