Burnley Grammar School

Comment by: James on 8th February 2024 at 15:39


I ran across that old report the other day, when I was checking an insurance policy (I have a file for stuff I don't use often). I just threw the earlier ones, away as they were worse, and the last one was more or less a rehash of the one I kept. I had to empty my mums house on my own and fairly quickly, so a lot of stuff just had to be burnt. The only reason I kept that one was because I remembered Mrs. Fennemore, who, coincidentally died ten days before my mum in 1996, - I only found this out a month or so after mum's funeral, and at times like that you feel a bit nostalgic.

By the way, I think I am right in saying virtually every boy who was not escorted back to school in a police car after lunch (some of the lads used to go shoplifting in Woolworths, we were close to a High Street), were described as "polite" in the headmasters comments, so it wasn't a great compliment or endorsement.

I wouldn't normally get as political as I did in my ;previous post,, I just wanted to show there were other things that anger me as much as the poor treatment of young workers. I was so lucky when I left school that I had good employers who let me experience the working world, I am just sorry so many are denied this now, and sadly those great days are very unlikely to return..

I left two items off my report: Science "Has no scientific curiosity or aptitude" (true, I am afraid) and Technical Drawing: "Often untidy presentation". I think that second one is just a little unfair - we had to draw a quarter inch border all the way round a sheet of A4 with the aid of a 6 inch ruler, and in my case an eraser was often needed - with a 2B pencil - it was a bit tricky, but I got my side and front elevations as good as any other pupil. Both those lessons were taught by our Mr. Boreham, and he was not my greatest fan. I always felt I would have thrived on that subject under a more understanding and reasonable teacher, and I loved it - I was just very nervous of him. I guess they would use CAD now, not nearly so much fun. Anyway he was right on the first subject, and in my opinion wrong on the second. Anyway, it would be a subject now with as much practical use as a gas light lamp-lighter, I suppose!

I was lucky enough to go to a middle primary school in 1969/70 that gave us showers and we used to have quite a bit of fun in them I seem to remember, I'd have been disappointed if they'd taken it away from us once we'd been doing it for a while after I started doing it. That was the age of eight onwards. Boys that age love getting a soaking and naked in my opinion and that's how it was when I was going to middle school until moving up four years later. By about 1973 and going into the nearby comprehensive school which was held in high regard locally that kind of thing began to feel completely different, not so lightweight and fun and more serious, elements of reluctance built in and all that. Middle school showering was much nicer than comprehensive school for me and easier to do. They never gave anyone free choice on showers at school, not even in my middle school and there was none of this walking in with your pants or shorts on to do so, it all came off, so nobody ever had any secrets from one another about exactly what we all looked like. This only really started to hit me in when I must have been thirteen or so when I began questioning how I was looking not just to myself but wondering what others might be thinking of me. Not a lot probably is the answer. I remember my sister saying that every single girl hated having to shower at the same school as me. I'm not sure you would ever say the same of boys though.

It made a huge difference which PE teacher took you at comprehensive and there was one I was always wanting to avoid who got stuck as my main outside teacher on the timetable for a year at one point who was a team sports obsessive and was quite fond of bare tops and shirts all weather hockey for some reason and if you were a shirtless boy doing that you really didn't want to be falling over onto the horribly gritty surface even slightly or it would graze quite easily and did so a few times to a completely indifferent teacher who then just sent you off to the medical office for a patch or clean up of the graze and expected you back out within ten minutes at most. When I changed main outdoors teacher again the hockey almost completely stopped and I was thankful for that. The comprehensive gym was technically vests only, with shorts, nothing on the feet, but those vests seemed to come off very frequently indeed whoever you had at the time. Including both schools I'm covering the period 1969 to 1977 here. I'm soon to be 63 and those days don't seem that long ago to me.

My three sons all went to school in the 1990's and at that time showers remained the rule for them and it seemed fairly similar generally to my own days, except they didn't do what I did in middle school, just secondary.

Now it looks to me like schools actively discourage things like showering in some places but do they actually forbid it does anyone know, so that even if you wanted to shower they would not let you? What a turn around if that's the case, if it is some places. I just don't understand how you can possibly play messy sports like rugby out on the school field at this time of year in these conditions on water logged ground, get thrown about on the ground and not at least be able to shower or expected to do so. How does that work out then? I remember the state of what I used to bring home from school and even what my sons brought home and stuck in the machine.

I think it is time to follow Nathan's example and offer Alan the full clean slate that he mentioned. Okay I'll start by taking back my man with the beret observation, the Frank one.

Possibly keep the big politics out of it though. Many of us are fully behind many of those sentiments you raised but I'm unsure this is quite the place for such diversions, even though you'll get no disagreement out of me on much of it. I think almost everyone on here probably knows the wretched state of the country in all our institutions, including schools.

I'm pleased you finally said something positive about your school, however small that was, the school secretary is at least something. You have never given us anything before and I'm sure I remember Mike asking for something a few months ago without success. I'm pleased you mentioned that. It's small but clearly a big deal to you. I can't believe you would chuck out your old reports though. Most if us keep them don't we?

Polite doesn't surprise me in the least. It's obvious what you were at school and up against. I'd be more shocked if you'd told us the report said the opposite.

I think a corner might have been turned here.

I went to secondary school in the 80s and indoor pe was always shirtless. It was a mixed comp but no mixed pe. Half of us had white shorts and half blue which was for differentiation in team games such as basketball.

In the sixth form there was no mandatory PE but if you had a free period that coincided with a Year 11 PE class you could join that if you wished. A lot of us did and it was the same kit requirement of shorts and no top.

Do I think there should be shirtless PE now? Yes but only for those who want it. Given that most people that age go shirtless quite a lot when the weather is hot enough, I think a lot would choose to.

That further response from Nathan says quite a lot about the man to me, to follow up later in the day. Most people wouldn't bother. A breath of fresh air and as the modern term says, he's completely owned you and kicked your backside into touch and all your arguments about PE teachers that you have tried to pull not just on the old ones who we know could sometimes be dreadful but the newer modern ones who you tried to mix in with the old ways too. He's done a good job showing you up in the nicest possible way of course, with a touch of class, no pun intended. I'll add myself to the positive comments about his input. Possibly the wrong person has decided to take the sabbatical though. It might be worth giving it a rest for a while on your line of thought and see where else this forum goes into other directions, although I don't want to see the old jockstrap and underwear obsessives reappear anytime soon either.

Comment by: Nathan Hind on 7th February 2024 at 23:23
(and Robert and James).

Mea culpa.

I genuinely did not mean to be offensive to Nathan yesterday morning, and as I clearly was, unwittingly, all I can do is apologise again. While I am at it I also owe Nathan a belated apology for an earlier post a couple of weeks ago when I was ungenerous to him, and too brusque. No excuse, but it was a bad day. Sorry.

Nathan has now set my mind at rest and I will not raise the matter again. I believe what he says.

My reason for raising the matter here is because the way younger workers (I was one myself once) are treated, to the point where they are forced to stay on at school to massage the unemployment figures, disgusts me. I had chances and experiences and money ( and kind considerate employers) before I was 18, that is being denied to so many. This forum seemed the best place to raise that. I will persue it no longer. The sword has been sheathed.

There are others issues we anger me just as much as well - for example, the way people who were born and worked in this country - many of them served this country in the services and paid their taxes, are forced to sleep on the streets in February,, and beg, when you compare that to the way usually young men - sneak into this country in rubber boats, tear up their papers and are then given four star hotel treatment, free medical treatment, assisted in all sorts of material ways by silly women from "Care4Calais" and they STILL complain they are not given enough. That angers me just as much as the plight of young workers but again, I realise my remarks will upset some people so I will stop there. Also, don't get me started on all the trans crap which seems to have engulfed this country in the past couple of years!, it received it's reductio ad absurdam last week with this silly woman MP - bearing in mind in the same week we were being warned that World War 3 (with Russia) was just five years away and that terrible "conscription" word was being used, which - rightly - upset one of our posters here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13042735/Dead-people-change-gender-Labour-MP-Charlotte-Nichols.html


A few explanations - why I post so early in the day, Nathan: I have experienced insomnia virtually all my adult life - I will not say suffered - , as I agree with an early hero of mine F.J. Camm, who was the author of countless radio ("wireless" in those days) instructional books and founded several magazines, one of which "Practical Wireless" has been in constant publication since 1932, and which, when I was growing up, and beyond, was part of my education. He always used to say "The best way of all to lengthen your days, is to steal a few hours from the night". I agree 100%. You will sometimes find me on American electronics chat rooms, as it is late in the evening over there. As Tony Hancock put it in one of his most famous comedy shows, "The Radio Ham" ::- 'I have friends all over the world - all over the world. ......None in this country, but all over the world"

Robert: Our school reports, beautifully typed up up by our lovely school secretary, Mrs Fennemore, on her Royal Imperial , were very brief and to the point:

For example: "Maths: Satis (several teachers used that abbreviation for "satisfactory" (I hope!), and was their only comment (they signed beside the typed comment) There was the good: English" "V Good, reading and writing skills" Art: "Shows aptitude, especially with penmanship" to the not so good: PE "lacks coordination, no improvement" Woodwork: Lacks both interest and ability". Ouch!

There would then follow a short summing up by the Headmaster. "Alan's attendance is good as is his timekeeping. He is a quiet but polite boy, who needs to give more attention to the subjects that do not interest him"

I bet me being described as "polite" is a shock to most of you, eh?. I think he included that routinely for any lad who didn't spit in the playground, or scrawl obscenities on the lavatory walls with ink markers.

It was the one time a year he remembered our forenames. Or did he?. Perhaps Mrs Fennemore added them - Mrs F. was by far the nicest person in our school - always had a smile and a friendly word, and genuinely DID know our forenames - even the "bad boys" liked her.

I was amazed, when clearing out the house after my mum died, nearly 30 years ago now, that she had kept all of those very short concise reports , all faultlessly typed up by Mrs F. I threw all of them out except that one from when I was 15, more to remember that lady who had typed it up, as she died abut the same time as my mum had (I am a sentimental old fool), than my less-than-glittering school career. All of them were more or less the same. Geography got slightly better as the years went on.


James: That was the unkindest one of the lot - Frank Spencer? I have never worn a beret in my life, not even when I was playing music, where, for a time, headgear seemed de rigueur (no - I never did - hays make my head sweat) . Couldn't we settle on Frank Pike - that "stupid boy"?

Again I apologise for any unintended upset, which was not my intention yesterday, and can I thank you for not resorting to the abuse and accusations I was receiving towards the end of 2023?. It's all been polite. Nathan - if your colleague wants to have a go - let him. My shoulders are broader these days, and if I could withstand Boreham and Roberts I can withstand anybody.

Comment by: TimH on 7th February 2024 at 17:09
Nathan - I hope you won't leave us - you always spoke a lot of sense.


This comment and the other one from Robert one of my elders of the profession has made me reconsider my initial comment earlier. I made that comment with a very annoyed fellow colleague beside me at the time who might have influenced my reaction a touch as we were still in school.

Count yourself lucky Alan I didn't let him grab the ipad out of my hand and say what he said to me, to you, on here.

You fully understand my answer clearly and concisely. Good. Matter is now closed. Slate cleaned. We will clearly never agree that I am able to decide the dress code for a class and choose the shirtless option without needing an explanation, or the need for a shower arrangement at school for PE, which I agree with.

I always said I would never force anyone into anything if they were set very much against it to the detriment of their actual mental health. But you must also remember that nobody in almost ten years has ever done so apart from a couple of inquisitive parents who then accepted the answers given.

I no longer wish to have to defend these points again with you Alan. I've been clear. Finally accept them from me please. Don't pigeonhole all teachers of the same subject.

Once again thankyou Tim, a period of silence on my end is needed I feel. I'm not sure how my head would feel if known what I was writing here in my name and my colleague did make that point to me this afternoon, although there are no social media restrictions of any kind on any of us but it's always worth being mindful of what is being said and careful. I'm sure he'd be fine though as I've defended myself well and where I work and actually said very little about what I actually do much of the time.

I'll take a sabbatical for a bit instead. It's a busier job than people think you know!

Now get a good night's sleep Alan, the timings of your posts are extraordinary and very unhealthy to both mind and body. I'm normally in bed and out like a light by 11.30pm latest and up bright at 6.55am on the dot. Call it my own bit of PE teacher discipline.

I was taken with your complement the other day to me but at the same time found it such a damned shame that you have no other nice words from teachers that you can remember from your days in school. There must have been some, your school reports must have said some nice things for example.

I did feel that Nathan would not wish to contribute much longer with that line of questioning however. Compared to me in the early years of my career in physical education and teaching in general he sounded like an absolute angel. We are all the product of our times to such a large extent but we can all make our own little differences all the same along the way.

I will also add my agreement with TimH about Nathan Hind who also seems an exemplary poster and so polite. Both of you are infact, and Alan has his better moments too, let's not be too harsh. I'll give you a B for effort but a D for attainment on that last one Alan.

Oh well done Alan. :-(

I know you didn't mean much harm in what you said but you just have what I can best describe as this Frank Spencer style knack of going about innocently saying things and getting people wound up.

I bet you wish you had this ability to get rid of PE teachers when you were actually in school. That's two now on here. At least one we know of is left for now. You might yet score a hatrick.

I don't blame the teacher for his annoyance. I think that was quite passively aggressive actually and quite close to a smear. You did not need to bring these unsavoury press stories into your discussion with him, or a teacher of yours who you have previously accused of all kinds of things. They should have remained quite separate.

I agree with Tim entirely. He sounded well rounded for a quite young man to me. I remember having a PE teacher who seemed almost illiterate and mostly grunted half the time, and the other half he was simply blowing his bleeding whistle which made more sense than what came out his mouth.

I was quite a shy kid at school, PE was just something else to put up with much of the time, some days I liked it, others I didn't. I got asked to do many things I didn't like, all the things that get a mention here lots. I don't think Nathan had anything to answer in my opinion about how he conducts himself and was perfectly happy to accept his explanations without needing detailed reasons for every decision he made - even that shirts off one. Happened to me, dealt with it. We all do.

Replying to Nathan Hind:



"First, nobody is making anyone aged over 16 even do PE at school, never mind ordering them to do all kinds like run around stripped shirts off. Most after 16 are not even doing PE anyway, and those that choose to do something are not told to remove anything on top after that age or shower"

Thanks Nathan, that is all I wanted to know. I am really glad that these lads (and girls come to that) are not being made to suffer for being made to stay on at school.

I was not offensive to you, however if I did upset you then I am sorry, but I made it clear that I was not accusing you of anything - I was seeking clarification, which you have now given me, and I will let the matter rest.

I hope you do not leave. Believe me in the past, some posters have been far more offensive to me, than I was in my morning post today to you - it wasn't even intended to cause offence, that kit plainly dkid, I am truly sorry..

I am genuinely sorry that the question so offended you

Nathan - I hope you won't leave us - you always spoke a lot of sense.

T

Someone asked when 'shirtless' PE was 'introduced'. Simply, I would say it goes back 100 years plus.
In the 1920s the health of the country was not good - think of things like TB & rickets and there was a 'national' move to improve things. The period between the wars (& onwards) saw a mass 'popular' movement towards fitness - both 'physical' & 'mental' - think of organisations like the 'Ramblers', the YHA, Scouts & Guides, National Assoc of Boys clubs (& Girls clubs), Women's League of Health & Beauty, local football & cricket clubs, etc., etc. Lido's & swimming pools were built; at one time, until quite recently there were six 'Sunday League' football pitches on 'common' land near me. In those days, of course, there weren't the vast suppliers of sports kit that there are now - you had a pair of footy shorts & that did for everything.

Rickets affected many youngsters in the 20s & 30s (my father included). To quote the NHS: A lack of vitamin D or calcium is the most common cause of rickets. Vitamin D largely comes from exposing the skin to sunlight, ... Vitamin D is essential for the formation of strong and healthy bones in children. And so - when you're out playing with your mates - take your shirt off ... and the same applies at school. (Nowadays we have to beware skin cancer, and I won't argue with that).

And thats it - all part of an attempt to improve the 'Public Health'.

Comment by: Alan on 7th February 2024 at 05:28

"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."

That suggests to me things are done on a whim or caprice by the teacher on the day - and I am not just going on at Nathan here, I am sure there are many teachers with the same attitude. I do not think it unreasonable to ask why, especially with older pupils. I will say what I have before, and that is, I do not think Nathan is in any way an ogre of a teacher. I just want to know the status of these older, and often unwilling pupils - no accusations, no suggestion's of wrongdoing. I am genuinely not talking the Royal Liberty or Roberts situations here. That I use Nathan as my source is because he is the only contemporary teacher who engages with us.


Just sitting here alongside a colleague at the end of a busy school day reading some of this is disbelief I'm afraid. Someone else, was it Graham the retired PE teacher said this discussion is going around in circles and never progresses beyond certain points and left. It feels like that.

Why this specific detail of interest so much, did this apply to you, were you made to do these things at school after age 16 in your time if you stayed on.

First, nobody is making anyone aged over 16 even do PE at school, never mind ordering them to do all kinds like run around stripped shirts off. Most after 16 are not even doing PE anyway, and those that choose to do something are not told to remove anything on top after that age or shower. If they take part in any PE and wish to do so they are free to do that if they wish. So let's just put this nonsense to bed please that modern schools are forcing boys aged over 16 to parade around shirtless in PE. It's not happening, okay, clear enough. Not happening in compulsory manner. Long ago it might have done but not now, certainly not in my school or any I know of. End of point and no more needs to be said about it. You do not need to worry or obsess yourself about that aspect any further I can assure you.

Now to that paragraph of yours that you have answered my comment in quotes with, which is the real reason I'm prompted to respond. Quite honestly to conflate those other things in with me is so deeply offensive and also to my colleagues that I have decided there is no further point in continuing. How kind of you not to think I'm an ogre. I've been open and honest, do an honest days work with young people and have spent time I didn't have to being more than accommodating to previous comments of yours in particular but it always hits the same brick wall.

I've been more than happy to engage but I think I will give it a rest and leave this discussion for the time being, maybe for good and follow Graham out of here.

Sometimes there's just no telling some people and when you do they will never accept what is said and always find yet another excuse. Rather like one or two pupils at times infact.

So based on that answer today in the paragraph you wrote I think I will bring my participation on this discussion to a final close.

Thankyou for reading my thoughts the past year or so.

Cheerio.

@ Richard - Thanks for the photographs from Filton. Its interesting that the school was built in 1959(?) and demolished c2005 - a difference from my secondary school.

(Strange - I'm not from that area, but I've attended events 400yds from the school!)

Comment by: ALAN 1970 on 6th February 2024 at 19:35



I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here, Alan. I wasn't accusing, but I was just trying to determine whether lads who are forced to stay on at school, because a very bad government is decimating employment opportunities for 16-18 year olds, so for those who loathe school (and I know I wasn;t the only one!) are given at least some options and control over their own lives, especially as it is through no fault of their own that they find themselves in this limbo land between being a schoolboy and a young working man. I suspect what follows it The Tony Blair Tribute Band, will be just as bad if not worse. I just want to know if, --as I hope they are not just herded in with he 15/16 year olds who have to be there till their 16th birthday. I especially didn't name anybody, but I was basing my supposition on these lines from Nathan's most recent post, especially the last line:

"

"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."

That suggests to me things are done on a whim or caprice by the teacher on the day - and I am not just going on at Nathan here, I am sure there are many teachers with the same attitude. I do not think it unreasonable to ask why, especially with older pupils. I will say what I have before, and that is, I do not think Nathan is in any way an ogre of a teacher. I just want to know the status of these older, and often unwilling pupils - no accusations, no suggestion's of wrongdoing. I am genuinely not talking the Royal Liberty or Roberts situations here. That I use Nathan as my source is because he is the only contemporary teacher who engages with us.



Comment by: Ethan on 6th February 2024 at 23:20


Hi Ethan, I alluded to a similar problem with my schoolmate Mark, a week or so back. Mark was Jewish, too. This is the point - all those men of our age and older, and some teachers (and I don't mean Nathan or Mr Cawston, who are both sane and fair minded, and I am sure wold have stamped it out had they heard it), who look back on the communal showers as some great happy bonding experience, full of nudity, sweetness and light , humour and Lifebuoy soap, clearly do not remember, or choose to forget, the horrible, miserable, seemingly never ending taunting that went on for some boys who didn't confirm to the lads myopic ideas of what was "normal" (personal confession - till very late in my school days I was very small (in ALL respects) and short, so I was the runt of the litter), another lad had a very large and noticeable scar. These taunts didn't just happen for the first week or so of your big school life, they went on throughout the years you were in secondary. Mark was still receiving the same taunts at 16 he was getting at 11. Had I been bigger and a fighter, I would have had some very good put downs for these lads (for example what were they doing forever looking at that part of your anatomy?) but if I had tried it, I would have just got a bloody good thrashing, so the best you could do was offer friendship (the three of us remained friends long after schooldays). By 16 I was as sick as being called "Tin-Ribs" and other things (often used by the teacher as well, as a form of abuse) as my mate was at being called "Frankenstein" (again picked up and used by the teacher when he was in his bad books and Mark was with the same sort of insults as I guess you were. It hurts, and it hurts for long after those schooldays. To this day though I am now an average height and build I am still loathe to remove clothes in public. My life as a male stripper was ended before it began.

You can laugh about it, make light of it, but it makes me uncomfortable that the morons who still exist and no doubt behave just as ours did, are still given the opportunity to act like that, because those old school institutions still exist. One can only hope today's teachers have more sensitivity.

Comment by: Richard on 6th February 2024 at 22:34


What a great find there you have. I agree it shows how we did things in school back in those times very well. Brings back many memories for me too with those pictures. I always remember that about a third of the class never wore any plimolls on their feet and went bare, and for some reason I always associated those ones as coming from poorer families for some reason although it was probably far from the truth.

Perhaps the teacher was the actual person who took those photos in the class and that's why there is no sign of one in them. The reason for him doing so would be a good one to know - we never will of course - and whoever took them looked to have a rather decent camera to me. They must have ended up somewhere for some reason or another and it certainly wasn't the internet in those days. I'm sure teachers were not allowed to just take photos for their own personal satisfaction just like that. Those are good examples I agree. Thanks for sharing your school memory there. Nice coloured gym walls I thought! Mine were so dowdy and uninspiringly beige. Wasn't that supposed to be the colour of that decade.

At least with this new IP system since the start of the year we know that the claims of one person placing much of the content and follow ups in his favour was complete and utter fiction, as I always thought.

I come from Israeli parentage who brought me here when I was 10 years old. I don't wish to overplay the point and become too heavy on a light hearted subject but of course the most extreme example of what has been described on subjugation through clothing was done by the National Socialists eighty years ago, the true pinnacle example of subjugating others by removing everything they have, their clothing particular to my point here, never mind the property, liberty and their lives of course. I speak of the holocaust. It's a strong point I am making I know that but I felt like making it, forgive me if some feel I have overplayed my hand a bit with that one to drive home a point made by others.

When I came here at that young age I went to a normal non Jewish school and briefly found myself being taunted for how I looked when I took a shower at school and noticed no other boys like me which I had not expected. I cannot tell you how relieved I was one year when another boy joined the class and was the same as me even though he wasn't of the same faith. I remember being so surprised that all the English boys had foreskins that I couldn't wait to tell my mother what I had seen.

My old school is on Flickr, Filton High School, where I went growing up in the 1970's in Gloucestershire and started there in 1975, just one year after the two pictures of a very familiar gymnasium we used in those days and although that was taken in a class from the year before I arrived at the school it is almost an exact copy of the PE lessons I had at the school in the following years there, so I can effectively show it to you as being 'my' PE class in every meaningful sense because it's a perfect match. There are a couple of pictures from 1974 in this case on Flickr, perfectly illustrating in rather good quality what we used to get up to and as you can see we were all made to do PE in our bare chests. I'm not sure why the photos must have been taken, they look very good quality I must say and where is the teacher in them I wondered when the boys are being seen. I should imagine it was quite unusual to have your PE class being photographed like this. White shorts were the main colour I remember wearing but in this photo game of basketball it looks like the teams must be differing by shorts colour which is how I seem to remember things being done with team set ups against each other. In a school where you all go bare chested there is no skins and shirts option after all. We NEVER wore shirts in the school gym at the school through to last lesson of regular mandatory schooling at fifth form.

It doesn't exactly surprise me that the PE photos are the most popular ones being looked at. The boys in the photos look like the first or second formers to me, about twelve then.

So here you are, a great typical example of a middle 70's English school PE lesson and what we had to be like and do. A shame that I can't get a shot of a PE teacher in them, would probably have recognised them if they had been.

After lessons like this, mandatory showering was always strictly administered for all. Overall it might have given most of us a better body image and made us less neurotic about our looks and physical shapes and sizes and what we had. Although as you can see there are no especially overweight or even underweight boys in obvious view, just normal looking boys of the 70's in a normal class doing normal things.

I'm sure not everyone liked doing things like this but in those days people didn't complain too much, they just got their heads down and on with it, the traditional British stiff upper lip began at a young age.

I used to hate having to pull those stupid green PE mats about though!

Paste the following link into your browsers;

https://www.flickr.com/people/134490316@N07

https://www.flickr.com/photos/134490316@N07/

Where has the PE teacher on here ever stated that he is making age 16+ pupils do the things you are saying Alan? He hasn't as far as I am able to read back at what he has been saying over recent months, but you keep picking up on this point.

Now let's get to that other point you make about starting PE as you mean to go on at an early age. I remember doing lots of shirtless PE in the school halls of both my first school, the infants as it was called, and then at the middle school through from the age of 5 until I was 12, never mind secondary school thereafter where similar was required a lot of times too, plus showers once you got to being at secondary level. But a lot of us change our attitudes and feelings as we get older even if we have been doing things a long time already and get naturally self conscious in our early teens regardless. I was a bit like that at times, but I'd been doing school PE since as early as I could remember in a similar way, very often not involving a shirt and just going with shorts. So your argument doesn't automatically stack up that just because you did something early in life it made you immune later on.

When I was 7 years old I used to run around the road with next to nothing on outside the house with friends. I wouldn't have been seen dead doing that by the time I was about 13 or 14, mostly incase any of the girls I was at school with might have seen me! But at 7 I didn't give any of that a second thought. The same applies at school. We change.

Comment by: Mark Maynard on 6th February 2024 at 03:44


I agree with every word you said in your message, Mark. I hold no brief for the armed services, but I had one mate who was in the army in the early 1990s (REME) and a relative in the RAF, and believe it or not, both had singlets as part of their PE kit I have seen photographs taken of everyday life in both organisations - there are documentaries shown on TV from time to time (Talking Pictures who show old TV shows and films - they're showing Out Of Town again now with Jack Hargreaves), and they have a 1966 film about the RAF and an army one from the late 70s(?) and they are also allowed to cover up in the scenes shown in the gym and on playing fields. I can't remember the titles but all their material comes round often enough

Why schools feel they have to inflict their strict (un)dress code, even today, seems to be based solely on a whim - if a teacher "feels like it", - perhaps just about justifiable for younger boys, but older teenagers? - but these days with students getting that much more grown up earlier, with bullying at high levels, face to face and cyberworld, why they persist in these outdated practices more suited to the immediate post-war years is completely beyond my ken.

Nobody seems willing to explain it,though many justify it.

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.