JEFFERSON CO.—Remember the big post we put up last week after all the flak about Jefferson County’s new “dress code” for the courthouse?
Well now, they’ve backed off a little bit.
Camp shorts, cargo-pocket style. Jack loves these. He even wears them in the winter.
Seems that several people who weren’t aware of the dress code were wearing camp shorts into the courthouse…you know, those multi-pocketed cargo pants-type of “shorts” that aren’t short at all, aren’t tight, and generally aren’t worn around the buttocks (saggin). They complained that “long” shorts shouldn’t violate any type of dress code…the shorts show less than most outfits overall that some people wear in the summer.
And they gained a little ground in their complaint.
So now, long shorts can be worn…despite the earlier edict that no pajama tops or bottoms; cut-offs or shorts of any type; house slippers or comparable footwear; tank tops; muscle shirts; halter tops or half-shirts; mesh or see-through shirts; hats or ‘do-rags; and clothing with inappropriate or offensive logos, pictures or writing can be worn.
The latter part of the edict is what we here take offense to (see our previous post as to why), but I, in particular, took offense to the “no shorts” thing, mainly because in the summer I wear some really nice shorts sets, three-piece ensembles, that come from places like Talbots and Coldwater Creek, and I buy these because they’re cool, they’re ladylike, and they’re fashionable. No buttcheeks hanging out, no skintightness, no thongs being displayed, like they tend to do these days…which started about 15 years ago in Europe (I was there; I remember):
To illustrate how ludicrous this all-encompassing “dress code” is, however, we have no further to look than a little anecdote that was relayed to Jack when he was waiting around with the camera crews Monday afternoon at the Coston hearing.
The camera guy advised that he was at the JeffCo courthouse after the dress code had been instituted, and with him was of course the little TV reporter relating whatever story it was going to be for the day. Lil gal had on a pair of nice dress shorts along the lines of what I was describing above. She was, of course, advised by courthouse staff that she could not wear them in (after being there for 30 minutes). So she ran to her house, and made a quick change, coming back wearing a little dark-colored skirt that, according to Camera Dude, “If it were any shorter, you could have read her lips.”
The problem with skirts like this is that they’re rarely worn by someone who weighs 110 lbs., like this model.
Now. I, as a former retail maven in a previous life, know there are lots of different shorts lengths and skirt lengths. I’m sure lil gal probably didn’t have on any shorter than a 5-inch length on her nice shorts outfit. But a 5-inch length on most shorts is totally conservative by comparison to a very short skirt in which, when one sits down, if one isn’t careful, the mystery’s over. But it’s by God a SKIRT!!! Which didn’t make the LIST!!! It is all adorably feminine and ladylike!!!! Also worn by hookers!!!
I don’t know who this TV gal is, but she has my admiration. Point made. When you start making dress codes, you cannot be inclusive. You must be EXclusive. You must not give a list of what’s acceptable to wear or to not wear; you must give a list of what’s acceptable to SHOW or NOT SHOW.
That way, you make sure that the parts that some people deem offensive are covered up. So why not institute a dress codes that introduces those standards? instead of the above-mentioned things you cannot wear to the courthouse, simply state:
Uncover your head while in the courthouse out of respect, but please cover every other body part that would be considered “indecent” if exposed. Please no exposure of breasts, front or side; no exposure of buttocks (to include crease with leg if you have one, butt-cracks, cheeks); no exposure of underwear at all, to include bra straps; no exposure of midriff, front or back parts; no excess exposure of skin via mesh or see-thru shirts; and no house slippers.
Then state that violation of these guidelines will be a requirement to hop into a dayglo orange jail jumpsuit for your court appearance.
Personally, I think the latter would be the ultimate deterrent. The judge isn’t going to question why you’re wearing jail togs. He (or she) will just proceed with your case…eyeing you carefully because your file isn’t showing you’re incarcerated, ergo he or she will know you’re in violation of the courthouse’s dress code. How that goes for you in your case…well, that’s your problem. Good suggestion, Sheriff Roger Mulch…why not try it? Let’s see how long it takes for word to get around…because I’m thinking such a thing will spread like wildfire, and maybe, just maybe, these folks will come to court showing the respect you’re trying to force them to show.