Dad Rages At Woke School That Allows Boys To Wear Skirts But NOT Shorts

A school has ruled that boys can wear skirts on hot days, but not shorts. Wymondham High Academy in Norfolk has angered parents by introducing a gender neutral uniform policy, permitting boys and girls to wear trousers or skirts, but neither will be allowed to wear shorts.

According to The Telegraph:

Jonathan Rockey, the headteacher of the 1,705-pupil school, defended the new policy as “something we are very proud of” and insisted parents had been consulted.

However, the move, which is set to be introduced at the start of next term, has angered many.

One parent, who asked not to be named, described it as “insane”, adding: “The school appears to be deaf to parents clearly voicing concerns on this matter.

“It is not in our children’s best interest to be overdressed and overheated in the summer. This is not conducive to an effective learning environment and I believe it is a health and safety issue.”

Another parent said: “We have been repeatedly asking year after year for shorts to be added to the uniform.

“This is because girls can currently wear a skirt in the summer but boys have to wear trousers all year around… Offering a skirt as an option is not gender neutral. It would be gender neutral to offer both boys and girls the option of a skirt or shorts.

A third parent added: “I don’t have any issues with boys wearing skirts. That isn’t the problem here. I’m sure many girls would also like the opportunity to wear shorts instead of trousers in hotter months.”

The new uniform policy was introduced after more than 400 parents took part in a survey, with a large number calling for a summer uniform to be introduced at the school, which was rated “good”, according to its latest Ofsted inspection in 2017.

The exercise produced just two changes – allowing boys and girls to wear trousers or skirts, and requiring girls to wear ties as well as boys.

A father of a boy who attends the school, spoke to LBC Radio host Nick Ferrari this morning:

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Funny how a ‘gender neutral’ uniform looks exactly like it did four decades ago before the term ‘gender neutral’ existed.


This begs the question; where did you go to school?


A regular old comprehensive where the school uniform included trousers and skirts.
Ten to fifteen years ago there was a big push to introduce a gender neutral uniform that meant trousers for all students – since trousers are far more practical, and offer far more privacy than skirts.
So I stand by my statement that this ‘new’ uniform is not new at all.
The matter of who can wear what is new, but that is actually a separate issue from the uniform code.
In other words, two entirely different issues have been conflated.


I’m almost inclined to call this a storm in a teacup.
School children in genuinely hot countries – like India or the African nations – don’t wear shorts, and they manage just fine.
Just like all those parents complaining managed just fine through their school years.
So who, really, is doing the complaining? The parents, or the children who think that they should have anything they want?

That aside, the biggest problem with shorts is that they still need to reflect the uniform code and there are not many shorts on the market that will do that.


It’s not a bloody ‘storm in a teacup’ but part of an attempt to destroy gender and especially masculinity. People like this headmaster are lunatics. He isn’t doing this to help his pupils be cooler in the summer but as a crazed WOKE statement. It’s dead simple. Why would a young boy want to walk around looking like a girl unless he was suffering from gender dysphoria? Years ago it would be laughable to even suggest it.
And my friends and i didn’t ‘manage just fine’ in our school trousers during summer time. We would sit on the field at lunchtimes and be sweating buckets! The biggest worry was that the girls would notice sweat patches on our shirts!
Stop making excuses for crackpots!


Over emotional any?
Was I all hot and sweaty during the school summers? Yes. But I still managed just fine.

Go back a few centuries and you’ll find many kids – boys and girls – wore thigh length smocks. What today we would term a short dress.
And in the middle ages men wore smocks and hose – what today we would call short dress and tights.
Then, of course, there is the short skirt known as the kilt.
There is also quite a rich history, dating back millennia, of women wearing trousers.

What that school teacher is advocating is nothing new, despite his self congratulatory claims to the contrary.

So all I see is provincial, poorly contextualised, ignorant and limited perceptions arguing over language change.

A storm in a tea cup.


There is a world of difference between a fashion that develops over a period of time, usually in order to solve a problem as with the smock which was used amongst country folk who had very little money but large families, in order to preserve vital clothing underneath that could be passed down, and a sudden school ruling based on a freak ideology that seeks to water down masculinity.
Just because something is provincial or poorly contextualised doesn’t make it any less dangerous. I assume there are real boys at that particular school, and for them and their parents maybe it’s not just ‘a storm in a tea cup’.
As i said, stop making excuses for crackpots!


A little over a decade or so ago, schools across the country introduced a unisex school uniform that included trousers for boys and girls. That, in essence, was a gender neutral uniform that had far more practicality than skirts.
Under the illusory banner of ‘progressivism’ and newness, that Norfolk school has begun reintroducing and normalising old values.
It’s what I see with the whole transgender movement: an erosion of gay rights (and the erosion of homosexuality) and women’s rights, and barely concealed homophobia and misogeny.

Unless it’s from the perspective of some old school religious nutjob, does it sound like I’m making excuses for ‘crackpots’?

As for clothing style changes in the past: the changes have almost always been because of fashions of the day, driven by the influencers.
It’s likely one of the reasons why rural folk, historically little effected by influencers, have been routinely mocked as ‘backwards’.
Today there is little distinction between rural and urban dwellers, but the disseminating mindsets are still there between those who do follow fashion and those who don’t.

No excuses. Just inconvenient facts.


Your vessel is leaking Craig 🙂


I don’t understand the reference.
Though it is worth pointing out that all vessels leak: that’s why they have bilge pumps.


Craig, we could extrapolate your rather specious historical analysis and have the children walking around naked (it worked for Adam and Eve). I’m loving the passion of my namesake though 🙂 Don’t hold back Robert, say what you’re feeling….


Until they imbued knowledge and developed self awareness – at which point they got dressed.
Extrapolating an argument for nakedness from a discussion of clothing is leaping to an entirely different track.

Much of the discussions on this site over the last couple of years has been centred around how language is being changed to alter perception (such as the definitions of vaccines and pandemics), yet when I point out how language has been changed to alter the perception of clothing and who should wear what, everyone seems to go into defensive denial.
Is it because I have challenged long held, unquestioning beliefs?


How far back must one go in order to support a weak argument? BTW- Speaking of bilge 🙂


We must see things differently, because all I see really is social regression – not progression.
Authoritarianism is regression. Collectivism is regression. Feudal systems are regressive. Slavery is regressive. Centralisation of capital wealth is regressive. Conversion therapy for current or potential homosexuals (puberty blockers, etc) id regressive. Men given carte blanche to attack women (the trans activists) is regressive. Blaming the weather on the sins of people is regressive. The stirring up of racial hatred is regressive. Grievance culture and persecutions are regressive. The promotion of ‘little adults’ is regressive. And, yes, reintroducing skirts into the school uniform is regressive.
Old, regressive ideas being re-normalised through a social engineering programme that uses new and fashionable language.

Marty Hopkirk

Reminds me of an incident from my primary school days, when me and several other boys would regularly take off our jumpers and tie them round our waists during hot summer days. On one particular day, our teacher summoned myself and the other boys to the front of the classroom and suggested that if we wanted to, they could “give us all skirts to wear instead” to laughs and giggles from the rest of the class.

Of course this was only intended as a light-hearted joke (nothing more, nothing less) and we all took it in good humour, but to think there are now schools seriously suggesting that boys should wear ‘skirts’ in the summer months (as the only alternative to trousers) is absolutely barmy, but sadly unsurprising in this day and age.

Listen LIVE!

The Richie Allen Radio Show is live Mon – Thurs  5-7pm and Sun 11am -12pm

Click the button to listen live. Stream opens in a new tab.


Support the show!

The Richie Allen Show relies on the support of the listeners.  Click the button to learn more.
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x

The Richie Allen Show relies on the support of the listeners. Help Richie to keep producing the show and talking about that which the mainstream media won’t. Please consider a contribution or becoming a Patron, it’s greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Halifax Manchester SORT CODE 11-05-16 ACC No 12130860

New Report