For Shame

I have always been a staunch rejecter of stereotypes. Despite the widely held belief that a stereotype wouldn't be a stereotype if it weren't for the most part true, I have always felt that stereotypes are base and inaccurate representations of general classifications of people for the purposes of brainwashing and propaganda. Anyone who would ever look at a new person and say "Hey, you are that culture/religion/gender/etc., so you must be x/y/z/etc." is ridiculous. Even though I was raised to be thoroughly aghast when someone rolls their eyes, I usually roll mine at stereotypes.

So, being that I don't believe in any sort of mass generalization, imagine my surprise when a gaggle of Catholic School Girls sauntered their way into Rubios today while I waited for my quesadilla that fit, to exact proportions and attitudes, everything I have ever heard of them.

Let us revisit for a moment, as I did in my own mind at the point in question, what that stereotype actually is:
1. They absolutely have to have tiny, plaid, pleated skirts that are entirely too racy for their age. Check.
2. This is usually accompanied by knee high stockings. Check, though apparently they do not have to be white...one misconception that I will allow and still be shocked by the events that followed.
3. They should ideally have pigtails or one solitary, but perfectly balanced on the crown of the skull, ponytail that dangles down the middle of one's back. Check.
4. They giggle. Check.
5. They wear patent leather character shoes that make them resemble elegant china dolls brought to life to walk in perfect, clickity timing with one another. Check.

What in God's name are these people thinking? I am not going to go into the otherwise implied, but again widely held, beliefs about Catholic School Girls but I admit that I kind of understand the problem. You would think, after all of the bad publicity; the scandalous suggestions, the nymphite implications; that those individuals in charge of the uniform determinations for such an establishment would have decided to go with a nice tailored suit look, or slacks and a polo, hell, even a frumpy frock would suffice.

Now on the one hand I sort of understand the possibility that the purveyors of this specific type of education might not have heard of Alicia Silverstone and Liv Tyler, nor of their counterpart of Aerosmith that would project such an...uninnocent...image, but perhaps they should. Perhaps there should be a specific individual within the hallowed halls of education that is supposed to watch out for Brittney Spears and her particular take on fashion. Maybe someone should be aware enough of the outside world to alter the dresscode to more accurately mimic the pious lifestyle that they are undoubtedly trying to encourage. How did pious ever become synonymous with mini-skirt?

You know what is synonymous with pious? Habit. Let them all wear habits. I think that would be a more appropriate attire. It would be difficult to, say, flaunt in a habit. Or to, oh I don't know, strut. Plus, habits have those nice little hoods. No more ponies or piggies. I would even caution against bangs. Tuck it all away under some nice burlap. Head to toe. And speaking of toes, since they aren't going to be seen under the habit anyway, why patent leather? Why not hiking boots? You know, to be prepared.

At any rate, I say we all should strike a blow against the Catholic School Girl stereotype and contact our local institution and demand immediate student retrofication! Who's with me?!?!?