Can banning skinny jeans curb bullying?

A North Carolina school district is considering a ban on skinny jeans and leggings to stop appearance-based bullying. Will that work?

Mike Segar/ Reuters
Jeans are seen for sale in an American Eagle Outfitters retail store in Manhattan, New York, U.S. in May 2016. A North Carolina school district is considering a ban on skinny jeans and leggings to stop appearance-based bullying.

Skinny jeans may be forbidden in one North Carolina school district, where a newly proposed dress code that bans leggings, skinny jeans, and "any other excessively tight fitting pants" has outraged many students and parents.

New Hanover County School System in North Carolina's Wilmington area proposed the new rule after some heavier girls were bullied on account of wearing tight jeans. The rule does, however, allow students to wear skinny jeans if a shirt or dress covers "the posterior in its entirety."

While some oppose the proposed ban on account of cost or fashion, others warn that changing a bullying teen's character takes more than changing school clothing.  

Earlier this month, the school district invited students to voice their opinions about the new rule on social media. "What am I supposed to wear to school??? Curtains???" one student tweeted. "Go to the mall and find 10 pairs of jeans that fit what you're looking for? I bet you can't," wrote another.

The reality, they say, is that most jeans available today for women and teenage girls adhere to the skinny jean trend. Leggings and tight-fitting jeans are easier to come by, and sometimes the only kind of pants available, at stores most popular among young women.

And not only is it difficult to find pants that fit more loosely, but doing so may also be a financial burden for some families. Many parents asked if the school board would purchase new pants for the students, since they are proposing to eliminate a staple in their wardrobes.

"If you want me to follow the dress code, the you have to replace all my skinny jeans and leggings. My family can't afford to," one student tweeted.

Moreover, the new rule does not guarantee that those students who were bullied will suddenly be immune.

"How about addressing fatphobia, bullying, and unnecessary oversexualization of girls w/o restricting their personal attire," another student tweeted. A different student pointed out that for some body frames, everything might fit tightly, whether the jeans are "skinny" or not: "I'm sorry. Everything fits tight. I have thighs. Sorry. Oh no. SO WHAT. MY SCHOOL IS FALLING APART. FIX THAT."

Parents also objected to the new rule. "From my perspective, telling people that they can't wear something because they are being bullied takes away the choice from them," Chris Furner, whose child is in first grade at Parsley Elementary School, told the Star News in Wilmington, N.C.. "They could have the choice to change their clothes if that is the case."

Lisa Estep, a school board member, posted a extended comment about the policy on Facebook. As a 6'1" woman who describes herself as a "bigger girl," Ms. Estep grew up being teased and bullied. "Guess what? You can't legislate kindness. But you can teach it," she wrote. "You can't legislate compassion. But you can live it. As a system, we should, as best we can, foster an environment where all students feel included and valued," she wrote.

Still, she added, bullying can never be completely solved: students bring emotional baggage beyond the school's ability to fix, which manifests itself in behavioral issues. "So we should enforce the current no tolerance policy on bullying," she continued, "But I, as a School Board member, should not try to equate dress code restrictions with helping to combat bullying." Epstein said she would hope that if enforced, that the rules be applied to both boys and girls.

In response to the criticism over the new dress code, Jeannette Nichols, vice chairwoman of the school board, said the proposal would return to the policy committee for more discussion. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Can banning skinny jeans curb bullying?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today