Should a male public school teacher be allowed to wear a dress?

America is fcuked up.

Let him do it. But if any students or parents complain, make him stop. The kids don't need any distraction from their education because this man just wants to wear a dress. It isn't fair to the kids.

No. If a man showed up to pretty much any job wearing a dress, his boss would ask him to change. His principal has every right to tell him to change, because it's distracting.

In my high school teachers couldn't even have beards.

But does he wear a tie?

Do what you want, but understand that education is a conservative environment. So, unless you want to remain a substitute, save the drag for your own time.

am I wrong or did the article say that he wore capri pants, not a dress? Art students (males) wear capri pants all the time now. So, that would not be cross dressing. I don't get it myself, but it is "fashionable."

The OP should feel free to wear a dress if he chooses.

There are differences between men and women. As progressiveness tries to blend the two into one, you get some wacky results.

Nope

Deuteronomy 22:5 & 1 Corinthians 6:9

Of course a male should be allowed to wear a dress (or anything else for that matter) as long as his body is covered to the level of decency in a professional setting.

That anyone worries about this stuff is absolutely mind boggling. Who gives a flying F what someone else wants to wear?

The Waterboy wrote:

Nope

Deuteronomy 22:5 & 1 Corinthians 6:9

F*ck you!

What you really meant wrote:

Of course a male should be allowed to wear a dress (or anything else for that matter) as long as his body is covered to the level of decency in a professional setting.

That anyone worries about this stuff is absolutely mind boggling. Who gives a flying F what someone else wants to wear?

I'm about as far to the left as you can get on social issues, but really? If a teacher wants to wear a clown suit to class every day, that's okay? What if he wants to wear the front half of a two-person horse costume? How about samurai armor?

No, it's improper attire. Just like he shouldn't wear running shorts or a tuxedo or sweatpants. Employers have the right to set a dress code for their employees, and unless you're working at a cross-dresser bar, banning men from wearing dresses is a perfectly acceptable policy. Independent of any "cultural/gender norms" or whathaveyou.

The Waterboy wrote:

Nope

Deuteronomy 22:5 & 1 Corinthians 6:9

Psalm 137:9 & 1 Peter 2:18

So why would that matter? Students are going to class in their pajamas.

Are female teachers allowed to wear pants?

Someone mentioned a tuxedo. What if the teacher came to work in a suit and tie and that proved distracting to the students (many of whom, as written above, come to school in pajamas)?

At what point should the teacher's right to dress himself (or herself) be curtailed because it proved distracting to the students? Is the question, what does the teacher have the right to wear (in this case with a government institution for an employer, that should be anyuting that doesn't violate public decency laws) or is it what will not prove distracting to the students? Because the latter is a very subjective standard (the opinion of 150 teenagers) and may end up clearly violating the teacher's civil rights.

I don't know if this question has been fully explored in the courts: can an employer, public or private, discriminate against an employee because who they are has a negative outcome on performance? This is one case in which some mayu successfully argue that being an open transvestite makes holding proper class impossible, and thus rule that a dress code for men and women may be enforced. But what if a real estate company that caters to affluent neighborhoods doesn't hire a fully qualified black realator because, the company argues, most of their clients don't like black people. Federal law bars the prospective employer from discriminating against someone based on race, however, in this case, it's not because of a personal prejudice, but how race would play a role in job performance.

In the case of the teacher, no one is saying that any American man doesn't have the right to wear a dress out in public, but does that right take a back seat if the students can't handle the teacher exercising thay right as he currently desires to? And if that's the case, if the students were distracted by having a woman (wearing pants) or a simply a black man as their teacher, should their civil rights take a back seat, too? You might say that what you wear is a choice and not the same as your gender or race, however, like it or not, you will find expert opinions that state that transvestites are wired differently and thus the desire to dress as the opposite gender isn't a choice.

An old guy at my work, about 60 years of age, dresses as a woman. Wears pastels, capris, lacy stuff, earings, puts hair in a pony tail. Before I started there, he occasionally wore sundresses (It was brutal, I hear). Don't think he has the $$$ to go all the way for the full operation. As my boss said, he's not even an attractive man, so he's an absolute train wreck of a woman.

Is it distracting? Fvck yea. I can't take the guy seriously.

Should he be allowed to wear what he wants? Yea, as long as it isn't too revealing. Gender identity is overrated, anyways.

But America is fvcked up. After working in the city for a few months, it's pretty easy to see why we're falling off our post.

This is political correctness gone too far. I'm very liberal about most things but, if I'm not allowed to wear khaki shorts a t-shirt and running shoes into my workplace, when that's the clothing that I feel most comfortable wearing, why should another guy get to wear a dress to his workplace? It's very unprofessional and would be like me going to a business meeting wearing short running shorts and a wife-beater, only even more distracting.

Next thing you know, it will be some gay guy in the news suing his former employer for firing him for having sex with another male while on the clock at his workplace and claiming that he was discriminated against because of his sexuality. People should be held to the same professional standards, regardless of their sexuality. That's what it means to be truly equal.