In response to anonymous above who questioned whether kids will learn how to dress themselves appropriately if they wear uniforms: Yes.

I was pretty clueless in junior high about what to wear (pictures I have from that time make me cringe). For high school I spent two years in a uniforms-only school and two years in a strict dress code (read: skirt, oxford shirt, blazer or sweater). I started college thoroughly able to dress myself stylishly. How was that possible, given that I'd just spent four years with very little choice about what to wear? Because I was no longer in junior high, that's why. High school coincides with a time of substantial personal growth and learning for most people. A high schooler with a reasonable level of social skill is going to pick up how to dress from the society around him or her - it's not necessary to torment the poor kid with having to choose a cool outfit day in and day out.

I LOVED wearing a uniform. Like a previous LW stated, it allowed me and my classmates to focus on our studies, on academics, and on who we were as people, rather than who had more money.

has nothing to do with this. YLS students are not elligible for Bones membership - the current membership is composed only of undergraduates in the senior class. Also, it's certainly not all male - it's actually an extremely diverse group these days - members tend to be the leaders of top groups on campus, like the captain of the football team, the editor of the Daily newspaper, the president of the black students' group...

xoxohth/autoadmit was a playground for sexually frustrated, angry guys to shoot off their mouths in ways they would never have the courage to in real life. If you read the complaint, you see that when you Googled the name of one of the plaintiffs, the first four results were things from autoadmit which talked about her big fake tits and how she was universally hated. Since law firms DO often Google prospective hires, it's not about the plaintiff needing to grow thicker skin, it's about her trying to protect her professional reputation. Considering it probably cost her about $150k just to attend YLS, plus three years of her life, I'd say that's something worth fighting for, and hard.

@Treeple - I agree with you on what would be the correct parallel.

@LeCastor - If I recall correctly, the Kosher dining facility at Yale was constructed with private funds, but operated as part of the university dining system. So the immense cost of building and equipping the thing was funded by the people who thought it was important (read: alums who keep kosher), not people who didn't (me). And here is the key thing - IT WAS OPEN TO EVERYONE. Male, female, black, white, Jewish, not Jewish. I used to eat there all the time, because it served some of the better food on campus. No, I did not eat there on Friday nights, because I know there were special things going on there, but I could have, if I wanted to. As someone mentioned upthread, the key difference is the impact of the accomodation on other people. The Kosher dining facility didn't harm anyone (funds that came from Dining Services would have had to have been used to feed those students elsewhere had there been no Kosher facility; everyone can use it), the women-only gym hours do (because men cannot use that gym during that time).

I took a quick look at the literature on the Goldman site, and it looks like they're planning to put the funding towards short programs in things like accounting, marketing and accessing capital. My mental image of a potential beneficiary of the program wouldn't be an illiterate woman who makes extra rice to earn the money to send her daughter to school, but instead that daughter, who has gone through several years of schooling but still doesn't have many options open to her.

And MC in TN makes a good point - the white guys at the top at places like Goldman aren't necessarily there ONLY because they're part of the old boys' network (though that can play a part). It's that the job itself is insane and cutthroat and life-eating and you barely ever see your family (and when you do you have one eye on the blackberry), and the number of women willing to do that for twenty years straight is very small.

Word. I've never known a cutter who wasn't all "look, look, look at my cuts! I'm so damaged and SAAAAD." Which is a problem, I suppose, but, meh. Superficial harm during a particularly idiotic time of life. I'm a lot more concerned about dangerous behaviors w/r/t drugs and sex. And yes, I do realize the three often go together, but in that case, let's just focus on the things that cause irreparable harm.

It's that he cares enough about me not to think to himself "if I ignore this task long enough, she'll do it and I won't have to." It has nothing to do with subservience or reversal of gender roles. It just means he cares about me. Like buying me flowers, but infinitely more useful. And I DO find it sexy when the man I love shows he cares about me. Who wouldn't?

The "is he rich?" question is an allusion to a song called "Time of the Season" from the sixties. The lyrics are something along the lines of "What's your name? Who's your daddy? Is he rich? Is he rich like me?"