Why do you care about how other parents dress?

FranticFrummie

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 5:27 am

Ack! I was in bed all day with a wicked migraine, so I missed a lot of this post and my comments got misunderstood again. I'm going to blame the migraine on my lack of communication skills here.

When I mentioned nail polish, etc. I was NOT talking about the parents, I was talking about 10 year old girls! The issue is related, because the girls dress that way because the parents let. They are copying their mothers.

For the record, I own Uggs. They are house slippers, and I wouldn't be caught dead wearing them out of the house. I own sparkly nail polish, but I keep it very subtle and low key. I am also an adult, and I know what is appropriate to wear and when.

I do not think that miniskirts and bright red nail polish are appropriate for 10yo girls, and that is what DD sees at shul (and all of these girls go to the MO school). The kids at her public school dress more tznius than the kids at shul do - and I do blame the parents for that.

During the week, most of the Jewish girls in our community wear denim jeans, short shorts, and tank tops, and their mothers do too. That is the sort of example I'd like to avoid, and what DD finds the most confusing.

The example that parents and teachers set DOES have a direct impact on the kids, in tzniut, middos, and general Yiddishkeit.

If we are supposed to be a light unto the nations, we should start with being a light to our own children. The people who are around our children, teaching our children, etc. all have a great impact on them. As parents, there's nothing wrong with wanting only the best influences for them. We should be searching for an environment that will cast the most light on our children.

Slightly off topic, has anyone else noticed that the daughters of "big name rabbis" are the ones in school who get away with the shortest skirts, makeup, nail polish, and dangly earrings - all in violation of the dress code? No one says "boo" to them, and the other girls, mostly the ones with subsidized tuition, can't help but notice the hypocrisy. Not the best example, either. I've met the mothers of these girls, and they are all Hot Chanies. Confused

shabbatiscoming

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 5:58 am

FranticFrummie wrote:

This will be the third time I have asked on this thread, what in the world is wrong with uggs? being worn out of the house by a grown woman?

FranticFrummie

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 6:19 am

It's not about one article of clothing, it's the over all cumulative effect. I wouldn't think twice about a tush length sheitel paired with a conservative outfit, either. A flash of colorful nail polish, a bright statement necklace, or a 4 inch heel is perfectly fine, when used in moderation, against a tznius backdrop - add them all together, and it just looks like you're trying too hard.

The combination of Uggs and a skin tight miniskirt is what's wrong. It draws all your attention to the legs (usually bare, no tights). Especially on a teenage girl who is experimenting with the power of her zexuality, and seeing the reaction she can get out of boys.

I have never, EVER seen Uggs worn with a skirt that fell below the knee, and worn with tights.

I belong to the Dolly Welsh school of fashion. Stay classy, and you'll always be in style.

shabbatiscoming

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 7:55 am

FranticFrummie wrote:

Hi, meet me, shabbatiscoming. I wear uggs to keep my feet warm. I dont own one shirt tight skirt. I wear skirts that come down to my ankle (Im short, thats where they usually come to no matter what) I have seen others do the same.

But my question still stands. You wrote that you would never be caught dead in uggs, but you really meant, that look you were talking about, not exclusively uggs. Gosh, uggs have been around for a long time. Why this new obsession with boots and shorter skirts? I really dont get it.
And if they are not wearing tights with the uggs, then what are they wearing?

MommyZ

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 8:02 am

shabbatiscoming wrote:

For some reason tights and Uggs is less frowned upon than leggings and Uggs. I really don't know why. If someone is comfortable in a long wig, knee length pencil skirt with leggings, and Uggs, good for them. I guess since there are so many Orthodox Jews, people take it for granted that they can count other Jews out based on superficialities.

mommy3b2c

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 8:14 am

DrMom wrote:

Of course how we dress sends messages to others about our hashkafa (and financial status, and social class, etc.). And of course we will tend to send our children to a place where they will feel comfortable.

BUT, there's a huge difference between saying "I'd prefer not to send my children to school X because I gather their hashkafa is a bit more liberal than ours, based on the style of dress of the mothers" vs. "the mothers there dress like sluts and bums."

And no, I don't buy the argument "Oh, if you're not Chassidic, you won't understand this attitude; I cannot explain it to you." You can explain it very simply, if you wanted to: it's called being nasty, putting down people who are not like you, disrespecting others' hashkafot, and putting insularity above love and respect for your fellow Jews.

Dr. Mom, you are so right! You finally acknowledged what ive been saying all along. There are messages sent by dress, which is why people care what the other mothers wear. And theres nothing wrong with that!

There is however something wrong with calling the other moms sl-ts or any other sort of name. I doubt anyone would disagree with you.

The op's question was why do you care? So I answered that question, and explained that we all care and theres nothing wrong with that as long as long as you are respectful to others.

If the post said, why do yeshivish/chassidish pple think its okay to call other people sl-ts? Then I would have answered that they dont. Sone people are just not nice.

MommyZ

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 8:16 am

mommy2b2c wrote:

Is calling people bums ok?

PinkFridge

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 8:19 am

FranticFrummie wrote:

The combination of Uggs and a skin tight miniskirt is what's wrong. It draws all your attention to the legs (usually bare, no tights). Especially on a teenage girl who is experimenting with the power of her zexuality, and seeing the reaction she can get out of boys.

I have never, EVER seen Uggs worn with a skirt that fell below the knee, and worn with tights.

I belong to the Dolly Welsh school of fashion. Stay classy, and you'll always be in style.

Better than tight mini skirt with stilletos or spikey biker boots, etc. My beef with Uggs is the $$$ ;-)
Seriously, I hear how for some reason Uggs has become part of a look, but it's by no means exclusive to that look. I really have no problem with boots, or their knockoffs. (Though of course no one would be caught dead in knockoffs.)

mommy3b2c

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 8:30 am

MommyZ wrote:

Fair enough.

And honestly, if you read through my posts, there is not one single post that would have anybody think that im okay with calling anyone names. I was just answering the original question. Why do people care.
I think I explained myself very well right from the start, but there are some posters on here who only ask these questions to put others down. They are not really looking for an answer. So when I answered right away in a way that was respectful to both sides, they starting picking my posts a part and accusing me of rediculous things such as being conformist, which is an absurd thing to say about me, of all people.

As I said before, I am neither yeshivish/chassidish or mo. Just trying to make peace.

DrMom

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 9:47 am

mommy2b2c wrote:

Of course dress does broadcast certain messages. I simply object to the bizarre messages that some people ascribe to various articles of clothing.

The Uggs discussion here is just plain ludicrous. Someone doesn't want to send her child to school where the mothers of the children wear uggs. Why? Because she thinks this particular footwear can ONLY be worn with short, tight skirts and some sort of hosiery which she doesn't like, therefore she makes an illogical leap to UGGS=poor yiddishkeit. It's insane. Why not say you're against short tight skirts because of tznius issues, and leave the footwear out of it?

It's the same aggravating (il)logic that leads to rules like "no metal eyeglass frames" because metal frames are "modern" (they're not but ...) and we don't want to catch "modern" cooties, and we don't want anyone to think we might have caught "modern" cooties, and we don't want our shidduchim compromised because someone thinks we caught "modern" cooties, and we will keep metal-eyeglass wearers (or Ugg-wearers) out of our schools so that we won't be mixing with the (ahem) wrong sort. You know, the "bummy" sort. It's snobbery based on the most superficial and picayune details -- details that have *absolutely nothing* to do with yiddishkeit.

Dandelion1

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 10:24 am

DrMom wrote:

Very well put. It is human nature to categorize, and unfortunately, this is usually done by physical appearance. I switched to an "elite" coed modern orthodox school in 4th grade, and you can be sure that the second I walked in I was assessed and pegged by the kids in the class. I was there on scholarship, my background did not match that of the "ruling class" so to speak, and that was noted and registered immediately. I was "poor." They were not. I was fortunate to make good friends there, but you bet that our socioeconomic status was well-matched.

I think what grates so much in discussions like this is that we are discussing divisions based on "religiosity." Not that it is better to be snobby based on wealth, or physical beauty, or whatever, but superficiality is easier to take when it is admittedly such. My clothes were hand-me-downs, theirs were from the expensive boutiques. They spent summers and vacations in pools on remote islands, we had the hydrant down the block. Clear, and concise, and ultimately, although unfair and unkind, honest.

But here, we have a situation of trying to assign people into groups based on criteria that do not reflect what is implied, what they are said to reflect. Uggs are not less tznius, nor are metal glasses, or long sweepy skirts, or the blue material called denim, or many of the other items mentioned. The implication is that the people who wear them are less g-d fearing, less frum. There might be other associations held and other reasons that some communities want to remain separate from bummy denim clad ugg wearers, but level of frumkeit isn't an accurate one. And it hurts that that is the message.

naturalmom5

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 10:54 am

FF, and others who rail against girls and women who dress very provocative, and act in a less than refined way.

I think its basic human nature 101.. In all my years, in college , work, travel, recreation, I have never seen secular women over 30 carrying on like this outside of the club scene.. They are comfortable in their own skin and dont need to rebel or look for attention.

On this very thread we have witnessed, what I see daily in real life. Many members of charedi communities throw large chunks of bein adom lchaveiro, middos, and other aspects of the Torah down the toilet. When called on it, they very obnoxiously, and unapologetically say , it just is, you wont be able to understand .. Excuse me, what I do understand is that you are not following the Torah... Then they have the unmitigated gall to say that other women , you have to dress like this, walk like this, talk like this, blow your nose like this etc....

So the obvious response to a lot of this, unfortunately is *** you.. This manifests itself in the very unrefined way many women dress and act..

It isnt rocket science

anon for this

Thu, Jan 02 2014, 10:57 am

candyheart wrote:

I think what grates so much in discussions like this is that we are discussing divisions based on "religiosity." Not that it is better to be snobby based on wealth, or physical beauty, or whatever, but superficiality is easier to take when it is admittedly such. My clothes were hand-me-downs, theirs were from the expensive boutiques. They spent summers and vacations in pools on remote islands, we had the hydrant down the block. Clear, and concise, and ultimately, although unfair and unkind, honest.

But here, we have a situation of trying to assign people into groups based on criteria that do not reflect what is implied, what they are said to reflect. Uggs are not less tznius, nor are metal glasses, or long sweepy skirts, or the blue material called denim, or many of the other items mentioned. The implication is that the people who wear them are less g-d fearing, less frum. There might be other associations held and other reasons that some communities want to remain separate from bummy denim clad ugg wearers, but level of frumkeit isn't an accurate one. And it hurts that that is the message.

candyheart, what you wrote here resonates with me. I find divisiveness in the name of Judaism so painful because it cheapens what Judaism is about. I see it as a serious chillul Hashem, in the literal sense.