Burnley Grammar School

Comment by: Nathan Hind on 5th February 2024 at 22:08


Nathan. As I have said before it if this shirtless stuff started the day you started school at 4 or 5, I don't see there would be a problem, at all, but it generally starts at around 11, when the level of self-consciousness is much higher (it would probably be non-existent at 5).

But let's move on to today. I think you might agree with me, that many lads, who would, until very recent times, been leaving school at 16, and earning money and living a more independent life, are stuck at school, very much against their will until they are 18. I don't want to rehearse this argument again about whether a 17 year old is an adult, or a "child" (let's settle on "young adult"? - not in my book a "child") but when you say, apropos of dress code "just state what you want and get on with it", while I will reluctantly agree with you this fairly applies say from 11 to 16, do you inflict this rule on those much older reluctant pupils, between 16-18 who don't want to be at school anyway?, and don't you feel uncomfortable doing so, if this is the case?.

Certainly when you elected to attend sixth form college, in the past, which covers those ages 17/18, the regime was far more relaxed and you could opt out of things like woodwork or PE if it had no relevance to your future career, or what you wanted to study.

I think these older conscripts ought to be given some consideration - do you agree?. I would go as far as to stay that those lads who have been let down by idiot governments, and who are at school as a sort of "punishment" for not being able to find work that government policies are denying them, ought to be allowed to opt-out of non academic subjects. Or perhaps they are?. I would like to know, because I know how aggrieved I would feel to still be being treated like a child in my later teens. In short, do you have a more flexible attitude with older pupils?

This isn't just a current government blast - I strongly suspect the next one will be worse - if power goes to Ms. Phillipson's empty head
any more she might be holding "advanced teeth brushing lessons" for sixteen year olds.

The problem is, all governments tend to comprise middle/upper class career politicians who do not understand the working classes and their desire to make decisions for themselves. Indeed, many of them have never really had a proper job in their lives, jumping on the political gtavy train as soon as they hit university.

Just seen the recent comments so before I forget in the morning I will add some thoughts on the whole shirtless psychology at time it was done.

Throughout history, clothing, or more importantly the partial or complete removal of it has been used against groups of people to stress a sense of subjugation on them. This applies strongest in the army but was also most definitely going on in schools within the UK in PE classes for certain. Until the 1980s most UK schools had a policy of shirtless PE as part of the boys PE uniform whilst the teachers in charge of many such classes would be dressed in tracksuit tops and even in many cases full length bottoms. The difference between the teacher and the pupil quite extreme and not accidental. In many cases the same teacher would be as active in the lesson while dressed like this. This generally applies to ages 11 to 16 most of all, and did in my case going from the years 1977 until 1982.

In no case was any sense of choice made available or options. It was a done deal. Taking your clothes from you is about a power dynamic, even just your shirt like in school, although of course they took the lot after PE as they forced the showers on you.

We knew this at school right back then.

I have no idea what it was about this period that gave rise to the practice becoming so widespread more than previously but it's real enough and memorable enough.

No actual problem as such myself with these things but won't pretend I was the keenest either and everyone knew years ago there was more to it in school, just they don't admit it like they do openly in the army.

Comment by: Stuart B on 4th February 2024 at 20:19
Teachers in PE don't have to justify asking the class to be bare chested even in 2024.



Technically this is quite correct. But as with everything the reality is slightly different. If I was to suddenly decide I wanted all my class to keep on doing a shirtless lesson each time that would take some justification and I'd probably be advised in some way possibly, but casual here and there shirtless PE now and again requires no reasons although they can be given, sometimes are, mostly not though, just state what you want and get on with it.

The Archie Deacon post on 4th February was a good one. The final paragraph caught my eye especially.

Archie - 'Back then I had no real sympathy for boys who didn't wish to take a shirt off or take a shower due to their own insecurities but in the years since and I'm getting on a bit, I've changed my view and each to his own, although a shirtless gym often felt like an efficient gym where we got on with it more. There is a hint of truth in the "It helps" discipline question, just a bit though, boys bond and muck in better when shirtless I did notice that in some classes. The bigger question is why? But it was never used as a disciplinary measure in and of itself.'


It's a good question that I'd like an answer to. I've not noticed any of this within my own PE groups taking gym but am aware it is a quite well held belief in certain circles. Interesting change of attitude you have. I'd have empathy for those with insecurities but wish them to talk about them. That's the difference between the older and younger generation I suppose. But I still expect showering and when asked shirts to come off without too much fussing about and that's what happens almost always as I've said before.

Just to go back to the comment that was made before Christmas regarding the schoolboys and the teachers being seen outside completely shirtless. I'm unsure if I commented about this at the time but I have shown that to one of my colleagues who came to my home and he simply dismissed it out of hand completely for what it's worth, in the sense of it being a scheduled normal school day PE lesson. Possibly it was something else on a voluntary basis with guys older than they looked. It could be opening a school up to various legal liabilities doing what was described we both tended to agree.

Finally, I would appeal to the Yorkshire Dad to follow up with some more information on his case.

My day today consisted of some quite traditional style gym PE indoors mainly, including a skins and shirts volleyball game of 10 aside, some morning running and an early afternoon fitness testing session with an introductory warm up activity. During that some removed shirts for a short period. A very typical day really. I've got to draw up my PE template for next term in the next couple of weeks with colleagues.

Does anyone have any idea why schools across the country seemed to really take to doing PE throughout the 1970's and 1980's barechetsed in particular?

I know this from my own children but when I was at school in the late 1950's and through a lot of the 1960's I always wore a nice pristine white top.

My own son used to complain incessantly about the way PE was done at his school in his secondary years, but he was not a PE hater or skiver, and this did include the regular going barechested lessons he had back then and how much he had to keep showering, not to mention the amount of rugby he had to do, not a sport he was keen on. I listened to what he said but never thought any more about it, putting it down to usual teenage angst most of them were probably thinking at the time.

When I saw the teacher say he had reconsidered his own opinion it made me think about it a little too from my own perspective.

Comment by: Stuart B on 4th February 2024 at 20:19


With all due respect, Stuart, fact or not, I think it is incumbent on all of us to explain ( I haven't said "justify") why we do things in our work which impacts on others. - . especially when we are talking about a practice which seems to be dying out now. I explained yesterday why I refuse to pay 50 pence more for a stamp today than I would have done a year ago (the first rise was in April, the second in October). I am not prepared to take the hit out of my own pocket, and if you raise charges to customers, you lose them because they forget little things like that, and probably think we get free postage from Royal Mail)

I was explaining, not justifying. Some companies would be prepared to take the hit. I am not, because I can't afford to.

Quite true Stuart B. That might come as a surprise to some on here.

A teacher is quite at liberty to request his class come to PE in the manner he wishes unless the head teacher decides otherwise and most head teachers rarely intervene in this. That's what makes the story placed by the Yorkshire Dad (plus the Nathan links) so very interesting, because we appear to have a head teacher some point during last year, 2023, (male or female, do we know this?) who was directly intervening in quite a detailed and personal way regards the PE department of his school and not in the way you would think, almost the completely other way to what you'd expect, where the head is demanding bare chests for boys in his school for PE while quite clearly a PE teacher in the school is less than comfortable with that kind of intervention, and I don't blame him.

It should be up the PE teacher on the day to make that decision like it almost always is and almost always was. In most circumstances the teacher effectively has the general say and doesn't have to give any explanation, unless asked I suppose, but just saying because that's how it is going to be is good enough bu anyone is free to give whatever explanation if they feel they want to. I have some experience of the subject and can confirm in my experience that PE being done shirtless did create a few problems where I was at times but teachers would prevail, as they should. A shirtless request is not deemed unreasonable in school PE. Many (not all) PE classes at my school were taken this way, shirtless for boys as a direct mandate for them all, so no discriminatory behaviour, and it was just because that's the way we wanted it at times, no more than that actually. Really that straightforward and nothing more to it.

Back then I had no real sympathy for boys who didn't wish to take a shirt off or take a shower due to their own insecurities but in the years since and I'm getting on a bit, I've changed my view and each to his own, although a shirtless gym often felt like an efficient gym where we got on with it more. There is a hint of truth in the "It helps" discipline question, just a bit though, boys bond and muck in better when shirtless I did notice that in some classes. The bigger question is why? But it was never used as a disciplinary measure in and of itself.

Teachers in PE don't have to justify asking the class to be bare chested even in 2024.

Fact.

Don't some schools have a school psychologist nowadays or is that my imagination?

The fifteen year old in the discussion here could do with maybe a chat with someone like that, a psychologist which might help. I see no point brooding about these kind of things.

Like others have said, the outcome would be nice to know.


Good to see common sense discussion return since new year also.


(I'm regular Mike who has posted lots, not the same lurker Mike who posted on 2nd February at 5pm by the way, although I largely agree with his points made anyway which are sensible)

I feel for that mother on mumsnet, agree or disagree she was just trying to help her son get over his insecurities and everyone was jumping down her throat.

The way I read it, it wasn’t his first time swimming, just the first time the swimming class was mixed gender. At any rate, schools can be very strict on uniform even when there is no clear rationale, and in this case it’s a perfectly normal swimsuit requirement.

Comment by: Tony on 3rd February 2024 at 23:36


I will leave Nathan out of this Tony, but I think it is important that anybody "in charge" can justify ANY decision they make. For example, last spring I decided that my little company, such as it is, would no longer use first class mail. Why? - well the price of a 1st class stamp went up from 1.10 to 1.25 at about 2 weeks notice, having gone up from 95p just a couple of months prior to that - and delivery isn't even guaranteed the following day now. 2nd class post "only"went up to 75p. Very little of my output goes by first class letter post (just the odd capacitor or transistor), but on principle I will not bow to Royal Mail's outrageous pricing policy. I know I have upset at least one customer because of this (he wanted his 1nF capacitor the next day - if not sooner) but he relented when I explained it to him. We have to justify our actions, whether it it postage stamps or dress code.


Robbie (4/2/27 0330 today).

I think it is in the nature of things that people ask for advice and never say thank you for it, or tell you the outcome. I know years ago I used to belong to a Yahoo electronics forum and you rarely got a thank you for a JPEG or some information culled from a book, but there you go.

I agree that if the lad has got to 15 without having to get his shirt off, (lucky him!) there is no point in starting an incident about it now, just request he is excused from swimming lessons. I still suspect he has got himself tattooed and is afraid of mum and the school finding out about it. It is the only explanation I can think of. What is a minor matter to us at our ages seems something really massive when you are a teenager. Or it could be he is very thin something that doesn't matter to everyone else, but it matters to him.

I do not agree with homogenisation of everything, or standardising everything like has been said. I think we are best when we have a country full of differences and that can apply to education as much as the high street.

I would really like to know why a mother asked that question on Mumsnet about her son, gained so much reaction for and against her shy son's request that she writes him a letter to excuse him from being made shirtless in school swimming but after all that has never bothered to come back with what the outcome was. I do find that irritating. I'd genuinely really like to know how that turned out and any reactions from the various sides in it, the family, the school and of course the boy involved.

For this to suddenly become an issue for a 15 year old schoolboy who could by that age be 6ft tall and the size of his teachers just seems so strange to me. Many of us reach our adult size at that age, certainly in height if not width! How come this boy wasn't given swimming classes sooner like almost anyone I know. Is Mumsnet thought of as a trusty source? It looked authentic enough to me, although hardly a site I normally gaze at.

If this boy is that bad over simple swimming requirements all boys do you'd have to wonder what kind of fuss he'd be making in days gone by in the schools most of us attended where we were forced into full scale mass nakedness with one another for the showers. This boy clearly never faced that old school reality I and most thread readers here did of a certain age. Quite lucky he doesn't go to Nathan's school. One wonders what kind of fuss or reaction would be going on there if he was fighting against actually being asked, or told to remove everything he had on and be naked with his peer group as opposed to just loss of a top in a pool. Someone should remind him of a past where this was an unavoidable school time action we took a couple of times a week.

He should definitely swim shirtless with his chest bare like anyone else. But I would not force him into it at that age, he's too old for that and possibly too big as well. I also wonder if he is even keen to swim at all and enter the water if he's avoided it to 15. Everyone loved swimming when I was at school, or so I thought and we always did it in mixed company unlike much segregated PE.

Going back to where I started and most of us in my time were expected to all be the same at school, standardised homogeny if you like with quite a bit of individuality stamped on if you showed too much of it. It's less so now I think, although I hate schools that try to dictate very narrrow types of hairstyles that youngsters can have, what does it matter? You could have whatever hair you wanted at my school.

I saw the question that was asked to Nathan about what reason he had for asking class to take PE at any one time bare chested.

Surely there doesn't really have to be a reason does there? It's just another example of an expected dress code if you like.

If an individual teacher simply decides he wants his own PE class to turn out in bare chests then surely that is his decision and he should not have to actually have a defined reason for why he is asking for it to be done that way. Some teachers might just prefer things that way in their class and others not, either way should be respected. They are the teachers after all, the decision makers, not the children.

I don't think Nathan has any reason to justify taking his class in bare chests when he does. I never questioned my teacher when he sometimes asked me to do that with my mates in the changing room or sports hall at school, we just whipped our tops off if we had one on and threw them aside and got on with the lesson or if we were changing just left them completely off and went on our way.

I do agree on the summer heat comment, that sounds like a funny old excuse to me to bring out of the blue. It sounds worse than just giving out the new rule and leaving it at that.

I saw the question that was asked to Nathan about what reason he had for asking class to take PE at any one time bare chested.

Surely there doesn't really have to be a reason does there? It's just another example of an expected dress code if you like.

If an individual teacher simply decides he wants his own PE class to turn out in bare chests then surely that is his decision and he should not have to actually have a defined reason for why he is asking for it to be done that way. Some teachers might must prefer things that way in their class and others not, either way should be respected. They are the teachers after all, the decision makers, not the children.

I don't think Nathan has any reason to justify taking his class in bare chests when he does. I never questioned my teacher when he sometimes asked me to do that with my mates in the changing room or sports hall at school, we just whipped our tops off if we had one on and threw them aside and got on with the lesson or if we were changing just left them completely off and went on our way.

I do agree on the summer heat comment, that sounds like a funny old excuse to me to bring out of the blue. It sounds worse than just giving out the new rule and leaving it at that.

Comment by: Will on 3rd February 2024 at 13:27


Hi Will, All I can say is that I knew somebody ho was in the army in the 1990s and I have seen filmed documentaries made later than that on TV, . I think my mate was at Sutton Coldfield originally, and even PT, as they call it there, was conducted in shorts AND singlets, (he showed me some photos of his army life) often with really stern PTIs. If that is good enough for military discipline, why isn't it acceptable in schools?. I do think some head teachers regard "their" school as their personal fiefdom. The way,for example, in recent weeks,some schools have been eager - some might say overeager , - to allow politicians to go into their schools. clearly with the heads approval, with a photographer and film crew to show the kids how "nice" they are. School in my view, should be entirely non political. Those absurd school visits are clearly electioneering.

Perhaps also it some regional sort of thing?. Here in London, tracksuits and full kits seem to be the norm (just occassionally I have to go past our local Academy - not - I hasten to add, as I often as I am in workspace where pupils wait at the bus stop, a few yards away, and their sports ground is open to the main road, and of course, we have the Mumsnet lad, who has never had to remove his shirt and is now 15. I wonder what part of the country that is (and why couldn't I have gone there!). If any headmaster advocated shirtless PE outdoors in the summer I think he would be in trouble because of the risk of skin cancer which has been plugged the last few years. They tell construction workers to cover up now

I think schools should be more open and honest about WHY they do things, in the way that they do, and explain them, and there should be some standardisation, so whether yo go to school in London or Leicester you can broadly expect the same treatment. .

Went to a school that did PE without shirts constantly in the mid eighties.

It feels like a golden age but was it really?

On this whole being told what to do thing, I get what Robert says entirely.

Spoke once to my old teacher about PE and when I pulled him up on shirtless PE memories I asked why it was seen as so important and keeping cool never came into it. But when he mentioned discipline I asked if that had anything to do with it like some people think and his answer was really short but really interesting, all he said was - "It helps".

I think those two words say an awful lot.

I hope the Yorkshire teacher comes back to answer the other PE teacher on here who asked him some points. Shirtless PE might not be as rare as some think even now but that kind of explanation for it and change is rather different to anything you might expect to hear. It sounds like that head teacher is pulling some kind of heat based health and safety stunt based on climate change pushing to me. I wonder if this might be a woman doing this or is a male head?

It's a phoney reason anyway and I think our Yorkshire dad teacher knows this by commenting about it.

Nothing wrong with shirtless PE if they want to do so, let them choose if it's too hot for them like many people do outside of school if they are doing the garden on a hot day or something.

I must ask the teacher from Yorkshire:

When your school began requiring boys to strip to the waist for PE, were they made to do so around their female peers? Or were girls separated for PE sessions?

Did any boy or parent complain about this mandate? Was any exemption made for boys who were uncomfortable with stripping due to say, obesity?


Since hot weather was used to justify making boys strip to the waist, were girls subjected to any change in policy?

Comment by: Robert Coulson - Teacher 1967-2009 on 2nd February 2024 at 19:08


Robert - genuinely, thank you - that is the nicest thing any teacher ever said to me (and I am not being sarcastic). I did my best, and I never went home with a list of complaints, I kept them to myself. I never caused fights or carried a knife - unlike quite a few!. I kept my head down. If we had teachers that encouraged, things might have been different, but not one of them ever did, and in the end that lack of encouragement or enthusiasm takes it's toll - worse for others than it was for me, as I had my outside interest - music. No music at school, and some of my schoolmates had no real interests at all of a practical sort.

What concerns me about school now - now that so many pupils will have to stay on till they are 18, thanks to the decimation of industry and the retail sector, is that back then, in my time, if you were at school at 17 you were in the sixth form, you had some control over what subjects you wanted to study and most teachers treated the pupil with a degree of humility and some respect, in some regards more as an equal, and not a nuisance. Now just tacking on two years to the ordinary school life, I am concerned that they will treat a 17 year old just like a 14/15 year old, and that won't help their self esteem or self reliance, and I put myself in their place and know how I would feel. My best creative years were , say, 18 to mid 20s, then life got in the way.

You are quite right, I didn't like being told what to do, when I was in a big band (and they'll never come back!) we had a leader who was dictatorial, so in the end six of us "resigned" - some on more friendly terms than others and we had a co-operative band - there was no leader and we produced far more productive music than we did in the big band. It was all co-operation not coercion. Again, a different leader of the big band might have made for a friendlier and more creative unit, but you have to work with what you are given.

I had a couple of jobs as an employee till fifteen years ago - no complaints against my employers who were invariably friendly and polite, but when , in 2007 my company was taken over by a multinational I resigned the same day , as I had visions of school again - after a few months I got my own business up and running, and I am much more constructive and happy than I would have been as a number in the multinational.

I hope somebody can prove me wrong that these reluctant stayers-on, because they can't find work (and it is not their fault - it is the fault of successive governments who have made so many areas of employment unviable, and now the fetish for "Net Zero") will be treated more like old sixth former were and not just part of the under 16 herd. The way things are going I am not hopeful. What is the point of giving the vote to 16 year olds, when they will have to take the morning off school to go and vote, even though they will still be regarded as schoolchildren?.. I would welcome professional opinions on this.

Finally, further news was published today about the Royal Liberty School affair, but out of deference to yourself, Nathan and Mr Butterfield, I will not give a link to it. When I give those details it is not me implying anything at all against teachers who post on this site - you must be decent or you wouldn't be writing on this site and being so open. If anyone DOES wish to see the material, they can always email me and I will send them the link.

Again, many thanks for seeing I am not the monster some people think I am. It means a lot.

"Let's face it, we are back to this "control" thing - I'm in charge and you'll do what I tell you." says Alan.


That is the basics of teaching for you Alan! Discipline isn't a dirty word.

You're just one of those kids who didn't like being told what to do. And adult perhaps. We all have a bit of that in us, some more than others, such as yourself.

I've met quite a few former pupils going back many years ago who I used to give a very hard time to for being like this and none held it against me and infact quite the opposite, they told me they needed it a firm word or two and direction but didn't know at the time.

Clearly you were not a bad lad at school, that seems clear to me, just one of the really sensitive ones in that poor environment I know you speak of.

It's not really a criticism of you, just an observation based on what I've read.

Robbie your reply is better than mine. The reason I wouldn't write the letter is because, though I am sure in the case of a teacher such as Nathan it would remain private, I can just imagine the delight some more more sadistic teachers would have in announcing to the class that so-and-so's mother had written to him, and in turning down the request make the boys distress even greater, by giving his fellow pupils "a laugh".

I, too, have the greatest sympathy for him. In writing on here these days I am more than cognizant of the fact that there are those who will delight in twisting my words, and making repulsive assumptions and allegations, but I did wonder if, perhaps, the lad had got himself a tattoo and he is worried about his teacher seeing it, because he is under-age legally, for such a procedure, and all sorts of problems might arise - the over zealous school reporting it to mum, the trading standards officers etc etc, , and possibly ending up as a court case, and for that reason the lad wants to remain covered up.

If I were the parent, my inclination would be to request my son to be excused from those classes, on the grounds that the school has left it very late to introduce the subject and it is therefore clearly not a priority in their establishment. If they refused, I would make sure he had lots of dental appointments lined up on the day of the week the lessons are due to take place.

I think though, that the case poses a stronger question - and that is, whom has the ultimate say on a child's upbringing - the parent or the school?. This question will, I think, become even more important if, what looks like the next government, is going to start meddling in children's lives, starting off with the otiose "teeth brushing lessons" - God help us!. Goodness knows what else they will try to meddle in. Schools currently act in loco parentis, but what further powers will they give themselves, if given governmental approval?, and these days we are talking about "children" up to the age of 18..

It was nice to read a reply that gave prominence to the lad's feelings and not just the knee-jerk, "he has to do what he's told, because I did" approach. It would be fascinating to know how the saga ended, and what the real problem is.

Lurker here emerging to give some thoughts on that Mumsnet post.

I thought 15 seems really late to be starting swimming but the original post says "he's not worn it (his swim shirt) for school swimming before" suggesting it's not the first lessons? Which makes me wonder why it's suddenly an issue now? Or have I missed something?

As for wearing swimming shirts, I really don't see the point myself. Surely they just make you stand out more. Could understand if there was some sort of medical reason like say severe acne but nothing in the post to suggest that?

My advice (assuming no medical reason) would be to just go for it. First time's always the hardest but in the long run it's for the best to get over insecurities. It's strange but once in the pool you don't notice you're just wearing shorts.

Comment by: Nathan Hind on 1st February 2024 at 21:26


I read the Yorkshire dad post at the time, Nathan, and I suspect as it is a private school the staff can do carte blanche what they want, but I seem to remember that there were some problems in Northern schools a few years ago, because, in the Muslim religion, it is deemed "immodest" for boys to remove their shirts, in or out of school and so parents were up in arms about such edicts in PE lessons, and as we are very likely to have a very pro-Muslim government soon (I read only the other day Starmer is "worried" he is losing the Muslim vote over his Gaza stance) I can see this being a "one summer experiment" . Again, I agree with you that you can be just as cool in a light top. I never get this "extreme heat" thing. If that were the case, given the heat in TV studios because of the lighting, every weather forecaster and newsreader and musician (it can be very hot grappling with wind and brass instruments) would be appearing without their shirts. Let's face it, we are back to this "control" thing - I'm in charge and you'll do what I tell you.

I have no religion but of course, I daresay a Roman Catholic school only has RC students and parents - and those who "pretend" to be RCs if yours is the best school in the district.

I was equally surprised there has been no further reaction to your post about the Mumsnet swimming case apart from the one last evening and my own earlier.

What kind of age is 15 to begin a swimming unit at school like was stated on the Mumsnet questioner? Has this boy really never been asked to swim at school before that rather advanced school age, like being in the old secondary fourth form or even days away from the fifth form, your final compulsory school year like it used to be.

15 is a terrible age in many ways and if this is the reality for that young man I feel for him if he suddenly at that age faces lining up in school with a mixed class of girls with boys, which could be the problem. At that age I would have been less than thrilled in actual school about it but did swimming when I was years younger, about 10 and shared both sexes and was fine. But I agree 15 is a bad age to suddenly face this if you do have body problems about yourself. The stupid thing here is like many body phobics, he very probably has a very nice good looking body for his age anyway but doesn't accept it.

I'm guessing this must be a rare boy who has been at school until that age and never faced PE where he had to never not wear a shirt then, or shower. Even nowadays I think most boys find they end up shirts off at some point in school if told to, showers less of an issue than once were.

I'm conflicted on the advice I would give here. I wouldn't really want to write that note if I am honest about it but would wish to stand up for my son's problem. I wonder if it is just a school thing, I'd like to know if he holds that same bother about being seen without any shirt bare chested in front of his own mum who asked the question, or his father or siblings?

It seems silly to a lot of people I know, but we have to just accept there are people out there who are very shy and terrible about their appearance and baring their bodies is almost a terror for them. Luckily I was not one of those types generally in my time. My gut instincts would be to tell him his life will be better off if he joins in the same as the others. It's the least complicated option and when he's about 30 he may wonder why he ever behaved like it, or hopefully a lot sooner.

I see this was quite a recent discussion, I wonder what happened in the end?

I am surprised that this posting from A Yorkshiredad has not received any kind of reaction so let me be the first.

Comment by: A yorkshiredad on 24th January 2024 at 14:36
I am an teacher who has chosen to work in the private sector, now well into my second year at my latest school. We teach boys and girls years 1 to 6 so 6 to 11 years of age. This is an excellent school with an outstanding OFSTED report, but it does have one peculiarity these days which seems very anachronistic. During the upcoming Summer term the boys indoor PE kit will change from T-shirt and shorts to shorts only. It was school policy last year and it will be again this year. The reason given for the policy is strictly practical, to keep the boys cool while exercising hard indoors in warmer weather. The head teacher does not want some boys suffering unnecessarily from the heat of summer so all boys must go bare chested while this is a possibility.



Do you mind me asking where the school is that you work? I am also a PE teacher incase you had not realised, at All Hallows R.C in Salford Manchester for almost ten years now.

To make that active change in PE kit does I agree seem an interesting development although I see no issue in principle with it. The ages you talk about are pre-secondary level anyway. I've certainly not come across those reasons before in terms of keeping cool and presumably by that meaning comfort. Have you had a recent change in head teacher by any chance because does he not realise that you can actually be kept quite cool enough in a loose fitting cotton top no problem in gym and in many cases, depending on humidity levels actually be cooler that way sometimes. Air humidity plays a far bigger factor in whether the body starts sweating than simply removing the shirt completely. It is not a reason I have ever used when asking my classes to remove tops in the gym for PE on occasions. Will you only be applying your rule on the hottest summer days or is this a blanket all summer long rule in your school. I agree with your assessment even more so because of those younger ages where the sweating and hormonal issues are nothing compared to secondary level teens pupils from 11 to 18. Our school showers, and nowadays when I speak to people they almost seem shocked, I have no idea why, or that now and again we might ask pupils to remove a top.

You are clearly uncomfortable with what your school is doing by posting your comment here, have you asked any questions directly yourself on the policy or gained any parental feedback?

I haven't read that thread yet but I will take your word for this bit;

'I think the REAL problem is, that here the lad is being asked to do something for the first time at FIFTEEN!'




That just seems very weird to me at that age, to be going swimming at school for the first time at the age of 15 years old, and then facing up to a bare chest phobia with it, unless he has been swimming and previously was allowed a top covering of some sort which again is very unusual too. All equally unusual, more so the age thing. How come this boy is only at age 15 starting to swim at school in the first place if true? Possible learning difficulties, or is he a regular normal teenager in all other respects? There must be more to that. I'd had my final school swimming lessons by the time I was 14 and was expected to be fully competent. Schools do not start swimming lessons at 15 years old, that's ridiculous. I will have to give that a bit of a read.

Nothing wrong with a bit of individuality but I think nothing is wrong with everyone being put in the same situation, bare chests for swimming in this case, the big problem would be if he was being made to stand out differently if the others were not like him in that bare chest state but in this case it is completely the reverse and he is wanting to stand out the other way around. If he can swim like that so what, let him if it keeps him happy but like was already said, probably best have a word and muck in like the rest in this case and gain some confidence and realise you have nothing to be scared of and nobody is laughing at what you look like at all because you are all reasonably similar in the end underneath what we cover up with.

I was quite unconfident in normal PE but took to the water with ease and enjoyed swimming at school. It's funny how that can happen.

Stephen gets school in that time period just about right in my view and I certainly remember a lot of use of stopwatches by school PE teachers but not to actually time the length of our changing room antics like taking the obligatory shower post PE. Like most schools I should imagine, we were allowed to just come and go as we pleased just walking nude around the changing room to and from the showers as we pleased, boys rarely bothered to wrap a towel around our waists just for the doing that. But you had to do it, excuses were never easily accepted. If you were caught daring to not do the naked walk to and from the showers and trying to get directly dressed then you were in massive trouble and it didn't matter which teacher took the class it was the same with them all on that one. So we knew to just do so without being told much of the time. You could actually get a detention at my school for not bringing your actual towel to PE, never mind the right pieces of kit, and they even specified a minimum size you had to bring. We all seemed to shower without complaint at the time but I've little doubt that beneath the surface there were a few other thoughts going on, this site seems to prove it. In PE I seem to remember that many times we could either wear a tee-shirt of some sort, no special type, or nothing at all and be shirtless and I do remember classes with mixed shirts and shirtless boys who simply chose to do PE that way without being asked and it all seemed to be accepted with little aggro. Looking back that seems all rather reasonable actually for a lesson. I was a tee-shirt wearer myself, although there were some lessons we did get told to take tee-shirts off if we had them on for reasons I cannot at this distance really remember.

Looking at the bareskin running comments and I have not heard about that one. Quite interesting I must admit. I wonder if there are younger men on that or doing that who are kicking back against the clammed up ways many places now have where you can't do this or that in the way you used to be able to and some rather wish they could so are doing this as adults, just a thought?

Although I never ran any cross country at school without a top like some men on here state, most of us did used to have our PE shirts off as we came back to the school block from running and were shirtless before we even got back in the door of that place. Cross country running was the one and only thing I ever did at school that meant a shower was absolutely essential afterwards and welcome to get the dirt off us. Even the football kept us cleaner. I think this was because we had a very well kept football pitch and sports field by the caretaker or groundsman at the time compared to other schools I remember seeing.

Ropes - and I could do them quite easily but can remember boys being told off for coming down them too rapidly incase of a rope burn, or getting to the top and hanging about showing off not coming back down. We always had to do rope climbing in our bare feet as that was considered the best way to climb the rope and would be told how to cling our feet to the rope and pull. Fashionable trainers didn't seem that common then and were never worn in the school PE gym that I ever noticed.

I'm not sure how fulfilling the job of being a PE teacher used to be when you probably realised that the majority of your class didn't even want to be doing any of it.

Comment by Nathan Hind on January 31st at 2029

God - that was a read Nathan! - like listening to an edition of Womans Hour on Radio 4 when the on/off switch has broken, or you can't get to the radio to switch it off (often happens to me during The Archers - that bloody music - I like it to be off before it starts). I put myself through Mumsnet voluntarily, so no complaining so here goes.
.

However - of the many responses this one caught my eye:

"I think wearing a top will draw more unwanted attention than being bare chested. However, nobody should be made to expose their body if they don’t want to regardless of sex."

That sums up my position entirely. This was the reason I disagree with much of what "Mr. Dando" writes - I don't think a Victorian bathing machine is the answer to this lad's problem in 2024- and he does have a problem, no matter how many of those ladies tried to excuse it with "body autonomy" - whatever that is! - I must admit I am not up on psycho-babble. I also knew of nobody who went in for physical self harming, another seemingly modern concept. Cigarettes and booze were the only self harming I was aware of back then.

But - I don't know if you'll agree with me - I think the REAL problem is, that here the lad is being asked to do something for the first time at FIFTEEN! (obviously no compulsory showers or bare chested PE lessons at that school). Looking back to my own school years, I think if showers and bare chested PE had started when I started school at 5 it wouldn't have been the problem it was when t started when I was 11. It is the bringing in of new rules, so far down the road, at an age when you are much more self conscious than you are as a young child is the real problem here. Add to that, at 5, teachers speak to you in a much kinder way than they do in comprehensive years. I remember the culture of shock of teachers calling me by my forename in July and then being shouted at by surname only in September. What had I done wrong? (that is the eleven year old me's thought process back then).

Talking about his problems might help, but then from the original letter it seems there might not be a father around, or if there is. he seems uninvolved. Certainly he isn't mentioned. Some lads would not feel comfortable at that age discussing any problem with their mum, and often there will be a reticence anyway at that age. Perhaps his mum is a bit over-protective?. I never once talked about my school problems at home.

If I were the boys dad I would have a good long talk with him and share experiences - let them see that even self assured adults had their problems when they were their age. If you know what the problem is, there might be a way to help him. Perhaps he is being bullied already?. I mentioned just the other day how kids can be extremely unkind to each other - how would you deal with my two schoolmates Nathan, whose problems/reason for bullying I mentioned the other day in my reply to Gareth.

I am not going to rehearse my own experiences here - you know them, this is about this Mumsnet lad. On a final, perhaps more controversial note - if this lad has got to the age of 15 without learning to swim, the school obviously didn't; take it very seriously until now (why - most schools get round to it at about 10/11?) , so might there be a case for saying at that advanced (for school age) , he should be allowed to opt out?. You know my views on inflicting infantilism on teenagers in their later years (up to 18 now thanks to inept governments insistence on staying at school if they can't find the jobs that ruinous policies have created a shortage of - "Net zero" indeed, an unachievable pipe dream by 2030 - if ever). We cant stop Ms. Phillipson and her wretched "teeth cleaning lessons" on five year olds but if this boy is so genuinely worried about swimming at 15 perhaps this would be a sensible way out. It won't solve his problem, but it will allow him to run away for them for a bit longer. Let's face it - most of us are running away from something all our lives.

To answer the burning question: Would I write the note?. No.because I know it would do no good. I'd be a rotten parent.

That boy should be made to do his PE in the required bare chest whether he likes it or not. Heaven's above, who runs schools? What the school decides he should wear for PE should not need to be up for discussion, whether it means he wears a top of any kind or none at all, either in swimming or normal PE.

If I was his father I would not write that letter, that would be pure indulgence and would prove detrimental both to the boy and the parents.

I didn't do a great deal of swimming at school that I can really remember, it was very sporadic in nature just now and again for short spells, nothing more, I did most in my own time with a female instructor friend of the family at weekends in a nice small group of girls and boys but I certainly know how we used to have to be sent along to gym through the school corridors from the changing rooms in our bare feet cold on the floor and our bare chests feeling quite nippy as we went, often very keen to get in that gym and start doing some PE to be met with a gruff teacher and feeling like I was in a gulag some days under one man I had who made PE feel more like a punishment session than a fitness one. But others were different.

I do remember some complaints about it actually but not directly to any teachers, it was all among lads quietly to each other. I'm going right back into 1974 with this and nobody cared what you thought, they just told you what to get on and do. Showers always came afterwards and the memory of these is that they were never that warm, the water came out quite slowly and that we all had no choice but to do them, all got sent in together, thirty or so stark naked and some clearly unwilling lads, and our teacher would get his stopwatch out and time what I think was something like 2 minutes 30 seconds after we went in before anyone was let back out again to dry and dress. Watched constantly and often told to shut up while we did so because of the noise. Sometimes the water went almost completely cold on us, meaning more noise, but we were not let out until the stopwatch said so according to our teacher. A bit over the top I agree, nothing wrong with just letting everyone come and go and get on with it but that's how it was for me in 1974 as a kid at the age of 13/14. A white adult size plimsoll was often used directly on the exposed backsides of any miscreants after PE which seems incredible now. Not a lot but just once in a while. I noticed how this teacher would smack with the plimsoll and then look in the eyes of the boy he'd just done it to, hoping that they were at least watering up.

I remember coming back to school in the miserable month of January 1974 just when the three day week had been introduced and recall many cold showers at school that horrible period, whether this was directly connected to the issues of the time I have no idea but school seemed a miserable place that month, fifty years ago to the day just about. I'm sure that teacher wouldn't have enjoyed a cold shower not long after Christmas on a January day very much at home but was happy to give us one and make us endure it to a set time limit.

I also remember the gym being darker than normal and pokey with the lighting less than normal in this period.

If that was a PE lesson now I'd be having words but most of our parents wouldn't have thought a great deal of any of that back in 1974.

There's not a lot wrong with many of the things I've described, the shirtless PE but more the culture it takes place within. Great lessons can inspire, bad ones can clearly kill one's esteem long term. I got through it generally unscathed and enjoyed PE under a couple of teachers and loathed it under another couple. That's the difference an individual can make in the same place with the same boys.

I thought you might like to have a read through some of the seven pages on this mumsnet discussion about her son who is very shy about taking his top off in PE to go swimming and some of the vastly differing answers to that lady.

One of my early posts was about a boy we had in PE who wanted to wear an all in one body outfit but it was made clear by my superiors that boys go swimming in swim shorts or trunks and nothing else in school.

In this case the mother is entitled to write the letter but my own advice would be to talk it out with the son and and prevent it as being the only boy in a swim class who is like that sets you up more noticeable than simply removing your top no matter how shy you might be about your body.

It's very unusual for boys to be fearful of going swimming and wanting to wear a top and that was made clear on here by many men I have read who feared shirtless PE but accepted swimming far more easily.

The initial fear is so often far worse than the end reality of just going and doing it.

I'll leave the link and hope it works.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4796153-son-unhappy-with-pe-uniform?page=1

Most PE teachers are not abusive perverts. But many mostly former people on these pages seem to have been especially having looked back at some of the comments going back a few years ago on here. This forum was being used by a very distasteful clique of characters with unhealthy obsessions.

Very pleased to see recent much of the past year looks so different.

Comment by: Gareth on 29th January 2024 at 21:03


That's a really interesting one, Gareth. As regards some children being kind, you are right, but I think it might depend on where your school was. For example I saw a TV programme last week with the comedian (he says) Josh Widdicombe called "Who Do You Think You Are". His first school was deep in the country (Dartmoor, I think) and there were only 4 pupils so I should hope and think they were kind to each other as there was so few of them, but the frustrations that build up in an inner-city comprehensive - and though I hate to use the term - working class - area is going to be a lot different from the ambiance of a small , probably middle class, school in the West Country.

Your bully seemed to have really been sorry and ashamed of how he had treated you twenty years earlier, and though you didn't want it, he did make a handsome gesture, and tried to make amends. As I said yesterday, I am sure some of the lads who made my two schoolmates lives a misery, would have , I am sure been mortified at how their younger selves had behaved. Perhaps school would bee a happier experience if we went as adults.

I saw very little of my ex school colleagues (I hesitate to call many of them mates), after school, apart from a couple who I stayed friendly with, one of whom died at far too young an age in 2022, but about six years after I left school one of my ex-teachers came to see me play, and was generous enough to make some nice remarks about my playing. He spoilt that moment by intimating he had been aware of what had gone on in the "old days" - and remember the old days were only a few years in the past, at that point, but made light of it and found no need to apologise, or even sound embarrassed about them. Had he have done so, I would have taken his remarks as a sort of healing process, as it was. the lavish praise meant nothing, and I just ignored him after that and talked to one of my bandmates,, without even referencing the teacher again. So I see where you are coming from, but at least your bully made the effort. I suppose the teacher (who was not one of the two I have mentioned previously) was making some sort of effort, but the fact he stood by and facilitated the bullying just had no positive effect on me.