Families of students in Anderson Community Schools are scrambling to assemble wardrobes for their kids that will meet the standards set by the school board for attire in the coming school year and beyond. From the noisy reaction of the dissenters, you might think the end of time was approaching.

In adopting the policy to require what is loosely termed uniforms, school officials noted that generally courts have ruled that uniform policies are legally enforceable, while dress codes are not. What is wrong with this picture?

It’s no big mystery what led to a uniform policy, a trend that is becoming widespread across these United States, thank you very much. Guys were showing up for school in pants that looked as if they were swiped from the closet of Shaquille O’Neal or Yao Ming and cut off at the knees and frayed with a few knife slashes in various places. Their shirts displayed a variety of printed material ranging from blatant advertisements to outrageous exercises of freedom of expression. And girls were wearing tops and bottoms that barely covered the essentials and little else, including tattoos and the like in the otherwise unadorned midriff area.

Essentially, the ACS uniform policy requires pants, trousers, capris, skirts, skorts or jumpers in black, navy or khaki with normal waistlines and at least knee length. Tops can be any solid color in polo, oxford or turtleneck styles with a collar (or turtleneck) and must be tucked in unless they have a 2-inch band around the bottom. Sweaters can be any solid color. No jeans, please. If there are belt loops, a belt is required.

Apparently that rules out otherwise normal decorations and multicolored garb, and it eliminates collarless shirts and free-fall necklines. Some of the handmade stuff my wife has made for our granddaughter — otherwise decent, attractive clothing — won’t qualify. And our granddaughter, who loves dresses, apparently will have to settle for skirts and tops instead (that part of the code is still unclear to most people).

The much-vaunted cost factor essentially will be a startup expense. Once stores (including low-cost alternatives such as Goodwill or the discount dollar stores) make a habit of stocking qualifying merchandise it should be at least as cheap as the stuff that provides a walking billboard for Tommy Hilfiger or Old Navy or the brand du jour. And help is available for low-income families as well.

Lots of kids can’t stand the idea. They’re being told they can’t sport the bummed-out look, and neither can preppies (or whatever they call them these days) flaunt all the latest teen fashions accented with expensive blings and the like. And their parents don’t like being told what their kids have to wear, either because they can’t outfit them to suit themselves or they have to convince the kids the tail won’t get to wag the dog any longer.

There have even been a couple of calls for school board members’ resignations. That’s about as likely to happen as seeing Mayor Kevin Smith ride a horse down Main Street in a Speedo. Others claim the dropout rate will skyrocket. OK, maybe it gives losers one more excuse to drop out of school, which will give them a chance to wear the uniform of whatever fast food chain, supermarket or auto parts store will offer a job to someone without a high school diploma. Or if they’re real losers, maybe a prison uniform.

Or they can move to another school district, if they can find one that lets them wear whatever they want to. The state’s largest school district, Indianapolis Public Schools, recently adopted a policy very similar to ACS’. The difference there is that IPS calls it a dress code. Conformity by any other name …

We’re told the ACS policy could get some tweaking. Maybe a few restricted variations will come under the acceptable label. That likely won’t satisfy the naysayers.

I also wonder about the ages of the protesters. Somehow I doubt if many of them are anywhere in my age range. Most of us, you see, had little if any more latitude than the so-called uniform policy.

When we were in school, girls wore skirts (and tops that came to or below the waist) or dresses, period. No shorts, capris or pants of any sort. Everything hung from the waist (although the guys then did tend to let their trousers sag as much as they could). One big problem in those days occurred whenever three girls walked side by side down the hall in their hoop skirts and layers of crinolines, and nobody could get past them.

Sometime after that came a ban on blue jeans. Some guys did wear T-shirts as outerwear, but in those days they were plain with no words or logos on them. And sneakers were strictly for gym class. Uniforms? Sometimes parochial schools had them, and they were more than dress codes in disguise – those who wore uniforms matched with cookie-cutter precision like Boy Scouts or Brownies or Little Lord Fauntleroys.

But of course every generation has to be a little bit more in-your-face than the one before it. And those who market style take advantage of this by aiming their sales pitches at the youngest customers.

Sooner or later, however, the point of no return has to be reached. And maybe today’s school boards are choosing to draw the line before bikinis and sleeveless metallic jackets become the norm.



Jim Bailey’s column appears on Sunday. He can be reached by e-mail at jameshenrybailey@earthlink.net.