That article and the author's slant seem pretty sloppy, two examples: > "I was expecting something like genitals to be number one, but only 6 schools (1%) expl

That article and the author's slant seem pretty sloppy, two examples: > "I was expecting something like genitals to be number one, but only 6 schools (1%) explicitly ban them." Because dressing so as to expose your genitalia is already prohibited by criminal indecent exposure laws in pretty much every country on the planet, duh. > "At worst, dress codes go so far as to turn whole people into a collection of inappropriate body parts to cover." Equivalently stated, this states the codes in objective terms so as to be enforceable and minimize confusion. Why on earth is this "at worst"? It's far better than subjective stuff like "no indecent attire"/"too-short pants/skirts"?