A middle school student went to school wearing a skirt. According to a complaint, a teacher allegedly made a remark that was considered offensive to the student. The teacher also asked the student to go to the principal's office.

The principal informed the student's parents, who, when they arrived at the school, asked for explanations about the teacher's reaction toward their child.

The next day, students, in support of their classmate, reacted to the incident in an inventive way: the boys wore skirts and the girls wore ties. They proved that they are descendants of Aristophanes.

The Secretary General of the Ministry of Education ordered an investigation into the incident, namely the teacher's remark about the student's skirt. He also stated: Our main goal is to create a democratic, inclusive school, one that accepts diversity, is open to society, and has sensitive teachers.

Finally, the long-standing instructions of the Ministry of Education, which are still in force today, state: Students' appearance should be marked by decency. Ostentation should be avoided. Excesses are not in keeping with the status of a student.

That is how things stand. But these facts raise reasonable questions. Specifically:

A) Why did the student go to school wearing a skirt? As a middle school student, did he not know that his appearance ought to be characterized by decency?

B) The teacher's remark is not known, so it is unclear whether it was offensive or not. In any case, a comment about the student's inappropriate appearance was necessary. And rightly, very rightly, the student was referred to the school principal.

C) The principal was right, very right, to call the parents to the school. And here lies the strange part: the parents asked for explanations about the teacher's reaction toward their child. This shows that they knew about, and approved of, the skirt on their child. But regardless of their views on the child's clothing, they should have known two things: first, that students' appearance ought to be marked by decency, so they should not have sent their child to school wearing a skirt. Second, they should have considered the possible negative, even mocking, remarks of the other students.

Of course, a child's sexual orientation concerns the parents. They know and decide, taking the child's best interests into account. But sexual orientation is also connected to the child's upbringing.

Parents play the first and main role in raising children. They carry great responsibility, which is why they need to exercise their role with particular care. Especially in the toddler and childhood years, when the child's personality is being formed.

A child's future development will depend on the child-parent relationship. Good parents will succeed, whether or not they have knowledge related to theories of child development. If they do have such knowledge, the challenges of upbringing can become easier.

A child develops its 'ego' and personality mainly through the relationships of its parents and its relationships with other people in the surrounding environment. Psychology's conclusions are clear: 'All the wisdom and all the knowledge in the world about child-rearing cannot replace the close human bonds, the family bonds, which are the basic central motive of human development.'

A person's personality is formed mainly in the first five years. Among other things, parents should teach their children to eat all foods, to love life and be optimistic, to respect others, to work during the day and sleep at night, to be free and responsible, to follow the logic of moderation, and so on.

Because there are many sirens, the issue is for parents to act in time so that the boy does not want to wear a skirt. They must teach the boy to be proud that he is a boy and the girl to be proud that she is a girl.

Pavlos Marantos

marantosp@gmail.com