School dress codes and the fetishistic perverts behind.

Dress codes? Yep. Every now and then they pop on the news in the context of schools. Places where kids outnumber the ruling minority of adults. Kids with the only right to obey rules and eventually gather useful knowledge.

Strikingly one of the first things that girls learn is that bra straps are taboo, an absolute opaque no-discussion subject.

Chances are that some retards and feminists haven't figured yet the purpose of bras and the fact that girls usually wear them on a daily basis. Obviously there's a sizeable risk that this fraction of the population equally ignores the purpose of straps commonly associated with bras.

So let's figure out what the mighty google has to say on the topic.

First search "bra straps dress code" yields in roughly a gazillion of associated to schools results give or take a few dozens.

Second experience "spaghetti straps dress code" produces almost identical results.

Third search "cami straps dress code" displays a variety of advertisements and nothing really significant on the first 20 or so pages.

Public attention focuses mainly on bra straps while concealing modesty camis are comparatively irrelevant in the number of referenced entries.

Is there a pattern ? A dwell into a well documented study (here) confirms that underwear is the third most common fetishistic concern.

Objects worn on legs and buttocks, shoes, top the list.

Long known symptomatic associations, nothing new under the sun.

Further Googlin'g reveals that school dress codes are also abnormally concerned by exposing footwear, shorts, skirts, midriffs, breasts, shoulders. And hair/makeup. Obviously.

A close match to the typical bottom-top associative classification used in fetishistic syndrome assessment.

And an expression of plausible deniability. Girls should not distract boys. Or adults?

The picture is now complete and very scary indeed.

School dress codes are purposely inverted variants of fantasies commonly found in a certain kind of very objectionable fetishistic literature.

The real intent of this inversion could well express the self-protection attempts of authors and enforcers of school rules.

Which leads to the very inconvenient eventuality that school institutions are hideouts for inhibited fetishists desperately seeking cover under socially acceptable plausible deniability.