I just had to laugh when I saw the ridiculous ruling by a
federal judge in North Carolina. NBC reports that he struck down as unconstitutional a rule in one
of the states charter schools that required girls to wear skirts:
Judge Malcolm Howard in the Eastern District of North Carolina ruled Friday that the dress code at Charter Day School in the town of Leland violates the Equal Protection Clause by discriminating against females.
"The skirt requirement causes the girls to suffer a burden the boys do not, simply because they are female," Howard ruled.
Really? How about this? Pregnancy causes the girls to suffer
a burden the boys do not, simply because they are female."
The fact happens to be that there men and women are different.
We can’t always equalize things. Nor should we necessarily try. There are for example modesty issues where reasonable
accommodations could be made. But the current cultural climate doesn’t recognize
such distinctions. Because of the dominant egalitarian ethic, male female
distinctions are strictly biological. Any consideration to traditional ethics and values are at best discarded as archaic and irrelevant - even sneered at by the militant
feminists. That is the only way to explain how a judge can strike down a rule that
respects traditional values.
The point is that men and women are different in ways which
are more than just physical. Traditional values which reflect those values should not be so
easily dismissed.
That said, I admit being influenced by the culture in which
I live. Therefore my own views on modesty in dress are not based on whether a
woman wears slacks, a skirt or a dress. It is in how provocative any of those
items are. Without getting into obvious detail I have seen women wearing
dresses that are far more provocative than many of the women I see wearing
slacks. And vice versa.
Be that as it may, I am equally convinced that in Orthodox circles women that wear skirts will be seen by their peers as being
more modestly dressed than those that wear slacks. I also believe that the
reason for this is based on both Halacha and tradition.
That the court rejected the school's argument that its dress
code promoted "traditional values" and fostered "mutual
respect" between boys and girls because there was no causal relationship
shown doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Not being able to prove the value of a tradition doesn’t mean we
should reject it. The positive
effects of tradition cannot always be described in concrete terms. It’s kind of like what Justice Potter Stewart said
about porn. You know it when you see it.
It was not all that long ago where almost all working women
wore skirts or dresses. That we have defined modesty down doesn’t mean that the
old standards should be abandoned as too burdensome. I believe
that the way a person dresses has an impact not only on how others see them - but on how they see themselves
Orthodox Judaism requires women to wear skirts. Which is why Orthodox schools require it of their female students. Although there might be a technical
way to get around that, I do not believe any Orthodox school would support that kind of
work around. Thankfully the court’s ruling does not apply to private schools. But
it wouldn’t hurt if public schools took a cue from private schools where traditional
modesty standards like wearing skirts are observed. And see how the overall character of those students develop. I believe the 2 are related. (Yes, as always I know there are exceptions.)
It’s just too bad that tradition has so quickly been tossed to the curb these days.
